Updated w/ correct component type
Thanks, I did discover on my own that I was using Spice components rather than the needed schematic components. That fixed nearly all of the problems. I do have a question regarding connections to "Implied" items such as GND and power supply. Most are recognized and show the board trace but some are ignored. I see the connection dot on component to GND on some and not others. When I attempt to add a connection dot it reports connection is already made yet no dot is displayed.
Any thoughts on this discrepency before I commit to etching?
Posted by jeffreyclay at
I have created a simple circuit with 5 opamps and a handful of components and when I create the pcb only the two pots appear. I don't know what I'm doing wrong. Any help for a beginner?
I've attached the schematic for you to examine.
I've recognized that I was using Spice components to populate the schematic rather than schematic parts. Most of this has resolved my problem with the exception of a few dangling connections to GND missing.
Posted by umurri at
I want tell you that I've found the right way to send you back and share the result of my little investigation on your circuit, sharing it into:
It's possible attach a file when we open a discussion, but it's not possible wen we want answer into an opened discussion.
So I will delete the file from the place where it was.
Posted by umurri at
I've discovered also many other things.
You often place new wires on wires already connected, and often you place well connected wire on unconnected ones, covering them from your sight.
Sometime you don't complete some wire to the right destination leaving the termination as a "stub" or dangling wires. These are quite invisible and it's a lot hard and annoying to search and remove. It's needed to color my background with a dark color, to select a brighter color for the unconnected pins and then to place the cursor at the exact coordinates, keeping the zoom to the maximum possible.
You often place a supply symbol on the supply pin of your components without place the necessary connection (wire) behind the two points.
When you draft a design it's better and more easy to forget the analogic way to do, that ask to make convert every GND at the same point.
This it's a right practice when you will design the PCB, but not while you trace the wire on the schematic.
I suggest you to think your desktop a multilayer and infinite plane of copper where you can apply your circuit in every point, without think to the CMR or strange Ground loops.
For the best clarity of the schema, following the previous suggestion, I suggest also to use for all the supplies and Ground local symbols when there is enough space to place it, but just a common wire when the space in the schema it's too busy.
It doesn't matter if in this wire theoretically are flowing several, many currents, because the schema it's only a symbolic representation of the connections and not of the behavior of the currents.
A general suggestion it's to draft your schema more wide and reduce the occupation when you will see all the work, or a big part of this. In this way you would change / rotate your component, with more easy and in less time.
I suggest to "Show the Network name" of every wire that you draft and then to apply significant names instead of N00nnn default name. In this way, you will helped in the reading of the reports and the netlist.
When you have a doubt, delete a segment of the suspected network, or all the network and then redraft it, paying attention to unconnected segment that can appears.
If you are troubled about the possibility to forget the path of a network, print it into a PDF file and keep the PDF opened in background. While you're drafting a wire, you will quickly turn to the PDF to remember the old right path.
Then, when you think to have "cleaned" the net and removed the unconnected wires hided by this, let's run the reports of the errors and if necessary, follow it on the netlist.
And more: in the "Setting and Hilights" panel, removing the "Connected Pins" you will have a quick display that help you to show and distinguish the connected pins from the pins unconnected.
As a "stylistic" observation (but it's a personal matter) I prefer put GND oriented to the bottom of the schema, as the negative supply, and their wire that are coming down from the components, while I put the positive supply oriented to the top, with the wires falling down to the circuit.
Sorry for the length of my answer.
I'm happy to help you now and in the future.
Posted by umurri at
My opinion is that you've used symbols coming from Spice library that are (or may) only symbolic, virtual symbols only necessary to describe the behavior of the component for the simulation.
The PartList ignore the "virtual" components. This can be an idea to how include a virtual component and don't count it into the partlist.
Use instead the physical components that you can find into other library as OPAMPS.cml
This is true for the other component too.
Be care to the connections of your schema that are not good. This is evident for the visible dot.
Be care also to some connection that for my opinion are not what you need.
The result it's now this:
Report File : C:\Mypath\JCR Bi-Amp (Custom Report).txt
Report Written : Wednesday, July 11, 2012
Design Path : C:\Mypath\JCR Bi-Amp.sch
Design Title :
Last Saved : 2012-07-11 20.06.57
Editing Time : 123 min
Units : thou (precision 2)
Component Value Qty
RA_POT 10K 2
Resistor (Z shape) 14