[ Feature Request ] Use a field from KiCad to automatically Smart Match R & C

[YFX]

My dream would be:

• I fill a field in KiCad for each Capacitor and Resistor, let’s call it “SMART_MATCH” with, for example, the value “0.1uF X7R 1206 50V”.
• I push my PCB, thanks to the great plugin, to Aisler.
• All C & R are automatically Smart Matched thanks to the field “SMART_MATCH” from KiCad.

(The rest of the components are matched thanks to the MPN field)

MPN must have priority over SMART_MATCH, so I can indicate a specific reference if I don’t want a generic one.

This way, 100% of the parts can be automatically matched and I can get an assembly quote instantly.

[Patrick-from-AISLER]

Absolutely valid point! I’ll schedule this for our software devs ASAP.
Short question, do you think it is necessary to add another field to the component in KiCad? Or just use MPN for both?

[Felix]

@Patrick-from-AISLER I think he explained the reasoning for this here AISLER Push for KiCad Does that explain why he wants it separately?

@YFX

then second question, how to automatically match (I mean all at once) the Capacitors and Resistors? If I enter “0.1uF 1206 50V” in KiCad’s MPN field, it gets matched with some specific C or R (not a generic one), but then it isn’t free anymore. I would like to automatically match all R & C with your “Smart Match” algorithm, based on a field from KiCad.

in conjunction with

@YFX

For 2) yes, that’s right. It would be great to indicate all Smart Match from within KiCad. Maybe thanks to a new field, as reusing “MPN” for a Smart Match text is not a good idea.

[Patrick-from-AISLER]

@YFX

then second question, how to automatically match (I mean all at once) the Capacitors and Resistors? If I enter “0.1uF 1206 50V” in KiCad’s MPN field, it gets matched with some specific C or R (not a generic one), but then it isn’t free anymore. I would like to automatically match all R & C with your “Smart Match” algorithm, based on a field from KiCad.

This is caused by the fact that we do not even look up Smart Match in that case.

I want to challenge if using just MPN makes it ambiguous or not. I don’t think so. @YFX do you know a case where a Smart Match description would also be a valid MPN and vice versa?

[YFX]

Hello Patrick,

You are right, using the same MPN field is possible if it’s coded correctly

And why not pushing the “smartness” even further. The package (1206, 0804, …) could be extracted from the “footprint” field (e.g. “Capacitor_SMD:C_1206_3216Metric”).

Example:
MPN = “0.1u 50V X7R”
footprint = “Capacitor_SMD:C_1206_3216Metric”

You extract 1206 from the footprint field and run Smart Match on “0.1u 1206 50V X7R”.

What do you think?

[Patrick-from-AISLER]

@YFX

And why not pushing the “smartness” even further. The package (1206, 0804, …) could be extracted from the “footprint” field (e.g. “Capacitor_SMD:C_1206_3216Metric”).

Example:
MPN = “0.1u 50V X7R”
footprint = “Capacitor_SMD:C_1206_3216Metric”

You extract 1206 from the footprint field and run Smart Match on “0.1u 1206 50V X7R”.

We tried that before and we faced to many ambiguous situations where we picked the wrong value. That’s why we came up with the Smart Match, a fast way to document the properties even tough you still have to describe these on your own.

I’ll fill an issue to support Smart Match on the MPN field in KiCad to get at least this going.

[Tim-from-AISLER]

Hi @YFX , I am happy to tell you that we implemented an automatic assignment for Smart Match based on the MPN field. Please give it a try, we are looking forward to your feedback!