Hi there, It does not work the way as i describe in this video. But Kicad 8 already has the trace export function included right away, so the use of fcad_pcb is not required anymore and the workflow "should/might" be easier. I personally will wait until the next KiCad version is released and then will make a video specifically for KiCad 9.

Nicee! Really looking forward on your next video😊😊

Glad you liked it, there is much more to come, stay tuned. :-)

And yes that one took a while to make, hopefully at least it will make the journey less painful for others.

Hi there nice to hear that you enjoyed the videos and even more if they are useful for an actual project. :) Regarding difference between FDTD and FEM, try asking chatGPT he gave a better answer within a few seconds than I have got reading through several forums and articles. internal difference (not visible to the end user): The main difference which even the name implies is that FDTD is time domain, so the calculations are done in time domain and then the result can be converted to frequency domain as well. FEM on the other hand theoretically can do calculations in frequency and time domain right away, but as end user I dont really care what happens internally (as a developer of those tools of course you would care a lot about this difference). difference visible to the end user: FDTD in almost all cases uses rectangular grids, while FEM can also use Tetrahedrons (shape simlar to a pyramid). Tetrahedrons can minimize the "staircase effect" which you tend to get with rectangular shapes. As solution just choose a fine enough mesh, so again as end user you can use both tools just fine in most cases. PS: FDTD and FEM can both do 3D, I only simulated the cross section in my last openEMS video because i wanted to keep it simple. 2D and 2.5D FEM: FEMM 4.2 2D and 3D FEM: Elmer 3D FDTD: OpenEMS PCBModelgen: did not use it yet, but hey thx for the tip for another video :) Enjoy running the differential pair simulation! The advantage of using a 3D solver is that it accounts for the effects of nearby traces, whereas ATLC assumes the differential pair is fully isolated, which isn't realistic in the real world.

sorry i oversaw this one: And any reasons that you switched to ElemerFEM from FEMM 4.2 in the more recent videos? No specific reason, I am just showing how to use all the different options. The advantage of FEMM 4.2 is that it is super fast because of the 2D/2.5D approach. The 3D solvers take hours so simulate even for the simplest of traces. So if you want a quick and rough estimate of e.g. the voltage drop across a trace, Femm 4.2 is super fast. With the 3D solvers you will have to let the simulation run over night in many cases or often even over the weekend, just to see that there was an error and to have a bad start into the working week ;-)

@@panire3 Thanks for the quick answer! I will address both of your replies here :-) Solvers and simulators are very interesting, I definitely need to read up way more. Since I only use Linux I'll probably start with Elmer and play with that (even though I know virtualization will work just fine). You say it's 3D FEM but perhaps it has compatibility with 2/2.5D as well? I was thinking about what a realistic workflow would be. Perhaps simple 2D simulations at first, for the general stackup and maybe some irregular design patterns on the board if any. Then we layout and route everything according to these results and of course all the 'best practices'. Then we can either simulate the PCB fully or just take out parts of the trace routing, depending on which is the least tedious. I think you have demonstrated both of those two alternatives in your videos. What do you think? I think what matters the most for me would be the time it takes for properly setting up a simulation. One button press would be ideal ;-) If it's faster to set up a full board by a simple import and some general settings, then it's fine if it will take time to complete. Simulations overnight are no problem, and/or in parallel. Then again I need to just play and learn the stuff to know more what to expect and learn the limitations. Great to hear that you consider another video with the other import tool! I would watch for sure. Another useful topic of interest for me would be thermal simulations from KiCad and FreeCad models , just throwing that out there without even a search about it :-)

@@jadahaa Yes, Elmer can also do 2D but I only used it for 3D so far. "One button press would be ideal ;-)" If you want one button press I think the commercial tools like altium designer are the best choice. Maybe they even have a student version for their signal integrity addons. "Another useful topic of interest for me would be thermal simulations from KiCad and FreeCad models" Elmer can do thermal simulations as well, i have posted a free link to my udemy course which includes thermal simulations in the comment section of this video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qqOxdH9va6h4gtE

@@panire3 Thank you! I will check it out

I tried to feedback you by writing a text, but instead I will plan to create videos covering all these topics. * Resistance (f) or trace impedance, as well as inductance and capacitance across frequencies * Skin effect for single traces, including proximity effects and interactions between multiple traces * For worst-case simulations, factors such as temperature, humidity, surface finish, and manufacturing tolerances can also be considered. For DC simulations, I found Elmer easier to use (DC resistance and capacitance), whereas for high-frequency simulations, OpenEMS was more effective. Hope this reply is acceptable for now.

