Electronics > PCB/EDA/CAD

Difference in Schematic Layout and Footprint with DipTrace

(1/2) > >>

TripleFault:
Hi guys!
This is my first post here.

Could anybody tell me, Dave or somebody else, why Diptrace seems to make the Schematic representation of a component different than the footprint of the component.
For example: I was creating a Schematic with a dsPIC30F4011 and they seem to group all the pins by functionality instead of numerically.
This makes the schematic look like a dogs breakfast when you try to connect to 2 consecutive numbered pins, and instead you have to run the wires to 2 different sides of the chip.

Is it necessary to redraw my own Schematics and/or Footprints for each component I use and is this how they designed the program?

Any help would be most appreciated!

Cheers  ;)

kaz911:
Schematic representation has as many "variants" as opinions. Each designer does it different - each CAD vendor does it differently.

Some like all the fx ADC's grouped together - some like it to look like the chip pinout. I think Dave talked about it at some point - might have been on the AmpHour show?

I like grouping .. I like Vcc on top - and ground on bottom on the schematic. PIC pins are not usually that way :-)

But components are easy to edit in DT.. - So go ahead and make your own :-)

/Kaz

graynomad:

--- Quote ---Schematic representation of a component different than the footprint of the component.
--- End quote ---
That's normal and I would argue the preferred way.

Beginners like to have the schematic representation of a chip look like the real thing but that normally is what makes things look like a dog's breakfast.

In general the pins should be moved around to make the schematic as readable as possible, VCC on the top, GND on the bottom, inputs on the left (or right), outputs on the right (or left) etc etc. as appropriate for the circuit.

I've not used Diptrace but I would think it's easy to modify the components to suit your preferences. Certainly in Altium this is easy and I have 100s of components and footprints, all hand drawn and often with several variations for each chip.

______
Rob

sacherjj:
A good simple example of this is a quad op-amp.  It would make things much more complicated in the schematic to have a single schematic element, vs 4 op amps.  However, it would help you pick the best op amps to choose to make layout easier.

harnon:
Hi TripleFault, welcome aboard.

This will be the same with any EE CAD program as the schematic layout depends on the component library you are using.  As noted above, its generally meant to make the schematic more readable.  If the "default" layout you are using doesn't suit your schematic its normally pretty straightforward to edit the footprint or schematic layout. 

There are plenty of tutorials around (I've linked some in the Diptrace forum) that describe how to edit a part.  Good Luck!

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page