----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob_xyz" <bob_barr@...> To: <Homebrew_PCBs@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 9:33 AM Subject: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: Autorouters > My guess is that the autorouter did the 'elsie1' layout and you > did 'elsie2' manually. > > In the 'elsie2' layout, there appears to be two unnecessary vias > under U2. I don't think the autorouter would have done that. (They > were probably the result of a crossing track that you later re- > routed.) The 'elsie2' layout has a few pads left unconnected which > are connected in 'elsie1'. It also uses varying track widths in > different portions of the same net. Yes, that's right. Interestingly, the autorouter only used five vias, whereas I used 27! I was trying to minimise connection lengths, as it was a L, C and F measurement system based on an RF oscillator. I also used top and bottom grounded copper pour, which the router won't have known about. I should have told it not to route the ground connections. Leon
Message
Re: [Homebrew_PCBs] Re: Autorouters
2006-01-06 by Leon Heller
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.