Thanks for the help. I got all the unconnected stuff connected, but PCBNew still crashes when I tell it to plot. Any Ideas? Where should I look?
Dick H. wrote: >> The other problem is that when I run a DRC check it says a number of >> pads are unconnected which are not unconnected. I did not have this >> problem when I ran a DRC a little while back, and the only thing I've >> done since then is increase the size of my vias and move some runs >> around. It would also plot without problems before. >> >> So how do I tell PCBNew that the pads are connected which have traces >> going to them? > > > The Nov-2007 release has the "Selection Clarification" menu which you > get when you click over your pad/track combo, right above the pad. > > In this menu you can see all the track segments which are under the > mouse. (Using the hollow track display mode also helps see all the > segments at or near the pad.) But back to the menu, your choices will > show the net number and/or name next to any track segment. If you see > a net number of 0 this means that segment is not connected as far as > pcbnew is concerned. (Your disagreement with its understanding does > not change its interpretation.) The segment has been lost to the > scrap heap and should be deleted and re-entered. > > You have to delete that segment and re-enter it. The problem is that > pcbnew uses segment end point testing to detect continuity, rather > than "visual overlapping". During track entry, "visual overlapping" > is sufficient to cause the injection of small segments behind the > scenes to actually achieve precise "end point equality". > > End point equality is when > > pointA.x == pointB.x && pointA.y == pointB.y > > exactly. > > So the end point of one segment must *exactly* match the endpoint of > the next segment for there to be continuity. > > During track entry, things are happening behind the scenes to add > small short segments to tie all the segments together *exactly*. > However, if just one of those segments is moved later, or a pad as a > result of a suttle footprint move, then there is no similar support > for *repairing* the "end point equality". This small segment > injecting is only during track entry. > > A similar discussion relates to the last segment on a track, the one > that "connects" to the pad. Here the exact (x,y) match also must be > true for one of the last segment's 2 end points as it compares to the > centerpoint of the pad. > > I am only the messenger, please don't shoot me. > > There has been some discussion about relaxing the "end point equality" > checking and going with a "do they overlap" type test. I am in favor > of that now that computers are faster. The computer should work for > us, not the other way around. And to me, if it looks like two track > segments are overlapping, then I'll bet that the same thing in copper > would conduct electrons :). > > The original design was done to speed up the ratsnest algorithms, > where the "end point equality" test was the fastest among any other > alternative test. > > With upcoming zone re-design, this "end point equality" test is back > on the table for discussion. > > Dick Hollenbeck > SoftPLC Corporation > http://softplc.com > > > > > Please read the Kicad FAQ in the group files section before posting your > question. > Please post your bug reports here. They will be picked up by the creator of > Kicad. > Please visit http://www.kicadlib.org for details of how to contribute your > symbols/modules to the kicad library. > For building Kicad from source and other development questions visit the > kicad-devel group at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/kicad-devel > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
