Subscribe to RSS feed

«

»

Nov
30

Desktop EDA – The Review

by Jeff Mirisola

I like this product. As is becoming a habit with me, I’ll pull a quote from Desktop EDA’s website:

The SolidWorks/IDF 3D Modeler is a Bi-directional translator between SolidWorks and IDF. IDF is an industry standard that allows the exchange of PCB design data between ECAD and MCAD systems. You can create SolidWorks assemblies of your PCB designs. You can also modify the SolidWorks PCB assembly and send the changes back to the PCB CAD system.

While there needs to be a little forethought put in prior to using Desktop EDA, I really like what it can do. You’ll need to have/create a library of parts. Part of this is accomplished by the 500MB library that comes with the software. There are also other resources available on the web.

Whether you’re creating a new board or, like me, getting the files from your vendor, Desktop EDA will simplify your life. I’ve spent the time reverse-engineering PCBs, it isn’t any fun. Especially if it has to be 100% detailed and not just a representation. It will even do the traces!

I followed the provided "How-to" file and had a board on my monitor in no time. "Oh sure, Jeff, of course it worked," you might say, "it was their help file!" Do you think that I wouldn’t have thought that? Devon Sowell, of 3-D Design Solutions, a SolidWorks guru and fellow blogger, sent me some files to try out and they, too, worked. No they weren’t perfect but, after talking to Brian Watson of Desktop EDA, I found out why. It had to do with the library of parts that I didn’t have. All the shapes were there, and the board, but the shapes weren’t detailed. Even without the detailing, just the quickness of Desktop EDA to create the PCB assembly was impressive. To sum it up, I’m looking into it more as something we may use here.

I’m going to see about getting some more time to play with it. If I do, I’ll let you know! As always, if you have a question or a comment, let me know!

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Blogosphere News
  • LinkedIn
  • Pownce
  • StumbleUpon

Related Posts

  • No Related Post

This post has no tag

  • http://www.rickyjordan.net Ricky Jordan

    I’ve heard many good things about Desktop EDA. A few of our user group members use it and like it very much. When I get some time, I’ll have to try their eval version.
    Thanks for the review Jeff!
    Best Regards,
    Ricky Jordan
    Certified SolidWorks Professional
    President
    NASWUG
    http://www.rickyjordan.net
    http://www.naswug.com

  • http://www.rickyjordan.net Ricky Jordan

    I’ve heard many good things about Desktop EDA. A few of our user group members use it and like it very much. When I get some time, I’ll have to try their eval version.
    Thanks for the review Jeff!
    Best Regards,
    Ricky Jordan
    Certified SolidWorks Professional
    President
    NASWUG
    http://www.rickyjordan.net
    http://www.naswug.com

  • http://profile.typekey.com/jmirisola/ Jeff Mirisola

    Thanks, Ricky. I’m glad that there are a couple of people who read my words!
    I enjoyed doing this review. The software was easy to work with and Brian, from EDA, was very helpful.

  • http://profile.typekey.com/jmirisola/ Jeff Mirisola

    Thanks, Ricky. I’m glad that there are a couple of people who read my words!
    I enjoyed doing this review. The software was easy to work with and Brian, from EDA, was very helpful.

  • Scott Klug

    how does Desktop EDA compare with CircuitWorks??

  • Scott Klug

    how does Desktop EDA compare with CircuitWorks??

  • http://profile.typekey.com/jmirisola/ Jeff Mirisola

    Scott,
    I wish I could give you a good answer, but I don’t know. I never tried CircuitWorks.

  • http://profile.typekey.com/jmirisola/ Jeff Mirisola

    Scott,
    I wish I could give you a good answer, but I don’t know. I never tried CircuitWorks.

  • Steve Kith

    Circuitworks has been very impressive until I’ve found this problem. There’s a glitch that I’ve found when I would export out an IDF file back to the layout tool. If your Solidworks part model contains a translation/rotation feature, the IDF file will interpret that and add another translation/rotation to the ECAD model. This is pretty frustrating if you have more than one iteration. For example, the first import from ECAD to MCAD works great, the next export from MCAD to ECAD may have problems if there’s a translation/rotation in the model because it translate and rote it again. My current fix is to only import from ECAD. This is currently working but not as effective as the software claims to be. I will probably look into Desktop EDA and see how the software compares. Also, Paul at Circuit works is aware of the problem, not sure what they are doing about it. Maybe customer pressure will encourage them to make it a priority.

  • Steve Kith

    Circuitworks has been very impressive until I’ve found this problem. There’s a glitch that I’ve found when I would export out an IDF file back to the layout tool. If your Solidworks part model contains a translation/rotation feature, the IDF file will interpret that and add another translation/rotation to the ECAD model. This is pretty frustrating if you have more than one iteration. For example, the first import from ECAD to MCAD works great, the next export from MCAD to ECAD may have problems if there’s a translation/rotation in the model because it translate and rote it again. My current fix is to only import from ECAD. This is currently working but not as effective as the software claims to be. I will probably look into Desktop EDA and see how the software compares. Also, Paul at Circuit works is aware of the problem, not sure what they are doing about it. Maybe customer pressure will encourage them to make it a priority.

