Electronic Circuits and Projects Forum



How to avoid very thin lines appears in the pour copper ?

« First 1234 Last »
  1. Thread Starter #11
    PCBWING PCBWING is offline
    Excuse me. Then how about this one? Now "the piece of copper on the right between the three pads and the trace“ is connected to other thing. It should be there but there is still a too thin line in the pour copper.
    thiner.gif
    0

  2. #12
    kubeek kubeek is offline
    I would just increase the isolation distance, it could be set to 8 mil now, so increase it to 10mil and those two thin lines should disappear. Then you should add a via to the remaining piece of copper to connect it to something or it should not be there at all.
    0

  3. #13
    jpanhalt jpanhalt is offline
    Quote Originally Posted by PCBWING View Post
    Thanks a lot. I think you said is the line fill case,
    If that comment is in response to my comment immediately above, then NO, I am not talking about the cross-hatch or lines fill (not available on Eagle) options. If you think of the fill as a vector rather than bit map, the fill is with lines that touch. The thicker the line, the more jagged will the edges be. The thinner the line, the more processing it takes. Eagle used to have a warning to that effect. Line width does not affect the gross appearance of the filled areas in Eagle, unless you pick the cross-hatch option.

    Just to clarify, there are multiple ways to do what you asked in your first post. Your later post on page 2 illustrates one of the problems of using isolate as the variable. Of course, you can avoid that by using multiple polygons. The restrict method avoids that too, and I find it easier to do in a controlled and precise manner. In Eagle, isolate and line width can affect other things too, like the the way thermals are made.

    Finally, as to the patch of copper that is not connected to anything, that is called an "orphan" in Eagle. You can choose to have them left in place or removed.

    BTW, Are you actually a PCB manufacturer or is that just an avatar you like?

    John
    0

  4. Thread Starter #14
    PCBWING PCBWING is offline
    Okay,I know your meaning: There should be a fit distance to set. Thanks, kubeek.
    0
    Last edited by PCBWING; 7th March 2012 at 02:20 AM. Reason: I input a Chinese" ,"

  5. Thread Starter #15
    PCBWING PCBWING is offline
    Quote Originally Posted by jpanhalt View Post
    If that comment is in response to my comment immediately above, then NO, I am not talking about the cross-hatch or lines fill (not available on Eagle) options. If you think of the fill as a vector rather than bit map, the fill is with lines that touch. The thicker the line, the more jagged will the edges be. The thinner the line, the more processing it takes. Eagle used to have a warning to that effect. Line width does not affect the gross appearance of the filled areas in Eagle, unless you pick the cross-hatch option.

    Just to clarify, there are multiple ways to do what you asked in your first post. Your later post on page 2 illustrates one of the problems of using isolate as the variable. Of course, you can avoid that by using multiple polygons. The restrict method avoids that too, and I find it easier to do in a controlled and precise manner. In Eagle, isolate and line width can affect other things too, like the the way thermals are made.

    Finally, as to the patch of copper that is not connected to anything, that is called an "orphan" in Eagle. You can choose to have them left in place or removed.

    BTW, Are you actually a PCB manufacturer or is that just an avatar you like?

    John
    Thanks for your reply. I can know in Eagle there would be some set options for it. In PCB plants like us, the "orphan" was given the name "Island".

    Yes, I'm working in PCBWING.com which is a online PCB manufacturer. But this is not an AD, at least before I become to a supporter of this "electro-tech-online" forum. Also we do not send Spam. I‘m here to make new friends, and also hope to maintain contact with the circuit professional technical personnel. Thank you very much.
    0

  6. #16
    jpanhalt jpanhalt is offline
    I do like the tear-drop shaped pads you are using. Prior to version 6.x, that was not possible with Eagle. It might be with the new versions, but I haven't tried.

    One thing to consider when using "isolate" to prevent the thin lines is that you may cure the problem is one area and create another somewhere else, particularly on complex PCB's. Using a restrict layer will not have that global effect.

    John
    0

  7. Thread Starter #17
    PCBWING PCBWING is offline
    Quote Originally Posted by jpanhalt View Post
    I do like the tear-drop shaped pads you are using. Prior to version 6.x, that was not possible with Eagle. It might be with the new versions, but I haven't tried.

    One thing to consider when using "isolate" to prevent the thin lines is that you may cure the problem is one area and create another somewhere else, particularly on complex PCB's. Using a restrict layer will not have that global effect.

    John
    Yeah, the tear-drop pads are useful. I saw many designs use it. If designers use the old version software, they could request the PCB house to add it. But it should be they done the copper pour before. Otherwise it would happen short circuit. Like this.
    short.gif
    0

  8. #18
    Boncuk Boncuk is offline

    What a question?

    Hi PCBWING,

    it really drives me crazy to see so many posts for such a simple PCB layout stretching from Christ's birth till now!

    There is absolutely no reason to keep traces that closely together as done in your layout!

    Many traces could be drawn in a straight line from start to end - except for one. That one has to be rerouted to go around other pads.

    Keeping safe distances between traces makes soldering a lot easier - thereby avoiding possible shorts between traces and/or pads.

    When there is enough spacing between traces you might perform "ratsnest" setting up 0.4064 or 0.6096mm between ground pour and traces/pads.


    Boncuk
    0
    Last edited by Boncuk; 7th March 2012 at 07:45 PM.

  9. Thread Starter #19
    PCBWING PCBWING is offline
    Quote Originally Posted by Boncuk View Post
    Hi PCBWING,

    it really drives me crazy to see so many posts for such a simple PCB layout stretching from Christ's birth till now!

    There is absolutely no reason to keep traces that closely together as done in your layout!

    Many traces could be drawn in a straight line from start to end - except for one. That one has to be rerouted to go around other pads.

    Keeping safe distances between traces makes soldering a lot easier - thereby avoiding possible shorts between traces and/or pads.

    When there is enough spacing between traces you might perform "ratsnest" setting up 0.4064 or 0.6096mm between ground pour and traces/pads.

    Boncuk
    Thanks for your "Hi" and so a many faces. I am worried that you did not understand the drawing. I do not think everyone agrees that these posts are useless. In many designs, there is not enough space for designers to draw a straight line, like this.
    slot.gif
    0

  10. Thread Starter #20
    PCBWING PCBWING is offline
    In addtion, curve is useful. I believe that it would be better if electrons run in a smooth curve.

    Curve & No space.gif
    0

« First 1234 Last »
Tags
Similar Threads
Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
16F628, how to get very low power consumption?? Mr RB Microcontrollers 6 15th September 2009, 06:50 AM
How to punch out thin metal stevef22 General Electronics Chat 14 14th September 2007, 02:00 AM
How to get very fast ATD readings???? cubdh23 General Electronics Chat 2 21st July 2004, 08:38 AM
How To Make Very Small Transmitter ? Bertone General Electronics Chat 3 4th July 2003, 05:58 AM
how to avoid heating of mosfet abhay General Electronics Chat 1 5th January 2003, 05:43 PM
Electronic Circuits  |  Learning Electronics

Join our community with over 100,000 Members! It's free, easy and when you're logged in you have many more features! Click to register.
Page Time: 0.11387 seconds      Memory: 7,753 KB      Queries: 17      Templates: 0