At 10:08 AM 2/5/2002 -0500, Robison Michael R CNIN wrote:
>why would i even place a trace like that?  i didn't.  its
>just an example.  actually, after the schematic was shuffled
>over to the pcb, some extra pads, vias, and traces were added
>for high-speed considerations.  the autorouter appears to not
>see them, and walks right over them.
>
>am i correct?

Might be.

>  if yes, then my question is why?  the autorouter
>plays off the design rules, doesn't it?  so why can't it see
>what the design rules checker sees?

Because it isn't the design rules checker, it is completely different code, 
patched into Protel. Phoenix will include a native autorouter, which is one 
reason why we expect it to be better. Not all design rules are passed to 
the autorouter (one benefit of this is faster routing, the problems with it 
are obvious); but the autorouter may not know what to do with certain 
manually placed primitives (there is a hidden primitive field that I 
suspect tells the router what it did and what was done outside the router).

>i'm in a serious eye-opening mode here.  i'm going to have to rethink my 
>design process.

In that thinking, recognize that the autorouter is a limited tool. It does 
a great job for its time, which was a few years ago.

[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