At 04:09 PM 12/14/01 -0500, Sean James wrote:
>I like using split planes; using a poured internal plane is the same as an
>external plane - every time you add or move holes, components, etc., you
>have to repour the plane. Whereas a split plane doesn't have that problem;
>as long as the via or pad is tied to the correct net, it stays connected, no
>matter how much you move it. Also, I think a split plane makes for a smaller
>file size & gerber plot.

Yes, those are all advantages of split planes over pours.

However, these are the advantages of pours that come to mind:

DRC is complete. Split planes can have opens that will not be detected. 
Rarely, shorts have been reported, I'm not so sure about that.

It's easier to wire two pads together if pours are used rather than split 
planes. With split planes one must draw a split around the two pads.
Split planes are essentially good for connecting areas (like pours), but 
pours can be combined on a layer with positive track, split planes, 
presently, cannot (except as a manually inspected workaround, the 
inspection is necessary to insure there are no shorts; the layer plots are 
merged.)


[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