
LibrePCB 0.1.3 released, now with DRC - dbrgn
https://librepcb.org/blog/2019-11-30_release_0.1.3/
======
dbrgn
Before people start asking:

Comparison with KiCAD and Eagle:
[https://librepcb.org/compare/](https://librepcb.org/compare/)

Talk by Urban that explains why he started LibrePCB, and how the library
concepts are different from other similar tools like KiCAD:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vu-h5y6tK34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vu-h5y6tK34)
(Slides:
[https://archive.fosdem.org/2018/schedule/event/cad_librepcb/...](https://archive.fosdem.org/2018/schedule/event/cad_librepcb/attachments/slides/2267/export/events/attachments/cad_librepcb/slides/2267/librepcb_slides.pdf))

If you want to try it:
[https://docs.librepcb.org/](https://docs.librepcb.org/)

Previous HN discussion:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18569969](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18569969)

~~~
StavrosK
I was at FOSDEM 2018, when LibrePCB and Horizon EDA were presented, and they
both looked very interesting. I will try LibrePCB for some small boards I want
to make, the library concept sounds like something we sorely need.

~~~
dbrgn
There will be another LibrePCB talk at FOSDEM next year!

------
panpanna
I started using librepcb for some smaller projects last year after having some
issues with kicad. My thoughts after manufacturing ~10 boards:

* It's simple, but what is there works reliably.

* Library management works really well.

* There are some issues with grids and alignment

* DRC was available in the ui but could not find any errors (have not tested 0.1.3 yet).

* No auto place/route. Horrible default placement.

* Minimal manufacturing support but what is there works

I moved from kicad when my old designs started looking different/broken due to
updated components (!!). How can kicad team allow this?

~~~
dbrgn
Thanks for your feedback! Great to hear from people that are using LibrePCB :)
I agree with most of these things.

Note: I think there was no DRC available in the board editor before 0.1.3,
only an ERC which reported things like unplaced components. In 0.1.3 you have
an actual DRC that checks things like copper clearance, minimum drill
diameter, etc.

PS: If you have a nice project to share, feel free to post it at
[https://librepcb.discourse.group/t/projects-
madewithlibrepcb...](https://librepcb.discourse.group/t/projects-
madewithlibrepcb/99) !

~~~
panpanna
You are right. But IIRC unplaced components was the only thing the ERC could
detect :(

------
q3k
See also: HorizonEDA [1], which I've used for a handful of projects and are
really happy with - mostly due to how much its library/parts UX is better than
anything I've every used before.

[1] - [https://github.com/horizon-eda/horizon](https://github.com/horizon-
eda/horizon)

~~~
atoav
I agree. Used it for multiple projects already. As one of the main
contributers to the parts library I especially like Horizon's parts pool
concept for these reasons:

\- the modularity (+inheritance) allows you to reuse a lot of existing stuff
and change things in one place while affecting all

\- the simple json format allows you to create parts/packages/etc from scripts
very fast

\- the package footprint editor is great and has generation scripts for a ton
of existing packages (SOIC, QFN, etc.)

I heard it was planned to release a 1.0 on the next FOSDEM in january.

------
nrp
It's fantastic that LibrePCB exists to solve the key pain points around KiCad,
but I wonder what the end state is. Network effects come into play pretty
strongly here with libraries, reference designs, and community knowledge. It
took years of improvements and Eagle getting heavily monetized by Autodesk for
KiCad to become the de facto EDA tool for hobbyists and open source hardware
developers. This space isn't that large. Is there a scenario where LibrePCB
gets enough critical mass behind it to be competitive with KiCad, or will
KiCad gradually improve and continue to grow to prevent that from ever
happening?

~~~
dbrgn
If there can be multiple graphics editing programs (GIMP, Inkscape, Krita,
...) and multiple 3D modelling tools (FreeCAD, OpenSCAD, Blender, Wings3D,
...) why shouldn't the space be big enough for multiple EDA tools (KiCAD,
LibrePCB, Fritzing, Horizon, ...)?

~~~
DSMan195276
I don't think it's a hugely controversial statement to say that the hobbyist
circuit/pcb design scene is a _lot_ smaller then than the number of hobbyist
graphic designers. So the question is more can the community actually support
two/three of these programs while also offering enough features for both to be
usable - or do we just get two/three effectively unusable programs with no
library support.

~~~
akiselev
I find it far more likely that ECAD industry will go the way of Blender where
the high cost of per seat licensing will drive big companies to start
contributing to open source alternatives to stop the bleeding. Given the
diversity in needs of different industries, each could contribute the pieces
they need into a whole that makes up a viable competitor.