@@panire3 Sounds like a great roadmap!! Looking forward to your videos! Yes I will have a look on OpenEMS. Thank You!

happy that you liked it :)

Glad it was helpful! :)

Thanks for your comment! I agree with the points you raised about the complexity and the repetitive nature of such simulations. I'll explore ways to visually summarize key EMI topics in another video.

@@panire3 Have you tried building a PCB microwave antenna before? And have you studied how it affects circuits close by? For example most mobile smartphone’s today have a microwave/wifi transceiver, which is typically the metal case of the phone itself, which also houses the circuit boards, components and CPU/memory modules. My question is, how do they isolate those components from the microwave radiation, when they are literally sitting inside the emitter itself?

Digital Circuits (CPU/memory) mostly dont really care about noise as long as its not too extreme. If there are sensitive analog circuits (e.g. compass IC, audio IC, current sense,...), in phones they will be shielded with a shield-can and via stiching from all sides, see example pictures below in the link. The Microwave antenna is not the only thing to shield against, each digital IC (e.g. CPU/memory) and the buck converters will also radiate, thats why each functional block is also shielded from each other. drive.google.com/drive/folders/12WIK75Rprk6w3uYxQqoohkPaZf_jGWDk?usp=drive_link In my view, if you want to build something, just go and create it without worrying too much. Big companies invest heavily in shielding because they sell millions of units and cant afford to make mistakes. For DiY projects or Startups, start with a basic design without any shielding and focus on carefully placing your analog circuitry (if any). Adress any issues that arise as they come. There is a high chance your design will work. Take Arduino, for example-the design looks simple and EMC guys will always point out how the layout needs improvement, but it works for many applications, and many commercial products use Arduino components. They might be a bit noisy, but they get the job done.

@@panire3 Thanks!

@@panire3 I notice that in cases where there is high voltage, that things change. Like for example with a CNC plasma machine, it requires the use of fiber optical connections because of the very noisy high voltage power supply and the plasma cutter itself.

Yes i have some video-material for thermal simulations as well. As a little hidden gem for the people who read this comment, here is a free coupon to my udemy course www.udemy.com/course/kicad-fem-with-free-software-tools/?couponCode=2BB0E57CD485732590EE if you like the course, i just ask for a review in return. check out Lecture 28 for a simulation with natural airflow included. Sometime next week, I will update the course with a video on airflow using multiple materials. Currently, the PCB I am simulating is simplified to consist of only a single material.

2 videos that helped me a lot in the beginning were this ones, they use forced airflow instead of natural airflow: kzbin.info/www/bejne/bZzOoqisasaojbs&pp=gAQBiAQB and kzbin.info/www/bejne/moS9kpyLgtGNhq8

@@panire3 Thank you! I will try it.

I was able to set it up. Maybe a hint for the fcad macro for FreeCAD would be good. I watched your arduino gnd simulation video first and there was that hint. The Installation of the other programms were no problem. Great Work!

​@@RivaleGary Thank you very much for your feedback and for caring about the future viewers' experience. :) I’ll include a detailed explanation on how to install fcadpcb.

Hi There, Yes its a bit tedious. Sadly this is often the bottleneck of free software, instead of paying ~70kUSD per year for the Ansys HFSS license, you spend an hour extra to set up the simulation. Lets see maybe in a few years this is all integrated in KiCad with just the click of a button.

Hi there, The vectors show the direction of the current. The color and length of the vectors shows the current density, the current density is the highest where the arrows are the longest and most red while short blue arrows show that in this area the lowest amount of current is flowing.

hi there, i smply used such a 12V power supply: shopdelta.eu/power-supply-adapter-12v2a5-5_l2_p3897.html?page=shop/flypage&func=CompereManage&product_id=3897