PCB Layout Programs

[chemelec]

Sprint Layout, Version 6

Has anyone tried the "Sprint 6 Layout" software?

I Bought it, But I am Not happy with it.

[ApBerg]

Has anyone tried the "Sprint 6 Layout" software?

I Bought it, But I am Not happy with it.

Hello Gary,

For some years I have used Sprint Layout now, some months ago made the update to version 6... and at first I tought it was a mistake... the program did things I was not happy with...
But now I am used to it, things I did not like can be turned off (or on) , parts moving with or without rubberbanding.. snap to grid or parts also can be on/off
So by now i like it..by the way, make a update from the Abacom's site there are some update's

In the past I have used most know programs.. Protels Esytrax, Ultiboard, etc etc .. for my working years always used Autocad.. but for the hobby electronics I am happy with SprintLayout..
(have no connection with.. and have payed Abacom for the online download version)

But as always..some like it and some not.. and I think that thats good , keeps things going.

So best regards to a cold Canada, must be winter ?

Ap

[Prospector_Al]

Hi Andy,

Perhpaps schematic capture programs should be discussed in the same time? Some programs like the one I'm using: "ARES", by Proteus in the U.K., can take a schematic and translate it into a PCB layout. It works well in many respects, but it has one very annoying feature: The graphic symbols for OP-AMPs are show upside down. i.e. not like the symbols in the manufacturer's spec sheets. The devices themselves are defined in silicon, and they can't be changed simply, whereas symbols on a page can be changed with a few key strokes, but the company insists on sticking to some convention designed by people who have no hardwarde experioence. In my opinion, the manufacturer's symbols and those used by a schematic program should be identical.

The discrepancy has caused me to make a number of errors...

How does Eagle show the symbols? Like the manufacturer's or like a stupid ANSI rule?

Regards,

Der_Shatzsucher_Al

[chemelec]

I sent actual Euros to the company in Germany to get it on a CD.
and I Just recieved it 2 week ago, so it should be up to date.

It is a Bit Cool Here, (now Slightly above Freezing) But I am off to PERU on Friday for a 3 week Holiday.

Previously I have been using a "Registered" Version of "QuickRoute 2", origionally made for win3.1.
Not as Fancy as this Sprint program, but it does most of what I need and it is very easy to run.
Seems to have some things not available on sprint

[Pete the Builder]

it has one very annoying feature: The graphic symbols for OP-AMPs are show upside down. i.e. not like the symbols in the manufacturer's spec sheets. The devices themselves are defined in silicon, and they can't be changed simply, whereas symbols on a page can be changed with a few key strokes, but the company insists on sticking to some convention designed by people who have no hardwarde experioence. In my opinion, the manufacturer's symbols and those used by a schematic program should be identical.

The discrepancy has caused me to make a number of errors...

That's a really good point. There is nothing worse, IMHO, than to place a component on a schematic, and find that someone has just placed the pins around the outline anticlockwise, or alphabetically, instead of logically. Grrrr...

So a "good" schematic drawing tool should either have a component library that works logically, or else that is relatively easy to modify. I must admit, with some of my newer designs, I spend nearly as much time creating new components as designing; but the results speak for themselves, I think. At least, they work properly, and look like they should!
-PtB

[Mechanic]

Hi Andy,

Perhpaps schematic capture programs should be discussed in the same time? Some programs like the one I'm using: "ARES", by Proteus in the U.K., can take a schematic and translate it into a PCB layout. It works well in many respects, but it has one very annoying feature: The graphic symbols for OP-AMPs are show upside down. i.e. not like the symbols in the manufacturer's spec sheets. The devices themselves are defined in silicon, and they can't be changed simply, whereas symbols on a page can be changed with a few key strokes, but the company insists on sticking to some convention designed by people who have no hardwarde experioence. In my opinion, the manufacturer's symbols and those used by a schematic program should be identical.

The discrepancy has caused me to make a number of errors...

How does Eagle show the symbols? Like the manufacturer's or like a stupid ANSI rule?

Regards,

Der_Shatzsucher_Al

Hi Al,

Are you able to right click on the component and flip it?

