thanks for your comments

so you are saying this is as it should be?

i will not argue with that, but the distinction between the the internal 
and external netlist can be a bit confusing even for those of us doing
this for some time

our pcb lib was 'cath' 'anod' so the part was re-numbered 'on board'
some time ago

the orcad sch (customer supplied) was '1' '2'

the part was an anti parallel bi color led being used in single color
mode, we couldn't edit their sch libs

we were struggling with long leg / short leg to square pad controversies

yada yada, i think you get the idea

my grandmother always said i should be a garbage man, it might have been
easier!

but what about the last part of my original message, 
'a related side note about this'
do you or does anyone know what i am talking about or have any comments
on that?

Dennis Saputelli


DUTTON Phil wrote:
> 
> Hello Dennis,
> 
> I would actually expect this to happen, assuming that you renumbered the
> pads on the board and not in the footprint library. (if in the library,
> you would have to 'update pcb' from the open library to correct the
> footprints.
> When you changed the pin numbers on the board, the net name assigned to
> that pin would have stayed the same.
> Effectively editing the 'loaded' netlist. The DRC checked the routing
> against this 'edited' netlist.
> Only re-loading the original netlist would re-assign the net names to
> the new pad numbers (other than manually editing both the pin number and
> net name for each pad).
> Certainly something to be careful of though, especially when dealing
> with 3rd party netlists.
> 
> regards,
> 
> Phil.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dennis Saputelli [mailto:dsicon@;integratedcontrolsinc.com]
> Sent: Thursday, 7 November 2002 1:21 PM
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] 99SE, a DRC trap or just a dumb user?
> 
> here is one about 99SE
> maybe this is to be expected, i'm not sure, but it *almost* caught us
> 
> the story:
> we had a finished, released and working bd
> for the next rev we unrouted all traces and moved some parts around to
> new mechanical locations
> 
> the netlist did not change
> 
> we had a few 2 pin parts
> the pads were numbered 1 & 2
> for some good reasons which i will not go into
> we renumbered 2 to 1 and 1 to 2
> 
> remember that the traces were all deleted
> 
> we then rerouted the board and it passed DRC
> 
> on final inspection the 1 & 2's were backwards compared to the schem
> (Orcad sch, so no sync'r)
> 
> apparently since the pin 1 had previously acquired the net VCC after
> it became pin 2 it was still perfectly happy being on VCC and
> pin 2 was happy wherever it went even though the intent was otherwise
> 
> examining the netlist proved that the pin numbers did not match the
> board
> yet the DRC was fine which just shows that it does not walk the netlist
> pin numbers
> maybe this is as it should be, i'm not sure
> or maybe the DRC should take that extra step and resolve the pin numbers
> 
> a few cycles of clear the nets and load the nets resolved this but
> it would have been easy to release and it would have been AFU
> 
> in retrospect this should have all been obvious,
> i write it here as a word of caution so that others may not fall down
> this hole
> reload the netlist! reload the netlist!
> 
> a related side note about this:
> when we went to re-load the netlist the correct file was in the drop box
> we hit Execute and it did something or other and there were no changes
> made
> 
> we did it a second time BUT used the Browse button to drill to the same
> file which was already listed and then it loaded a bunch of macros
> and reversed the 2 pins
> 
> it does not seem to always need that extra step, just sometimes which is
> a bit mysterious
> 
> Dennis Saputelli
> 

-- 
___________________________________________________________________________
www.integratedcontrolsinc.com            Integrated Controls, Inc.    
   tel: 415-647-0480                        2851 21st Street          
      fax: 415-647-3003                        San Francisco, CA 94110

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:proteledaforum@;techservinc.com
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:ForumAdministrator@;TechServInc.com
*
* 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