delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f |
X-Recipient: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
DKIM-Signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; |
d=gmail.com; s=20120113; | |
h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references | |
:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition | |
:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:user-agent; | |
bh=18zHUq5wTmWoCyez87hdPsjjeMvveua+99v5tdiAsI8=; | |
b=SwSixwuFaEnqmi0r/DY8CSN+bsjNkPwKIKIiudvQm2Ia11uzSh0kyZCi957TUqXU+s | |
M4nYfk7ude3ffgAxv0KK7HXpOWgwYHRxa9LIr+DPKv5+3wjabHgZb8L83iVUbLdIhZQO | |
Sfcn0XcYmDv2AxLeAoDm/T/zmwlVyHLzuuu2uWuKOIEWHb3qzyh2kU7MgJHKLe+l0Y3N | |
iQB0ovaQXs9BMdXWy3PWNd1M2VxV6SeARRRc8TjK/GwRJgshB7/dlvxPnGDcIO2zztwX | |
JQD+ckrMjQJ22Og4CA5DXFfE+9RwgzIZOr2VBgkl7GbIr5Noxf4e1xR9WGVy3iTNwfN8 | |
CimA== | |
X-Received: | by 10.112.202.69 with SMTP id kg5mr21691883lbc.33.1407148770427; |
Mon, 04 Aug 2014 03:39:30 -0700 (PDT) | |
Date: | Mon, 4 Aug 2014 14:39:27 +0400 |
From: | Vladimir Zhbanov <vzhbanov AT gmail DOT com> |
To: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
Subject: | Re: [geda-user] Silkscreened component values, mailing list, and |
gEDA development | |
Message-ID: | <20140804103927.GF24580@localhost.localdomain> |
Mail-Followup-To: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
References: | <alpine DOT LNX DOT 2 DOT 02 DOT 1406291518550 DOT 30669 AT localhost DOT localdomain> |
<1404129760 DOT 16971 DOT 8 DOT camel AT pcjc2lap> | |
<4F3EB7F5-6600-4ED1-9DD0-9333AED9CC9A AT noqsi DOT com> | |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
In-Reply-To: | <4F3EB7F5-6600-4ED1-9DD0-9333AED9CC9A@noqsi.com> |
User-Agent: | Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) |
Reply-To: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
Errors-To: | nobody AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailing-List: | geda-user AT delorie DOT com |
X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 08:50:45AM -0600, John Doty wrote: > > On Jun 30, 2014, at 6:02 AM, Peter Clifton <pcjc2 AT cam DOT ac DOT uk> wrote: > > > I think diode-3.sym agrees with the ACY series diodes in PCB (or at > > least, has reversed pin 1 & 2 from diode-1.sym. > > Screaming Circuits recently stopped checking diode pin numbers against > schematics, resulting in a bunch of boards with reversed diodes. They > told my customer that "the convention" is that cathode is pin 1. > Perhaps there is an emerging defacto convention, although I’m not > aware of any standard. There is at least an IPC standard. You can find at http://landpatterns.ipc.org/IPC-7351BNamingConvention.pdf. See p.5 for numbering conventions. They seem to follow IEC standards, but I'm in doubt since I found no IEC convention on pin numbering yet. I've also found a link to the full version of the standard. See it at http://pcbget.ru/Files/Standarts/IPC_7351.pdf. Pin numbering examples start at page 66. We could follow that standard in regard to gschem->pcb workflow. > For SPICE, the anode comes first, so it should have pinseq=1. > diode-1.sym and diode-2.sym are correct, but diode-3.sym and > schottky-1.sym are wrong. Many symbol creators don’t seem to > understand pinseq. For SPICE, I'm thinking of using a unique attribute, say "pinnode". So we could part the two workflows - simulation in SPICE and making pcb's. I believe that in general every particular workflow should lean on its own attributes in gEDA/gaf. Vladimir
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |