Pulsonix User Forum

Technical advice from Pulsonix engineers and the wider community.

 All Forums
 Help with using Pulsonix
 PCB Design
 Template pour misunderstanding

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!

Format Mode:
Format: BoldItalicizedUnderlineStrikethrough Align LeftCenteredAlign Right Horizontal Rule Insert HyperlinkInsert EmailInsert Image Insert CodeInsert QuoteInsert List

* Forum Code is ON

   Upload a file

Check here to subscribe to this topic.

T O P I C    R E V I E W
Remco van Hardeveld Posted - 04 Apr 2018 : 15:03:25

In the past two weeks I have started to design a new PCB with all its components and tracks. Today I finished with it and wanted to add a GND template on the top and bottom layers to flood fill the whole PCB area. At first sight it looks correct, but on closer inspection at some point the minimal width were exceeded.

For example between two ferrite bead pads I have a gap of 0.4 mm. My minimal spacing rule for tracks is 0.15 mm. this leaves a small line of 0.1mm that is filled with the template, but the dimension should not be allow to be smaller than 0.15mm. If I was allowed to upload a file, a picture of the above mentioned misunderstanding was elaborated.

I have tried width all different settings in Technology settings: Spacing rules & DFM/DFT rules. But the small line of 0.1mm still remains. I'm sure that I have some settings missed or overlooked, but I think it will cost me days to find this out. Therefore, my question is: Is my misunderstanding correct and that there is just a setting that I missed or is the the only way how the template works.

I working with the lastest version: 9.1 Build 6872

Thanks in advance,

7   L A T E S T    R E P L I E S    (Newest First)
steve Posted - 09 Apr 2018 : 10:30:21
The suggestion log mentioned is 42452

Pulsonix Assistance
cioma Posted - 09 Apr 2018 : 09:46:14
I believe there is an enhancement request already logged to have an option for templates to use line width only for filling and have a zero width boundary.
Remco van Hardeveld Posted - 09 Apr 2018 : 07:44:36
Thank you for the fast reply.

I chanced the line thickness to 0.15 and as said, no more traces exist smaller than 0.15 when poured.
steve Posted - 06 Apr 2018 : 14:36:56
With the data sent, we were able to see that due to the very thin line width used on the Template, this was why the result was as seen. The copper that is poured within a template always uses the same line style as the template. If you have a minimum ‘bridge’ thickness that you want to maintain, then you will need to set the line style of the template to that thickness. In this case, setting the template to use a line style of 0.15mm will ensure that no ‘strip’ of copper will be thinner than that.

Different results in different regions of the board can be achieved using multiple templates with differing line styles and widths.

If you have footprints with pads that have minimal gaps between them, where you would not wish for pour to travel through, then protect those pad banks by using an Area in the footprint.

Pulsonix Assistance
cioma Posted - 06 Apr 2018 : 13:56:11
What's the line width of your template?
Remco van Hardeveld Posted - 05 Apr 2018 : 07:24:26
Hi Steve,

I have send the email, but I forgot to tell you where to look in the PCB in the email.

On the mechanical layer I added a text call out with a small description. The arrow of the text call out is directly pointing at the spot where a trace is smaller than my minimal required trace width of 0.15 mm that is caused with the Template GND pour.
steve Posted - 04 Apr 2018 : 15:31:25
To answer your question we will need to see the design. Please send it to support@pulsonix.com identifying where we should investigate

Pulsonix Assistance