Best PCB design tool?

[Jeffw5555]

I started a career in PCB design in the late 70’s, using a 4X light board and Bishop Graphics tape and pads, later took a job with Northrop, 4X drafting board with vellum sheets and colored pencils , that were digitized on a Gerber system. Changed careers, but 15 years ago I started a company and needed to design boards again. Tried out a bunch of different design software, and settled on a system by Abacom, called Sprint Layout. For those that know how to properly design boards, it is brilliant, super-intuitive and easy to use. And it is cheap, only 49 Euros. I also use their schematic software called Splan. I don’t think there is anything out there that is a better value for what it does. The only criticism is that I needed to tweak and create a lot of my own pad macros.

 

[MidnightArrakis]

I started a career in PCB design in the late 70’s, using a 4X light board and Bishop Graphics tape and pads, later took a job with Northrop, 4X drafting board with vellum sheets and colored pencils , that were digitized on a Gerber system. Changed careers, but 15 years ago I started a company and needed to design boards again. Tried out a bunch of different design software, and settled on a system by Abacom, called Sprint Layout. For those that know how to properly design boards, it is brilliant, super-intuitive and easy to use. And it is cheap, only 49 Euros. I also use their schematic software called Splan. I don’t think there is anything out there that is a better value for what it does. The only criticism is that I needed to tweak and create a lot of my own pad macros.

[I started a career in PCB design in the late 70’s] -- My first PCB design was by "forced default" back in 1972. I was stationed at a "SECRET" military base that was located -- literally -- in the middle of the Utah desert!!! Salt Lake City was about 100-miles away!!! The unit I was assigned to that recorded and analyzed the incoming computer data from nerve-agent gas tests (NO KIDDING!!!) needed cleaner digital data for the IBM mainframe computers. So, the "Head Honcho" of our group had this electrical engineer design some digital signal-processing circuitry and then he told me, "Well, then Williams.....I guess you can design the circuit boards and a mechanical enclosure to put them all in"!!! I had never done either of those design functions before!!! So, while the engineer was designing the circuitry, I ordered a bunch of stuff to manually hand-tape PCB's and I designed 8 small circuit boards for the first time in my life. Everything worked "right off the bat" and -- THAT -- was really exciting!!!

[using a 4X light board] -- About six-years later, I built a 5-foot wide X 4-foot deep light-table down in the basement of where I rented in 1978 and started to design PCB's while "working-from-home". Most of my PCB designs were at a 4X-scale, while a few were at a 2X-scale. I got involved with some rather specialized really tiny PCB's for RCA that I had to layout at a 10X-scale because 4X wasn't large enough.

[and Bishop Graphics] -- I bought myself a BISHOP Graphics PCB-footprint book, which I still have to this day!!!

[I started a company] -- Doing what???

[settled on a system by Abacom, called Sprint Layout] -- Never heard of it and I read and subscribe to all types of PCB-design magazines and periodicals.

[only 49 Euros] -- So.....it's "European-centric" like KiCAD??? Meaning, KiCAD even has separate schematic and PCB libraries that are called "U.S.-type".

/

 

[Cqwet Dbdfte]

KiCAD even has separate schematic and PCB libraries that are called "U.S.-type".

Ever looked at a schematic from Philips (Eindhoven) ? Those rectangular boxes are resistors.
The US zigzag type is seldom seen, maybe for wire-wounds. Japanese schematics?
Ouch. The East Asians have a penchant for the worst western fonts, almost illegible.

 

[MidnightArrakis]

Ever looked at a schematic from Philips (Eindhoven) ? Those rectangular boxes are resistors.
The US zigzag type is seldom seen, maybe for wire-wounds. Japanese schematics?
Ouch. The East Asians have a penchant for the worst western fonts, almost illegible.

[Those rectangular boxes are resistors] -- I'm aware of that. And, what I have seen in some European schematics that makes things confusing is that -- BOTH -- capacitors and resistors are sometimes shown as "rectangular boxes" in the same schematic, so you need to look at the value of the "box" in order to determine which part it is supposed to be. Schematics are NOT supposed to be confusing!!!

[The US zigzag type is seldom seen] -- Except here in the U.S.!!! In contrast, "rectangular boxes" are rarely ever seen.

[Japanese schematics? Ouch] -- And.....also confusing, as well.

/

 

[Newmarket]

And, what I have seen in some European schematics that makes things confusing is that -- BOTH -- capacitors and resistors are sometimes shown as "rectangular boxes" in the same schematic

ime Capacitors are never represented by a rectangular box. It's not a valid symbol. Nothing to do with originating in Europe or otherwise.

 

[ruffrecords]

ime Capacitors are never represented by a rectangular box. It's not a valid symbol. Nothing to do with originating in Europe or otherwise.

And inductors as a filled in rectangular box.

Cheers

Ian

 

[MidnightArrakis]

ime Capacitors are never represented by a rectangular box. It's not a valid symbol. Nothing to do with originating in Europe or otherwise.

[Capacitors are never represented by a rectangular box] -- So.....I guess I was dreaming when I saw schematics in threads right here on this forum that had both capacitors and resistors shown as rectangular boxes, huh??? IIRC, the schematics that I saw were older vintage schematics, but still.....

[It's not a valid symbol] -- While I will grant you that a rectangular box may not be a valid symbol for a capacitor, it doesn't rule out the fact that it was still used.

[Nothing to do with originating in Europe or otherwise] -- I never said or even implied that its use "originated in Europe". The couple or so schematics I have seen in threads on this forum that had rectangular boxes shown for capacitors -- just happened to be -- from Europe. That's all.

/

 

[Newmarket]

[Capacitors are never represented by a rectangular box] -- So.....I guess I was dreaming when I saw schematics in threads right here on this forum that had both capacitors and resistors shown as rectangular boxes, huh??? IIRC, the schematics that I saw were older vintage schematics, but still.....

I clearly don't know what you have seen. That would be simply bizarre.
I simply observed that I had never seen that in viewing likely thousands of schematics since late 70s.

[It's not a valid symbol] -- While I will grant you that a rectangular box may not be a valid symbol for a capacitor, it doesn't rule out the fact that it was still use

Sorry someone used it as such I think we'll be able to get through it

[Nothing to do with originating in Europe or otherwise] -- I never said or even implied that its use "originated in Europe". The couple or so schematics I have seen in threads on this forum that had rectangular boxes shown for capacitors -- just happened to be -- from Europe. That's all.

/

So what imply that there is some "European" element in this ????
Just stick to legitimately internationally recognised conventions and there's no problem.
Caveat,: I do sometimes struggle with GDT symbol

 

[Cqwet Dbdfte]

What if there was a way to share libraries between us, instead of everybody building their own? I know some individual adjustment is necessary since we don't all build the same things, but still..
Like a "hifiengine" sort of thing just with components, footprints, etc. Or maybe a PCB section alongside the "tech docs" section?

Google Pete Millet, he's got a few libraries for audio, for EagleCAD. Then keep googling for Adafruit, Sparkfun for libs.
However, I never found a "perfect" library. I changed or produced almost every one I use. Symbols are often too big, have redundant ground leads (that can be appended to a single pin), not logically descriptive etc. New chips are never found in a standard library, much cruft from 20 30 years ago still lingers.
Master the art of making your own library symbols and foot prints a primary objective, many YouTube videos. The rest is pretty simple.

 

[MidnightArrakis]

What if there was a way to share libraries between us, instead of everybody building their own?

[What if there was a way to share libraries between us, instead of everybody building their own?] -- GREAT IDEA!!! But, unfortunately, a non-feasible one!!! WHY??? One person uses ALTIUM Designer, I personally use CADENCE/OrCAD, someone else uses DipTrace, yet another uses EasyEDA, another uses FreeCAD, a bunch of others use KiCAD, then there's MENTOR Graphics, Pulsonix and of course ZUKEN!!! See the problem here???

Other than building your own libraries, you can always download -- FREE -- schematic symbols and PCB-footprints from:

https://www.samacsys.com



Or.....

https://www.ultralibrarian.com



Both of these schematic symbol and PCB-footprint vendors are accessible, one way or another, through either Digi-Key or Mouser when you are searching for a part to use in one of your designs. Of course, you can also directly access their websites through the links I have provided above.

However, one somewhat important item to keep in mind when importing/using the PCB-footprints from these two companies is this.....their PCB-footprints follow industry-standard IPC guidelines as far as their drill-sizes, pad-sizes, annular-ring size dimensions, etc., etc., etc. go. What this means to a DIY'er on this forum is that the solderable annular-ring will probably be too small to solder to, as these are -- INDUSTRY -- standards where the component soldering is normally accomplished by wave-soldering machines.

