At 11:30 PM 12/8/01 -0500, Darryl Newberry wrote:
>...
>Macro 683: New Node
>Add node J9-10 to net CFD0
>
>Macro 684: New Node
>Add node J9-10 to net NCFON_3P3V
>...
>Macro 819: New Node
>Add node J3-10 to net QMUTE
>
>Macro 820: New Node
>Add node J3-10 to net BAT_POS
>...
>
>Why is the synchronizer trying to attach the same pin to 2 different nets.
>Isn't this a netlist error by definition? There is nothing wrong with the
>schematic AFAICT--each pin has a single wire stub with the net label sitting
>on it. There is no obvious relationship between the pin and the 2nd net
>name. QMUTE and BAT_POS are single-node nets, whereas CFD0 and NCFON_3P3V
>each have multiple nodes.

I don't know what is causing this, though I can list some suspicions. Most 
of them would be detected by ERC. (I advise setting the ERC matrix to 
detect every possible warning or error, but duplicate part checking is not 
matrixed, instead this error is hard-coded into ERC.)

(1) as hinted, duplicate parts.
(2) duplicate pins within a part, especially a hidden one which will create 
a net with its name.
(3) bad schematic database.

The first step is to run ERC. All ERC errors and warnings reported should 
be corrected or verified as spurious -- i.e., they should be thoroughly 
understood (such as being a deliberately open output) before being 
suppressed with No-ERC Directives. Ultimately, one wants a completely clean 
ERC report. This leads to another possibility:

(4) A duplicate part error has been suppressed with a No-ERC Directive.

The next step, if fixing errors has not corrected the problem, would be to 
generate a net list instead of running Update PCB. Verify that there are 
two occurrences of the pin names in the net list, which is what we expect 
to see from the reported symptoms. If there are not two names and the net 
list still generates the problem macros when loaded into the PCB, then we 
have a serious PCB problem. I will assume that this is not the case.

Run the Schematic Cross-Reference Report. Look for two occurrences of the 
part in question. But the following procedure may be more comprehensive.

With all sheets of the schematic open, set the Panel Browse for 
Primitives/Pins. Check "All in Hierarchy" and press Update List. Look for 
two occurrences of the pins in question. If they are there, you can read 
the pin locations and you can jump to them.

It this does not uncover the problem, attempt to pare down the schematic to 
a minimum file that still shows a duplicate pin. As part of this process, 
you should be able to remove any confidential information. Then, I would be 
interested in seeing the file; also, if we cannot find the problem, it 
should be submitted to ProtelCSC. But let us have a crack at it first.

[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/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to