Have a question about CadSoft EAGLE?  Ask our Expert, Jorge!

Thank you Graham. Much appreciated. I have the entire schematic done with exception of this one issue so porting it over to OrCad will not be a problem.

My bank card is out with Cadence(Industry leader) on the phone. Should have known better dealing with a German company & its product. I support American companies. Much appreciated Graham. Take care and have good one!

~Emjay

TL;DR

Noone's hand feeds me anything!

Take your ego back to your imaginary 'kingdom' where it rules dude. This is real life where you don't count.

~Emjay

On 04/08/2014 06:58 PM, Emjay Ahday wrote:

I am building the COMPONENT for the SCHEMATIC being the COMPONENT is not

listed in EAGLE's library.

Hi Emjay,

Perhaps there's a terminology difference between OrCad and Eagle.  I

used to use OrCad back in the late 80's and early 90's, and you're right

- components are placed on schematics.

In Eagle, the term "component" is not used but instead replaces it with

"device".

SCHEMATICS ARE COMPRISED OF INDIVIDUAL SMD or

STANDARD THROUGH HOLE COMPONENTS.

Uhmmm... not really.  Schematics are composed of symbols.  There's

nothing on a schematic that would elude to the physical implementation

of the said device - it's merely a symbol.  Transistor (vertical bar,

arrow and lines), resistor (zig-zag lines), capacitor (parallel lines),

etc.  They're all symbols.  It's not until you work on the

implementation of the design that you start dealing with SMD or TH packages.

In Eagle, a device contains (usually) one symbol, like the zig-zag lines

of a resistor symbol, and one or more packages where each package

represents layout of the device.  It could be SMD, or TH, or numerous

sizes of both.  It is the /device/ that ties a /symbol/ to one or more

/packages/.  Thus, when you place a device on your schematic, you also

choose a package that will be used later in the board layout.  One can

also change the package of a device without changing the symbol.

I don't know why "device" was used instead of "component".  Perhaps is

something related to German/English translation.  Perhaps it's because

the former is a more generic term.  Note that some devices do not have

anything installed.  Shorts, plated mounting holes for chassis grounds,

board-implemented capacitors and inductors for RF designs, and tabs for

card edge connectors are all devices that have no installed components.

As such, the term "component" would misrepresent what they are.

Try using a dictionary if you are that ignorant of the English

language.(below you will see the term COMPONENT used)

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-mount_technology

 

I will just buy OrCad which is most familiar to me being trained in it.

Perhaps that would be best for you.  One must consider the cost of the

software and support for it, and weigh that against the cost of learning

new software.

Also for future references, when you see someone waiting for a response

from someone who was DIRECTLY ADDRESSED, DON'T ANSWER IN PLACE OF THAT

PERSON!

I would suggest that if you want a response from an individual, send

that individual an email.  By posting in a public support forum, you

implicitly are soliciting any of the forum readers to provide help on a

volunteer basis.

I would also pose that yelling accomplishes nothing other than to

alienate yourself.  There's an old saying related to this... something

like "biting the hand that feeds you".

HTH,

    - Chuck

On 09/04/14 01:53, Graham Wideman wrote:

Jorge often posts as "CadSoft Guest", so actually the reply you read may

have been from him.

No, it wasn't Jorge, it was me. But if Emjay is too pig-headed to accept

help from anyone else WHEN POSTING IN A PUBLIC FORUM and finds

emphatic correction to be too painful to respond in any way but rudely,

then I fear there's no hope for him.

Emjay:

Jorge often posts as "CadSoft Guest", so actually the reply you read may have been from him.

Sounds like you are frustrated with the answer, but it contains the key that may solve your situation.

The central point is that, like most EDA software, Eagle distinguishes between the component's symbol used on the schematic, versus the physical shape of the component and its required pads or holes and the space that it occupies on the PCB.

Eagle calls the schematic symbol "Symbol", the PCB shape "Package", and the combination of the two is called "Device" (which I think of as "component", don't know about you.)

The schematic symbols often bear no shape relationship to the physical package. The schematic works best set to a large grid size (say 0.1 inch), with the schematic symbols defined in the library to have connection pins on that 0.1 inch grid. Because Eagle Schematic can only snap wires to the grid locations, if you have library symbols that don't abide by that grid it's difficult to impossible to connect wires to them. If instead you use a fine grid in Schematic editor, that would permit you to connect wires to symbols with odd pin positions, but it's too easy to position a wire near a pin, thinking it's connected, when actually it's a bit off.

Matters are different in PCB, because we have to abide by the physical size of packages and the position of their pins. So in PCB, we would use a finer grid (and the packages in the library likewise).  Connecting is not a problem because that's already defined in the schematic, and represented on the PCB by airwires until routed.

From the discussion so far it sounds like you are trying to create a library _device_ (in Eagle terms) whose _symbol_ (for use in Schematic editor) is a dimensionally accurate picture of a micro-smd package. Of course, you could do that if you want, but most people would draw the accurate micro-smd _package_ for use only on the PCB, and for the Schematic _symbol_ draw a generic rectangle with pins positioned on the 0.1 inch grid.

As a related matter: It is in the _symbol_ that you would name the pins with function names (such as VCC, GND, D0, D1 or whatever). It is in the _package_ that you name the pads (1, 2, 3...). Finally, it is in the _device_ that you associate one or more packages with a symbol, and for each package list which pad associates with which pin.

Hope that helps.

I am not conflating anything. Been building schematics and COMPONENTS by hand for over 40 years since before EDA desktop software was available so I know my terminology very well. You are the one who is confused or just plain ignorant first for answering for someone you are not, secondly, for not understanding.

I am building the COMPONENT for the SCHEMATIC being the COMPONENT is not listed in EAGLE's library. SCHEMATICS ARE COMPRISED OF INDIVIDUAL SMD or STANDARD THROUGH HOLE COMPONENTS.

Try using a dictionary if you are that ignorant of the English language.(below you will see the term COMPONENT used)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-mount_technology

I will just buy OrCad which is most familiar to me being trained in it. Try working on your people skills novice, for you sure are socially ignorant.

Good day.

P.S.

Also for future references, when you see someone waiting for a response from someone who was DIRECTLY ADDRESSED, DON'T ANSWER IN PLACE OF THAT PERSON!

I asked JORGE whom you are not!

I await JORGE not  you!

~Emjay

On 08/04/14 22:20, Emjay Ahday wrote:

I built the component using 1 mil increments on the symbol instead of

keeping it at 0.1". Chuck's instruction set is clear I only need to know

will it affect the size of the component.

Yes, this is the rule for SCHEMATIC SYMBOLS

I also need to know why is it that when building a component one must

use 0.1"

... FOR THE SCHEMATIC SYMBOL ...

when like in my case the component

... PACKAGE ...

is a micro-smd which the

package measures in millimeters and the pads measure in mils, which is

why I used mils? 

You are conflating two different things. All PCB design software (and

most PCBs designed by hand in the old days) begins with a schematic

representation of the circuit from a functional perspective. Then you

take this and create a board layout using the physical characteristics

of the components.

I built the component's pads using mils(as the pads are 9x12mils in

dimension) but I am instructed by Chuck to built the entire symbol using

0.1" which doesn't make sense to me.

It makes perfect sense if you get the terminology clear.

A "symbol" is the mnemonic representation (for example a transistor

symbol with a thick vertical bar, an arrow and two other lines) of the

component for use on the schematic.

A "package" is the dimensioned representation of the physical component

placement on the PCB.

A "device" is a grouping of one (or more) symbols to one or more

possible packages for a family of components. For example, a 7400 has

four NAND gates and comes in DIP, SOIC and possibly other packages.

 

Seems rather odd, but then again I am re-familiarizing myself with EAGLE

not having worked with it in over 12 years being company trained in

OrCad.

But OrCad also has a clear - in fact even more explicit - distinction

between schematics and boards, so you should be familiar with the

concept that schematic symbols do not look like the physical package and

are not related to it in size.

Hi Jorge,

And thank you for being kind enough to respond to my inquiry.

Chuck gave me the following process for correcting my symbol grid situation....

_______________________________________________________________________________

Emjay,

Open the library and edit the symbol of interest.  Then set your grid to

0.1" with:

    grid 0.1in 1;

This sets the grid to 0.1 inches and sets the display of the grid to

every 0.1 in.

Start the move command:

    move

and do a Control-Click on each of the pins that are in your symbol.  The

control-click will cause a pin move to your cursor position and align to

the current grid.  You can also align other features of the symbol, such

as outline wires and text objects as well.

From there, save the library, and open your schematic.  Then do a

Library Update for the library that was changed, or do a

Library-Update-All.  The updated symbol should appear on your schematic,

assuming, of course, that you have already placed one on there.

After you run Nets from the pins of the symbol, you should be able to

move the symbol around have have the nets rubber-band to follow the

movement.  This confirms that the net is connected to the pin.

Switching to the board editor, you should see an air wire from each of

the pads that are connected to a net.  Use the ROUTE command to route

these air wires.  You can use RIPUP to turn the traces back into air wires.

HTH,

    - Chuck

_____________________________________________________________________

Now I asked if the resizing of the grid will affect the component's size? which I never got a response back from Chuck.

I appreciate dealing with you on this subject being you are kind enough to respond when you can.

I built the component using 1 mil increments on the symbol instead of keeping it at 0.1". Chuck's instruction set is clear I only need to know will it affect the size of the component.

I also need to know why is it that when building a component one must use 0.1" when like in my case the component is a micro-smd which the package measures in millimeters and the pads measure in mils, which is why I used mils? 

I built the component's pads using mils(as the pads are 9x12mils in dimension) but I am instructed by Chuck to built the entire symbol using 0.1" which doesn't make sense to me.

Seems rather odd, but then again I am re-familiarizing myself with EAGLE not having worked with it in over 12 years being company trained in OrCad.

Thank you in advance Jorge for your help is truly appreciated!

~Emjay

Hello,

I have to do a project with raspberry pi, could you help me and advice me which robot will be compatible with it?

I want to buy a cheap robot which I can hook to the raspberry pi, nothing something advanced.

Thank you.

On 4/4/2014 1:55 AM, Emjay Ahday wrote:

My apologies. The version is 6.3 not 6.5. And yes I have. The technical

writing is not coherently structured to seamlessly flow from process to

process in detail.

Hi Emjay,

The english manual, you found is the most comprehensive reference on

EAGLE. What processes are you looking for in a particular?

If the interest is more a step by step guide, then I would suggest

looking at the tutorials made by Adafruit.com, Sparkfun.com or

Dangerousprototypes.com.

hth,

Jorge Garcia