Sorry Abd,

In my unproficient manner of typing emails (occasional brain fade and other
mental lapses etc.), when I was attempting to use cntl-V and do a paste, I
somehow sent the email before it was complete (thank you MS Outlook
Express).

Sorry about that!

Can you reply to the completed  email and it's specific questions when it
catches up with the "forum posting lag" and shows up in your inbox 3 hours
from now ; )

Thanks,

JaMi

----- Original Message -----
From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "JaMi Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 2:28 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Collecting / reassigning primatives in Gerbers etc.


> At 01:56 PM 9/24/2002 -0700, JaMi Smith wrote:
> >All of the following questions are based on the following premise: I have
> >Gerber files of an old design that I want to import into P99SE or DXP,
and
> >notwithstanding the initial problems that I may have getting the files
> >imported, lets assume as a starting point that I have all of the
appropriate
> >primatives imported on to their appropriate layers.
>
> Batch Gerber import automatically selects the proper layer. more or less.
>
> >  Another way to look at
> >this would be take a completed design done in P99SE or DXP, and delete
the
> >schematic, release all of the primitaves of all of the components, and
clear
> >all of the nets, etc., etc., etc... What I now have as a starting point
for
> >all of the following questions is a design full of primitives on
individual
> >"copper" layers, and other primatives on other types of layers such as
soder
> >mask, paste, overlay, etc., etc., etc., but now all of these primatives
are
> >basic, simple, standalone, isolated, and untrelated, to each other, in
any
> >manner other than their actual placement and individual size and shape.
> >
> >Question 1. Will Protel 99 SE, or Protel DXP, or any other EDA System for
> >that matter,
> >
> >Question 1. Will Protel 99 SE, or Protel DXP, or any other EDA System for
> >that matter,
>
> Having a bad day, JaMi? ....
>
> Basic process for recovering a design from gerber:
>
> Import the gerbers, batch.
>
> Select and convert the flashed pads for a component into the appropriate
> kind of final pad. You may need some utility to import the holes, or you
> can manually assign holes if necessary. It won't be for SMT components.
>
> Hole data can come from a drill tape, for manual use a drill drawing is
> fine. You'll appreciate it at this point if the designer outputted hole
> sizes instead of symbols or letter codes. But rarely will this be true. I
> had a Tango utility that imported a drill file into a PCB file and
> converted surface pads to through pads with the correct hole. That could
> probably be modified to work with Protel....
>
> Make a library part from those pads. Include the appropriate silkscreen
> lines, etc. (Use copy and past to take the primitives into the library.)
If
> you have a part list from the old board, you might be able to use the old
> footprints. If you have a pick and place file from the old board, you
might
> be able to automatically place the footprints, there is a way using Place
> from File. But I'll assume you don't have that data. Be sure to give the
> footprint pads correct designators.
>
> So you will have to manually place all the footprints. Before placing
them,
> move all the pads for the layer on which you are working to a mech layer.
> That way you can see them, but it will be easy to delete them when you
have
> placed the footprints. You can use snap if you set things up right, and
get
> exact placement easily.
>
> Select and globally edit all via pads to have the appropriate hole size
> then use the Convert tool to convert them to actual vias.
>
> At this point you can create a net list. If you have a net list from the
> old board, consider yourself fortunate, you may be able to compare them.
>
> Move the refdes information (usually on the silkscreen plot) to a mech
> layer and move the footprint refdesignators to matching positions. Delete
> the original plot designators.
>
> Yes, it's tedious. Parts of it could be susceptible to automation. Parts
> are just plain tedious. Nevertheless, this process should be less
> time-consuming than a new design. A little less.
>
> I have not given all the details.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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