Drawing wire on a layer

Morten Leikvoll schrieb:

(using 5.7.0)

When I draw a wire between two points, it seems to connect to airwires at

the end, even if there is no net/smd on that that layer in any of the wire

ends. (If there are two different airwires at each end, it refuses to draw

the wire.)

I agree it should connect to the airwire if there is a pad/via or net/smd at

the same layer you are drawing, but I think it should start a new netname if

there is no natural connection.

Am I missing some advantages the way it is done now?

 

[In addidtion, I think this connecting should also happen for every wire

when you paste stuff over existing airwires... Or at least ask you if you

want to do that]

 

 

I am sorry, but I read your message several times and I don't

understand what you want to tell us. Could you please give me

some more information and maybe send me an example for clarifying?

--

Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Best regards

Richard Hammerl

CadSoft Support -- hotline@cadsoft.de

FAQ: http://www.cadsoft.de/faq.htm

"Richard Hammerl" <ric@cadsoft.de> wrote in message

news:hjjoco$4ua$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

Morten Leikvoll schrieb:

(using 5.7.0)

When I draw a wire between two points, it seems to connect to airwires at

the end, even if there is no net/smd on that that layer in any of the

wire

ends. (If there are two different airwires at each end, it refuses to

draw

the wire.)

I agree it should connect to the airwire if there is a pad/via or net/smd

at

the same layer you are drawing, but I think it should start a new netname

if

there is no natural connection.

Am I missing some advantages the way it is done now?

 

[In addidtion, I think this connecting should also happen for every wire

when you paste stuff over existing airwires... Or at least ask you if you

want to do that]

I am sorry, but I read your message several times and I don't

understand what you want to tell us. Could you please give me

some more information and maybe send me an example for clarifying?

Ok, I was afraid my explanation was a bit hard.

First, imagine if you have two different airwires at the same point (at

different layers). When you draw a wire (not route, but wire!) it will hook

up to one of them. Uless the wire you draw is a continuation of an existing

wire or pad, it just connects to one of the airwires (I do not know wich one

it prefers). What I try to say is that in the case your wire is not meeting

any other wires or smd's, it should not hook up to the airwire.

Imagine this case:

-You got two smd's next to each other on layer1

-You route one of them out to a via and change to layer2, then route it over

the second smd. Now you got 2 airwires at the same point.

-Draw a wire (not route!) on layer3 from this point to anywhere. This will

be hooked to one of the airwires. I think this should not happen. It should

only happen if you draw at layer1 or 2, but not at 3.

I hope this helps understanding the issue.

[For the paste case, I'd like the same type of matching of nets over

airwires, so that the new wires in the paste buffer get their name replaced

with the airwire names, if they match up at all airwire ends..]

Morten Leikvoll wrote on Mon, 25 January 2010 04:48

First, imagine if you have two different airwires at the same point (at

 

different layers). When you draw a wire (not route, but wire!) it will

hook

up to one of them. Uless the wire you draw is a continuation of an

existing

wire or pad, it just connects to one of the airwires (I do not know

wich one

it prefers). What I try to say is that in the case your wire is not

meeting

any other wires or smd's, it should not hook up to the airwire.

This still isn't making much sense.  I guess you are in the board editor,

but why are you using WIRE instead of ROUTE to draw copper traces?

Whenever you click on something and there are multiple options nearby, I've

always seen Eagle highlight one of them, then right click cycles thru the

available ones, then you left click to confirm the specific choice.  What

happens when you use ROUTE?

--

Browser access to CadSoft Support Forums at http://www.eaglecentral.ca

"Olin Lathrop" <eagle@embedinc.com> wrote in message

news:hjk23o$jb6$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

Morten Leikvoll wrote on Mon, 25 January 2010 04:48

First, imagine if you have two different airwires at the same point (at

 

different layers). When you draw a wire (not route, but wire!) it will

hook up to one of them. Uless the wire you draw is a continuation of an

existing wire or pad, it just connects to one of the airwires (I do not

know

wich one it prefers). What I try to say is that in the case your wire is

not

meeting any other wires or smd's, it should not hook up to the airwire.

 

This still isn't making much sense.  I guess you are in the board editor,

but why are you using WIRE instead of ROUTE to draw copper traces?

Whenever you click on something and there are multiple options nearby,

I've

always seen Eagle highlight one of them, then right click cycles thru the

available ones, then you left click to confirm the specific choice.  What

happens when you use ROUTE?

Every time you comment my stuff, you are teaching me to do things YOUR way..

Please stop that I know just as many tricks that works for me as

you probably do for yourself.

I  used this to strengthen some polygon fills. The general spacing I use

doesnt make the fill between some via's, but I accept some smaller clearance

at some places, and therefore use wire's between those via's (and rename it

to whatever I want) to make the airwire disappear (after ratsnest). You may

discuss the correctness of this, but I'm not interested in hearing right now

It can be fixed by not drawing a wire between airwires, rather move the ends

after drawing, so its not a dead critical issue, its just not right, and

thats why I posted this.

"Olin Lathrop" <eagle@embedinc.com> wrote in message

news:hjk23o$jb6$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

This still isn't making much sense.  I guess you are in the board editor,

but why are you using WIRE instead of ROUTE to draw copper traces?

Whenever you click on something and there are multiple options nearby,

I've

always seen Eagle highlight one of them, then right click cycles thru the

available ones, then you left click to confirm the specific choice.  What

happens when you use ROUTE?

I should add that I also use this method when I know where to route from,

but airwire isnt starting there. It saves me a lot of time. Try it

Morten Leikvoll wrote on Mon, 25 January 2010 07:29

Every time you comment my stuff, you are teaching me to do things YOUR

way..

