Topic for #qi-hardware is now Copyleft hardware - http://qi-hardware.com | hardware hackers join here to discuss Ben NanoNote, atben / atusb 802.15.4 wireless, and other community driven hw projects | public logging at http://en.qi-hardware.com/irclogs
Openfree` has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
cladamw has joined #qi-hardware
emeb has joined #qi-hardware
cladamw has quit [Quit: Ex-Chat]
cladamw has joined #qi-hardware
wolfspraul has joined #qi-hardware
qwebirc77136 has joined #qi-hardware
qwebirc77136 is now known as rjeffries
<wolfspraul>
good morning everybody
<wolfspraul>
cladamw: hi! :-)
<wolfspraul>
I am reading over the m1 schematics and I am so impressed about their quality!
<rjeffries>
This project is new to me. seems very open, but I am not expert on licenses etc.: http://www.ethernut.de/
<cladamw>
good morning
<wolfspraul>
that is really fun to read through and think about, one can feel it's not the typical sloppy junk with all sorts of loose ends and "don't cares"
<wolfspraul>
thank you (and Werner) so much for your excellent work on this
<cladamw>
the quality derived from werner's suggestions. :)
<wolfspraul>
I have a few small questions here and there, clueless as I am about circuits
xiangfu has joined #qi-hardware
<wpwrak>
and adam's relentless work on applying them with great care :)
<wpwrak>
cladamw: i'm actually a bit puzzled how you avoided making a lot more mistakes :) i mean trivial things that you just overlook. after a while, i simply don't see my own mistakes anymore. but try as i might, i found almost nothing in your work.
<wpwrak>
wolfspraul: and thanks :)
<rjeffries>
wolfspraul when do you plan to have thge new itereatuion of MM available for customers to oreder?
<wolfspraul>
on the pdf side, we already know we could be better in technical things like searchable text, links, page titles, what not
<wolfspraul>
some things I noticed on the power supply page
<wolfspraul>
U11 pin4 "Inhibit" ends in a little 'x'
<wolfspraul>
does that mean it's not connected/floating?
<wolfspraul>
I would think so but that may not be 100% clear
<wpwrak>
all those little "x" mean unconnected
<wolfspraul>
yeah
<wolfspraul>
ok
<wolfspraul>
most of my feedback is about 'understandability'
<cladamw>
wpwrak, hehe ... i eventually got used to your rules but still not convinced myself to good quality once I saw all explanations you mentioned. All reasonable !
<wpwrak>
it's something you put there manually, so that kicad warn you if you forgot to assign some pins
<wolfspraul>
something I noticed in the 5V bottom-left part - D15 says "5.6Vdc" but C142 is just "100n"
<wolfspraul>
so the cap doesn't have a unit, but the voltage does
<wpwrak>
yes, we use the compact unit-or-multiplier-as-decimal-point notation for the most common values
<wolfspraul>
only occured to me because the two are right next to each other
<wpwrak>
we only switch to regular SI style for the more exotic parts
<wolfspraul>
but not for 5.6Vdc? :-)
<wolfspraul>
voltage is not exotic
<wpwrak>
R and C are a lot more common than zeners :)
<wolfspraul>
I agree to leave the Vdc there btw, but it makes me feel sad about the missins 'farad' :-)
<wolfspraul>
sure sure, just saying because I saw those two back to back
<wpwrak>
besides, zeners have multiple voltages. so the "dc" does convey information.
<wolfspraul>
it felt wrong
<wolfspraul>
next one - I noticed those blocks "POWERED" on nets
<wpwrak>
do you also feel bad about the missing Omega for resistors ?
<wolfspraul>
I'm wondering whether that is more helpful or more confusing
<wolfspraul>
no
<wolfspraul>
I understand the system
<wolfspraul>
but you have to admit seeing those "5.6Vdc" and "100n" next to each other feels unbalanced
<wpwrak>
so our instincts work in similar ways ;-)
<wolfspraul>
it feels like "one of them must be wrong"
<wolfspraul>
small detail
<wolfspraul>
just my impressions
<wolfspraul>
"POWERED"
<wolfspraul>
basically we want to clarify where the power lines are
<wpwrak>
my instinctive response to 100n is also that it's a little odd. but i have a hard time coming up with a rule that would require an F for caps but no Omega for resistors.
