Eagle library editor

et

gue

yeh I think the most usual way of doing it now is to have every layer the same, some of them just happen to be mostly pours of gnd or supply Planes that are drawn inverted and all that mess must be a left over from some old way of making films or something like that

-Lasse

I've only used Protel, so this may not apply to Eagle.

However, in Protel, anything you draw on a plane layer is not-copper, so if I declared Layer 2 as a ground plane, then drew a polygon on it covering the whole board, I would have _removed_ all the copper on that layer - obviously, the autorouter would know not to use that non-copper for ground connections.

She keeps pretty busy, working here, running our web site, coaching softball, doing a little contract PCB layout. I don't think she wants to do a huge amount of contract work, probably not enough to buy and learn a bunch of different layout programs.

John

Right. You'd send out the mylars to the photo shop. They would invert your padmaster layer and expand the pads to make your ground plane, reinsert the pads, and merge that with a separate sheet that has little bits of tape that connected up the things you wanted grounded.

What a pain: I don't miss any of that. Checking a modestly complex board might take two people two days. But then, I did fall in love once, being one of those two people checking a layout for two days.

John

The learning has to be in a healthy relation to the expected revenue, of course. But the buying thing can sometimes be avoided via VPN access.

After having used various systems for the various clients there is usually a routine that comes in, makes new systems less of an effort. Like renting a car. "Oh, steering wheel on the other side, ok".

That might be it, thanks.

Cheers

Phil "Gradually coming up to speed" Hobbs

Thanks. I ponied up the $275 for a one-year STD license.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Using a PLOY GND should work. in 4.16 using the command AUTO, there are preferred directions for the layers. With N/A meaning not to route on that layer. Just make sure your gnd layer is not a supply layer. Click on the layer Display icon and double click the layer that is in question. If the layer name started with a $ it's treated as a supply layer. The kick is you can draw a poly on a supply layer and get weird results.

The eagle help has everything you need.. Just type HELP or HELP layer Supply Layers

Layers 2...15 are treated as supply layers if their name starts with the '$' character and there is a signal with an identical name but without the leading '$'.

Any pads or vias belonging to that signal are implicitly considered connected by the RATSNEST command and the Autorouter.

Supply layers are viewed "inverted", which means that any objects visible on such a layer will result in "copper free" areas on the board. The program automatically generates Thermal and Annulus objects to connect and isolate pads and vias to/from these layers.

You should not draw any additional objects into a supply layer, except, for instance, wires along the outlines of the board, which prevent the copper area from extending to the very edges and thus possibly causing short circuits through a metal casing or mounting screw. Note that there are no checks whether a supply layer really connects all pads and vias. If e. g. a user drawn object isolates a pad that should be connected to the supply layer, there will be no airwire generated for that (missing) connection. The same applies if several Annulus symbols form a "ring" around a Thermal symbol (and would thus completely isolate that pad from its signal). Also note that the size of the annulus symbols used in a supply layer is only derived from the value given under "Annulus" in the "Supply" tab of the Design Rules, and that neither the minimum distances under "Clearance" nor those in the net classes go into this calculation.

For a safer and more flexible way of implementing supply layers you should use the POLYGON command.

Cheers

Joerg wrote:

If you have a teeny tiny project which will work with Cadsoft's crippleware version, the Free Software stuff competes easily. ...and if you get one of the 2 EE specialist Linux distro CDs (there may be even more that are current and unknown to me), you get both and you don't even have to *install* anything.

WRT something that bugs you that much, for less money than you spent on Cadsoft's DRM'd junk, you could have HIRED a coder to fix that for you. ...instead of whining.

Yeah, that's not so good. Again, for less than the purchase price of a closed-source app from a screw-you company, you could have hired a coder

--or have put a bounty on that bug for the gEDA guys.

Nonsense. Lots of folks have gEDA running under Windoze. Children and idiots are -not- the target audience.

...if you're a child or an idiot. ...and the **entire** ECAD market is niche; that's why is so easily abused by the vendors.

Years back, Terry Porter would post links here to the output of his gEDA efforts. He was making plenty of money with the tools even then.

What is needed is OPEN document standards for EDA. With all vendors then shooting at the same target, there would be real competition aka a level playing field. "Proprietary standards" suck.

...for you.

The business model in the ECAD marketplace is to buy up the competition and knife the baby. Without OPEN file formats and OPEN standards, giving money to the payware vendors just finances the abuse.

It's not about install. Install worked fine with both. gEDA inside a VM, of course.

No, you cannot. Well, maybe in Bangladesh. Plus then you've create a fork that is incompatible with everyone else's and all future releases. May be ok for hobby but that won't fly in the business world.

Ever looked at the Cadsoft license prices lately? Engineers often only need schematic editors because layouts are usually contracted out. Forgot what I paid since I won't upgrade right now but it was truly miniscule compared to just about any other commercial CAD package. Beats me why some shady people still crack it.

It makes it useless for any hotshot analog project where offsets or RF leakage must be controlled.

No. Do the math. These guy will not work for minimum wage, and they shouldn't.

Like who?

A user whom I'd consider a real expert and who is very versed in gEDA has tried. Didn't work. Even one of the gurus in the group said there's some stuff in gEDA that makes that a real challenge. Better check the facts before making such statements.

Also, an attitude like "we only cater to the arrived" will always be unsuccessful in such markets. Ever thought about who's going to be the next generation? To me, mentoring is a large part of what I consider my duties to give back to society. Sadly, to some it isn't.

Nonsense. What's abused here? In the more than two decades that I do circuit design I always bought CAD packages and used them.

Sure, there is the occasional small company. Take a look around when you get into the real corporate America, companies with parking lots the size of Walmart's.

Would be nice. There was this EDIF movement. But other than some nice gala events and champagne, Perrier water and caviar nothing ever came of it that was worth writing home about. Ain't gonna happen.

Oh no. I've talked with clients about it. Same thing, they felt that Eagle was of cast-iron robustness.

Unfortunately that is true :-(

It would be cool, yes, but I do not see that happen. With the gEDA guys there is a very noticeable MS-phobia which will keep this otherwise promising CAD tool in the niche area. Plus they do not seem to believe in the integrated suite concept yet that's clearly where the market is going since years.

Kicad could probably be fixed fairly easily but the movers and shakers do not listen to feedback such as mine. So ...

Also, in Protel, I normally drew a wide track around the edge of the board on the plane layers - this kept the plane copper from extending to the edge of the board - this could be important, especially if the board will be mounted in metal guides.

That should be standard design procedure for all rack cards. I remember a situation where a card puller handle snapped. So the guy took a big flat blade screwdriver, reached in ... *PHSSSOOOSH* ... that lit up the lab pretty good.

nish

o set

reg

e:

alogue

s,

In eagle the isolation set for pours also goes for pour to outline same for not plated holes for screws etc.

-Lasse

As usual, I forgot the smiley face. Sorry. :-)

Joerg -

JeffM was, in his opinion, screwed by CadSoft some years ago. He has a vendetta and looks for any post where he can jump in and post his link to his years-old complaint. You will get nowhere by replying to him. Your comments about happy customers are right on. I've used Eagle for about the last 10 years and have had no problems that were not handled by their tech support. Stick to your guns.

Cheers, John S

IIRC, the edge of the board can be specified in Eagle so that what you suggest is not necessary.

John S

That sounds like a very odd and obfustigated way to get a copper pour. AFAIK you can define copper pours in most programs by drawing a polygon. In some software packages (Orcad Layout comes to mind) you can define a layer as a plane so the layer if filled with copper by default and anything you 'draw' in it is anti-copper.

One of my customers used Geda and PCB to create a design. IMHO a paid CAD package is more productive. Jeff's warnings made me not buy Eagle but spend the cash on a second hand CAD package instead.

I tried Kicad but I'm not impressed.

I thank those people for not having to deal with dongles, tedious registration schemes, node locks, etc. I always use the cracked version and leave the original on the shelf. I have a rule: if software has some kind of registration/licensing scheme I won't buy it unless there is a cracked version. I don't want to be punished or held on a leash when buying software.