BUT!!!.....FEAR NOT!!! -- All ya gotta do is bring up a PCB-footprint from these vendors into your PCB-footprint library editor and increase the pad-size to suit your fancy!!! So, if for example, you have a resistor footprint with a padstack calling out a -- 52R32D -- pad (which means, a 52-mil pad with a 32-mil drill, which gives you a 10-mil annular-ring. This is typical for wave-soldering), you could change the padstack to be a -- 92R32D -- (which will give you a 92-mil pad with a 32-mil drill and a 30-mil annular ring). NOTE: Resistor lead diameter = 22-mils + 10-mils oversize so the component lead can easily fit into the pad-hole = 32-mil drill size. Your mileage may vary.

>> I often wonder why members of this forum don't like the information I provide in my postings???

/

 

[MidnightArrakis]

Tried out a bunch of different design software, and settled on a system by Abacom, called Sprint Layout. For those that know how to properly design boards, it is brilliant, super-intuitive and easy to use. And it is cheap, only 49 Euros. I also use their schematic software called Splan.

[settled on a system by Abacom, called Sprint Layout] -- I hate to break the news to ya, Jeff.....but your "Sprint-Layout" PCB Design Software program has been DISCONTINUED!!! See below:


However, it strangely -- STILL -- seems to be purchasable at this address:
https://www.electronic-software-shop.com/login/



I had read in one of the reviews that apparently this program can also import generic GERBER files and then also EDIT them as necessary. I found -- THAT -- to be uniquely interesting!!!

If I feel like gambling 50-bucks to see if the website still sells the program, I just might spring for it just to see!!!

/

 

[Disco Volante]

I really like your geeky posts, especially when providing information.
Thanks, I'm a little wiser. Slowly getting into KiCAD, just lack of spare time keeping me from making my own PCBs..
Cheers, V!

 

[gswan]

Totally agree with You, colleague!
Do You have any libraries for DipTrace, made by yourself?

Yes. I built all my libraries. This was from experience with other packages having libraries that contained errors (in the 1980's/90's).
Policy was to build and check all library footprints and schematic symbols, even if just copying them from another library first.

 

[Jeffw5555]

[settled on a system by Abacom, called Sprint Layout] -- I hate to break the news to ya, Jeff.....but your "Sprint-Layout" PCB Design Software program has been DISCONTINUED!!! See below:

View attachment 122626
However, it strangely -- STILL -- seems to be purchasable at this address:
https://www.electronic-software-shop.com/login/
View attachment 122630
View attachment 122631

I had read in one of the reviews that apparently this program can also import generic GERBER files and then also EDIT them as necessary. I found -- THAT -- to be uniquely interesting!!!

If I feel like gambling 50-bucks to see if the website still sells the program, I just might spring for it just to see!!!

/

I don't think they discontinued it, they just changed their sales website and don't have all the links figured out!

Here is a screen capture of one of my designs, 4 layer due to the fact there are a total of 4 switching power supplies on board, as well as an opto-isolated USB section.



Here is the populated finished board:



And here is the finished product inside the enclosure with the piggy back SBC installed, which acts as a wireless web server for our application to run remotely on a phone or tablet.:

 

[Jeffw5555]

The Sprint Layout program doesn't have any integration with the schematic program. I don't need any of that nonsense, I designed the circuit, created my own schematics and BOM's, then laid out the board exactly like I would have done 40 years ago. I simply export the Gerber and excellon files to my contract manufacturer and they take it from there. I don't need auto-placement or routing, I can do it in my head as I go along. It is one of the joys of PCB design, like solving a complex puzzle.

I build most my own libraries for the components. It is a piece of cake with this program. Data sheets always have all the recommended land layouts for something I haven't done before, only takes a few minutes to create the lands.

If you are an old school layout guy like me, you will love this program. I had a new design, albeit a small board, took only a few hours to lay out, two days later I had the prototype bare boards in my hands, have a a small automated reflow oven, within a couple hours I had the complete boards to test.

 

[gswan]

[Those rectangular boxes are resistors] -- I'm aware of that. And, what I have seen in some European schematics that makes things confusing is that -- BOTH -- capacitors and resistors are sometimes shown as "rectangular boxes" in the same schematic, so you need to look at the value of the "box" in order to determine which part it is supposed to be. Schematics are NOT supposed to be confusing!!!