<wolfspraul>
a "strong and continuous" signal :-)
<wpwrak>
"POWERED" is to help kicad with error checking
<wolfspraul>
I find that "POWERED" confusing because I think there must be a wire/net "POWERED" somewhere
<kristianpaul>
hi wolfspraul :)
<wolfspraul>
is it?
<wolfspraul>
until I understand it's more like a comment/note
<wpwrak>
you can have pins that are defined as "power input". you must connect them to a "power output"
<wolfspraul>
and even then it's quite fuzzy since "powered" is still about electrons and physics as everything else
<wpwrak>
that can be a pin marked as such, or some other pin with the POWERED on top
<wolfspraul>
again, just describing my confusion
<wolfspraul>
but eventually I got it
<wpwrak>
it's a confusing concept :)
<wolfspraul>
all sorts of lines are marked "POWERED" :-)
<wolfspraul>
not sure what to think of this
<wpwrak>
kicad makes it even more confusing by just having a mysterious diamond-shaped symbol
<wolfspraul>
some devices can be powered using just the energy coming over signal wires...
<wpwrak>
at least we got rid of that one :)
<wolfspraul>
you could argue this forever
<wolfspraul>
power is flowing all over
<wpwrak>
think of it as a declaration
<wolfspraul>
yeah but very strange one
<wpwrak>
sort of a comment for kicad
<wolfspraul>
don't know what the point should be
<wolfspraul>
you could easily take this concept apart I think
<wolfspraul>
thinking about something as simple as a PWM circuit
Ayla has quit [Quit: dodo]
<wolfspraul>
so first it's not a "powered" line, and then it is? after the lowpass filter?
<wpwrak>
i consider it borderline useful, too. but that's what you have to do to get kicad to be happy with your design
<wolfspraul>
sure sure
<wolfspraul>
just my feedback
<wolfspraul>
here's another one...
<wolfspraul>
we have a lot of ICs, on the power page for example "TPS76301"
<wolfspraul>
a regulator? so I am wondering whether ICs should have 2 more fields in the schematics, just text: 1) type 2) maker
<wpwrak>
if you run an ERC on, say, atben, you'll find more weirdness. nasty things i didn't work around. such as "output" pins that connect to ground. (for RF hardening) of course, kicad complains. but it doesn't provide a means for modeling such oddball concepts.
emeb has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
<wolfspraul>
I think chip brands are important, and so might be a quick categorization like "regulator" or "ldo" or whatever
<wpwrak>
i wouldn't be opposed to specifying the maker.
<wolfspraul>
great
<wolfspraul>
how about category/type ?
<wolfspraul>
speeds up reading I think
<wpwrak>
(maker) because boom may be mislead, too. it does matching on vendor part numbers.
<wpwrak>
dunno. it's usually pretty clear what the things do. just a question of recognizing design patterns.
<wolfspraul>
oh
<wolfspraul>
we continued the thread in 2 channels :-)
<wolfspraul>
sorry about that
<wolfspraul>
#milkymist then
<wolfspraul>
or here?
<wolfspraul>
I'm confused now
<wolfspraul>
so for ICs - add maker & type
<wolfspraul>
?
<wolfspraul>
if possible, I would vote for keeping that "POWERED" box out altogether
<wolfspraul>
in the PDF
<wpwrak>
if you drop the POWERED, ERC gets messy
<wolfspraul>
I don't want to drop a kicad concept
<wolfspraul>
I only talk about the PDF I am reading
<wolfspraul>
and I describe the things that cause me a little mental bump
<wolfspraul>
without any subsequent aha moment
<wolfspraul>
more like "urgh" moment
<wolfspraul>
I have some more
<wpwrak>
i think it's just another concept you have to get used to. i think the "POWERED" is already much better than the diamond. e.g., you guessed right that it's just some sort of comment. you'd have had a much harder time figuring out what the diamond means.
<wolfspraul>
in a PWM you first have a pulse, then a DC current
<wpwrak>
the critters are in the lower right corner
<wolfspraul>
just with my tiny little knowledge of electronics I already kinda swallow hard on this 'powered' thing
<wpwrak>
you're over-analyzing :-)
<wolfspraul>
good thing we don't document intricate regulator circuits
<wolfspraul>
not over-analyzing
<wolfspraul>
I run into this, it wastes my brain energy
<wolfspraul>
until I mentally dump it into the trash bin
<wolfspraul>
because I see those "5V" marks clearly
<wolfspraul>
or "1V8"
<wolfspraul>
so what could that be?
