7 ms·

If fritzing gets #1 spot on HN I would like to wholeheartedly recommend https://www.kicad.org/ https://www.kicad.org/ as well. IMHO much saner workflow and good

If fritzing gets #1 spot on HN I would like to wholeheartedly recommend https://www.kicad.org/ https://www.kicad.org/ as well. IMHO much saner workflow and good UX in the latest version.I did a simple PCB and got it manufactured on https://jlcpcb.com/ https://jlcpcb.com/ for a couple bucks. Quite a rewarding experience. I would also suggest that anyone who cares about computers gets to know basic electronics. How do transistors work, what is a bus (e.g I2C or SPI) and how is it all connected? (Drumroll ... a PCB of course). There is a ton of tutorials on youtube that do it end to end. E.g Phils Lab https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLDqQ2L_mUQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLDqQ2L_mUQ for a PCB design. Or Ben Eaters excellent beginner tutorial "Hello World from Scratch" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnzuMJLZRdU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnzuMJLZRdU

de6u99er 4y ago
KICAD reminds me a lot of PICAD which I used when doing my electronics engineering degree.
127 4y ago
I have only had good experiences so far on JLCPCB. I can very much recommend. Quality boards for very cheap, plus you can actually get the parts pre-assembled if they have them in their catalog (most common parts should be there) It's weird to "shill" for a company but I'm very happy that they exist, and hope they and companies like them continue to exist. Plus Kicad is cool ;)
memorable 4y ago
It does.
cybrox 4y ago
I would actually urge anyone to check out KiCAD instead, not just as well. The only merit Fritzings has against a thriving open ecosystem such as KiCAD is its dumbed down interface that would make it more accessible to beginners. However, if you want to use it without paying €8, you have to compile it from source, which makes this whole point mute.
- em3rgent0rdr 4y ago
  Another merit of Fritzing is the integrated breadboard layout, linked with the schematic. Often I want to try the design out with a breadboard with DIP chips to see how things work, and also to provide a breadboard layout for people that don't want to order a PCB.
- janoc 4y ago
  The problem with Fritzing is that it is so much "dumbed down" that it is mostly useless. It doesn't even enforce basic design constraints such as having the PCB traces horizontal/vertical/45deg angle or clearances. And good luck with creating your own components!
  - noasaservice 4y ago
    Well, to be fair, the 0/45/90 deg traces are a byproduct from early days of EDA CAD products. Aside high frequency busses (which you're doing EM analysis on anyways), traces can be all sorts of shapes. That 3v3 or 5v line can have 135deg traces - they might be ugly, but they're very doable. This is a case where early electronic CAD turned into a cargo-cult. Prior to the early computing CAD days, the traces were really rounded and flowing, and had teardrop fills. They were also done freehand, with transparencies, markers, and tape. This is a good example of hand-designed boards: https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/vtg-early-1970s-ampex-computer-tape-1800408683 https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/vtg-early-1970s-ampex...
    - naraic0o 4y ago
      mitxela did a great video on this topic recently and wrote a plugin for kicad to make the regular geometric layouts more organic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euJgtLcWWyo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euJgtLcWWyo
    - bsder 4y ago
