On 06:45 PM 9/07/2003, Jason Morgan said:
Firstly you posted to the wrong list, this list is for Protel 99se, and not
DXP,
there is a separate list for DXP issues, see
http://forums.altium.com/cgi-bin/msgbylist.asp?list=dxp


PEDA is not just for P99SE but is certainly mainly used for that - the Altium DXP list certainly has a much higher SNR both generally and for DXP related stuff.



To answer your question, its the same as in 99se, you create a
component-component clearance rule
that uses the same component type for each side of the rule.

I use this exact method for a mechanical part that sits over some LEDs.

e.g.
Create a rule in Placement: Component Clearance: New Rule
HasFootprint('FOOTPRINT_1') vs HasFootprint('FOOTPRINT_1') you need to
specify "Full Check"
and a large negative clearance, e.g. -999mm

My experience is that this doesn't work. DXP does not support negative clearance checking (overlaps). It has been something I and others have been asking for for a while now. I just tried a test case and couldn't get it to pass a batch DRC if I had any overlap at all - a negative clearance acted like a zero clearance.


Are you sure this has worked for you, Jason. Can you give a little more detail? I would love to know why it doesn't work for me.

The only way I have been able to solve this sort of problem is by excluding the affected footprint from testing by making the general (All-All) rule into a:
NOT HasFootprint('FOOTPRINT_1') vs NOT HasFootprint('FOOTPRINT_1')


This excludes 'FOOTPRINT_1', in this case, from any clearance checking - but this then means that *no* component is checked against any component with footprint 'FOOTPRINT_1'. I thought I had solved this issue to exclude just 'FOOTPRINT_1' from being checked against any other 'FOOTPRINT_1' but all other components being checked against each other and 'FOOTPRINT_1' but I can't recall and it is late. I think there should be something in the DXP forum archive on this.

This solution is pretty poor as it doesn't scale well. A number of users have been requesting generalised clearance rules (not just component and electrical) with negative clearance (overlap) capability. Hopefully it will appear in a DXP SP soon.

Ian



* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* 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/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to