<wolfspraul>
a DC current?
<wolfspraul>
then what is "POWERED"?
<wolfspraul>
nothing, just confusion
rjeffries has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
<wpwrak>
perhaps we should have left the diamonds. you may have found them easier to overlook :)
<wpwrak>
the bikeshed problem :)
<wolfspraul>
and again, I do want to learn. in a PWM, where does 'powered' start?
<wolfspraul>
first it's a pulse, right?
<wolfspraul>
then it becomes a DC current
<wolfspraul>
true?
<wolfspraul>
or did I misunderstand this
phirsch has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<wolfspraul>
seems very artificial to me where the "POWERED" starts
<wpwrak>
it starts on the net to which you connect to a "power in" pin and which doesn't already connect to a "power out" pin
<wolfspraul>
and your example of shunting to ground or whatever in atrf as well
<wolfspraul>
this "powered" concept feels wrong to me
<wolfspraul>
but the "1V8" are clear
<wpwrak>
think of it as a directive to guide ERC
<wolfspraul>
it's in the mental trash bin now
<wolfspraul>
I don't think about it anymore :-)
<wolfspraul>
I can't see it
<wolfspraul>
it disappeared! :-)
<wolfspraul>
another one
<wpwrak>
its presence does not affect what your circuit does. only what complains you get from ERC.
<wolfspraul>
we have a nice little table with hw revision on one of the fpga sheets
<wolfspraul>
I understand [kicad/erc]
<wpwrak>
maybe we should call it "FNORD" then :)
<wolfspraul>
but I talk about readability/understandability of the pdf
<wolfspraul>
and I think I may have a point there
<wolfspraul>
coming from that angle...
<wpwrak>
it's a quirky kicad concept
phirsch has joined #qi-hardware
<wolfspraul>
so, that hw revision table
<wolfspraul>
I like those little tables
<wolfspraul>
on the power supply page, we have a bunch of voltages we are generating
<wolfspraul>
wouldn't it be nice to have a little table that lists who the different voltages are for?
<wolfspraul>
just high-level, but I think it could help
<wolfspraul>
in fact, on the top left side we have a 4V3 = 4.3V? who is that for?
<wpwrak>
sure. you commonly have power distribution diagrams. also things like current would be interesting.
<wpwrak>
doesn't even have to be part of the schematics
<wolfspraul>
yes, current too
<wolfspraul>
although we have a few little "4A" etc here and there
<wolfspraul>
my idea was just to start with a little table on the power supply page
<wolfspraul>
very simple
<wolfspraul>
who is the 4V3 for?
<wpwrak>
yes, that's the beads. since openmoko, i'm very picky about seeing them properly specified ;-)
<wpwrak>
i think it's for audio
<wpwrak>
yes, audio
<wolfspraul>
ah, ok
<wolfspraul>
well then, "little overview table"
<wolfspraul>
I have some more
<wolfspraul>
on the fpga decoupling page
<wolfspraul>
the larger caps are polarized, the smaller ones not?
<wpwrak>
this touches on a broader problem: it would be nice if global labels indicated there else the signal appears
<wolfspraul>
it there an obvious reason/explanation for that that any EE would know, or should we add a little comment?
<wolfspraul>
say for example C88 is polarized (4u7) but C98 (470n) is not
<wolfspraul>
maybe this is obvious for more knowledgeable folks
<wpwrak>
i'm not even sure if all of the caps drawn as polarized are really polarized. i'm almost certain they're not.
<wolfspraul>
well ok
<wolfspraul>
then I even may have a point
<wolfspraul>
some more
<wolfspraul>
on the U22C page (btw I don't know which page is bank 0/1/2/3)
<wolfspraul>
I really hate those DNP/0R resistors without explanation
<wolfspraul>
feels like some uncertainty/sloppiness/unfinishedness to me
<wpwrak>
that's bank 2
<wolfspraul>
R158-R161
wej has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
<wolfspraul>
R158 is 0R DNP, R159 is 0R
<wolfspraul>
bah
<wolfspraul>
:-)
<wpwrak>
-> xilinx manual ;-)
<wolfspraul>
so it has to be like this?
<wolfspraul>
can R159 also be DNP?
<wpwrak>
M0/M1 set some sort of boot mode. but the details are probably complicated.
