Hi all,
I've been hacking away at a little project you might find useful:
http://footprinter.xyz/It's a very basic footprint editor that lets you draw pads on top of the recommended footprints from component datasheets.
There's more information on GitHub at
https://github.com/fredgreer/footprinterPlease let me know if it helps you!
Hi,
Please tell me how to use it and what version of Kicad it is compatible with.
Thanks in advance.
Neat! One thing I would suggest would be to have the size of new pads be equal to the size of the most recent pad placed.
There is some sort of copy function shown on the demo but I don't see how it is started. Is this working for anyone?
There is some sort of copy function shown on the demo but I don't see how it is started. Is this working for anyone?
Ctrl+C and then Ctrl+V works for me.
Hi,
How do you install / use it ?
There's no executable, so I think that it's a plugin. I'm stuck here !
Regards
It's not a plug in. It works as a web page in Firefox but would not work in IE. Try a different browser.
Don't those things in the datasheet always say "not to scale" and such?
It's not a plug in. It works as a web page in Firefox but would not work in IE. Try a different browser.
Not so obvious to open
http://footprinter.xyz/ ! The readme file is very confusing.
Thanks a lot anyway, you put me on the right way.
Regards
Don't those things in the datasheet always say "not to scale" and such?
yup. exactly my first thought ... also vertical and horizontal may be differently scaled.
i would like to see a 'solidowrks style' interface.
you draw shapes and specify distances / lengths between objects.
Don't those things in the datasheet always say "not to scale" and such?
yup. exactly my first thought ... also vertical and horizontal may be differently scaled.
i would like to see a 'solidowrks style' interface.
you draw shapes and specify distances / lengths between objects.
Very much this. Every time I have to draw something in any EDA I've tried I find myself really wishing I had a dimension tool.
The nice thing about Kicad is that the footprint format is plain text and fairly simple. With some practice you can have a text editor open in one window, the datasheet in another, and just enter the footprint by hand. This is much faster than any graphical tool.
I tried it briefly to create a QFN40 footprint from a datasheet.
- Precision is not good, to match the pad sizes from the datasheet I still end up entering the actual numbers from the datasheet, I'm not able to match the numbers using the visual interface
- Positioning of the pads is consequently off
- Positioning the pads with the mouse is tedious and difficult get the necessary precision
- Screen captures from the datasheet, which is what I'd mostly do, doesn't give a reference precise enough. All the lines are multiple pixels thick
Footprint attached for reference
I tried it briefly to create a QFN40 footprint from a datasheet.
- Precision is not good, to match the pad sizes from the datasheet I still end up entering the actual numbers from the datasheet, I'm not able to match the numbers using the visual interface
- Positioning of the pads is consequently off
- Positioning the pads with the mouse is tedious and difficult get the necessary precision
- Screen captures from the datasheet, which is what I'd mostly do, doesn't give a reference precise enough. All the lines are multiple pixels thick
Footprint attached for reference
footprints like that are easy to make. it's the crap like this that is a pain in the butt :
footprints like that are easy to make. it's the crap like this that is a pain in the butt :
Yeah, I know. If you need a standard footprint there are other, better options, like the footprint wizards in KiCAD
But still, I'd prefer a parametric input instead of a point-n-click interface, which might get me a result quickly but what's it worth if the pads are a couple 10ths of millimeters off because it's not possible to setup the scale or place the pads with enough precision.
footprints like that are easy to make. it's the crap like this that is a pain in the butt :
Yeah, I know. If you need a standard footprint there are other, better options, like the footprint wizards in KiCAD
But still, I'd prefer a parametric input instead of a point-n-click interface, which might get me a result quickly but what's it worth if the pads are a couple 10ths of millimeters off because it's not possible to setup the scale or place the pads with enough precision.
exactly. Last friday i had to make one for a power ic that had pads with 45 degree and 33 degree angles in them ... QFN device with internal pads ,pads with cutout , pads that widen as the enter the body. And of course datasheet had all measurements .... except the ones i need ( center of pad and pad length and width. They only gave the edge coordinates ... mmaaargghhhhh so i modeled it in solidworks since there you can easily specify anything to anything and the tool will warp and bend your sketch to your specification. ) load the step file in altium -> create pcb from 3d body model . kaploink. done.
I tried it briefly to create a QFN40 footprint from a datasheet.
- Precision is not good, to match the pad sizes from the datasheet I still end up entering the actual numbers from the datasheet, I'm not able to match the numbers using the visual interface
- Positioning of the pads is consequently off
- Positioning the pads with the mouse is tedious and difficult get the necessary precision
- Screen captures from the datasheet, which is what I'd mostly do, doesn't give a reference precise enough. All the lines are multiple pixels thick
Footprint attached for reference
footprints like that are easy to make. it's the crap like this that is a pain in the butt :
And connectors. Especially the ones that come without 3d file to verify, and interlock with an enclosure, with a datasheet full with strange mix of imperial and metric values. Drafted by a person who is a mechanical engineer, never made a footprint in his life and doesn't really speak English.
I tried it briefly to create a QFN40 footprint from a datasheet.
- Precision is not good, to match the pad sizes from the datasheet I still end up entering the actual numbers from the datasheet, I'm not able to match the numbers using the visual interface
- Positioning of the pads is consequently off
- Positioning the pads with the mouse is tedious and difficult get the necessary precision
- Screen captures from the datasheet, which is what I'd mostly do, doesn't give a reference precise enough. All the lines are multiple pixels thick
Footprint attached for reference
footprints like that are easy to make. it's the crap like this that is a pain in the butt :
And connectors. Especially the ones that come without 3d file to verify, and interlock with an enclosure, with a datasheet full with strange mix of imperial and metric values. Drafted by a person who is a mechanical engineer, never made a footprint in his life and doesn't really speak English.
yup, those too.. i HATE connectors. to the point that, if a manufacturer can not provide a detailed STEP file i refuse to use their product.
I tried it briefly to create a QFN40 footprint from a datasheet.
- Precision is not good, to match the pad sizes from the datasheet I still end up entering the actual numbers from the datasheet, I'm not able to match the numbers using the visual interface
- Positioning of the pads is consequently off
- Positioning the pads with the mouse is tedious and difficult get the necessary precision
- Screen captures from the datasheet, which is what I'd mostly do, doesn't give a reference precise enough. All the lines are multiple pixels thick
Footprint attached for reference
footprints like that are easy to make. it's the crap like this that is a pain in the butt :
And connectors. Especially the ones that come without 3d file to verify, and interlock with an enclosure, with a datasheet full with strange mix of imperial and metric values. Drafted by a person who is a mechanical engineer, never made a footprint in his life and doesn't really speak English.
yup, those too.. i HATE connectors. to the point that, if a manufacturer can not provide a detailed STEP file i refuse to use their product.
Have you found you're able to trust those STEP files? So far I've always created the part per the numbers and just considered it a bonus if the step file works, let alone is fully detailed (and not obnoxious colours).