Yay! Much better looking than before. You have a super AD8655, take good care of it
-
Welcome back Guest! Did you know you can mentor other members here at H-M? If not, please check out our Relaunch of Hobby Machinist Mentoring Program!
Needing more than a spark test?
- Thread starter graham-xrf
- Start date
This is a partial reason to my resistance to upgrading. I'm mid design at this point, so I don't really want to "have the cheese moved". When I get this one finished, I will do the upgrade.
It went seamless. On startup, it asked to configure the default global library set (recommended), or to use the custom configuration. I said to keep the custom, but it has not gone as expected. You are right to do what you did mid-design. I was not that far into it. I expect I have to mess with libraries again, to get back to my user global stuff, but that's OK.
My desktop link brought up the project, my schematic looks intact.
For my Ubuntu-based Linux Mint, I used..
sudo add-apt-repository --yes ppa:kicad/kicad-7.0-releases
sudo apt update
sudo apt install --install-recommends kicad
apt upgrade.
Everything Kicad 6 has evaporated, replaced by Kicad 7. It loads the previous version drawing, and saves it as the new version.
Kicad V6 is not being maintained anymore.
Stay with Kicad 6 until you reach a point you can afford to risk it. I had less to lose.
This is what I feared - losing my custom global libraries. I don't have a huge amount of them, but it is a pain to fix up that kind of stuff.
It turns out the package manager for my Ubuntu variant, Pop!OS, has KiCAD now at 7.0, but it is in the Pop!OS repo, which I rarely pull from. I will have to block that update for a while. In synaptic which uses Ubuntu repos, I only see V6. Going to have to watch all this carefully the next month...
Definitely block the update!
At least, Kicad does store all the symbols used into the project file itself, so that even if exported, the symbols and footprints stay with it. That is why my ADC did display in Kicad 7.
That said, in my (brief) look, I do not see my Global User Library. I expect it can be put back, but I would not have wanted that to happen if I was in the middle of a layout!
I have read that when Kicad updates, it does not overwrite everything in a library. I understand that stuff the user put there can stay unharmed, and it may only need a configuration path setup to see it again. We shall see!
Random data point: I tried the V7 update today. I don't have a good methodology for keeping my custom/user libraries, but my footprints using LOCAL_LIBRARY_DIR all successfully persist across the upgrade, including the environment variable/path. I don't use a global user library as I edit on two different computers (shop vs house) using a NAS to share project files. (That probably doesn't preclude a global user library, just how I set myself up). I'm running kicad on my Win10 machines. V6 and V7 are both installed and both work. I did back up all my files before starting V7.
Last edited:
Due to my inexperience in setting up KiCAD, some of my local libraries are in different spots, which is a bit frustrating. Makes it harder to back up.
I have stuff in /home/.local/share/kicad/6.0/symbols and in /home/Documents/kicad/library, and one other spot. I don't know why they didn't go in a common area. I'll have to figure out a backup scheme for this prior to an upgrade. Seems the simplest is just to backup ./local/share and Documents/kicad. My footprints seem to be all in the same area. Somehow I will blunder through this.
There is the Preferences --> Manage Symbol Libraries, and --> Manage Footprint Libraries.
They let you create both global and local libraries, and set paths to them.
I honestly have not explored V7 yet.
Today was taken up casting lead (another story), and rescuing a Jones & Shipman 300mm circular drive table, now no longer with the Bridgeport the owner has sold on. We got to it just in time, removed the slight flash suface rust that was starting to give it the orange tinge, and then gave it some ACF50 corrosion protection. Also constructed a wooden carry device it bolts to, with handles each side for two people to safely move it about. It's now way too late, and I will take things up again tomorrow.
Last edited:
Added in some components to my PCB, a display, a Teensy 4.1, and an ADC! Wow, things got complicated fast!
What is the minimum size "cheap" via that can be done? KiCAD default was 0.7 pad with a 0.3mm hole. Too big for the ADC! I tried 0.6 pads and 0.3 holes to get a little more room. I really need smaller ones, and smaller traces. For my narrow traces I use 0.2mm, it helps a littel.
I will have to use 0402 parts in close to the ADC, because 0603's are BIG. I sort of did things backwards, by not placing the capacitors first. Not so good. I have 4 internal planes for power supplies and 2 external layers for routing. Haven't figured out the ADC related zones yet.
What is the minimum size "cheap" via that can be done? KiCAD default was 0.7 pad with a 0.3mm hole. Too big for the ADC! I tried 0.6 pads and 0.3 holes to get a little more room. I really need smaller ones, and smaller traces. For my narrow traces I use 0.2mm, it helps a littel.
I will have to use 0402 parts in close to the ADC, because 0603's are BIG. I sort of did things backwards, by not placing the capacitors first. Not so good. I have 4 internal planes for power supplies and 2 external layers for routing. Haven't figured out the ADC related zones yet.
@WobblyHand
Here is a link to jlcpcb's tech specs: https://jlcpcb.com/capabilities/pcb-capabilities
I tend to set the spec's to slightly more than the given minimums (several youtube discussions on this can be found, e.g., eevblog).
I use .55/.25 for a minimum via size, .1mm for a minimum trace width and trace to trace clearance on 4 layer boards. I use .25mm as my default trace width, typically .5mm routed power/ground traces..
Also, not sure of your circuit speed, but if the lines to the left of U5 are of any speed, I'd suggest spacing the traces further apart. While the pcb design rules give a minimum, cross coupling can be problematic and the minimums are for fan out at small parts but not great for long parallel runs. I use 1mm as a rule of thumb. 3x the trace width is apparently a common recommendation. I'm throwing this out as what I've picked up for good basic design practices, if you have more experience then let that lead you.
0402s? That's smaller than I would attempt if assembling it by hand using a hot air rework station.
Here is a link to jlcpcb's tech specs: https://jlcpcb.com/capabilities/pcb-capabilities
I tend to set the spec's to slightly more than the given minimums (several youtube discussions on this can be found, e.g., eevblog).
I use .55/.25 for a minimum via size, .1mm for a minimum trace width and trace to trace clearance on 4 layer boards. I use .25mm as my default trace width, typically .5mm routed power/ground traces..
Also, not sure of your circuit speed, but if the lines to the left of U5 are of any speed, I'd suggest spacing the traces further apart. While the pcb design rules give a minimum, cross coupling can be problematic and the minimums are for fan out at small parts but not great for long parallel runs. I use 1mm as a rule of thumb. 3x the trace width is apparently a common recommendation. I'm throwing this out as what I've picked up for good basic design practices, if you have more experience then let that lead you.
Are you considering a split ground plane? I've heard pros and cons on that. I made ground plane cuts around my ADC but was careful to make sure I didn't route any lines over the cuts due to impedance changes causing reflections.
0402s? That's smaller than I would attempt if assembling it by hand using a hot air rework station.
Last edited: