Altium Designer users?

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

mikep

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 18, 2006
Messages
450
Location
Philadelphia
My company is considering purchasing Altuim Designer. As I am the principal circuit designer/layout person, they want to know my opinion. One factor is that alot of legacy designs were done by a consultant in altium and we would like to be able to open them and edit, etc. Another big thing is our ERP software uses a JET database, which Altium can supposedly interface nicely with. I really like the idea of having libraries linked to our inventory/purchasing system. Ive been spending too much time lately manually matching up BOMs and fixing little data entry errors.

I am currently using Eagle and for the most part like it, but obviously it is very limited.

I have already done research on Altium but have never sat down with the software myself. Has anyone here taken the time to learn it completely? How much down time am I looking at if we switch? is it really worth $10k?

mike p
 
I use it at work. We bought it initially to get simulations to work properly as the older version had issues. In the end, we do use it for simulations but it does have a lot of advantages over many other packages. If it's worth the $10k price, that's another matter.

It does support VHDL design and that sort of thing, for FPGA's. We don't use FPGA's at all, and when I do need any kind of PLD, it's usually just an Atmel GAL chip (22V10 or 750C) and for those I just use CUPL which I'm familiar with. So we don't use that bit.

It supports making multiple BOM's from one PC board - optional populations. Also if you are doing parts substitutions and using your internal part number, you can do that. But understand, if you do that, you'll have lots of build variants. What we do, and I had to argue to do it because 'yet another build variant' seems too easy but it becomes way to hard to manage. What I do is keep a build variant matched up for a feature set. Then when there are parts subs, the purchasing/manufacturing engineer sends me a list of part number subs and if the change is to be permanent or temporary. In any case, I modify the variant, make the build files (pick+place, etc), then remove the part number substitutes if it's a 'this build'. Then *he* archives the build files but I don't have a record of it in the design file. But if I try to archive everything, I find that having all fifty different times we've built the same board but substituted a panasonic cap for the original nichicon....

I do use the external database - you essentially make an XLS file that cross-references a PC board footprint, schematic symbol, simulation model (if you are using the simulation features), a 3D model, our internal part number, and a 'generic' part description. It still is 'your problem' to use a company database as that is still difficult. What I did was start with a copy of the company database, and massaged it. Now I grab the latest parts from the company database and graft them in at the end of the file.

The schematic, PC board, and netlist entry is pretty decent, though 'annotate' has an annoying habit of wanting to re-order resistor packs and multi-part op-amps and stuff. You need to edit the part once annotated and tell it to lock the subpart number after you annotate it. I always optimize my layouts of packs, so I find that a bit annoying. I think it's not supposed to do that.

When doing global editing, you need to remember that to get out of the selected parts, you need to 'Clear Filter', as opposed to the old Protel 99SE which had a separate 'global edit' feature that just went away when you were done. It takes some getting used to.

I don't use 'rooms' in my boards since they are pretty tight layouts and I just manually place everything. So when I update PC board from schematic I always find the line that says 'Add Room' and uncheck it.

Auto-place is hopeless, but no worse than any other CAD package I have tried. Auto-route might be ok, but I don't use it. I manually route all of the time. There's a PC board rule directive available from the schematic so you can take a net and add a width requirement, for example, for power handling. This is a bit of a PITA though, if you need to run a power line to the top of a current sense resistor and also a sense line to a little TSSOP comparator. It tries to run the same trace width the whole way. The solution is something called a 'net tie' which is essentially a short-circuited component. It allows two different net directives.

Making manufacturing files is a breeze. You can make BOM's to your heart's content. I have a standard file format that I use. I make a grouped BOM for purchasing, and a single combined pick/place and part-by-part BOM for the CM and everyone else. That is the master because it includes all parts subs and stuff like that. We used to have to send several files and hope that nobody screwed it up. Now everything is in one place.

Exported 3D models are huge, since they are in IGES or that kind of thing. Note that the 3D model import and export isn't glitch-free, or at least wasn't on the last version. I think they are fixing it. There's a new release and it might be fixed already.

-Dale
 
It took about a week for me to set up to work roughly how I liked it. Our company accounting program is Accpac which doesn't interface nicely to anything. If your system uses a JET database you might be able to configure it to directly interface to your part database but you may need to add fields to the accounting database to link to various fields.

I do my designs part-number centred. In other words, I always place parts by our part numbers. Everything else - values, vendor, tolerances, package, simulation model, 3D model, etc. links up from there.

-Dale
 
Mike, what is it that your company manufactures, or if you cannot say, where on the complexity scale does it lie? Altium is a stunning product, but it may be more than you require.

Two of the areas that my business operates in are contract design services and design/manufacture of our own products. In the contract design role, I have used an older version of Altium (Protel 99 SE). Whilst impressive, it was over-facilitied and therefore poor value for money for use in my manufacturing business.

