Any orcad 16.3 users which could help me out a bit?

Go To Last Post
14 posts / 0 new
Author
Message
#1
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Hi.

Footprints, is there no standard footprint library with the package? I can`t get the Capture to recognize any names i found for footprints. I got a very simple design ready to be exported to the Orcad PCB editor, but missing footprints for simple stuff like 1206 resistors/caps, 2x3 and 2x5 headers, and a RJ11 4-pin connector. By some reason the SOIC14 and SOIC8 was found easily :P

Any input would much appreciated!!

Kim

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

It only takes a couple of minutes to create footprints like that with the Pulsonix software I use. It should be the same with OrCAD.

Leon Heller G1HSM

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Yeah i was able to make a footprint earlier today, but it is still not recognized :S

I suspect I am missing something obvious, surely it should not take one work day to figure out how to export from schematics to layout software....

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Try OrCAD support. That's what they are there for.

Leon Heller G1HSM

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

is your library also visible in the orcad PCB tool.
you can specify it in the schematic, but if it is not attached in the PCb tool it will not be able to find the component.

ow and btw all the footprints you mentioned should be present.although if i recall correctly the 1206 will be R1206 and C1206.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Tried both R1206, C1206, SM1206... Nothing seemed to work.

Ended up just making my own pads, once i figured out how to use the footprint wizard it wasn`t that bad.

Thanks anyway :)

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

It would have saved you a lot of time if you had done that in the first place, as I suggested. :)

Leon Heller G1HSM

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I created and maintain the footprint library at my company. We are currently using v16.5 (used to be v16.3). We do not use any of the footprints that shipped with the product. Being a control freak, I have drawn all of the several thousand components (schematic symbols and footprints) currently in our library. CIS is a powerful, useful tool for managing your library should you wish to pursue a similar path. That said, there are some footprints (and schematic symbols) that ship with the product. If you are running on Windows, I imagine the footprints are located somewhere similar to:

C:\Cadence\SPB_16.3\share\pcb\pcb_lib\symbols\

Let us know if this works. And next time, try not to open the door for Leon to pump up Pulsonix... :roll:

Edit: you can also check the psmpath and padpath variables in PCB Editor/Allegro to see where it thinks the footprints are.

Science is not consensus. Science is numbers.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Leon, the fastest way would still be if i could pursuade may supervisor to buy a eagle license :P But yes, you are right, it would have been fastest to just make them from the start. Guess it`s one of that pride things, just HAVE to make it work, slept on it and desided to just give up...

Hobbss, i think I`ll design all the footprints i use from now on, but as the company is not really into developing I wont make too much out of it, just do design and forget it :P

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Personally I can't stand Eagle. Maybe its because I learned PCB layout with professional tools (Mentor Graphics, Cadence, etc), but the tool seems very unintuitive to me.

Science is not consensus. Science is numbers.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

hobbss wrote:
Personally I can't stand Eagle. Maybe its because I learned PCB layout with professional tools (Mentor Graphics, Cadence, etc), but the tool seems very unintuitive to me.

I hate both Eagle and OrCAD, but I hate Eagle 100x more than OrCAD. They're both terrible though. I'm stuck with OrCAD at work. But I honestly would look for another job if they switched to Eagle.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I was always an MG guy (loved PCB Expedition). At a new job, they tasked me w/ selecting a new CAD program (they had used Eagle in the past). I couldn't justify the price difference between MG (~29k) and Cadence (start at ~8k). I think Cadence has a much better tiered upgrade path than MG.

That said, Cadence has grown on me, and I can do some pretty nifty stuff with it.

Science is not consensus. Science is numbers.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Funny, i feel the exact same thing when working with cadence. I like eagle for the transparency between pcb/schematics and that the footprints is easily chosen when adding parts. Very straight forward when getting to know the interface.

Then again, i have yet to do a complex design, and i have not used cadence long enough to really understand the design-flow. But as a complete newb, it feels like everything is done with a sledgehammer.
What really throws me off is the lack of connection between schematic symbols and footprints. Also, most of the shortcuts is just plain stupid, why on earth would someone use "F9", to do the same job "ESC" does in every other software i have used? Same goes for "F6" instead of "enter", "ctrl+D" instead of "delete".

It`s not that eagle or perfect either, i just feel that for the cost of orcad, it should have been WAY more fluent to use.

Anyway, i know orcad have allot more features, but for my case i probably never use them :P

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

hobbss wrote:
I was always an MG guy (loved PCB Expedition). At a new job, they tasked me w/ selecting a new CAD program (they had used Eagle in the past). I couldn't justify the price difference between MG (~29k) and Cadence (start at ~8k). I think Cadence has a much better tiered upgrade path than MG.

That said, Cadence has grown on me, and I can do some pretty nifty stuff with it.

you did not look at Altium designer ???
After using Orcad for years this was a mayor step forward.
Specially the 3D stuff they have. It saves us a lot of mailing calling with the mechanical guys ( who are in another location) they send us the plastics in step and we design the board in those plastics.