      > Well, to be fair, the 0/45/90 deg traces are a byproduct from early days of EDA CAD products. Aside high frequency busses (which you're doing EM analysis on anyways), traces can be all sorts of shapes. The constraint is still there. Curved traces make your GUI ridiculously unmanageable. Ever tried to manipulate font outlines? It's like that on a PCB, only an order of magnitude worse. You have to operate control points for every single segment rather than just dragging a trace. All for effectively no benefit on 99.9% of all PCB designs. In fact, the only good argument for using non-Euclidean traces is in the ultra-high-speed arena (think DDR4 bus or multi-GHz RF). If traces are small enough that they fit between the PCB weave, different traces can have enough difference in electrical permittivity that it will screw up the matching (trace 1 has an FR-4 fiber directly underneath while trace 2 only has cross fibers underneath and so has about 50% air underneath instead of 100% fiberglass). Consequently, you have to swing the angles to weird things like multiples of 7 or 13 degrees to prevent that.
ComradeUlyanov 4y ago
is librepcb any good?
- goodpoint 4y ago
  It's very good! https://hackaday.com/2020/01/22/review-testdriving-librepcb-shows-that-its-growing-up-fast/ https://hackaday.com/2020/01/22/review-testdriving-librepcb-...
throwmeariver1 4y ago
... for the reading folks "Electronics Explained" by Louis E. Frenzel, Jr. Is probably the best book for a general knowledge buff up.
SwishyTaco4 4y ago
While we're sharing our favourite open source EDA tools, HorizonEDA deserves a lot more love and attention.
Hewitt87 4y ago
While we're sharing our favourite open source EDA tools, HorizonEDA deserves a lot more love and attention. https://horizon-eda.org/ https://horizon-eda.org/
- phkahler 4y ago
  >> While we're sharing our favourite open source EDA tools, HorizonEDA deserves a lot more love and attention My impression is that Horizon-EDA is well worth following, but not as far along as KiCAD. It's a nice second option that some people prefer.
  - IshKebab 4y ago
    Unless you really need some really advanced KiCAD features then Horizon is far far more usable. Night and day.
    - phkahler 4y ago
      I'm just happy to say you can now use SolveSpace to create STEP models of components for either one: https://solvespace.com/index.pl https://solvespace.com/index.pl
- ThrowawayIP 4y ago
  The Pool concept of horizon is very interesting. Libraries & Library Management are absolutely the worst part of EDA/E-CAD. I wonder where the Return on Invested time happens for this concept.
sschueller 4y ago
Even better is that with kicad you can fully automate fab outputs via CI pipeline for example in gitlab. I have my projects run ERC and DRC then if they pass, gerbers for JLCPCB, BOM (with parts #s for LCSC) and placement for assembly as well as an interactive BOM are generated.
- mch82 4y ago
  Is there a good tutorial for setting up a pipeline like you’ve described using? Really cool!
  - sschueller 4y ago
    I gathered my setup from a few sources but the main one is https://github.com/INTI-CMNB/kicad_auto https://github.com/INTI-CMNB/kicad_auto and https://github.com/INTI-CMNB/KiBot https://github.com/INTI-CMNB/KiBot . Here is my current setup for gitlab: When adding components, add "LCSC" to overall schematic (BOM export will fail if added to each part separately (join issue)) and the part number in each part in order to use the JLCPCB assembly service. Only parts with LCSC column are exported in the JLCPCB BOMs. .gitlab-ci.yml ... tests: image: setsoft/kicad_auto:dev_k6 stage: testing script: - "[ -f *.kicad_pcb ] && kibot -c test.kibot.yaml" tags: - docker pcb_outputs: image: setsoft/kicad_auto:dev_k6 stage: gen_fab script: - "[ -f *.kicad_pcb ] && kibot -c output.kibot.yaml" only: refs: - master artifacts: when: always paths: - Fabrication/ tags: - docker ... test.kibot.yaml kibot: version: 1 preflight: run_erc: false update_xml: false run_drc: true check_zone_fills: true ignore_unconnected: false output.kibot.yaml # Gerber and drill files for JLCPCB, without stencil # URL: https://jlcpcb.com/ kibot: version: 1 filters: - name: only_jlc_parts comment: 'Only parts with JLC (LCSC) code' type: generic include_only: - column: 'LCSC' regex: '^C\d+' variants: - name: rotated comment: 'Just a place holder for the rotation filter' type: kibom variant: rotated pre_transform: _rot_footprint outputs: - name: JLCPCB_gerbers comment: Gerbers compatible with JLCPCB type: gerber dir: JLCPCB options: &gerber_options exclude_edge_layer: true exclude_pads_from_silkscreen: true plot_sheet_reference: false plot_footprint_refs: true plot_footprint_values: false force_plot_invisible_refs_vals: false tent_vias: true use_protel_extensions: true create_gerber_job_file: false disable_aperture_macros: true gerber_precision: 4.6 use_gerber_x2_attributes: false use_gerber_net_attributes: false line_width: 0.1 subtract_mask_from_silk: true layers: # Note: a more generic approach is to use 'copper' but then the filenames # are slightly different. - F.Cu - B.Cu - F.Paste - B.Paste - F.SilkS - B.SilkS - F.Mask - B.Mask - Edge.Cuts - name: JLCPCB_drill comment: Drill files compatible with JLCPCB type: excellon dir: JLCPCB options: pth_and_npth_single_file: false pth_id: '-PTH' npth_id: '-NPTH' metric_units: false output: "%f%i.%x" - name: JLCPCB comment: ZIP file for JLCPCB type: compress dir: Fabrication/JLCPCB options: files: - from_output: JLCPCB_gerbers dest: / - from_output: JLCPCB_drill dest: / - name: ibom comment: Interactive BOM type: ibom dir: Fabrication/ibom options: dark_mode: true - name: 'JLCPCB_position' comment: "Pick and place file, JLCPCB style" type: position dir: Fabrication/JLCPCB-BOM options: variant: rotated output: '%f_cpl_jlc.%x' format: CSV units: millimeters separate_files_for_front_and_back: false only_smd: true columns: - id: Ref name: Designator - Val - Package - id: PosX name: "Mid X" - id: PosY name: "Mid Y" - id: Rot name: Rotation - id: Side name: Layer - name: 'JLCPCB_bom' comment: "BoM for JLCPCB" type: bom dir: Fabrication/JLCPCB-BOM options: output: '%f_%i_jlc.%x' exclude_filter: 'only_jlc_parts' ref_separator: ',' columns: - field: Value name: Comment - field: References name: Designator - Footprint - field: 'LCSC' name: 'LCSC part number' csv: hide_pcb_info: true hide_stats_info: true quote_all: true*
rock_hard 4y ago
Also plugging https://flux.ai https://flux.ai in this context It’s a modern take on electronics design with slick UX Comes with a free tier as well as paid Software engineers here are gonna love that components in flux are fully programmable from schematic/PCB all the way down to simulator models
- basilskral 4y ago
  I'm using Altium as my major tool for professional electronic design but I looking for something LESS expensive. And I've already done one paid project on Flux.ai. If you beginner in electronics I recommend you invest your time in something progressive like Flux rather than KiCAD or EAGLE. Yes, KiCAD and EAGLE are good tools and you will still find a lot of projects for a few years before they become complete dinosaurs but at some point, you will hate working in them(oh, gods, how I hate EAGLE, sorry for everyone who loves it)
- johnrain1974 4y ago
  I joined the beta about 6 months ago and these guys develop fast. When I just signed in there was no PCB at all and now a bunch of people made their PCBs in Flux and even assembly. Definitely worth to at least trying this tool.
- by_Seeing 4y ago
  Was going to recommend the same
- scoutt 4y ago
  It's truly interestering. We considered it, and we didn't like it. It seems something born to be "vendor lock-in" plus the fact that it looks super volatile (a bad combination). We are sure that our current EDA tools will at least stick around for a while. And it's browser based. Opening any of the examples on the main page with firefox lifted up my PC like a hovercraft by the way the fans started to spin, with several seconds delay for any interaction (on a PC that's capable of running Altium and Orcad). PS: I love the animation on the main page and how the mechanical engineer has no idea on what's going on!

