Drawing a circuit diagram

I've wired up a friend's garage and I would like to leave him a straightforward drawing of how it was done so that he has a record for any changes.
What would be the simplest PC package to do this on ?
Rob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
robgraham wrote:

Pen & Paper
-- JGH
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 07:42:40 -0700, jgharston wrote:

... then, to satisfy the PC requirement, scan it.
I've got a pad of 1/4" squared paper in the cupboard that's really handy for quick diagrams (USians don't seem to do graph paper unfortunately, or at least none of the places I've been into yet stock it)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jules wrote:

I gave up circuit design after watching an old HP plotter draw in ten minutes a circuit diagram that would have taken me week to draw in pen and ink. I 'got into' computers then and never looked back too hard.
CAD leaning curves are steep, but the reults are worth it.
Corel Draw s the best all round 2D package I have found - mixes maths and pretties very well.
3D Rhino seems to suit me, though others swear by solidworks.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Didn't know it was still around. Was a reasonable alternative to Acorn Draw many years ago. I'll have a look for it.
--
*7up is good for you, signed snow white*

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@davenoise.co.uk London SW
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Gosh, its up to version 14 now...Corel X4..
14 is a bit bloated. 12 is very good, and I have a version 8 somewhere that is very usable as well.
If only it worked on Linux...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Oh my goodness, CorelDraw is fantastic. It takes a bit of learning to get the best out of it, but it's full of tricks and shortcuts that make the job easier. I've been using it since v2. Version 4 was good, 5, 6, and 7 were bad, 8 was good but had some annoyances, I have no real experience of 9-11 having never loaded them on my own machines, 12 is the one I use now and it's brilliant, definitely the best ever. I haven't used or seen later versions.
What puts people off CorelDraw is that is isn't very intuitive. You have to put a bit of effort in.
Just for a laugh, I must tell you this. In the days of Win 3.0 I had CorelDraw loaded but the only text programme was the crappy thing that came with Windows. Since I had been forced by work to learn Corel I took to doing all my text documents on it! It was really hopelessly bad for this, but it was the best I had. I still have some mag article originals that I wrote in CorelDraw. And yer tell that to the young people of today and they don't believe you . . .
Bill
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bill Wright wrote:

Gosh., Its a lot more intuitive than autocad..

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Ohh, do you really think so?
Bill
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The beauty of Acorn Draw is it was written for kids. And even the first version is pretty powerful. Many later ones with different gizmos - but still basically the same.
Oh - Coral Draw costs the thick end of 400 quid.

Heh heh - reminds me of making up some logos using a very basic DTP package. Nothing like improvising.

--
*Why do the two "sanction"s (noun and verb) mean opposites?*

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@davenoise.co.uk London SW
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009 13:56:32 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"

I bought an out of date revision for 3 quid at a computor show, registered it, and upgraded it for a song.
Derek
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In uk.d-i-y, Bill Wright wrote:

Persuade her to upload them to the web and mail you a link. I think automatic thumbnail creation is a feature of some sites, so you would know what was on the pics, and you could download them (or not) as desired.
--
Mike Barnes

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

yep ... give here a link to Humyo, esnips or Photbucket ... then it's only links of her out of focus cats
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

For screenshots, embedded into a word doc works quite well if you're not competent enough to generate a png. Word compresses them enough to make them not painful, and people can cope with "prt sc, then paste into a new word document" if you want eg a picture of an error screen.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In uk.d-i-y, Clive George wrote:

That must be some version of Word than I've never used. IME Word *expands* images (as if jpg -> bmp), and in the most recent version I've used (2002) the tools that are supposed to compress them are well-hidden and non-functional.
The other problem, for photos rather than screen shots, is that all the tags (e.g. when taken) are lost.
--
Mike Barnes

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Word 2003, and I think the previous version too. Screenshot pasted in without doing anything clever - 236,700 bytes in PNG, 254,976 in .doc.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Clive George wrote: <>

Memory may be faulty, but IIRC Word uses PNG as the internal format of bitmaps. Even when Word would not actually accept PNGs themselves. So an embedded PNG tends to have its size reflected in the total document size but a BMP if often compressed to some extent.
Also, nasty problem was always getting images out of Word. Copy and paste produced some bizarre effects. Then I read of the idea of saving the Word document as HTML - and all the images end up in the underlying folder.
--
Rod

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Clive George wrote: <>

But doing so to Excel is better. I keep getting sent Word screenshots that are awkward to view - as they are so scaled down to fit within the margins. And this is getting worse as people generally have larger and larger screens. (Is Alt+PrtSc too complicated? Most of the time it is a window they need to report.) The odd person sends an Excel spreadsheet - I can open the application full screen and see a reasonable screenshot straight away.
And yes - the bundled picture tools are unbelievably awkward and slow. I'd drop a copy of IrfanView on every PC...
--
Rod




Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 08:28:38 +0100, Rod wrote:

I do that on every PC I build or work on. Takes about 20s to turn a 20MB JPG in to 50kB of acceptable quality for a snap of somebody's little cat/brat.
--
Peter.
The head of a pin will hold more angels if
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

So really then, it's everybody. You're like me.
Bill
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.