Library Management

[spflanze]

Yesterday I downloaded and installed the latest Kicad. While doing so I noticed that part libaries were a separate download. So I installed Git, and cloned the libaries into the directory: "C:\Kicad User Libraries\Git".

Then I ran Kicad and found that the Kicad installation already included a part library which is located at: "C:\Program Files\KiCad\share\kicad"

Do these libraries contain the same part data? If not, what are the best practices for using them together?

Should Git have been used to synchronize the data at "C:\Program Files\KiCad\share\kicad" instead of cloning to as new directory?

[Doctorandus_P]

For beginners with KiCad I recommend installing and using just the default libraries that come with KiCad itself.

I also recommend to not be afraid of modifying existing schematic symbols or Footprints to make them fit particular needs for custom projects. The editors for schematic symbols and footprints have a coherent interface and work "just as expected" when you know Eeschema and Pcbnew, so the learning curve is small and not steep.

Sometimes I try to find a weird part in some online library. Even when I find such a part it usually would have taken less time to design it myself (or from modifying an existing schematic symbol or footprint). Qualitiy of online found Footprints is also dubious. They are often made from some generic generator that does not always fit well with KiCad, so you end up modifying those footprint anyway. And of course you have to check them. I never trust such footprints.

[phil from seattle]

+1 on modifying library entries.

If you use JLCPCB, they want a pin one indicator for ICs and few (if any) SMD IC footprints in the libraries have that. So, I wind up copying them and adding a circle near pin 1. Same thing for LED and Diode footprints - I add an anode indicator.

[jziegler]

Take another look at the SMD ICs, there is a pin 1 indicator on many that I looked at, but it's less obvious than the typical dot.  The line on the edge of the body extends along pin 1.  The line lines stop short of the other pins.  I saw this on both SOIC parts and an oscillator that I used.  But at first I didn't think there was a pin 1 marking either.

I have not used any diodes or LEDs so far, so I can't speak to those.

[phil from seattle]

Yeah, I see that but JLCPCB is pretty clear about the dot.  And, I want it to be super easy to see as the assembly techs are really pushed to be fast. I've learned that any ambiguity is bad when it comes to getting boards assembled.

[jziegler]

I didn't notice them saying that they want a dot (must have missed it), but I did have boards assembled by them recently with the standard KiCad footprints.  I have not tested the boards (just got them a couple days ago and I'm busy) but inspecting them it looks correct.  I also made sure that the alignment was correct in their viewer by editing the position file for correct rotation.

I'll also note that this is my first hobby project that I has assembled outside.  And in my professional work, I do the schematic and review the boards, but have a PCB designer that I work with that handles preparing everything for assembly.

And I agree about wanting to avoid ambiguity.  I've seen some issues over the years caused by that...

[ebastler]

Since I am also (slowly) moving towards my first order of assembled PCBs from JCPCB, and was planning on using the standard KiCad footprints with only the elongated edge line indicating pin 1, I'd like to double-check:

Where exactly does JLCPCB say that you must place dots on the silkscreen? All I found is this page, which explains their placement previewer and the meaning of the red dots it shows. Yes, they do talk about dots in the silkscreen, but I take that to be merely an example of how pin 1 can be marked in the silkscreen.

I also found discussions in other forums where posters mentioned that they have successfully had boards produced without any silkscreen at all. It seems that if there are clear pin 1 markings on the silkscreen, JLCPCB uses them for a plausibility check of parts orientation. If there aren't, you are on your own and better check things carefully in the placement preview.

Can anyone confirm or deny? Thanks!

[phil from seattle]

You can do anything you want, it is your call.  During the submit process, they allow you to change rotations on SMT parts so you can fix problems by updating the CPL file and reuploading it.  Having a clear indicator (their gerber viewer in the rotation check section is not that good) so you can be 100% sure is worthwhile.

Some people let the JLCPCB techs fix the rotations.  In that case, I would err on the side of blindingly obvious.