 |
Search Sci.Electronics.Basics |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Sci.Electronics.Basics -> generate a schematic for pcb ?
There are 20 messages in this thread.
You are currently looking at messages 1 to 20.
|
Author: robbDate: 17:22 09-12-07
|
|
is there a way to generate a schematic by just listing the
components and there connections instead of drawing it out in one
of the schematic tools ?
i was thinking something like
1. create a named list of all the board components
2. each component has a sequence of statements telling what it
connects to
EG Idea , U001:Pin 1 .to. U004:Pin 4
R001:in .to. T003:Collector
etc...
and then import that into sme schematic software to generate the
schematic ???
does something like that exist ***OR*** maybe there is an easier
way to schematic a legacy board ?
thakns for any help,
robb
|
|
|
|
Author: Tim WescottDate: 17:33 09-12-07
|
|
On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 17:22:16 -0500, robb wrote:
> is there a way to generate a schematic by just listing the components
> and there connections instead of drawing it out in one of the schematic
> tools ?
>
> i was thinking something like
> 1. create a named list of all the board components 2. each component has
> a sequence of statements telling what it connects to
> EG Idea , U001:Pin 1 .to. U004:Pin 4
> R001:in .to. T003:Collector
> etc...
>
> and then import that into sme schematic software to generate the
> schematic ???
>
>
> does something like that exist ***OR*** maybe there is an easier way to
> schematic a legacy board ?
>
> thakns for any help,
> robb
That's a "netlist", and no, I don't think there's a tool that'll take a
netlist and make a schematic out of it.
A good schematic and a poor schematic can both generate the same
netlist. The difference is that more people will be able to understand
the good schematic faster than the bad one. If you make a poor
schematic, then at some point someone will read it and curse you -- and
it may be you, after you've forgotten what you did!
So make a nice, logically organized schematic that you can be proud of.
--
Tim Wescott
Control systems and communications consulting
http://www.wescottdesign.com
Need to learn how to apply control theory in your embedded system?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" by Tim Wescott
Elsevier/Newnes, http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html
|
|
|
|
Author: D from BCDate: 17:52 09-12-07
|
|
On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 17:22:16 -0500, "robb" <some@where.on.net> wrote:
>is there a way to generate a schematic by just listing the
>components and there connections instead of drawing it out in one
>of the schematic tools ?
>
>i was thinking something like
>1. create a named list of all the board components
>2. each component has a sequence of statements telling what it
>connects to
> EG Idea , U001:Pin 1 .to. U004:Pin 4
> R001:in .to. T003:Collector
> etc...
>
>and then import that into sme schematic software to generate the
>schematic ???
>
>
>does something like that exist ***OR*** maybe there is an easier
>way to schematic a legacy board ?
>
>thakns for any help,
>robb
>
A netlist is generally used to go from schematic capture to PCB.
I think you're looking for a conversion from netlist to schematic
capture...
AFAIK that doesn't exist..
Well...not entirely true but I'll leave that detail out.
If it did exist, it would be cool to see auto schematic part placement
and connection autorouting done just like in PCB programs.
D from BC
|
|
|
|
Author: D from BCDate: 18:05 09-12-07
|
|
On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 16:33:17 -0600, Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com>
wrote:
>On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 17:22:16 -0500, robb wrote:
>
>> is there a way to generate a schematic by just listing the components
>> and there connections instead of drawing it out in one of the schematic
>> tools ?
>>
>> i was thinking something like
>> 1. create a named list of all the board components 2. each component has
>> a sequence of statements telling what it connects to
>> EG Idea , U001:Pin 1 .to. U004:Pin 4
>> R001:in .to. T003:Collector
>> etc...
>>
>> and then import that into sme schematic software to generate the
>> schematic ???
>>
>>
>> does something like that exist ***OR*** maybe there is an easier way to
>> schematic a legacy board ?
>>
>> thakns for any help,
>> robb
>
>That's a "netlist", and no, I don't think there's a tool that'll take a
>netlist and make a schematic out of it.
>
>A good schematic and a poor schematic can both generate the same
>netlist. The difference is that more people will be able to understand
>the good schematic faster than the bad one. If you make a poor
>schematic, then at some point someone will read it and curse you -- and
>it may be you, after you've forgotten what you did!
>
>So make a nice, logically organized schematic that you can be proud of.
Yup..and if the schematic is a massively time consuming sparkling
example of perfection, it can be hung in an art gallery next to the
other expensive works of art...
:P
[insert Mona Lisa] [insert Switching Power Supply]
D from BC
|
|
|
|
Author: John LarkinDate: 18:30 09-12-07
|
|
On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 16:33:17 -0600, Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com>
wrote:
>On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 17:22:16 -0500, robb wrote:
>
>> is there a way to generate a schematic by just listing the components
>> and there connections instead of drawing it out in one of the schematic
>> tools ?
