On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 13:33 -0500, rickman wrote: > I guess I am missing something significant with this. Why wouldn't the > inductor just be a component on the schematic and a component in layout > just like any other inductor? The only difference is that the footprint > defined for the component would be the copper that makes up the > antenna. It would have a pad on each end for the signal connection. Is > arbitrary copper in a footprint not supported? Not currently supported. PCB would also need to treat that copper differently in its own connectivity scanning code, otherwise it would merrily extract the whole DC-connected netlist (shorting either side of the inductor). > As to DRC, I would think design of an antenna would be a pretty complex > thing to analyze automatically. A 3D field solver comes to mind. Is > any of that capability currently interfaced with these tools? Perhaps I was going a bit far to suggest full DRC for the actual antenna design. What I really meant was not loosing information for net connectivity checking leading up the antenna. -- Peter Clifton Electrical Engineering Division, Engineering Department, University of Cambridge, 9, JJ Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 0FA Tel: +44 (0)7729 980173 - (No signal in the lab!) Tel: +44 (0)1223 748328 - (Shared lab phone, ask for me)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user