I am looking at using the open source PCB layout software FreePCB. I have used Eagle in the past, but I want to make a board slightly larger than the free version will support. I searched a bit looking for comments on FreePCB, but I don't see any. The latest note from the developer says he has not received any bug reports on the latest version. So it sounds like it might be usable.
Anyone had any experience with this?
I've tried it. It is remarkably stable, and does more than free closed-source layout programs I've tried. It comes with a large library of pre-defined footprints and has a built in footprint editor that is very easy to use. There aren't many limitations in FreePCB that I know of.
I can't compare it to Eagle, haven't used it.
-Chris
proxy wrote:
larger
Does FreePCB autoroute at all? Didn't find any mention in the homepage.
The Home page
Luca
All I can say that's positive about FreePCB is it's free. Other than that it's pretty awful. Reminds me of one of the original, pre-historic layout products back in the 70's. It was like a system we had based on a DEC PDP 11 in college.
But if you haven't any money then go try and use it. You might, just, get a rudimentary PCB out of it. However, if you have a few hundred dollars to spare then go get something that does the job properly... Don't mess with this nonsense.
Prescott
Autorouter draws or tries to draw all the tracks automagically according to the schematic. This can also be infuenced by many different rules. This operation can also be very time consuming if the board is very complex. But basically autorouter can save a lot of time.
Eagle, for example, has an autorouter. It can we found here:
A person just posted on the Forum of TARGET3001:
Hello, I have a Target 3001! Smart v 11 license, with a 700 pin/pad limit. I have used Target 3001 to design the schematic of the circuit I was developing in my graduate work. As the time was not too much, I have used the Target embedded autorouter to partly route my circuit, with two layers, about 500 pads. Then, I have modified some autorouted tracks, but, anyway, the autorouter has made it possible to save hours and hours (if not a few days), and realize also the PCB with soldered components, so I had it available on the academy board's desk. The whole conceptual work and the final circuit project are the important things in earning a degree, but also the physically realized circuit was of great interest to the academy board! Thank you.
I agree, that an autorouter is really something you should think about.
Certain parts of layout, like RF or analog should be done mostly by hand. But often circuits have a digital parts you the tool can do it for you, much faster. Especially, if you can select traces and options in an autorouter your result will turn out good. For how much,$59 or $149 that is really worth the money. ...richard
D> All I can say that's positive about FreePCB is it's free. Other than
just,
And an autoplacer.
And a trace optimizer, not that I've gotten a lot of feedback about what it does to your board.
Don Prescott wrote: : All I can say that's positive about FreePCB is it's free. Other than : that it's pretty awful. Reminds me of one of the original, : pre-historic layout products back in the 70's. It was like a system : we had based on a DEC PDP 11 in college.
If the OP runs Linux, he might try looking at gEDA/PCB:
It's becoming the cannonical free/open-source EDA suite for Linux users.
: But if you haven't any money then go try and use it. You might, just, : get a rudimentary PCB out of it. However, if you have a few hundred : dollars to spare then go get something that does the job properly... : Don't mess with this nonsense.
Don't worry about Don -- he hates any software which you can get for free:
We all suspect that Don is a rudimentary AI application written by Cadence or Synopsys.
I suggest that the OP try FreePCB, and then give gEDA/PCB a spin. I can't speak for FreePCB, but I'll bet that he'll be plesantly suprised by the quality offered by the free/open-source package gEDA/PCB.
In any event, one is always best off trying the application for ones-self than taking advice from Usenet. My advice: Take suggestions from Usenet posters, but form one's own opinion.
Stuart
I know it's not sporting to follow up to my own post, but I forgot to make a point.
Stuart Brorson wrote: : I suggest that the OP try FreePCB, and then give gEDA/PCB a spin. I : can't speak for FreePCB, but I'll bet that he'll be plesantly suprised : by the quality offered by the free/open-source package gEDA/PCB.
gEDA/PCB also has an autorouter, so it also provides that particular feature required for professional-quality work.
Stuart
Not true. I have played with the odd game I got for free in the past. In general though, for design tools you gets what you pay for. Some products are remarkably good value and impressive for the money - but money has to be involved if you are designing a fair size board that's not locked to a specific board manufacturer.
On top of the product usually being pretty gruesome to use you tend to get 'minor' drawbacks like you're in the middle of a job after spending 3 weeks on it and low and behold the file is corrupt and 'cos it's free or super cheap there ain't nobody to fix it for me. I have to start again. Or if some feature that I need that's supposed to work doesn't and 'cos it's open source there's nobody responsible.... So, the few hundred bucks I tried to save has been wiped-out there and then.
I saw something on here a few weeks back where a guy claimed an aerospace company had switched to 'open source' PCB software. Of course the company was never named. So, here's an invitation gimme some known companies that have switched to 'open source' on PCB design....And NOT down in some lab at a far flung outpost, I'm talking mainstream design. And PLEASE stick to the question - don't start telling me about Apache servers.
