PROTEL 99SE MISSING POLYGONS EAGLE SOFTWARE

Some sources (sources that are not much better than the guys at the water cooler) say acid trapping is what tear drops are about. I've dug around and never found much basis for this. о—“Oh, you want a *cogent* argument? Good luck. Nobody has ever explained to me what a split/mixed layer does, so I It's like a copper pour but more complex and not well >I use split planes often, to create separate bits of GND, avoiding Some of the cheap quick-turn board houses just don't read fab notes. >state they never do they never read any notes, so the gerbers needs >problem: the PCB fab needs to read English, which JCLPCB specifically I need a PCB layout program that lets me do anything I want on any >a note on that signal layer to merge that with the said plane. >a thick track in the plane to exclude the copper from it, and then put >planes I have always put the tracks on another *signal* layer, and put >Signals within planes can be useful, although when I had tracks within >PADS also has split/mixed planes and 'plane connect' areas, neither of >The algorithm is more complicated for an arbitrary polygon. It won'tДo an inner pour unless you explicitely route into it with a via, It sometimes does strange things with thermals and net names. PADS handles pour clearances perfectly in all cases, as far as I know. Traps, paving entire layers, silly things like that. People also like to worry about right angles, acute angles, acid When I doДЇast stuff, I do direct (AA, any angle) routing to keep fast traces Most people use diagonal routing, multiples of 45 degrees. >That's good, although I notice you are using only 90 degree angles :) Both are drawn 'shapes' with net names and some rules. >to draw the pours exactly the way I want them. >It can even automatically resolve pour overlap conflicts, but I prefer >or pad or shape, that's a different net from the pour. It maintains whatever clearance you want around anything, trace This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. All I used to do was to link them both with a meaty Sometimes there would be and Isolated pour and therefore an

PROTEL 99SE MISSING POLYGONS EAGLE SOFTWARE

> I wonder if any modern PCB software does this sort of thing absolutely > out in the 1960s, so why these issues in the 1990s? > 'inside' a shape, for any arbitrary shape, have been thoroughly worked > OTOH I would have thought that algorithms for working out if you are > this breaks with polygons which have say 45 degree tracks.

> sort of geometric algorithm to work out the connection topology and > an angle, not 90 degrees, leading me to suspect that they use some This appears to be related to splits which have tracks at > this correctly, it still reports some plane segments are being > specific feature), not with just a normal track. > Protel PCB requires any such breaks to be done with a polygon (a > errors it is like ignoring compiler warnings. > track, to get correct grounding routes etc. > But others relate to 'broken nets' where a plane has been split with a > vias within SMT pads it doesn't like that. > Some of these I have not solved and just leave them. > However v2.8 can sometimes generate a lot of mysterious DRC errors. The best designs are necessarily accidental. Pour, it properly throws a connectivity error. Of course, that slices up the niceД¬opper pour, which is your choice. In PADS, if you run vias or traces inside a copper plane area, it just >I wonder if any modern PCB software does this sort of thing absolutely >out in the 1960s, so why these issues in the 1990s? >'inside' a shape, for any arbitrary shape, have been thoroughly worked >OTOH I would have thought that algorithms for working out if you are >this breaks with polygons which have say 45 degree tracks. >sort of geometric algorithm to work out the connection topology and

>an angle, not 90 degrees, leading me to suspect that they use some >this correctly, it still reports some plane segments are being >specific feature), not with just a normal track. >Protel PCB requires any such breaks to be done with a polygon (a >errors it is like ignoring compiler warnings. >track, to get correct grounding routes etc. >But others relate to 'broken nets' where a plane has been split with a >vias within SMT pads it doesn't like that. >Some of these I have not solved and just leave them. >However v2.8 can sometimes generate a lot of mysterious DRC errors. >instructions on the layers, and who want apertures embedded within the >for JLCPCB, who famously state they cannot read English and never read

>Protel 99SE which opens the v2.8 files apparently ok but so far have >to use it :) Also I often need to revisit very old projects - anything >Yes it is ancient (1995) but it works, does all I need, and I know how

Protel 99se missing polygons eagle