[sdiy] Eagle footprints

Sarah Thompson plodger at gmail.com
Mon Nov 23 07:22:52 CET 2015


I've not found an ideal option for resistors, capacitors, standard package
inductors, etc. Usually I add those attributes at the schematic level
rather than the library level -- this still generates perfect BOMs and
supports copy & paste, etc. One thing I do sometimes is make a
kind-of-library-thing (for want of a better name) which is essentially a
schematic containing a large number of circuit snippets that I can cut &
paste into a working design. Used with an underlying library this serves a
similar purpose, but deals with the resistor/capacitor issue and also of
course lets you make a library of subcircuits rather than simply devices.

In reply to Charlie Wallace, the Octopart add-in is here:
https://octopart.com/excel

I don't know if it works on anything other than for-real Excel on Windows,
since that's the only thing I've used it on, but it certainly works
amazingly well.

I second the BSDL ULP for making parts that can be hacked on further -- I
often use this to make packages. It does work without a BSDL file,
incidentally, though if you actually have one it is a lot easier to use.
I've done a 484 pin FPGA package from a BSDL generated directly from the
Actel chip editor software before, which worked fine and saved many hours
of work.

Sarah

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 7:36 PM, john slee <indigoid at oldcorollas.org> wrote:

> On 23 November 2015 at 12:12, Sarah Thompson <plodger at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> One thing I have recently started to do in EAGLE is to religiously add
>> attributes to every library object that specify Digikey/Mouser/manufacturer
>> part numbers. This makes it really easy to generate an accurate BOM
>> directly from Eagle, the
>
>
> Yeah. I like this.
>
> What are you doing for parts with many possible values, like resistors? Do
> you have a deviceset (as they are named in Eagle XML) with a separate
> device for each E96 value (since you can preconfigure the value in the
> device), with a supplier/manufacturer part# attribute on each device?
>
> For me that approach makes sense. Though I would consider creating an
> external filter (one with understanding of manufacturer part numbering
> schemes built in) to translate from one manufacturer to another, at least
> for things like R and C
>
> John
>



-- 
[s]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20151122/12e6388a/attachment.html>


More information about the Synth-diy mailing list