>>
>> i was thinking something like
>> 1. create a named list of all the board components 2. each component has
>> a sequence of statements telling what it connects to
>> EG Idea , U001:Pin 1 .to. U004:Pin 4
>> R001:in .to. T003:Collector
>> etc...
>>
>> and then import that into sme schematic software to generate the
>> schematic ???
>>
>>
>> does something like that exist ***OR*** maybe there is an easier way to
>> schematic a legacy board ?
>>
>> thakns for any help,
>> robb
>
>That's a "netlist", and no, I don't think there's a tool that'll take a
>netlist and make a schematic out of it.
>
>A good schematic and a poor schematic can both generate the same
>netlist. The difference is that more people will be able to understand
>the good schematic faster than the bad one. If you make a poor
>schematic, then at some point someone will read it and curse you -- and
>it may be you, after you've forgotten what you did!
>
>So make a nice, logically organized schematic that you can be proud of.
There are some tools that convert VHDL to schematics, but they are
expensive and insanely ugly. For people who can't understand their own
VHDL, I suppose.
Schematics should be art.
John
|
|
|
|
Author: John LarkinDate: 18:31 09-12-07
|
|
On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 14:52:54 -0800, D from BC
<myrealaddress@comic.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 17:22:16 -0500, "robb" <some@where.on.net> wrote:
>
>>is there a way to generate a schematic by just listing the
>>components and there connections instead of drawing it out in one
>>of the schematic tools ?
>>
>>i was thinking something like
>>1. create a named list of all the board components
>>2. each component has a sequence of statements telling what it
>>connects to
>> EG Idea , U001:Pin 1 .to. U004:Pin 4
>> R001:in .to. T003:Collector
>> etc...
>>
>>and then import that into sme schematic software to generate the
>>schematic ???
>>
>>
>>does something like that exist ***OR*** maybe there is an easier
>>way to schematic a legacy board ?
>>
>>thakns for any help,
>>robb
>>
>
>A netlist is generally used to go from schematic capture to PCB.
>
>I think you're looking for a conversion from netlist to schematic
>capture...
>AFAIK that doesn't exist..
>Well...not entirely true but I'll leave that detail out.
>
>If it did exist, it would be cool to see auto schematic part placement
>and connection autorouting done just like in PCB programs.
>
>
>D from BC
Did you ever trace a piece of equipment, to derive its schematic? The
result is usually very, very ugly.
John
|
|
|
|
Author: robbDate: 00:02 10-12-07
|
|
"Tim Wescott" <tim@seemywebsite.com> wrote in message
news:UPCdnTic64Sw8MHanZ2dnUVZ_gSdnZ2d@web-ster.com...
> On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 17:22:16 -0500, robb wrote:
>
> > is there a way to generate a schematic by just listing the
components
> > and there connections instead of drawing it out in one of the
schematic
> > tools ?
>
> That's a "netlist", and no, I don't think there's a tool
that'll take a
> netlist and make a schematic out of it.
>
> A good schematic and a poor schematic can both generate the
same
> netlist. The difference is that more people will be able to
understand
> the good schematic faster than the bad one. If you make a poor
> schematic, then at some point someone will read it and curse
you -- and
> it may be you, after you've forgotten what you did!
>
> So make a nice, logically organized schematic that you can be
proud of.
>
thanks Tim,
that was my suspicion.
bleh, thanks again,
robb
|
|
|
|
Author: robbDate: 00:04 10-12-07
|
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Ben JacksonDate: 16:43 10-12-07
|
|
On 2007-12-09, John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>
> Did you ever trace a piece of equipment, to derive its schematic? The
> result is usually very, very ugly.
I once traced a bipolar H-bridge and got about 1.5 times around a cycle
before I realized that the schematic I was drawing needed to fold onto
iself. Very mind bending.
--
Ben Jackson AD7GD
<ben@ben.com>
http://www.ben.com/
|
|
|
|
Author: krwDate: 18:20 10-12-07
|
|
In article <8guol31i8f9n3h2sv0jgj4ast3ba4f0k0t@4ax.com>,
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com says...
> On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 16:33:17 -0600, Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 17:22:16 -0500, robb wrote:
> >
> >> is there a way to generate a schematic by just listing the components
> >> and there connections instead of drawing it out in one of the schematic
> >> tools ?
> >>
> >> i was thinking something like
> >> 1. create a named list of all the board components 2. each component has
> >> a sequence of statements telling what it connects to
> >> EG Idea , U001:Pin 1 .to. U004:Pin 4
> >> R001:in .to. T003:Collector
> >> etc...