Recently I had the pleasure of attending an Altium "roadshow". It was a most useful day and well worthwhile for getting an overview of the product. I reached the same conclusions I made several years ago - for the needs of my analogue custom design and manufacturing business, we are well served by the Seetrax design platform. If we were in the digital arena with SSL, Calrec, AMS-Neve and similarly placed businesses, then Altium would be a platform to consider.

To help decide if it is worth the price for your business, you could ask Altium for a demo disk; they are helpful in this regard.
 
Thanks guys. Good info, but I still dont know if it is worth it. gotta think some more.

The company makes RF/fiber systems. we do very compact optical converters, racks, power supplies and monitor+control systems. mostly small mixed signal boards, some analog only and some RF. Not hugely complex but eagle's lack of system level design is frustrating. what I mean is, Ive got 4-10 pcbs that interconnect to each other in stackups and via a backplane. I draw each board as it's own project in eagle, then have to manage pinouts and interconnection manually. it hasn't bitten me in the ass YET.

and of course I do audio designs on my own, and for that I can't imagine ever needing more than eagle.

mike p
 
Thanks for the reply and detailed info, Mike.
I am not familiar with Eagle, so cannot comment one way or another on it; the net-based introduction looks fine.

As mentioned in my previous post, my business uses Seetrax as the in-house design platform, and for what we do, it works very well. Your board-stacks & backplanes sound like they could be well-managed by the hierarchy system within Seetrax. As with all CAD packages, there are things it does very well, and things that other packages do better.

Other packages I have used are Proteus and PADS.

Dealing with personal views of the 4 packages that I can draw experience on, for handling of complex PCBs and associated technologies, I would put Proteus bottom, PADS & Seetrax midway and Altium at the top.
From a user-friendliness point of view, I place Seetrax at the top, then PADS, then Proteus and lowest is Altium. (That is not to say Altium is bad, it's just that I would be unlikely to use more than a small percentage of its facilities - it does not fit into my business needs).

Hope this helps a bit.
 
Im still thinking about this, but there has been developments that make a switch to Altium more unlikely.

Eagle users take note: I updated to Eagle V5.0 and am quite happy with the improvements. Very good so far! Go to the CADSoft website for details.

the new attributes feature is nothing short of awesome. I can now associate in-house part numbers with library parts without using the name or value fields. I just banged out a ULP (user language program) to export BOMs in a format that our inventory software can easily import. works like a charm. Now I just have to update all library entries with the PN attributes.

Also, a co-worker is putting together a Solidworks API for me that will import NC drill files and pick and place files to help automate the PCB->Solid model creation process. if this works, I think I can keep using Eagle indefinitely. anyone got a source for smd package 3D models, for instance IGES format?

mike p
 
[quote author="mikep"]My company is considering purchasing Altuim Designer. As I am the principal circuit designer/layout person, they want to know my opinion. One factor is that alot of legacy designs were done by a consultant in altium and we would like to be able to open them and edit, etc. Another big thing is our ERP software uses a JET database, which Altium can supposedly interface nicely with. I really like the idea of having libraries linked to our inventory/purchasing system. Ive been spending too much time lately manually matching up BOMs and fixing little data entry errors.

I am currently using Eagle and for the most part like it, but obviously it is very limited.

I have already done research on Altium but have never sat down with the software myself. Has anyone here taken the time to learn it completely? How much down time am I looking at if we switch? is it really worth $10k?
[/quote]

We're a DXP shop, and Altium upgraded one license to Designer 6. We've been looking at upgrading everyone as DXP is fairly long in the tooth. Our PCB layout guy likes a number of Designer's features (differential routing is a snap, setting design rules is a lot easier, you can drag a handful of traces and route them as a group, etc).

Now, the downside: Altium seems to think that Designer 6 is the only software package you need. They throw in FPGA tools (a synthesizer and hooks into the Xilinx tools), an 8051 compiler and basically a lot of extra crap that we'd never use. I mean, we already pay Xilinx for their full-up tools plus the EDK, and we're happy Keil C51 users. But Altium will not sell their package without that stuff, so it's thousands of dollars wasted.

(Trying to explain that we'd rather not tie up a Designer license on an FPGA synthesis/place-and-route run falls on deaf ears.)

Certainly, it's better than Eagle, which is best avoided for professional work. (The Eagle folk haven't figured out that having net names visible in pads and vias is a real handy layout feature.)

I've got the eval version of PADS, which is much less expensive (I think $1700 for the schematic and $4K for unlimited-database layout) and Mentor seems pretty open about selling us what we need, not what they think we want. Anyone use PADS here?

-a
 

Latest posts

Back
Top