de6u99er 4y ago

KICAD reminds me a lot of PICAD which I used when doing my electronics engineering degree.

127 4y ago

I have only had good experiences so far on JLCPCB. I can very much recommend. Quality boards for very cheap, plus you can actually get the parts pre-assembled if they have them in their catalog (most common parts should be there) It's weird to "shill" for a company but I'm very happy that they exist, and hope they and companies like them continue to exist. Plus Kicad is cool ;)

memorable 4y ago

It does.

cybrox 4y ago

I would actually urge anyone to check out KiCAD instead, not just as well. The only merit Fritzings has against a thriving open ecosystem such as KiCAD is its dumbed down interface that would make it more accessible to beginners. However, if you want to use it without paying €8, you have to compile it from source, which makes this whole point mute.

em3rgent0rdr 4y ago
Another merit of Fritzing is the integrated breadboard layout, linked with the schematic. Often I want to try the design out with a breadboard with DIP chips to see how things work, and also to provide a breadboard layout for people that don't want to order a PCB.
janoc 4y ago
The problem with Fritzing is that it is so much "dumbed down" that it is mostly useless. It doesn't even enforce basic design constraints such as having the PCB traces horizontal/vertical/45deg angle or clearances. And good luck with creating your own components!
- noasaservice 4y ago
  Well, to be fair, the 0/45/90 deg traces are a byproduct from early days of EDA CAD products. Aside high frequency busses (which you're doing EM analysis on anyways), traces can be all sorts of shapes. That 3v3 or 5v line can have 135deg traces - they might be ugly, but they're very doable. This is a case where early electronic CAD turned into a cargo-cult. Prior to the early computing CAD days, the traces were really rounded and flowing, and had teardrop fills. They were also done freehand, with transparencies, markers, and tape. This is a good example of hand-designed boards: https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/vtg-early-1970s-ampex-computer-tape-1800408683 https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/vtg-early-1970s-ampex...
  - naraic0o 4y ago
    mitxela did a great video on this topic recently and wrote a plugin for kicad to make the regular geometric layouts more organic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euJgtLcWWyo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euJgtLcWWyo
  - bsder 4y ago
    > Well, to be fair, the 0/45/90 deg traces are a byproduct from early days of EDA CAD products. Aside high frequency busses (which you're doing EM analysis on anyways), traces can be all sorts of shapes. The constraint is still there. Curved traces make your GUI ridiculously unmanageable. Ever tried to manipulate font outlines? It's like that on a PCB, only an order of magnitude worse. You have to operate control points for every single segment rather than just dragging a trace. All for effectively no benefit on 99.9% of all PCB designs. In fact, the only good argument for using non-Euclidean traces is in the ultra-high-speed arena (think DDR4 bus or multi-GHz RF). If traces are small enough that they fit between the PCB weave, different traces can have enough difference in electrical permittivity that it will screw up the matching (trace 1 has an FR-4 fiber directly underneath while trace 2 only has cross fibers underneath and so has about 50% air underneath instead of 100% fiberglass). Consequently, you have to swing the angles to weird things like multiples of 7 or 13 degrees to prevent that.

ComradeUlyanov 4y ago

is librepcb any good?

goodpoint 4y ago
It's very good! https://hackaday.com/2020/01/22/review-testdriving-librepcb-shows-that-its-growing-up-fast/ https://hackaday.com/2020/01/22/review-testdriving-librepcb-...

throwmeariver1 4y ago

... for the reading folks "Electronics Explained" by Louis E. Frenzel, Jr. Is probably the best book for a general knowledge buff up.

SwishyTaco4 4y ago

While we're sharing our favourite open source EDA tools, HorizonEDA deserves a lot more love and attention.

Hewitt87 4y ago

While we're sharing our favourite open source EDA tools, HorizonEDA deserves a lot more love and attention. https://horizon-eda.org/ https://horizon-eda.org/

phkahler 4y ago
>> While we're sharing our favourite open source EDA tools, HorizonEDA deserves a lot more love and attention My impression is that Horizon-EDA is well worth following, but not as far along as KiCAD. It's a nice second option that some people prefer.
- IshKebab 4y ago
  Unless you really need some really advanced KiCAD features then Horizon is far far more usable. Night and day.
  - phkahler 4y ago
    I'm just happy to say you can now use SolveSpace to create STEP models of components for either one: https://solvespace.com/index.pl https://solvespace.com/index.pl
ThrowawayIP 4y ago
The Pool concept of horizon is very interesting. Libraries & Library Management are absolutely the worst part of EDA/E-CAD. I wonder where the Return on Invested time happens for this concept.

sschueller 4y ago

Even better is that with kicad you can fully automate fab outputs via CI pipeline for example in gitlab. I have my projects run ERC and DRC then if they pass, gerbers for JLCPCB, BOM (with parts #s for LCSC) and placement for assembly as well as an interactive BOM are generated.