> >>
> >> and then import that into sme schematic software to generate the
> >> schematic ???
> >>
> >>
> >> does something like that exist ***OR*** maybe there is an easier way to
> >> schematic a legacy board ?
> >>
> >> thakns for any help,
> >> robb
> >
> >That's a "netlist", and no, I don't think there's a tool that'll take
a
> >netlist and make a schematic out of it.
> >
> >A good schematic and a poor schematic can both generate the same
> >netlist. The difference is that more people will be able to understand
> >the good schematic faster than the bad one. If you make a poor
> >schematic, then at some point someone will read it and curse you -- and
> >it may be you, after you've forgotten what you did!
I'm dealing with a piss-poor one now. No off-page connectors. No
busses. Few wires. VHDL is far more readable.
> >So make a nice, logically organized schematic that you can be proud of.
>
> There are some tools that convert VHDL to schematics, but they are
> expensive and insanely ugly. For people who can't understand their own
> VHDL, I suppose.
They're really used to understand what logic is being generated out
of one's VHDL (read: how the synthesizer is screwing the pooch).
They're also useful to figure out what primitives are being used by
core libraries. As far as a schematic for documentation, forget it.
> Schematics should be art.
Perhaps, but they don't pay me to be an artist (nor schematics ;).
--
Keith
|
|
|
|
Author: Robert BaerDate: 22:53 10-12-07
|
|
Tim Wescott wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 17:22:16 -0500, robb wrote:
>
>
>>is there a way to generate a schematic by just listing the components
>>and there connections instead of drawing it out in one of the schematic
>>tools ?
>>
>>i was thinking something like
>>1. create a named list of all the board components 2. each component has
>>a sequence of statements telling what it connects to
>> EG Idea , U001:Pin 1 .to. U004:Pin 4
>> R001:in .to. T003:Collector
>> etc...
>>
>>and then import that into sme schematic software to generate the
>>schematic ???
>>
>>
>>does something like that exist ***OR*** maybe there is an easier way to
>>schematic a legacy board ?
>>
>>thakns for any help,
>>robb
>
>
> That's a "netlist", and no, I don't think there's a tool that'll take a
> netlist and make a schematic out of it.
>
> A good schematic and a poor schematic can both generate the same
> netlist. The difference is that more people will be able to understand
> the good schematic faster than the bad one. If you make a poor
> schematic, then at some point someone will read it and curse you -- and
> it may be you, after you've forgotten what you did!
>
> So make a nice, logically organized schematic that you can be proud of.
>
?? "A good schematic and a poor schematic can both generate the same
netlist" ??
Forgive my abysmal ignorance, how is that possible?
Give a simple example.
|
|
|
|
Author: Robert BaerDate: 22:56 10-12-07
|
|
John Larkin wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 14:52:54 -0800, D from BC
> <myrealaddress@comic.com> wrote:
>
>
>>On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 17:22:16 -0500, "robb" <some@where.on.net>
wrote:
>>
>>
>>>is there a way to generate a schematic by just listing the
>>>components and there connections instead of drawing it out in one
>>>of the schematic tools ?
>>>
>>>i was thinking something like
>>>1. create a named list of all the board components
>>>2. each component has a sequence of statements telling what it
>>>connects to
>>> EG Idea , U001:Pin 1 .to. U004:Pin 4
>>> R001:in .to. T003:Collector
>>> etc...
>>>
>>>and then import that into sme schematic software to generate the
>>>schematic ???
>>>
>>>
>>>does something like that exist ***OR*** maybe there is an easier
>>>way to schematic a legacy board ?
>>>
>>>thakns for any help,
>>>robb
>>>
>>
>>A netlist is generally used to go from schematic capture to PCB.
>>
>>I think you're looking for a conversion from netlist to schematic
>>capture...
>>AFAIK that doesn't exist..
>>Well...not entirely true but I'll leave that detail out.
>>
>>If it did exist, it would be cool to see auto schematic part placement
>>and connection autorouting done just like in PCB programs.
>>
>>
>>D from BC
>
>
> Did you ever trace a piece of equipment, to derive its schematic? The
> result is usually very, very ugly.
>
> John
>
I have done that on rare occasion, and find it tedius and prone to error.
It would be nice to have a netlist-to-schematic converter!
|
|
|
|
Author: Paul BurkeDate: 03:36 11-12-07
|
|
Robert Baer wrote:
> ?? "A good schematic and a poor schematic can both generate the same
> netlist" ??
> Forgive my abysmal ignorance, how is that possible?
> Give a simple example.