<wolfspraul>
can all those 4 be removed?
<wolfspraul>
ok but you admit that a block of 2*2 resistors, all 0R, two DNP two not is confusing!
<wpwrak>
it's really a "go to the current xilinx docs if you need an answer" type of question
<wolfspraul>
something like this I mentally want to rip out entirely and understand what is really going on
<wpwrak>
i mean, in the general sense
<wolfspraul>
or it's a leftover of unfinished/partial works
Openfree` has joined #qi-hardware
<wolfspraul>
I have some more :-)
<wolfspraul>
hope this is interesting for anyone...
<wolfspraul>
similar issue on the nor flash page
<wolfspraul>
R60/61, R184
<wpwrak>
a 0R / DNP pair is usually clear: we want to be able to generate H or L. there's one choice that's the normal condition for our board. but someone may what to change it. therefore, we add a footprint that allows doing that
<wolfspraul>
60 and 61 are 10k dnp
<wpwrak>
think USB_BOOT on the ben
<wolfspraul>
184 is 4k7
<wolfspraul>
so those are all pull-up resistors?
<wolfspraul>
why is one 4k7 and two are 10k?
<wpwrak>
where are they ?
<wolfspraul>
and the 10k - is the pullup needed or not?
<wolfspraul>
those are the ones we fiddled around with forever in the reset battles :-)
<wolfspraul>
nor flash page
<wolfspraul>
but I see those 3, and it looks confusing/unfinished
<wolfspraul>
if r60/r61 are dnp now, can we remove them?
<wolfspraul>
no pullup needed?
<wpwrak>
on which page are they ?
<wolfspraul>
I may misunderstand it of course
<wolfspraul>
u9 nor flash
<wpwrak>
thanks ! ah yes, they're indeed a bit odd
wej has joined #qi-hardware
<wolfspraul>
some more
<wolfspraul>
C127 on that page, value is 1u, but not polarized
<wolfspraul>
the bigger ones before were polarized, the smaller ones not
<wolfspraul>
what is the cutoff/reason?
<wpwrak>
i think polarization is quite arbitrary
<wolfspraul>
just saw it. C128 is 100n C127 is 1u
<wolfspraul>
well
<wpwrak>
as i said, several caps drawn as polarized probably have components that aren't
<wolfspraul>
should we remove the + then?
<wolfspraul>
in some use cases the difference can be quite dramatic though I would think
<wpwrak>
i don't know what rules adam applies. in the end, i does't bother me too much, since they're nearly equivalent
<wolfspraul>
ok
<wolfspraul>
next one first
<wpwrak>
(nearly equivalent) in the cases we have here. you're right that there are situations where things are less obvious.
<wolfspraul>
on the usb a/b page, some more wonderful DNP resistors
<wpwrak>
DNP can mean a number of things :)
<wolfspraul>
and even better, a note saying "full speed: mount R168" "low speed: mount R169"
<wolfspraul>
now that is confusing
<wolfspraul>
do we really mean a difference between full and low?
<wolfspraul>
or between host and slave?
<wolfspraul>
why is that comment/dnp resistors missing on the usb c/d and e/f pages?
<wpwrak>
design variants, things where we want to leave a plan b open, and then stuff we simply leave to the user to equip
<wpwrak>
there's a lot of the latter in audio
<wolfspraul>
low and full?
<wolfspraul>
with resistor values?
<wolfspraul>
what do we mount on R4 then?
<wolfspraul>
both dnp?
<wolfspraul>
I don't get it
<wolfspraul>
it's just confusing
<wolfspraul>
so with both dnp, neither low nor full with work?
<wolfspraul>
something is not clear there
<kristianpaul>
dammit, never close kicad even you already saved... for some reason things get messy...
<kristianpaul>
at least eeschema..
<wolfspraul>
those are 1k5 (dnp) resistors on the D+ and D- lines? huh?
<wpwrak>
wolfspraul: it's for configuring the port for a full or low-speed device
<wpwrak>
totally unsupported by gateware and firmware, of course :)
<wolfspraul>
I don't get it
<kristianpaul>
close by powering off computer*
<wolfspraul>
DNP means the circuit is open there?
<wolfspraul>
it connects to 3V3!