mch82 4y ago
Is there a good tutorial for setting up a pipeline like you’ve described using? Really cool!
- sschueller 4y ago
  I gathered my setup from a few sources but the main one is https://github.com/INTI-CMNB/kicad_auto https://github.com/INTI-CMNB/kicad_auto and https://github.com/INTI-CMNB/KiBot https://github.com/INTI-CMNB/KiBot . Here is my current setup for gitlab: When adding components, add "LCSC" to overall schematic (BOM export will fail if added to each part separately (join issue)) and the part number in each part in order to use the JLCPCB assembly service. Only parts with LCSC column are exported in the JLCPCB BOMs. .gitlab-ci.yml ... tests: image: setsoft/kicad_auto:dev_k6 stage: testing script: - "[ -f *.kicad_pcb ] && kibot -c test.kibot.yaml" tags: - docker pcb_outputs: image: setsoft/kicad_auto:dev_k6 stage: gen_fab script: - "[ -f *.kicad_pcb ] && kibot -c output.kibot.yaml" only: refs: - master artifacts: when: always paths: - Fabrication/ tags: - docker ... test.kibot.yaml kibot: version: 1 preflight: run_erc: false update_xml: false run_drc: true check_zone_fills: true ignore_unconnected: false output.kibot.yaml # Gerber and drill files for JLCPCB, without stencil # URL: https://jlcpcb.com/ kibot: version: 1 filters: - name: only_jlc_parts comment: 'Only parts with JLC (LCSC) code' type: generic include_only: - column: 'LCSC' regex: '^C\d+' variants: - name: rotated comment: 'Just a place holder for the rotation filter' type: kibom variant: rotated pre_transform: _rot_footprint outputs: - name: JLCPCB_gerbers comment: Gerbers compatible with JLCPCB type: gerber dir: JLCPCB options: &gerber_options exclude_edge_layer: true exclude_pads_from_silkscreen: true plot_sheet_reference: false plot_footprint_refs: true plot_footprint_values: false force_plot_invisible_refs_vals: false tent_vias: true use_protel_extensions: true create_gerber_job_file: false disable_aperture_macros: true gerber_precision: 4.6 use_gerber_x2_attributes: false use_gerber_net_attributes: false line_width: 0.1 subtract_mask_from_silk: true layers: # Note: a more generic approach is to use 'copper' but then the filenames # are slightly different. - F.Cu - B.Cu - F.Paste - B.Paste - F.SilkS - B.SilkS - F.Mask - B.Mask - Edge.Cuts - name: JLCPCB_drill comment: Drill files compatible with JLCPCB type: excellon dir: JLCPCB options: pth_and_npth_single_file: false pth_id: '-PTH' npth_id: '-NPTH' metric_units: false output: "%f%i.%x" - name: JLCPCB comment: ZIP file for JLCPCB type: compress dir: Fabrication/JLCPCB options: files: - from_output: JLCPCB_gerbers dest: / - from_output: JLCPCB_drill dest: / - name: ibom comment: Interactive BOM type: ibom dir: Fabrication/ibom options: dark_mode: true - name: 'JLCPCB_position' comment: "Pick and place file, JLCPCB style" type: position dir: Fabrication/JLCPCB-BOM options: variant: rotated output: '%f_cpl_jlc.%x' format: CSV units: millimeters separate_files_for_front_and_back: false only_smd: true columns: - id: Ref name: Designator - Val - Package - id: PosX name: "Mid X" - id: PosY name: "Mid Y" - id: Rot name: Rotation - id: Side name: Layer - name: 'JLCPCB_bom' comment: "BoM for JLCPCB" type: bom dir: Fabrication/JLCPCB-BOM options: output: '%f_%i_jlc.%x' exclude_filter: 'only_jlc_parts' ref_separator: ',' columns: - field: Value name: Comment - field: References name: Designator - Footprint - field: 'LCSC' name: 'LCSC part number' csv: hide_pcb_info: true hide_stats_info: true quote_all: true*

rock_hard 4y ago

Also plugging https://flux.ai https://flux.ai in this context It’s a modern take on electronics design with slick UX Comes with a free tier as well as paid Software engineers here are gonna love that components in flux are fully programmable from schematic/PCB all the way down to simulator models

basilskral 4y ago
I'm using Altium as my major tool for professional electronic design but I looking for something LESS expensive. And I've already done one paid project on Flux.ai. If you beginner in electronics I recommend you invest your time in something progressive like Flux rather than KiCAD or EAGLE. Yes, KiCAD and EAGLE are good tools and you will still find a lot of projects for a few years before they become complete dinosaurs but at some point, you will hate working in them(oh, gods, how I hate EAGLE, sorry for everyone who loves it)
johnrain1974 4y ago
I joined the beta about 6 months ago and these guys develop fast. When I just signed in there was no PCB at all and now a bunch of people made their PCBs in Flux and even assembly. Definitely worth to at least trying this tool.
by_Seeing 4y ago
Was going to recommend the same
scoutt 4y ago
It's truly interestering. We considered it, and we didn't like it. It seems something born to be "vendor lock-in" plus the fact that it looks super volatile (a bad combination). We are sure that our current EDA tools will at least stick around for a while. And it's browser based. Opening any of the examples on the main page with firefox lifted up my PC like a hovercraft by the way the fans started to spin, with several seconds delay for any interaction (on a PC that's capable of running Altium and Orcad). PS: I love the animation on the main page and how the mechanical engineer has no idea on what's going on!