For example, I could create a circuit using a couple of opamps and a
half a dozen resistors or so, a few diodes and a capacitor. The
components could be laid out and the connections drawn in so it's easy
to follow- the circuit I've got in mind is a simple linear ramp slew
rate limited voltage follower.
Or I could lay the opamps out in random orientations on one part of the
sheet, all the resistors likewise in another corner, etc., and simply
assign the pins to nets (on the PCB CAD I use I could even hide the net
names). The result would be exactly equivalent to the well- sketched
version, but would be harder than spaghetti assembler to understand.
PB
|
|
|
|
Author: krwDate: 18:17 11-12-07
|
|
In article <5s70rkF17ol13U1@mid.individual.net>, paul@scazon.com
says...
> Robert Baer wrote:
>
> > ?? "A good schematic and a poor schematic can both generate the same
> > netlist" ??
> > Forgive my abysmal ignorance, how is that possible?
> > Give a simple example.
>
> For example, I could create a circuit using a couple of opamps and a
> half a dozen resistors or so, a few diodes and a capacitor. The
> components could be laid out and the connections drawn in so it's easy
> to follow- the circuit I've got in mind is a simple linear ramp slew
> rate limited voltage follower.
>
> Or I could lay the opamps out in random orientations on one part of the
> sheet, all the resistors likewise in another corner, etc., and simply
> assign the pins to nets (on the PCB CAD I use I could even hide the net
> names). The result would be exactly equivalent to the well- sketched
> version, but would be harder than spaghetti assembler to understand.
You don't even have to try hard. Simply leave all the "wires" off
the components and simply name them. Oh, and don't forget to skip
the cross-reference step. :-(
--
Keith
|
|
|
|
Author: MarraDate: 19:21 11-12-07
|
|
You need to get hold of a decent CAD package and forget net lists.
Some are much easier to use than others.
As an experienced electronics engineer I use PCBCAD28
It is powerful yet doesnt want to know the ins and outs of every
connection until your blue in the face.
|
|
|
|
Author: David L. JonesDate: 21:10 11-12-07
|
|
On Dec 12, 11:21 am, Marra <cresswellave...@talktalk.net> wrote:
> You need to get hold of a decent CAD package and forget net lists.
>
> Some are much easier to use than others.
>
> As an experienced electronics engineer I use PCBCAD28
>
> It is powerful yet doesnt want to know the ins and outs of every
> connection until your blue in the face.
You forgot to mention you are the author of said software (and
probably it's only user?), and have been slammed many times for
spruiking it on here, for example:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.design/browse_frm/thread/07faedb5000ef8c1
/70f06e9f2863598f
Dave.
|
|
|
|
Author: Robert BaerDate: 03:44 12-12-07
|
|
Paul Burke wrote:
> Robert Baer wrote:
>
>> ?? "A good schematic and a poor schematic can both generate the same
>> netlist" ??
>> Forgive my abysmal ignorance, how is that possible?
>> Give a simple example.
>
>
> For example, I could create a circuit using a couple of opamps and a
> half a dozen resistors or so, a few diodes and a capacitor. The
> components could be laid out and the connections drawn in so it's easy
> to follow- the circuit I've got in mind is a simple linear ramp slew
> rate limited voltage follower.
>
> Or I could lay the opamps out in random orientations on one part of the
> sheet, all the resistors likewise in another corner, etc., and simply
> assign the pins to nets (on the PCB CAD I use I could even hide the net
> names). The result would be exactly equivalent to the well- sketched
> version, but would be harder than spaghetti assembler to understand.
>
> PB
Ahhh....except for looks, it is the same schematic.
Most PCBs are not laid out in random order, so the result may not
look fabulously perfect sparkling white super duper, but it certainly
would not look like dog-doo scattered by ten thousand vultures either.
|
|
|
|
Author: MarraDate: 16:41 12-12-07
|
|
How on earth can I be spamming the group ?
I simply gave an opinion on the software I use !
I simply took another companies software, tore it to pieces, improved
it, then wrote my own without the bugs in it !
|
|
|
|
Author: MarraDate: 16:42 12-12-07
|
|
If i was gonna spam it certainly wouldnt be on a group with 3 people
offering opinions !
|
|
|
|
Author: MarraDate: 17:05 12-12-07
|
|
You would be better off with a PCB CAD software that autoplaces as
well.
This would find the optimum net lay out for your PCB.
PCBCAD28 does this really well.
It has:
auto-autoplacer.
swap autoplacer.
rotational autoplacer.
place and route autoplacer (keeps going finding best routes until you
stop it)
www.murtonpikesystems.co.uk
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
Contact | Electronic Portal
|
|
|
