Our current designs were done in ViewLogic and all the connectors are
broken up this way. So I had recently been thinking of the way to do this
in Protel.
What you do is create a part in the component for each pin, which would
mean for a 168 pin connector you'd have 168 parts in the component. Of
course I think this sucks, so I came up with the idea of several parts to a
connector based on the signals. All the data pins are one part, all the
address pins another and so on. Of course this only works with defined
connectors like ISA/PCI and such, but it would make the schematic easier to
understand for me at least.
Of course many of the things done on these schematics I find hard to read
and I blame Viewlogic for some of them, and our former California office
for the rest.
Rob
"John Branthoover" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 06/12/2001 09:16:18 AM
Please respond to "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: (bcc: Rob LaMoreaux/DSPT)
Subject: Re: [PEDA] R: ERC RUle Matrix (Was A request or two)
Hello All,
The major complaint that I have with the ERC function is that it can
not
distinguish between parts "J1A" and "J1a". I have a design where I was
requested to break up an ISA connector into individual parts (62 pins) for
clarity on the schematic side. Every time I perform an ERC on this design
I
get numerous "Duplicate Designators" errors. The net list however, is
generated correctly.
When I reported this error to Protel, I was informed that this is not
a
bug and that I was using Protel incorrectly. Oh well, It is tough being a
rookie. ;-)
-----Original Message-----
From: Dwight Harm [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 3:05 AM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] R: ERC RUle Matrix (Was A request or two)
The main change to the ERC matrix that I'd suggest over the default is to
set the "Unconnected" row and column to either warning (yellow) [or error
(red)] instead of No Report (green). This will require you to put a "No
ERC" marker on any unconnected pins, but that seems like a good idea,
anyway.
The other change I made was to make the "Unspecified Port" row and column
all error (red), as I don't want to have ANY port unspecified.
Dwight Harm
Trax Softworks, Inc.
-----Original Message-----
From: giuseppe triani [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2001 11:54 PM
I would like to use a more rigorous ERC check matrix. Did you customized
it?
Best Regards,
Giuseppe Triani
>
> The pin type is used by ERC to check for e.g. outputs connected together
or
> unconnected inputs. I use ERC on every schematic as a final check before
> generating the netlist, but with a much more rigorous check matrix than
the
> default to pick up such things as unintentionally unconnected passive
pins
> (e.g. on connectors).
>
> Regards
>
> Andy Gulliver
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/subscrib.html
* - or email -
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=leave%20proteledaforum
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
