Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • State Verified Answer
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 7 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 89 subscribers
  • Views 3441 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Related
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Test points and mounting hole library components?

lamabrew

Hi, I'm just starting an eval of Circuitstudio but I seem to be stuck on what I would have thought was a basic need in all designs. I searched the docs/forums and came up empty, apologies in advance if I missed it.

 

I can't find any schematic library components for test points (through hole or SMT pad), nor for mounting holes (with a pin for grounding or just a plain hole, though maybe the latter isn't really a schematic things in the CS worldview?).

 

I found a post that referred to a "Testpad" library but I can't find that.

 

I was hoping to not have to tackle component creation on day 1.

 

Thanks for any pointers/advice.

Parents
  • 0

    Brewster,

    I create all of my components.  I create all 3D models.  Sure, there are libraries out there that are free and easy to use.  Sometimes I feel like they are improperly created or difficult for some of my designs.  Sometimes I want an extra added feature.  Sometimes the soldermask or overlay isn't what I want.  So after years of using Altium and after purchasing CircuitStudio, I made the decision to make all of my libraries.  It may take a little bit of extra time sometimes.  My theory behind this primarily resides in component selection.  I want to know exactly the size of each component.  I want to know that I am placing the exact component that I want.  Sometimes generic is fine.  In the case of test points, I created my own in multiple shapes and sizes.  I can always add more if I choose.  Library development is a crucial skill to fully understand.  Here are some screenshots:

    image

    image

    image

    RF test points may require a secondary adjacent pad that is ground.  Super easy to make in CS.

Reply
  • 0

    Brewster,

    I create all of my components.  I create all 3D models.  Sure, there are libraries out there that are free and easy to use.  Sometimes I feel like they are improperly created or difficult for some of my designs.  Sometimes I want an extra added feature.  Sometimes the soldermask or overlay isn't what I want.  So after years of using Altium and after purchasing CircuitStudio, I made the decision to make all of my libraries.  It may take a little bit of extra time sometimes.  My theory behind this primarily resides in component selection.  I want to know exactly the size of each component.  I want to know that I am placing the exact component that I want.  Sometimes generic is fine.  In the case of test points, I created my own in multiple shapes and sizes.  I can always add more if I choose.  Library development is a crucial skill to fully understand.  Here are some screenshots:

    image

    image

    image

    RF test points may require a secondary adjacent pad that is ground.  Super easy to make in CS.

Children
  • 0 in reply to adamwebber

    Hi James,

     

    Thanks for the feedback. Without straying too far from my original question, here's a bit more why I'm asking about library components.

     

    This upcoming project is a bit unique in that it's starting with a totally clean slate. Most of the boards to be designed will be simple 2 or 4 layer things < 40 in^2 (260 cm^2) though a few are considerably larger. Almost no high speed signals, no fine pitch parts, etc. My criteria during for evaluation has become (there's a much longer list, this is just the part relevant to my question):

    1) fast learning curve (as everyone will probably come from a different background)

    2) easy to get designs done quickly with low error rates

    3) easy to get the job done for engineers that don't normally do PCB design (at some point there may be a dedicated layout resource, but not initially)

     

    These days seems just about any schematic editor/layout tool can handle the technical needs. Though I've seen some that seem to retain the same UI thinking of their DOS version and while they may work, would have a painful learning curve with their totally non-intuitive UI, particularly for occasional use. Some newer tools still seem to have somewhat fatal bugs with questionable workarounds.

     

    Dropping tools stuck in the past (fear of losing their user base perhaps?) I see no shortage of technically competent tool choices.

     

    For me that leaves the next big pain point that I've experienced as the main decision point: Building, maintaining, and using component libraries to get useful schematics, correct layouts (electrical and mechanical), and BOMs that correctly map to vendors and suppliers, all while trying to minimize the use of gratuitously different components that drive up production costs.

     

    Tools with fully validated libraries that are easy to use are going to score big in this evaluation. If the tool has extensive libraries then the ease of adding new components within the context of the overall goals will be the next criteria as I wouldn't expect to find more than half the parts to be there. My simple trial board does have mounting holes and test points, and this is the first time I've hit a tool that doesn't appear to have them in a library. 95% of projects I've been associated with in the past decade have that need so I perhaps somewhat presumptuously assumed they would be part of a library for a tool that promotes its comprehensive libraries as a reason to pick the tool image

     

    Regardless, thanks for the comment. I guess time to crack open CS component creation.