<wpwrak>
the pull up/down configuration depends on whether you have a host, low-speed device, and full-speed device
<wolfspraul>
I don't get it, sorry
<wpwrak>
we have only host ports, hence only the pull-downs but no pull-ups
<wpwrak>
that's how USB works :)
<wpwrak>
what this circuit does is give you the choice to configure it for any of these modes, should you choose to do so
<wolfspraul>
maybe we should write "full speed client" and "low speed client"?
<wolfspraul>
right now one could very easily think this somehow affects full and low speed in host mode
<wolfspraul>
but I think it doesn't
<wpwrak>
we could add a comment that it's for configurint the port as a device, yes
<wolfspraul>
it's just confusing, to me
<wolfspraul>
device, sorry
<wolfspraul>
host and device
<wpwrak>
no, host mode is unaffected
<wolfspraul>
but that's not obvious
<wpwrak>
it's a common source of confusion :)
<wpwrak>
such is life in usb land :)
<wolfspraul>
so then let's write "FULL SPEED DEVICE" and "LOW SPEED DEVICE" instead
<wpwrak>
when i first saw it, i thought someone had misunderstood the USB spec
<wolfspraul>
nah come on, that one word can help clarify things. it's not impossible to explain...
<wpwrak>
only then did i realize these were meant as configuration alternatives
<wolfspraul>
the lack of clarifying "device" confused me
<wpwrak>
kristianpaul: if you do that, do at least a few sync first :)
<wolfspraul>
that's it!
<wolfspraul>
1. 'powered' designator
<wolfspraul>
2. add maker and type to ics
<wolfspraul>
3. small table to clarify power users and current
<wpwrak>
i wouldn't touch "powered". it's a cost of living with kicad
<wolfspraul>
5. R158-R161 could be documented better/cleaned up
<wpwrak>
but you can try to make a patch that lets eeschema omit things like POWERED and submit it ;-)
<wolfspraul>
6. same for R60/R61
<wolfspraul>
7. usb device config resistors could be documented better
<wolfspraul>
that's it
<wpwrak>
though it may be tricky to get that right. there are other pieces of meta-data you don't want to suppress. and you'd also have to follow the wires, maybe convert junctions, too. etc. it's a bit of work.
<wolfspraul>
I feel most strongly about #2 and #3 in this
<wolfspraul>
god no, I won't touch that [powered]
<wolfspraul>
then I think #4, and #5/#6 should also be possible to improve slightly
<wpwrak>
(((-:C
<wolfspraul>
#7 is just adding one word
<wolfspraul>
#1 is just ranting
<wolfspraul>
but overall the schematics are a joy to read!
rejon has joined #qi-hardware
<wolfspraul>
cladamw: can you help with a power diagram/table?
<wolfspraul>
this concludes my feedback :-)
<wpwrak>
kewl. not too bad :)
<wolfspraul>
thanks
<wolfspraul>
if even I can read that stuff, it's already written for dummies
<wpwrak>
hehe :)
<wolfspraul>
the IC maker/type could help even more
<wolfspraul>
or, at least in the online PDF, some cool little links to wikipedia one can click on to find out about some background concepts
<wolfspraul>
but those are just bells and whistles, plus the PDF has some serious technical shortcomings like text search
<wolfspraul>
ability to follow wires by clicking on them
<wolfspraul>
etc.
<wpwrak>
some concepts are difficult to convey because they depend on a lot of background. just like that usb pull business. it's a very common source of confusion everywhere. but yes, we can make it a little bit more accessible on our side.
<wpwrak>
(pdf) all things that really need support from kicad itself
<wolfspraul>
as I said I feel most strongly about my #2 and #3
<wpwrak>
another thing that would be nice to clear up would be to have chip pin numbers on all the bypass caps :) we have that now for the RAM
<wolfspraul>
yes, although that also doesn't include the mystery 4V3 user :-)
<wolfspraul>
but yes, that's what I mean just integrated nicely as a little table or so in the "power supply" schematics page
<wpwrak>
and it was a pretty good lesson - before these things weren't there, which led to a good amount of weirdness and miscommunication with layout. fortunately, harmless. this time.
<wolfspraul>
right now we have a set of regulators and circuits prepping this or that voltage
<wolfspraul>
but little info on where this goes, current, overview
<wolfspraul>
definitely [chip pin numbers for bypass caps]
<wpwrak>
maybe the power tree needs updating. i see that it still has that ancient noisy codec
<wolfspraul>
maybe we can move it into the schematics?
<wolfspraul>
remove from wiki?