The bigger problem than the number of hobbyists is that the vast majority
can't even afford to prototype the high end of what PCB designers can do. For
example, a 12-24 layer board with mixed RF and 1ghz+ digital signals (like the
hundreds of smartphone main boards connected to a camera that are design each
year) can cost thousands or tens of thousands to fab in small quantities, let
alone assembly and parts to put it together.

~~~
DSMan195276
That's a very interesting point, I do agree that could happen if enough
companies are unhappy with the price, though that's not something I know much
about. The price of switching to a new tool would be very high though, I would
think, so any viable competitor needs to be very feature complete and probably
needs a high degree of compatibility with whatever tools they're currently
using.

And yeah, I was considering going into that but didn't want to talk too much
out of my knowledge zone. There is definitely a huge divide between the
professional PCB designers and what hobbyists (like me) tend to make. My most
complicated board is a 2-layer with mostly through-hole and a few surface-
mount. BGA, the really small surface mount parts, any anything crazier than
maybe 4-layers is just completely out of my reach - I could theoretically
design them with a lot of learning, but the expense of getting the design
fabricated and the impractically of soldering them manually just makes it a
complete non-starter. But yet, those parts are pretty much all that you'll see
on modern boards. What I'm doing is so much simpler than what professionals
are doing it's really not comparable. _I_ mostly don't need the complexity of
something like Eagle, but for companies doing modern PCB design those complex
features are an absolute requirement.

~~~
davidzweig
You can solder 0402 scale stuff with a pair of tweezers, a $20 USB microscope
and a regular soldering iron. 4-layer layout is actually easier than 2-layer,
it means less track gymnastics required. This kind of stuff could qualify as
'professional level', a good choice for all kinds of general boards (sure, not
smartwatches probably).

~~~
DSMan195276
For me, the biggest limiting factor is not really skill, but cost. I can
theoretically do all of these things, but the cost tends to be prohibitive and
the risk too high. 2-layer boards are the best and 4-layer boards are my limit
because going any higher just goes way outside the price I can justify putting
into hobby projects that may not pan out. 2-layer boards you can sometimes get
on sale dirt cheap (ignoring shipping...), and the mark-up when going from
2-layer to 4-layer tends to be at least 2x, and for most places I've looked at
more like 4x or higher.

The same thing goes for small surface mount stuff. Ex. I was looking at using
a TSSOP package for a project, but I just couldn't justify the cost of ~10$ a
chip when I was unsure I could even solder it. Even for my last project, I
messed up a few boards because I had trouble soldering the leads for the
Micro-USB connector on it.

On the topic of 0402's, I agree I could probably solder them with enough
patience - though that goes back to the risk issue, if I can't then I blew a
bunch of money on boards I can't put together. For my projects, I thankfully
haven't yet run into a situation where I needed to go that scale, so the
lowest I've gone are 0805's, which are nice and chunky.

And to be fair, I don't really know what qualifies as "professional level",
I'm mostly thinking of things like computer motherboards, phones, smart
watches, etc. Tons of things have PCBs in them that don't require that level
of detail, and I don't know the percentages of people doing each - perhaps
there is a decently sized professional market for a tool that can do smaller
boards with less layers/complexity much smoother.

~~~
lukego
> the biggest limiting factor is not really skill, but cost

Can we put a number on the cost?

Seems to me like if you want a "serious amateur" electronics lab for doing
things like prototyping boards with BGA components then you need a budget of
around $300 - $1500. Price depends on whether you want cheap-and-cheerful
starter kits that will eventually be replaced verses professional stuff that
ought to last for decades.

On the one hand that's real money but on the other hand that's also what it
costs to buy a new laptop or travel to a conference.

------
dev-il
Is it possible to import/convert KiCAD libraries? Library coverage of the
gazillion of available components is something that takes a lot of work and
time. Even KiCAD with its head start, and higher user count that comes with
it, is still lacking a lot of components. So whatever one thinks of KiCAD's
libraries or library management… it would still make a huge difference for the
user to have an import function or conversion tools so as to not have to start
pretty much from scratch as long as the library coverage is lacking.

------
lukego
Thanks for posting this. I'm planning to start work on my first ever PCB
tomorrow and I'll try learning this instead of KiCAD and see if I need to
switch or not.

~~~
panpanna
If you are completely new to PCB design and manufacturing I would recommend
kicad instead.

I like them both but kicad has excellent tutorials on all aspects of the
process. See for example the Conceptual Electronics videos on YouTube.

------
awalton
Great. Now let's work on standardizing a footprint description language for
components so we don't have to create a new footprint library for every new
tool on the planet. (And maybe even so manufacturers will just release their
footprints using that format, so we don't have to struggle there either).

------
ivoras
Cute, but EasyEDA is where the hobbyists are at right now. They realised that
to win hearts and minds, the winning combination is to have a PCB editor, a
components shop, a PCB manufacturing service and a PCB SMD assembly service
all integrated (up to a point) in a single product.

~~~
dbrgn
You're dismissing a free non-commercial open-source cross platform EDA
software project by promoting a web-based closed source commercial EDA tool by
saying "that's where hobbyists are" without even showing any evidence for that
(and in a dismissive tone). I think you're on the wrong forum.

------
fizixer
Engineering $/w industry in general is full of proprietary, fleecing,
outdated, and $mug, bloatware and crapware.

Any open-source effort is welcome.

If it were up to me, I'd dedicate the rest of my life to developing open-
source engineering s/w alternatives, so I could play a small part in
thoroughly crushing the commercial land$cape of engineering $$$$ware.

