Hey guys: Can't you panelize the PCB in CAMtastic?
Best regards, Ivan Baggett Bagotronix Inc. website: www.bagotronix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 10:26 AM Subject: Re: [PEDA] Multiple Subcircuits > At 10:38 PM 11/27/01 +1000, robi artwork wrote: > > >PCB-Circuit - Duplication can only be done within the PCB-Package. > >You simply select, copy & paste. > >If you ask me - "don't do it" > >Your board manufacture should have proper software to do these things - and - > >he also knows the panel size and the router bit he's using to separate the > >individual pcb's, when penalizing. > > Panelizing, unless they are planning to charge extra.... :-) > > Robi misunderstood the question, which is about a subcircuit, not panelized > identtical boards. > > Ths original question from Dave Babcock: > > >>I have a PCB I am designing that I want to duplicate a subcircuit 64 times. > >>I want to be able to layout the subcircuit once in PCB and then make an > >>array of this subcircuit. > >>Can I do this from the schematic or in the PCB? Any help is appreciated > > There are a number of ways to do this. The only other response which has > been made as I write this described how to duplicate the track but not the > components themselves. > > You could simply select the components from one section and copy and paste > them, using Paste Array. > > The problem is that the components will be renamed when copied, and the new > names will not be what you want, probably. > > I recommend using partnames that can be readily edited to unique names for > each section, both in PCB and in Schematic. For example, assume that a > section has no more than ten of each type of part class designator, i.e., > R,C,U, etc. You could name two resistors in the first section R010 and > R011, in the second R020 and R021, etc., up to R640 and R641. You want to > keep the designators short to make it easy to keep them readable. If you > consider that desireable. > Make your first section on the schematic, synchronize it to the PCB, and > arrange the parts for it and route them. Get it right at this point, it > will be a big pain to change it later, every change will be multiplied by 64! > > Once you have your section, carefully planned so that when multiplied up it > is going to fit, and use the paste array tools to multiply it by 64, > *keeping the component reference designators the same*. Unselect it and > then select each section in turn, globally editing selected components > to give them the section's designator prefix and then dEselect All. (With > the designator scheme I gave, I would name the original parts RXX0, RXX1, > etc. Then I would edit each section to substitute the section number for XX.) > > It would be possible to write a utility which would automate this process. > With 64 sections, I'd be tempted.... (I haven't done this for a while, and > I would not be surprised if someone will pop in with the information that > the utility exists, either in the Protel system or externally, that will > handle the designator renaming problem automatically. I don't have time to > check at the moment...) > > Now, your original schematic has the XX parts. Using a similar process in > the Schematic, multiply up your section schematic and edit each section to > give it the same reference designators as you used on the PCB. There are > some tools, including the automatic annotation functions, which may ease > this process. > > Update the PCB from the Schematic. > > Then dEselect All and select all the copper (track, vias, free pads, arcs, > fills) in your first section. Copy it to each section, setting a reference > point on a component pad easy to identify. (You might also be able to do an > array paste on the copper as well, I haven't done it that way.) > > The copper will normally take on the proper nets, unless you have made an > error in copying either the schematic or the PCB sections. Delete the > stepping reference pads on the mech layer if you used them and have not > already deleted them. > > Done. > > I haven't done a big array for a while, so, as I mentioned, I will not be > at all surprised to find that it has become easier. However, the process as > I described it took perhaps half as long to describe as it would have taken > to do it for 64 sections, not including the time to design the individual > section. The time will not increase with an increased number of parts, only > with an increased number of sections, because of the renaming time. > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Abdulrahman Lomax > Easthampton, Massachusetts USA > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Forum Guidelines Rules: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
