| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
olga
United Kingdom
107 Posts |
 Posted - 03 Jul 2009 : 15:25:23
|
Hi,
Could there be an easier way of renaming components, please?
(I don't like the current auto-rename widget, as I can never seem to make it do what I want it to! )
One way to make the auto rename a bit more user-friendly might be to be able to specify different strip widths for the horizontal & vertical.
For my current board I want to be able to rename everything on the left hand side, then the middle, then the right; as that's how the circuit's laid out, so in effect I want three, narrow-but-tall strips.
Currently, if I want to change a component reference, I have to do several stages. For instance, if I want to swap C1 & C2 I have to call C1 C2a, rename C2 as C1 and then go back & rename C2a as C2.
I know this is to avoid the problem of duplicate names, which EPC doesn't allow to happen at all, but I can't help but think there has to be another way to do it!
Best wishes,
Olga.
|
|
|
Peter Johnson
United Kingdom
498 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jul 2009 : 13:09:36
|
Using the component name as the index as well does have that problem.
A bigger one as far as renaming is concerned is the way we've identified symbol origins in the libraries. Surface mount is fine, as they're generally in the geometric centre, but most of the discrete items are on pin 1. Now, with a neat row of resistors, you can guarantee that at least one will have been reversed, which means that it's no longer a neat row logically, and the numbering can go haywire, especially using stripes.
The best suggestion for this is perhaps to ask for the geometric centre rather than the symbol origin to be used during rename. The algorithm for this already exists, as it's used in the component positions report. What do you think? |
 |
|
|
olga
United Kingdom
107 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2009 : 11:59:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Peter JohnsonThe best suggestion for this is perhaps to ask for the geometric centre rather than the symbol origin to be used during rename. The algorithm for this already exists, as it's used in the component positions report. What do you think?
That would certainly help.
Another thing that might help is if there were a way to list all of the components in an Excel- or even text file- type manner, edit them there & then 'import' the changes to the PCB. Possibly it could be a list of current names & names you want to call them. I know that a method like this is used on another layout package, but I don't know if it would be feasible to do with EPC.
Best wishes,
Olga. |
|
|
|
Iain Wilkie
United Kingdom
1015 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2009 : 12:17:49
|
This could be coupled with a rather annoying other aspect of easy PC. At the moment, if you wish to edit the "values" of components (lets say a batch of caps need changing from 0.1uF to 0.2uF but they are spread across a number of schematic pages, you need to do them page by page. However in the PCB file ALL components are listed in order and I have said in the past that it would be great if you could edit the value there (as they are all in the one big list) and then back-annotate .... but this has never been implemented. Olgas suggestion of export/modify/import could be a good mechanism to support this problem as well
Iain |
|
|
|
olga
United Kingdom
107 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2009 : 13:15:15
|
Hi Iain,
Is it the 'Component Values' sheet which you're using to do this?
I've never needed a schematic which covers more than one sheet, so I've never encountered this problem. However, being able to change the reference in this sheet would be a good idea.
To Peter,
Something else which might help is the ability to sort by columns, so that you could collect all the 0.1uF together, if for example they all needed changing.
Best wishes,
Olga. |
|
|
|
Iain Wilkie
United Kingdom
1015 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2009 : 13:57:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by olga
Hi Iain,
Is it the 'Component Values' sheet which you're using to do this?
I've never needed a schematic which covers more than one sheet, so I've never encountered this problem. However, being able to change the reference in this sheet would be a good idea.
Olga.
Hi Olga,
Yes it is the component values sheet. Ok if there is only one schematic sheet but really annoying if you have say 12 like I do in some designs. As you will know you can copy/past within the component values table BUT all components are only brought together in the PCB editor, so it would be good if values could be edited there and then back annotated.
Iain |
|
|
|
olga
United Kingdom
107 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2009 : 14:58:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Iain Wilkie
Yes it is the component values sheet. Ok if there is only one schematic sheet but really annoying if you have say 12 like I do in some designs.
Ouchie!
quote:
As you will know you can copy/past within the component values table BUT all components are only brought together in the PCB editor, so it would be good if values could be edited there and then back annotated.
Yup, I see what you mean. So what we'd really want is to be able to change the component itself from that sheet (not just its value) and then back-anotate to the schematic.
If that were also coupled with the ability to change the reference, that would just about fit the bill, I think!
Best wishes,
Olga. |
|
|
|
Iain Wilkie
United Kingdom
1015 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2009 : 16:32:31
|
quote:
If that were also coupled with the ability to change the reference, that would just about fit the bill, I think!
Best wishes,
Olga.
Absolutely,
Iain |
|
|
|
Peter Johnson
United Kingdom
498 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2009 : 18:13:24
|
Well, I've logged the various requests for different centres, csv import, values in back annotation, but the one that's not worth putting in at present is the ability to sort on columns. The reason is that we're using a Microsoft utility to draw the tables - and it won't let you do this! Another example of MS only going half the distance. Anyway, until we move to a 3rd party utility for this (which is intended, but is a MAJOR project because of the global scope of the function), there's little point in asking for stuff like this. Any 3rd party utility would have to have features like this even to be considered, and if it's there, then it will be implemented!
I'm not sure how practical back annotating an actual component change would be. What about if the original only used one schematic gate, and the replacement three (or vice versa)? It wouldn't take many of thiose for the schematic to become unrecognisable with connections flying all over the place! |
|
|
|
Iain Wilkie
United Kingdom
1015 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2009 : 18:24:49
|
Peter,
Not talking about back annotation on a component "change" but just component values or designation ..... i.e C3 is now to be called C6 and/or it is a 0.1uF cap now changing to a 0.2uF cap.... things like that. The components would be the same.
Iain |
|
|
|
olga
United Kingdom
107 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jul 2009 : 12:02:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Peter Johnson
Well, I've logged the various requests for different centres, csv import, values in back annotation, but the one that's not worth putting in at present is the ability to sort on columns. The reason is that we're using a Microsoft utility to draw the tables - and it won't let you do this! Another example of MS only going half the distance.
Wonderful!  Especially since this feature is in other M$ apps (Excel to name but one!)... as you say, Microsoft not doing what it should.
Best wishes,
Olga. |
|
|
|
olga
United Kingdom
107 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jul 2009 : 12:03:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Iain Wilkie
Not talking about back annotation on a component "change" but just component values or designation ..... i.e C3 is now to be called C6 and/or it is a 0.1uF cap now changing to a 0.2uF cap.... things like that. The components would be the same.
Yup, that's precisely what I meant.  |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Component renaming