4 Replies Latest reply on Oct 21, 2008 11:31 AM by Greg.Hansen

    Library Automation


      When it comes to building symbols, footprints and the pin mapping between the two, I know we'd all like to have a "just do it" button, but really what are the most important requirements for automation?  For example if we look at symbol generation is it extracting the pin list from the manufacturers data sheet, or is it the ability to automatically generate symbol graphics that conform to company standards, which would save the most time?  I have my own ideas but I'd really like to know what you think.

        • 1. Re: Library Automation



          first of all get the chip manufacture to agree on a data exchange format.


          I know there where trials with partminer and similar companies/webpages to offer e xml based exchange format. But I have still to find a vendor that offers this data files readily available on their website. Take a clue on how long and how hard it is to find the appropriate Ibis model. Until this is solved any amount of work into automation is futile.


          Having said that, I would like to see the following:

          -A set of general rules on the formation of symbols (e.g. in Europe a resistor is a box, in other parts of the world a resistor is a serpentine line, and so on)

          -A set of general rules for the geometry/cell (round corners, square corners. Some company dont mind this, other insist on round corners, A and B side difference. etc)

          -A set of override rules based on company specific requirements (a glue dispenser can not make glue points smaller than X, etc..)

          --Here a standard feedback or data exchange with the tools from manufacturing is vital. ODB++ started in the right direction but is not enough

          -A set of override rules for every part number (and a way to document the reason of change) (E.g. We found out that component X, even following the design specification of the producer does not solder well, but by widening the pad by XXX mm, a better solderability can be achieved)

          1 of 1 people found this helpful
          • 2. Re: Library Automation

            Hi Andy,


            Good to hear from you again. I would also like to see automation around checking to corporate standards. Quite often we simply copy an existing symbol to a new symbol if only minor changes are required. We've looked at other data collection and symbol generation tools in the past, such as ChipData, and unfortunately never been able to justify the investment.


            Best Regards,

            Greg Hansen

            1 of 1 people found this helpful
            • 3. Re: Library Automation


              Hi Greg,



              Glad to see you're still in the PCB business.  What did you think to the ChipData approach?  Does using datasheet information from the Web answer the need for a ready source of data to seed generation tools?



              All the Best






              • 4. Re: Library Automation

                If I remember the tool correctly, it mined data from PDF datasheets. This worked well for most integrated circuit families, but proved more trouble than it was worth with other part types.