X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2020 15:50:24 +0100
From: "Gabriel Paubert (paubert AT iram DOT es) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To: "Richard Rasker (rasker AT linetec DOT nl) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Pcb: Automatic clearance between polygons?
Message-ID: <20200115145024.GA22248@lt-gp.iram.es>
References: <3721c0b4-2805-2d9f-eba0-119c9c2dd81e AT linetec DOT nl>
 <CAJZxidAFqANGm2MofmyeSVTZyRS+YCS16-JtfAidjwYHoKE0GQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <f9aa875e-4c81-2eae-689e-24ba6dc00355 AT linetec DOT nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <f9aa875e-4c81-2eae-689e-24ba6dc00355@linetec.nl>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; d=iram.es; s=DKIM; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type;
 bh=eQVFD3xD0v1WKuBHC12FyKFqOhjXHs9gKblE8eMytXs=;
 b=R2zfhUr6HHBFNmQSRUHiKbcZYxEfQYrZzWzB1nIBmojFdo8XTcqbhy8H5HSSl0gpnkRppE1QYHiH
	vrpOnnz1A0gTk/ipkwzgf8J2fzDLTF4+kpkSq7yhJc3hRMK7THwOl6coUogjNuQzILwPPiX+OWJf
	L21Sc58jcrWMlBssRWx9JiJooGTIK0XvwIZIIZeimtgzlRG1yRwhZhxByVrCa/iDIaIGqgurAQPD
	ewhmBlacm0r36i9LalGRMSP6w4KSB/xNdhEBukoj61yAWTYWoUDs9aHPctAsXqXFTyJ9xTMWKI4e
	er9Slqyq7+FJdm9XQ0QAPFg8Rn7ww9NGV7uE8w==
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 02:30:08PM +0100, Richard Rasker (rasker AT linetec DOT nl) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
> Hello Chad,
> 
> Op 13-01-20 om 20:40 schreef Chad Parker (parker DOT charles AT gmail DOT com) [via
> geda-user AT delorie DOT com]:
> > Hi Richard-
> > 
> > What's wrong with wide traces? The end caps?
> 
> Traces are OK for simpler shapes. The problem is that they have a fixed
> width and (of course) do not clear pads and pins. So for a more complex
> shape, I'd have to use a thin trace to make the outline, and then 'colour it
> in' using lots more traces.

You can put a solid polygon (not cleared by traces) inside the outine...

> 
> > What about using a large element pad for your connections instead of a
> > polygon?
> 
> This is even less convenient, as it requires defining separate pads for each
> situation.
> 
> For example, I have four 0.5W 0805 resistors that need as much copper as
> possible to dissipate heat, located amidst other components. So for each of
> these resistors, I draw two polygons covering the desired area, connected to
> the pads by setting a zero clearance gap (Shift+K) for each pad. No problems
> so far, as other pins, pads and traces still have automatic clearance with
> regard to this polygon.

or use pcb-rnd.

	Gabriel

> 
> However, when I want to fill up the remaining space with a ground plane, I
> need to manually steer clear of the polygons that are already present, which
> can be quite a bit of fiddly work. Not really a problem, but time-consuming
> all the same. It would be nice if a polygon had a 'clearance gap' parameter
> that would make other polygons observe a certain clearance, just as they do
> with all other elements.
> 
> But as said, I just wondered if I overlooked an option all those years -- it
> is more of a nuisance than a real problem.
> 
> > I'll have to look and see if there any facility for polygon-polygon
> > clearance. I've only delved into polygons a couple times, but I have a
> > vague recollection of something.
> 
> Well, I'd be most interested! And of course I'll be glad to do any testing.
> 
> Thanks already,
> 
> Richard Rasker
> 
>