[The US zigzag type is seldom seen] -- Except here in the U.S.!!! In contrast, "rectangular boxes" are rarely ever seen.

[Japanese schematics? Ouch] -- And.....also confusing, as well.

/

Rectangular box for resistors started around the late 70's/early 80's when ISO standards were updated for drawing symbols. America follows ANSI standards, which have zig-zag resistors. The reason for the change was that drawings were all done by hand and it takes a lot longer to draw a zig zag than a box so it saved a lot of time drawing schematics.

 

[MidnightArrakis]

Rectangular box for resistors started around the late 70's/early 80's when ISO standards were updated for drawing symbols. America follows ANSI standards, which have zig-zag resistors. The reason for the change was that drawings were all done by hand and it takes a lot longer to draw a zig zag than a box so it saved a lot of time drawing schematics.

[zig-zag resistors] -- Just by the nature of the schematic symbol itself, an electron attempting to zip through a circuit in a schematic drawing meets up with this symbol it has to travel through that makes it swerve back and forth and back and forth, is going to -- impede or.....resist -- its speedy travel. Therefore, at least to me, the "zig-zag" symbol inherently makes more sense as to what its function is as an electrical symbol than what a rectangular box represents. To me.....a rectangular box could represent a "storage" device.....something that can hold something else. Much like a capacitor. SEE???.....

[drawings were all done by hand and it takes a lot longer to draw a zig zag than a box] -- As someone who has sat or stood at many drafting tables back during the 70's and 80's for lots of electronics companies, I would certainly question the "it takes a lot longer to draw a zig-zag than a box" stance of such!!! All of the drafting departments and drafting personnel that I had worked with all used plastic templates with the schematic symbols built into them. It may have taken all of 1.5-seconds to draw a "zig-zag" resistor symbol. But, with the ISO probably being more European-based, I can easily understand where their collective perspective could come from. Much like all of the "Climate Change" foolery that we are having to deal with these days. A cow farts somewhere and the "Green New Deal" fanatics go into hysterics about how the methane gas is going to kill us all because that fart raised the global temperature by some imperceptible amount!!! GET A LIFE!!! (not directed at you, gswan).

/

 

[Cqwet Dbdfte]

The linking between PCB layout and schematic is a fundamental feature, pretty much standard these days, otherwise the risk for errors and useless boards is very high.
Some software like KiCAD and EasyEDA some button has to pushed to synchronize pcb to schematic, EagleCAD its automatic. I have seen the pains some go thru to verify PCB to schematic on some cheap free software. Hard no.

 

[Jeffw5555]

The linking between PCB layout and schematic is a fundamental feature, pretty much standard these days, otherwise the risk for errors and useless boards is very high.
Some software like KiCAD and EasyEDA some button has to pushed to synchronize pcb to schematic, EagleCAD its automatic. I have seen the pains some go thru to verify PCB to schematic on some cheap free software. Hard no.

Of the boards I have laid out in the last 15 years, I have made zero errors in translating the schematic to board layout. I have had a few board spins to change the actual circuit, because of changes I have needed to make in the actual circuit design itself to get the circuit working optimally. But this is the beauty of the rapid prototyping world we live in today, since I can get prototype boards at my door in a couple days for relatively low cost, the cost impact is nil compared to the "old days" where it could take weeks to get prototype boards made at high relative cost. Checking is not painful. I would do it manually even if my software supported automatic checking.

Sure, schematic to layout checking is obviously important for inexperienced designers, or if you are dividing the work among others. I do it all, so I don't need it. I wouldn't trust even a high-end layout program to create the most optimal design anyway. An example is a GPS module I designed that my company makes. It needed special ground plane considerations, along with proper heat relieving in the underside of the daughter module to get it to flow properly during manufacturing. There is so much to know about the balance of circuit performance versus manufacturability, as well as repairability, that cannot be captured by having a high end layout program with schematic integration.

 

[Cqwet Dbdfte]

One of the features of EagleCAD, and others, is that you can click on a net in schematic and have it light up on the PCB. This helps in troubleshooting.
There is no advantage in not having the linking.
After some 300 PCBs I do not consider myself inexperienced.
I no longer prototype old school, order boards for every little thing if needed