Print Page | Close Window

PADS Layout V2005 Export To DipTrace

Printed From: PCB Libraries Forum
Category: PCB Footprint Expert
Forum Name: Questions & Answers
Forum Description: issues and technical support
URL: https://www.PCBLibraries.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1329
Printed Date: 23 Nov 2024 at 3:44am


Topic: PADS Layout V2005 Export To DipTrace
Posted By: dwaltoneng
Subject: PADS Layout V2005 Export To DipTrace
Date Posted: 02 May 2014 at 1:17am

I am having difficulty exporting from PCB Library Expert to DipTrace CAD tool.

One footprint is not exported/imported correctly. I have tried selecting PADS Version 2005.0 and 2007.0

The following is part of the exported PADS Version 2005.0 output from Library Expert, for the Footprint Name QFN50P400X400X80-21

COPCLS 10 0.01 1 20
1.37 0
1.37 -1.22 0 -900 1.07 -1.37 1.37 -1.07
1.22 -1.37
-1.22 -1.37 2700 -900 -1.37 -1.37 -1.07 -1.07
-1.37 -1.22
-1.37 1.22 1800 -900 -1.37 1.07 -1.07 1.37
-1.22 1.37
1.22 1.37 900 -900 1.07 1.07 1.37 1.37
1.37 1.22
1.37 0

The document "PADS Parts Library ASCII File Format Specification Version 2005.x" says the angles are in degrees. The output from pcbl is in 1/10 of a degree. The current beta version of Diptrace expects degrees not 1/10 of a degree. If I change the angles from 900, 1800 and 2700 to 90, 180 and 270, it is imported correctly into Diptrace.
The document "PADS Layout ASCII Format Specification PADS 9.0" says the angles are in 1/10 of a degree. What is correct for V2005.0?

Referring to the V2005.0 spec, the last number in the line "COPCLS 10 0.01 1 20" is the linestyle, which should be either -1 or 0. The number 20 is correct for the v9.0 spec, where it is the pin number minus 1. What is correct here?


uploads/2945/QFN50P400X400X80-21.fpx" rel="nofollow - uploads/2945/QFN50P400X400X80-21.fpx
uploads/2945/QFN50P400X400X80-21.zip" rel="nofollow - uploads/2945/QFN50P400X400X80-21.zip



Replies:
Posted By: chrisa_pcb
Date Posted: 02 May 2014 at 10:19am

Hi. Can you send me the PADS 2005 ASCII .pdf? Whats weird is that I'm showing no exceptions to the rotation units being in degrees, rather than the normal tenths of a degree. PADS itself loads the 2005 .d and .p that is put out without issue.

Also keep in mind that the .d and .p are applicable to the library specification document included with PADS, plib_ascii.pdf,  as opposed to the .asc which is described in ppcb_ascii.pdf. There are minor differences between the two, so please ensure you're reading the right specification.

Posted By: dwaltoneng
Date Posted: 02 May 2014 at 4:37pm
Someone has posted the 2007 documents at docin.
Ppcb_ASCII v2007 http://www.docin.com/p-306298051.html
Plib_ASCII v2007 http://www.docin.com/p-306297849.html

Interesting that Plib_ASCII says the angle is in degrees, and Ppcb_ASCII says the angle is in tenths of a degree.
Is Plib_ASCII the document we should be referring to?

Posted By: chrisa_pcb
Date Posted: 03 May 2014 at 3:08am

Originally posted by dwaltoneng dwaltoneng wrote:

Someone has posted the 2007 documents at docin.
Ppcb_ASCII v2007 http://www.docin.com/p-306298051.html
Plib_ASCII v2007 http://www.docin.com/p-306297849.html

Interesting that Plib_ASCII says the angle is in degrees, and Ppcb_ASCII says the angle is in tenths of a degree.
Is Plib_ASCII the document we should be referring to?

Ppcb_ASCII.pdf describes the .ASC (full board) specification.

Plib_ASCII.pdf describes the .p/.d (library part) specification.

When you choose a .asc output, it places the parts(part decal, part type, and then a part to place) on a board in order to import them. When you choose the part and decal format, it uses library style. They vary in minor ways.

I've looked back through my stuff in comparison to these pdfs, and it appears that prior to version 9, the .d file used degrees, rather than tenths of a degree for the angles contained in an arc. All .asc files have always described the angles of an arc in tenths of a degree. It looks like they brought the two specs inline with version 9.

As such, I put in the modifications, but they'll be awaiting the next update.

Posted By: dwaltoneng
Date Posted: 04 May 2014 at 12:20am
Originally posted by dwaltoneng dwaltoneng wrote:

Referring to the V2005.0 spec, the last number in the line "COPCLS 10 0.01 1 20" is the linestyle, which should be either -1 or 0. The number 20 is correct for the v9.0 spec, where it is the pin number minus 1. What is correct here?


In the 2005 and 2007 version of Plib_ASCII.pdf, I think the last number in the line "COPCLS 10 0.01 1 20" is the linestyle, which should be either -1 or 0. Is this right?
Setting the last number 20 to -1 causes DipTrace to come up with a memory exception though.


Print Page | Close Window