On 04/08/2012 07:14 AM, Edwin van den Oetelaar wrote: > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Edwin van den Oetelaar <[email protected]> > Date: Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 12:28 PM > Subject: remarks about the internal nanometer resolution > To: KiCad Developers <[email protected]> > > > First of, I have not followed the discussion about the NanoMeter. > I do have some remarks. > >From an engineering standpoint the NanoMeter makes little sense to me. > If the smallest item represented is a nano-meter, in a 32 bit integer > this means the largest board can be only 2.14 meters in size. (-/+ of > the origin) > >From my viewpoint this is not enough. (I know of CNC machines much > larger than 2 meters) > I have seen boards (radar systems and backplanes of 60 layers) which > do not fit in there either.
a) This is a single BOARD of this size > 2 meters, or replication array of a smaller board? b) How do you suppose we'd handle the 60 layers? > However I have never seen boards which require a resolution of more > than 8000 dpi in photoplotting. > All systems which I have seen in measurement (CNC and photoplotting) > are not more accurate than 0.5 micron (0.5 * 10e-6 m) > > I would propose the internal resolution to be *10 nano meter instead > of 1 nano meter which would result in making designs larger than about > 2 meters and no significant loss of resolution* related to PCB design > and production. This is one of a number of solutions to a "problem" which has yet to be fully understood or defined. Let's focus on "the problem" a little longer. _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