I use Diptrace and can do that as well as swap pins around in the schematic view to help things flow better.

Some features I think are very important in a cct layout program are linking between schematic and pcb, ability to import and export in common formats, ability to make/ edit components and footprints and ability to easily import and edit parts library's. Also tracks staying attached when moving components is a must.

Cheers Mick

[ODM]

Opamp symbols? The opamp inputs are free to swap and flip around as one wishes. It's just the pos/neg symbols which give an indication of what the inputs are, as well as notation for compensation and offset trim etc. Manufacturers will generally use the symbols how they wish. Example, page 2 vs 5, and then the multitude of test layouts which follow - a TI datasheet: http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/lmh6609.pdf
For another example, there's LT - two arrangements of +/- inputs and no input symbols at all, just text: http://cds.linear.com/docs/en/datasheet/13645fa.pdf
There are examples for this in practically every major manufacturer's datasheets, so it's a case of "designer beware".

For the jedec pinouts of opamps and comparators, there are a few curious alternatives - mostly legacy parts. Just about every part made these days conforms to the de facto standards for pinouts.

As far as going about with this in Eagle goes, it has standard libs for different national vs. international logic notation symbols, so you can choose what logic symbols you prefer. Same goes with symbols for passive components.

If you want to reallocate inputs in a part, or wish to use a different amp/gate part from the same package, there are quick functions for pin/gate swapping that will let you reroute the use of parts as you want. Practically every smooth cad gui does it these days though.

[Prospector_Al]

That's a really good point. There is nothing worse, IMHO, than to place a component on a schematic, and find that someone has just placed the pins around the outline anticlockwise, or alphabetically, instead of logically. Grrrr...

So a "good" schematic drawing tool should either have a component library that works logically, or else that is relatively easy to modify. I must admit, with some of my newer designs, I spend nearly as much time creating new components as designing; but the results speak for themselves, I think. At least, they work properly, and look like they should!
-PtB

Hi Pete,

Yes, it's possible to flip the symbols in ARES, and it's also possible to "decompose" them and put them together again so that the pin positions correspond to the real world situation, bit it really shouldn't be necessary to do that for every symbol, especially in a program that isn't free.

I'm looking for a better program--the lost time in fiddling with the symbols outweighs the cosst of a program that is designed ny professionals.


Just my opinion,

Allan

[sido]

Hi Guys,

Well my choice is diptrace. I have tried many before it and they just didn't make sense. Diptrace is straight forward. There are heaps of component library's that come with it and there are also component library's that other users have kindly uploaded to the diptrace site for free download. I have only had to make a couple of footprints for parts that I could not find. It also has a schematic program so you can make your schematic first, then take that schematic and auto place and auto route. But I am lazy, I work from paper schematics and manually lay everything out. That way it is how I want it to be!

Minimum grid size is .001", Excellent for making very tight boards!

The only down side to this program is that it is pin limited to 300 pins/pads or you can get a fully functional 30 day trial. If you were working on something big you could build the different circuit modules, then get the 30day full functional one and combine all of the modules into 1 board.... Probably have to reformat your windows drive somewhere in the process too!!

Design spark seems to have a lot of/all features, but I just can't seem to get it to work for me. I go looking in the footprint library, get lost, and clost the program about 10 minutes later! One day!


Cheers Mick

Would have to agree there Mick. After having fears to learn something new with software, I bit the bullet last night and downloaded the Freeware version of Diptrace. Having never used a professional Electronic Design software, within a hour I was able to design a basic 10 component count schematic, then input it to PCB and was able to produce my very first Negative artwork.

What a well laid out UI and great easy to follow tutorials.

Even though i spent only a hour, i still have a lot to learn.
I am glad i read this thread and thanks Mick for recommending the Diptrace EDS. So far i like it. Will take a while to learn its full capability as its all a new learning curve for me.

BTW Mick. To get 3D to work do i have to download the 97 Meg utility software to run that mode??
And can i import a schematic from a PDF File?? Sort of jumping the gun here, but would just like to know.

Cheers Sid

[Aziz]

Hi all,

I like the good old unix command line-style German PCB & schematics program called Eagle.
Aziz