![how to fix protel 99se cannot open document how to fix protel 99se cannot open document](http://obrazki.elektroda.net/69_1215295894.jpg)
In other words: the generic symbol should at the very least have two parts: power and generic pins, and then the part with the generic pins should have pins on at most two sides of the rectangle, i.e. In my practice, after the layout is complete, generic symbols like FPGAs and P1/P2 are redone in a form that has the pins grouped to best fit with the flow of the schematic, the symbol is broken up into as many constituent parts as needed to best convey the information graphically, and all pins get application-specific names in addition to generic ones, i.e. That's the downside of the schematics never reaching the customers anymore - eventually what happens is that nobody in the company can quite read it either The P2 eval board "schematic" suffers from this ailment, and everyone seems to just work in this yucky style. In my experience, schematics usually look not very good with generic symbols for chips that essentially have all-equivalent pins, and square symbols that mimic physical pin layout are poor UX to begin with There certainly can be a specialized symbol that maps the pins in their physical locations on the actual chip to aid in hardware debugging, but this is a separate concern from visualizing the flow of signals: the former is a debugging add-on, the latter is the primary function of a schematic as a document for human consumption.Ī schematic is there to aid in describing the function of the circuit - it's not meant to be a graphical means for netlist entry, even though most people these days seem to use it this way. Pad size used in the KiCad standard library and should work just fine. Maybe I need to see if I can get that to come out from the block on a 45 degree angle at one corner. Note 4: I'm not totally happy about the thremal ground pad 101 reference in the symbol.
![how to fix protel 99se cannot open document how to fix protel 99se cannot open document](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/protel99setraningmanualpcbdesign-120912101948-phpapp02/85/protel-99-setraningmanualpcbdesign-74-320.jpg)
#How to fix protel 99se cannot open document series#
It is a recommended practice to use a series of paste "blobs" rather than a single large paste "blob" but I'm not certain of the recommended sizes without further research. This is what was used in the original TQFP footprint I copied. Note 3: Notice the paste mask are rounded style pads of 0.890668mm. Note 2: The footprint uses a slightly modified pad size (1.475x0.3mm) from the recommended OnSemi (in P2 specs) pad size of 1.49x0.28mm. The vias were/are currently specified as 0.2mm (~0.008") but I think I will need to change them to 0.3mm (~0.012") for manufacture and I may need to adjust the paste mask accordingly. Note 1: I based the footprint on that used for the TQFP100 using a 5x5 thermal relief pad, with corrections to use a 9.6x9.6mm pad. So, here is my first attempt at a P2 symbol and footprint. KiCad has improved dramatically since I took a brief look years ago. Yesterday was my first attempt with KiCad. What footprint did you use? (I didn't load the library) I thought it may be beneficial to try and keep the KiCad P2 stuff in one thread. Hope you dont't mind me posting to your thread.