  • Steve Kith

    Circuitworks has been very impressive until I’ve found this problem. There’s a glitch that I’ve found when I would export out an IDF file back to the layout tool. If your Solidworks part model contains a translation/rotation feature, the IDF file will interpret that and add another translation/rotation to the ECAD model. This is pretty frustrating if you have more than one iteration. For example, the first import from ECAD to MCAD works great, the next export from MCAD to ECAD may have problems if there’s a translation/rotation in the model because it translate and rote it again. My current fix is to only import from ECAD. This is currently working but not as effective as the software claims to be. I will probably look into Desktop EDA and see how the software compares. Also, Paul at Circuit works is aware of the problem, not sure what they are doing about it. Maybe customer pressure will encourage them to make it a priority.

  • Steve Kith

    Circuitworks has been very impressive until I’ve found this problem. There’s a glitch that I’ve found when I would export out an IDF file back to the layout tool. If your Solidworks part model contains a translation/rotation feature, the IDF file will interpret that and add another translation/rotation to the ECAD model. This is pretty frustrating if you have more than one iteration. For example, the first import from ECAD to MCAD works great, the next export from MCAD to ECAD may have problems if there’s a translation/rotation in the model because it translate and rote it again. My current fix is to only import from ECAD. This is currently working but not as effective as the software claims to be. I will probably look into Desktop EDA and see how the software compares. Also, Paul at Circuit works is aware of the problem, not sure what they are doing about it. Maybe customer pressure will encourage them to make it a priority.

  • Roger Castro

    I’ve used both Circuitworks and Desktop EDA’s ECAD to MCAD conversion to create Solidworks 3D PCBs for about 5 years. Yes, both Circuitworks and Desktop EDA will make a 3D; but, Circuitworks only uses the IDF format which, if it isn’t version 4, does not support traces, pads, silk screens, or layers. Since most PCB CAD systems at this time only output IDF version 2 or 3, all you get is a dumb board with parts and holes….and depending on the PCB design system used, the self extracting 3D of a component from IDF is not always very concise. That’s why I only use components I have in my Solidworks 3D libraries, which are cross matched with the schematic and its PCB component footprint. I guess you could say the PCB 3D is therefore schematic driven.
    I use Desktop EDA because its a direct link between Altium and the Solidworks platform. No muss no fuss. Setup is easy and you can have a Solidworks 3D in a short period of time. I can produce very realistic 3Ds of PCBs to prepare documentation from everything to just PCB assembly, to product integration, to test fixture design.
    When sending PCB information to vendors I’ve had more than one ask how such a document was created…..and checking alignment on a PCB in a spring pin test fixture with an overclamp lid assembly is easy to do. No more crushed components or broken spring pins. You know the dimensioning is correct before you order the fixture. (WOW! Do it right the first time)…Even the interface PCBs contained within the test fixture are in 3D.
    **Roger, thank you for your comment. My reviews tend to be superficial as many of the products are ones that I don’t need in my day-to-day activities and I just don’t have the time to get as in-depth as I’d like. Comments like yours are extremely beneficial to others. **

  • Roger Castro

    I’ve used both Circuitworks and Desktop EDA’s ECAD to MCAD conversion to create Solidworks 3D PCBs for about 5 years. Yes, both Circuitworks and Desktop EDA will make a 3D; but, Circuitworks only uses the IDF format which, if it isn’t version 4, does not support traces, pads, silk screens, or layers. Since most PCB CAD systems at this time only output IDF version 2 or 3, all you get is a dumb board with parts and holes….and depending on the PCB design system used, the self extracting 3D of a component from IDF is not always very concise. That’s why I only use components I have in my Solidworks 3D libraries, which are cross matched with the schematic and its PCB component footprint. I guess you could say the PCB 3D is therefore schematic driven.
    I use Desktop EDA because its a direct link between Altium and the Solidworks platform. No muss no fuss. Setup is easy and you can have a Solidworks 3D in a short period of time. I can produce very realistic 3Ds of PCBs to prepare documentation from everything to just PCB assembly, to product integration, to test fixture design.
    When sending PCB information to vendors I’ve had more than one ask how such a document was created…..and checking alignment on a PCB in a spring pin test fixture with an overclamp lid assembly is easy to do. No more crushed components or broken spring pins. You know the dimensioning is correct before you order the fixture. (WOW! Do it right the first time)…Even the interface PCBs contained within the test fixture are in 3D.
    **Roger, thank you for your comment. My reviews tend to be superficial as many of the products are ones that I don’t need in my day-to-day activities and I just don’t have the time to get as in-depth as I’d like. Comments like yours are extremely beneficial to others. **

  • Alan K.

    Roger,
    It sounds like you’ve experimented with the libraries in CircuitWorks? I’m having a problem moving my work back & forth between home & office; when I open an idf file at home, transfer the library to work, and then try to open it at work the parts seem to rotate around or don’t appear at all. Any advice? I also tried the Desktop EDA program which I liked very much, but it’s not fully running on my 64 bit OS. I considered going back to a 32 bit OS, but haven’t made a final decision yet. So far the Desktop EDA has been easier to use, and functions better than CW. Also, spending $3,500 on SW premium just to get Circuitworks is not very appealing.

  • Alan K.

    Roger,
    It sounds like you’ve experimented with the libraries in CircuitWorks? I’m having a problem moving my work back & forth between home & office; when I open an idf file at home, transfer the library to work, and then try to open it at work the parts seem to rotate around or don’t appear at all. Any advice? I also tried the Desktop EDA program which I liked very much, but it’s not fully running on my 64 bit OS. I considered going back to a 32 bit OS, but haven’t made a final decision yet. So far the Desktop EDA has been easier to use, and functions better than CW. Also, spending $3,500 on SW premium just to get Circuitworks is not very appealing.

blog comments powered by Disqus
SEO Powered by Platinum SEO from Techblissonline