Please stop that

You seem to be going out of your way to use Eagle in ways it wasn't

intended, then complain when it doesn't work.  Try embracing the tool

instead of fighting it.

Quote:

I used this to strengthen some polygon fills.

It's still not clear what "this" is.  Maybe a picture would help.

Quote:

The general spacing I use doesnt make the fill between some via's, but

I accept some smaller clearance at some places, and therefore use wire's

between those via's (and rename it to whatever I want) to make the

airwire disappear (after ratsnest).

So if I understand this right, you have a polygon with a certain spacing

parameter.  That spacing causes the polygon to be broken up near some vias

because there isn't enough clearance to flow between them?  And in some of

those cases you want to manually add the trace because you know the

clearance is really OK in those areas?  If that's the case, you could have

just said so.  If not, then I'm still confused and a better description is

still needed.

If the above guess as to what you really want is correct, then I still

don't see why you need to use WIRE instead of ROUTE as intended by Eagle.

There is a better chance Eagle understands the connections made by ROUTE,

and the user interface regarding airwires should be clearer.  Have you

tried ROUTE?  Either way you will get lots of DRC errors, so that shouldn't

be the difference.

Quote:

You may discuss the correctness of this, but I'm not interested in

hearing right now

You started this thread.  Discussing the correct or best use of the tool is

legitimate and relevant, whether you wish to hear it or not.

--

Browser access to CadSoft Support Forums at http://www.eaglecentral.ca

Morten Leikvoll wrote on Mon, 25 January 2010 07:44

I should add that I also use this method when I know where to route

from,

but airwire isnt starting there. It saves me a lot of time. Try it

Once again, it's still not clear what "this method" is exactly.  However,

you should read the help on ROUTE again.  It is not constrained to start on

airwire ends only.  If you press SHIFT or CTRL (can't remember which off

the top of my head, see the help page) while clicking on the route starting

point, it will start where you clicked, not the nearest airwire end.  If

that's what you were trying to accomplish, then there is no need to use

WIRE instead of ROUTE, and a bunch of good reasons not to.

--

Browser access to CadSoft Support Forums at http://www.eaglecentral.ca

On 01/25/10 10:48, Morten Leikvoll wrote:

"Richard Hammerl" <ric@cadsoft.de> wrote in message

news:hjjoco$4ua$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

Morten Leikvoll schrieb:

(using 5.7.0)

When I draw a wire between two points, it seems to connect to airwires at

the end, even if there is no net/smd on that that layer in any of the

wire

ends. (If there are two different airwires at each end, it refuses to

draw

the wire.)

I agree it should connect to the airwire if there is a pad/via or net/smd

at

the same layer you are drawing, but I think it should start a new netname

if

there is no natural connection.

Am I missing some advantages the way it is done now?

 

[In addidtion, I think this connecting should also happen for every wire

when you paste stuff over existing airwires... Or at least ask you if you

want to do that]

I am sorry, but I read your message several times and I don't

understand what you want to tell us. Could you please give me

some more information and maybe send me an example for clarifying?

 

Ok, I was afraid my explanation was a bit hard.

First, imagine if you have two different airwires at the same point (at

different layers). When you draw a wire (not route, but wire!) it will hook

up to one of them. Uless the wire you draw is a continuation of an existing

wire or pad, it just connects to one of the airwires (I do not know wich one

it prefers). What I try to say is that in the case your wire is not meeting

any other wires or smd's, it should not hook up to the airwire.

 

Imagine this case:

-You got two smd's next to each other on layer1

-You route one of them out to a via and change to layer2, then route it over

the second smd. Now you got 2 airwires at the same point.

-Draw a wire (not route!) on layer3 from this point to anywhere. This will

be hooked to one of the airwires. I think this should not happen. It should

only happen if you draw at layer1 or 2, but not at 3.

 

I hope this helps understanding the issue.

Fixed for version 5.7.1:

  - Fixed wrongfully adding a wire to an existing signal if the wire is placed

    at a point where a connected SMD pad exists on a different layer.

Klaus Schmidinger

--

_______________________________________________________________

Klaus Schmidinger                       Phone: +49-8635-6989-10

CadSoft Computer GmbH                   Fax:   +49-8635-6989-40

Pleidolfweg 15                          Email:   kls@cadsoft.de

D-84568 Pleiskirchen, Germany           URL:     www.cadsoft.de

_______________________________________________________________

"Klaus Schmidinger" <Klaus.Schmidinger@cadsoft.de> wrote in message

news:hjk9dq$ns4$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

Fixed for version 5.7.1:

 

- Fixed wrongfully adding a wire to an existing signal if the wire is

placed

   at a point where a connected SMD pad exists on a different layer.

Will this also fix the case if you have end of sig1 on layer2 AND end of

sig2 on layer3 on the same point, while drawing a wire from that point on

layer4?

"Olin Lathrop" <eagle@embedinc.com> wrote in message

news:hjk99h$nq1$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

Once again, it's still not clear what "this method" is exactly.  However,

you should read the help on ROUTE again.  It is not constrained to start

on

airwire ends only.  If you press SHIFT or CTRL (can't remember which off

the top of my head, see the help page) while clicking on the route

starting

point, it will start where you clicked, not the nearest airwire end.  If

that's what you were trying to accomplish, then there is no need to use

WIRE instead of ROUTE, and a bunch of good reasons not to.

You are right there. That can be used for some of my cases where I need to

start from a point where there is no airwire. I haven't really programmed my

fingers to use that functions (old habits die hard) but I will. Its an

easier way than using wire draw.

It doesnt help me when cheating on the fill tho, but thanks.