Prescott
Don, I can understand your reluctance to view free software as having reasonable quality if you have had experience in the past with other free tools that corrupted data or weren't supported.
FreePCB and gEDA/PCB don't have those problems.
What free PCB tools have you used?
-Chris
D>
to
'cos
and
These products don't produce the occasional corrupt design....? Well, that is quite remarkable. How do you know? How many boards have you designed with FreePCB and gEDA/PCB...?
What free board design tools have I tried.... well let's see, I tried AutoTRAX (the new one)- it's still at beta level after about 3 years, and it's no longer free. Erm.... the free version of Eagle. That's not bad for a free product. But you can't count that one, it's only useful for mickey mouse size boards in free form. I would not use a free PCB layout product on anything that has a commercial application. I only use products that are supported.
I haven't tried gEDA/PCB 'cos I believe it's Linux and I don't use Linux.
My point is this, yes if you look around the web you can find a free version of many applications, but not many people in the commercial world care to use these products. The potential savings just aren't worth it. OK. you're gonna say I'm wrong. The invitation is still open - name some known commercial organisations using open source tools for PCB Layout - (again, only PCB layout not servers, etc).
Prescott
I strongly suggest you try these tools before you criticize them. The tools you've tried are all trial versions of closed source, commercial tools. Try the open source tools, you'll be surprised by how well they perform.
If you like windows, FreePCB only runs on windows, and PCB runs happily on windows through Cygwin.
I built 4 boards with open source PCB tools. This isn't a huge sample size, but at least I am speaking from experience. No doubt if you change your question to, "who out there has fabbed a board with these tools?", you'll be flooded with response.
-Chris
D> >
Well,
application.
That is to your shame! Even the worst distribution of Linux is better than the best distribution of 'doze.
However, gEDA runs just fine under 'doze. The guys working on it are hardware and software professionals. As I understand it, some of them are even being paid by their employers to work on this project.
You are completely missing the point. There are scads of guys running small 1 or 2 person shops that cannot afford to spend $5000-50,000 per year to keep a seat of [Orcad,Mentor,Cadence...] warm.
With the commercial software, you generally get *almost* exactly what you pay for... The cheap hobby priced tools like Eagle, are just exactly that, cheap hobby grade tools.
The gEDA tool suite aspires to be much more. You need only do a google search on "Icarus Verilog" to get an idea of who's using the free tools, and for what. gEDA is certainly being used by most, if not all major universities.
-Chuck Harris
gEDA and PCB are supported. Both have active mailing lists and developers who are on those lists and respond to user's problems, usually with patches. If you're going to compare OSS with proprietary (it's a mistake to compare "free" (as in beer) to "commercial" because those are the wrong categories - Eagle is free but proprietary, RHEL is commercial but OSS) you should consider what kind of tech support you *really* get for prorietary products.
When comparing support, consider these questions:
Note that getting the right answer to some of these is *critical* for large organizations which rely heavily on working EDA tools. The fact that you have access to the tools' sources is a point in favor of OSS
- you avoid all the nasty negotiations for escrowing the proprietary tools's sources.
Heck, if you start waving money around you'll probably find a couple people willing to provide commercial support for gEDA/PCB. You could probably convince *me* to provide commercial support for PCB.
So? gEDA and PCB run on Windows too.
Since gEDA and PCB target small shops, perhaps this isn't a fair request, since commercial organizations using them won't be well known. However, as a Red Hat employee, I know of a *lot* of *large* companies choosing OSS over proprietary because of the answers they get for the above list of questions. For example, our group supports GCC for embedded devices, and we normally fix customer's problems in under 24 hours.
There you go, endorses my view exactly. No disrespect, 'open source' will undoubtedly nibble around the edges and find devotees, but someone running a commercial operation using design tools in anger is unlikely to want to drop 'paid-for' products and opt for 'open source'- not for a long time anyhow....
Prescott
Your logic is flawed. Just because product X targets small shops, does not mean that open source is inappropriate for commercial designs. You're confusing target audience with quality.
I've seen the feature set that the BIG eda vendors are providing, and the technology is just way more than small shops need, and it would be a lot of effort to try to keep up with them. Even Eagle is way out of that class, but you don't see me saying that "someone running a commercial operation using design tools in anger is unlikely to want to drop 'big shop' products and opt for 'Eagle'- not for a long time anyhow....".
If the vendor goes out of business, you're better off with open source software.
I consider this a minor point, only because vendors don't go out of business that often.
the
parts of
vendor?".
you
thing
I used to work in a software company that did work in the general EDA field. Never had a problem with Americans. It was only Europeans who would threaten legal action even though that only happened a couple of times. I don't think this is an argument anywhere in private industry. Maybe in government circles as they always try to cover their asses there.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.