<wpwrak>
that should be possible, yes
<cladamw>
not to remove it now, i think that i can use KiCad editor to edit a new power tree.
<cladamw>
a power tree i can equip them with power net name, chip reference, circuit block and etc.
<cladamw>
regards to chip pin numbers with bypass caps, i'll also clean them up.
<wpwrak>
i would put the circuit block before the chip reference. less intimidating :)
rejon has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
<cladamw>
the chip pin name don't need to be accurately same as current m1rc3 if later m1r[4..n] producing.
<cladamw>
for examples two 100nF placed to pin 1 and pin 19, layout guy can place whatever 100nF to pin1 or pin19,
<cladamw>
we made unclear and unreadable in previous runs.
<kristianpaul>
wpwrak: no it not
<kristianpaul>
i still deleted same components
<kristianpaul>
save
<kristianpaul>
rsync
<kristianpaul>
close kicad
<kristianpaul>
no poweroff
<kristianpaul>
re-open
<wpwrak>
(pin 1 vs. 19) well, it shouldn't cause much work for the layout guys either way :)
<kristianpaul>
and got EESchema file text load error at line 788
<cladamw>
(circuit block) wpwrak ?
<kristianpaul>
hmm
<kristianpaul>
and now there are lots of missing components on the screen...
<wolfspraul>
cladamw: yes, good!
<wolfspraul>
of course, first make a new and clean version in kicad before removing the wiki one
<wolfspraul>
now that we have kicad, we have a better place for this info than the wiki
<wpwrak>
cladamw: i mean "Audio LM4550BVH" looks nicer than "LM4550BVH Audio".
<wolfspraul>
before we needed the wiki to have any place outside of the dark and closed AD files :-)
<wpwrak>
kristianpaul: did you use a weird character in some name ?
<cladamw>
wpwrak, okay. :)
<kristianpaul>
wpwrak: let me see, but this wasnt happening before the component cutoff..
<kristianpaul>
nope
<kristianpaul>
just can see 3 components right now afaik,
<kristianpaul>
i just deleted one block now and the same error popup..
<wpwrak>
kristianpaul: it gets better: pick a text comment. double-click to edit the text. delete it. then press OK. you'll get "Empty text !". and then kicad segfaults ;-)
<wpwrak>
(at least here)
<kristianpaul>
dont cheerme up that much ;)
<wpwrak>
perhaps you can recover it by putting some text in the empty line with a text editor
<kristianpaul>
i'll try found root cause
<kristianpaul>
by trial and error :)
<cladamw>
wpwrak, would you mind if I outline frame to your header or he10 module ?
<cladamw>
s/I/I add
<qi-bot>
cladamw meant: "wpwrak, would you mind if I add outline frame to your header or he10 module ?"
<kristianpaul>
or try another versio perhaps? this is 2011-05-25
<cladamw>
wpwrak, are you qi-bot ? hehe ...
<wpwrak>
(mind) not at all. i've just been lazy :)
<kristianpaul>
putting some text in the empty line seems works, but how many empty lines left :)
<kristianpaul>
perhaps i need sed help
<cladamw>
wpwrak, also since a dedicated pin number 1, 2, or n, (n-1) there would be good. :)
<wpwrak>
you mean to mark #1 ? the default kicad lib uses quare pins for #1, round for the rest
<kristianpaul>
argh, EESchema file undefined object at line
<kristianpaul>
better replace not remove empty spaces..
<cladamw>
wpwrak, i'd like a feature for Fped. i.e. place number (txt) in outline, can it be now ?
<wpwrak>
no, it can't do text
<cladamw>
Can KiCad do #n, #n-1 ?
<wpwrak>
lemme see ...
xwalk has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
<cladamw>
hmm .... i was thought your pin# can be shown inside solder paste in Fped, but can't add number text in outline in the future ?
<wpwrak>
yeah, the module editor has text
<cladamw>
hmm ... alright.
<wpwrak>
i only show the pin number as non-physical text (i.e., something pcbnew shows but that doesn't go to the gerber)
<wpwrak>
the problem with supporting text that goes to the gerber would be matching kicad's fonts and such. tricky.
rejon has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
<cladamw>
if yours(Fped) can do, that would be super ole.
