I *think* this kind of problem can also happen (or used to happen...?) if there are duplicate reference designators (or some other kind of duplication - sheet numbers perhaps) in a design. It then gets confused between the duplicate parts or sheet numbers. Sometimes "update PCB" will cause it to "toggle" between the set of duplicated parts - run it and it uses the first, run it again and it does an "ECO" and replaces the first with the second, run it again and it goes back to the first.. etc.
---Phil DD> In our case, the parts were placed using the "Update PCB" process, the PCB DD> was fully sync'd to the schematic, and the schematic was correct. The real DD> key point is that in the layout, I could pull up the properties for the part DD> and see that the footprint was called a 1206 even though the actual DD> geometry/primitives were those of an 0603 footprint. Since each part has its DD> own instance in the layout, Protel thought the part was correct. The only DD> way this could be a manual error was if someone created a part called "1206" DD> that had the pads for an 0603, and then placed parts using this footprint. DD> I don't think this was a manual error for two reasons. DD> 1) All the above mentioned footprints have been static in our global library DD> for long before this PCB has been in existance. DD> 2) I also found an second part (0805) that looked like an 0603. Its fairly DD> unlikely that someone made both an 0805 and a 1206 that looked like 0603s. DD> Darcy DD> -----Original Message----- DD> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] DD> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] DD> Sent: December 23, 2004 11:42 AM DD> To: [email protected] DD> Subject: Re: [PEDA] Wrong geometry, right footprint name! DD> In a message dated 2004-12-23 12:19:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, DD> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >> 1) Anybody seen anything like this before? or can come up with an sequence >> of steps that may have caused this? >> >> 2) Its going to take a long time to check every part in the design. DD> Anybody >> have any suggestions for finding further errors? >> DD> Easy enough to do. Either load the part manually, or have it in the DD> schematic DD> as 0603 and later change to 1206, and forget to check the box to update part DD> footprints. DD> I'd just reload the netlist, being sure to check the two boxes (and DD> thereafter reselect the netlist file - they do it backwards). Then clean up DD> the DD> resulting DRC errors, and you should be home. DD> Steve Hendrix DD> ____________________________________________________________ DD> You are subscribed to the PEDA discussion forum DD> To Post messages: DD> mailto:[email protected] DD> Unsubscribe and Other Options: DD> http://techservinc.com/mailman/listinfo/peda_techservinc.com DD> Browse or Search Old Archives (2001-2004): DD> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] DD> Browse or Search Current Archives (2004-Current): DD> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] DD> ____________________________________________________________ DD> You are subscribed to the PEDA discussion forum DD> To Post messages: DD> mailto:[email protected] DD> Unsubscribe and Other Options: DD> http://techservinc.com/mailman/listinfo/peda_techservinc.com DD> Browse or Search Old Archives (2001-2004): DD> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] DD> Browse or Search Current Archives (2004-Current): DD> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.290 / Virus Database: 265.6.4 - Release Date: 12/22/04 ____________________________________________________________ You are subscribed to the PEDA discussion forum To Post messages: mailto:[email protected] Unsubscribe and Other Options: http://techservinc.com/mailman/listinfo/peda_techservinc.com Browse or Search Old Archives (2001-2004): http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] Browse or Search Current Archives (2004-Current): http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
