[EFM] Been quiet lately... too much DIY ?

[Jim Patchell]

Paul Perry wrote:

> At 09:22 AM 31/05/00 +0200, "Theo" <t.hogers wrote:
> >Sounds like you exspect the auto router to do it all on its own.
> >I like to use it more as an interactive tool.
>
> Well, I agree entirely on this last.
> My point was, that it is a bit rude for an (alleged) EE to charge
> $$$ without doing anything but autoroute. And yes, it was protel ;-)

>
> The other problem with a fully autorouted solution is that since
> the traces aren't  laid out the way you would expect, troubleshooting
> is a complete bitch.
>

    I would have to disagree.  I have found it no more difficult to debug
autorouted boards as opposed to boards that were hand routed by somebody
else.  In fact, I prefer the autorouted boards.  Since they were done to
the netlist generated by the schematic, I have found that in 100% of all
cases that the board matches the schematic 100%.  In my 15 years of
experience, mistakes on the board are always traceable back to the
schematic.  Verifying the schematic is probably one of the most difficult
things to do.  Although, this does get back to autorouting vs hand
routing....when I do hand route, I find it easier to locate errors in the
schematic. :^)

    Even when I hand route, (presently I use Protel For Windows 2.7), I
use the manual router as this assures greater accuracy and faster hand
routing.

    Also, someone here said something about autorouters being suitable
for only low speed boards.  Take a look inside your PC.  It was probably
autorouted.  I used the Coopy and Chyan Specctra router once, it has
modules that will do routing based on cross talk and time delay specs.
For doing high speed boards, routers like this are probably only option.

>
> paul perry melbourne australia

    -Jim