<kristianpaul>
ha
<wpwrak>
i'll put it on my to do list for 2013 :)
<kristianpaul>
i just save it as another name (no mod) and same error
<cladamw>
wpwrak, tks a lots ! not bad. :-)
compcube has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
<kristianpaul>
hmm
<qi-bot>
[commit] Werner Almesberger: reset reachable_pkg in the instantiation process and restore on inst_revert (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/fped/59b90b3
<wolfspraul>
this one about atben - there is a crystal X1 16MHz 8pF 40ppm ESR=80R
<wolfspraul>
maybe we could relax those specs a little so nobody gets stuck finding *exactly* such a crystal
<wolfspraul>
is that possible?
<wolfspraul>
for example the ESR - probably anything above or below 80 should be ok, no?
<wolfspraul>
or the ppm, if it's 30 or 20, what would be the problem?
<wolfspraul>
if that info is missing then someone may not know what to do with a part they found with say ESR 100...
<wpwrak>
oh, that's a maximum value. like a resistor tolerance of 5% doens't mean we'd reject a 1% resistor
<wolfspraul>
ok but we can be more helpful
<wpwrak>
the capacitance must match C10 and C11, though
<wolfspraul>
the ESR is a minimum or maximum?
<wolfspraul>
40ppm is the precision, right? if so, would <= 40 ppm be more helpful?
<wolfspraul>
I just want to convey good positive vibes to the reader, less worries :-)
<wpwrak>
maximum. but i wonder where it comes from ...
<wpwrak>
i think 40ppm is pretty unambiguous :)
<wolfspraul>
the point is to make those specs more reader/user *friendly*
<wolfspraul>
a higher precision crystal will work as well, so why not write "<= 40 ppm"?
<wolfspraul>
if the schematics should be an exercise in "think yourself", then I can also have a lot of ideas how to achieve that, of course :-)
<wpwrak>
ah, the ESR is from the transceiver data sheet. so far so good. but they actually relaxed the spec. now it's <= 100 Ohm
<wolfspraul>
a large part of the industry seems to believe in that model anyway
<wolfspraul>
how good that they say <= :-)
<wpwrak>
(higher precision) because it's obvious ? :) that's a bit like foo++; /* increment foo */
<wolfspraul>
so I think we should do that too, obvious or not, if it helps people more quickly navigate around the specs and focus their time on where it matters to them
<wolfspraul>
you could say "all crystal ppm are meant <=", but then it's better to just write <= there imho
<wpwrak>
naw, if you fill the schematics with trivial junk, people will not notice the places where you actually have something to say
<wolfspraul>
two characters
<wolfspraul>
ESR is <= 100R now?
<wpwrak>
will be, once i finish dinner :)
<wolfspraul>
I agree about not repeating obvious/redundant information
<wolfspraul>
but then you want to invite people and accelerate their first steps
<wolfspraul>
ESR= is a good example of potential time waste
<wpwrak>
yes, the ESR is bad
xwalk has quit [Read error: Operation timed out]
xwalk has joined #qi-hardware
wolfspraul has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
rejon has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
wolfspraul has joined #qi-hardware
cladamw has joined #qi-hardware
wolfspraul has quit [Quit: leaving]
xiangfu has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
rejon has joined #qi-hardware
jekhor has joined #qi-hardware
kristoffer has joined #qi-hardware
<qi-bot>
[commit] Werner Almesberger: atben/atben.sch, atusb/atrf.sch: correct and clarify ESR of X1 (reported by Wolfgang Spraul) (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/ben-wpan/42f1a78
xiangfu has joined #qi-hardware
rejon has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
jurting has joined #qi-hardware
jluis|work has joined #qi-hardware
woakas has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
_whitelogger has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
_whitelogger has joined #qi-hardware
Jay7x has joined #qi-hardware
zedstar has joined #qi-hardware
zumbi_ has joined #qi-hardware
jivs has joined #qi-hardware
zumbi_ is now known as Guest88650
_whitelogger_ has joined #qi-hardware
_whitelogger has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
hozer has joined #qi-hardware
woakas has joined #qi-hardware
xiangfu has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
Jay7x is now known as Jay7
xiangfu has joined #qi-hardware
Ayla has joined #qi-hardware
jluis|work has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
xiangfu has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
xiangfu has joined #qi-hardware
jurting_ has joined #qi-hardware
jurting has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
jluis|work has joined #qi-hardware
<Ayla>
hi
<Ayla>
is there a way to tell GCC that a branch will probably be used more often than another one?