Author Topic: "Standardizing" schematic part sizes with page  (Read 1731 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline LoveLaikaTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 580
  • Country: us
"Standardizing" schematic part sizes with page
« on: September 25, 2020, 02:00:15 pm »
Sometimes, when I work on a schematic in KiCAD, I find that there are component and page mismatches. What I mean is that because of the way the KiCAD schematic page is laid out, I can't seem to be able to reach a node on a component at times. I think this has something to do with the schematic grid size/spacing, my custom-made components, maybe even KiCAD's own components. It's kind of annoying, so I'm trying to fix it by either fixing the schematic template or redoing my own custom parts to be more aligned with the default KiCAD schematic grid. What are the typical units and spacing of KiCAD's own grid so that I may use it as a guide when redoing my old components?
 

Offline greenpossum

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 408
  • Country: au
Re: "Standardizing" schematic part sizes with page
« Reply #1 on: September 25, 2020, 02:24:43 pm »
https://forum.kicad.info/t/tutorial-how-to-make-a-symbol-kicad-v5-1-x/13336

Use a 50 (default) or 100 mil grid or you will have problems connecting things.
 

Offline LoveLaikaTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 580
  • Country: us
Re: "Standardizing" schematic part sizes with page
« Reply #2 on: September 25, 2020, 02:39:28 pm »
Thanks. That helps a lot. Everyone seems to like to use mils whereas I'm used to millimeters. I know that mils is a common standard, but it's kind of annoying at times, especially when engineering formulas seems to use the metric system.
 

Offline janoc

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3873
  • Country: de
Re: "Standardizing" schematic part sizes with page
« Reply #3 on: September 25, 2020, 02:47:31 pm »
Thanks. That helps a lot. Everyone seems to like to use mils whereas I'm used to millimeters. I know that mils is a common standard, but it's kind of annoying at times, especially when engineering formulas seems to use the metric system.

Mils vs mm really shouldn't matter as long as the grid of the symbol is the same (or integer multiple) of the grid used in the editor. Of course, if you want to use existing symbol libraries it is better to stick to the conventions.

This mils/millimeters matters when laying out a board because through-hole footprints are usually on an imperial 0.1" grid and SMD ones are mostly metric.
 

Offline greenpossum

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 408
  • Country: au
Re: "Standardizing" schematic part sizes with page
« Reply #4 on: September 25, 2020, 02:48:18 pm »
It's historical and anyway it's irrelevant for a schematic which is symbolic whereas on a PCB it is physical. You can think if it as 1.27mm or 2.54mm if you wish. Engineering types have all sorts of conversion factors in their head anyway.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf