On Friday 25 September 2009, gene glick wrote:
>DJ Delorie wrote:
>> I talked with Dan about it, we seem to think it's better to not use
>> the ground plane for the return signal, and route the return the same
>> way you route the audio. Think of it like a differential pair. That
>> way, you get
DJ Delorie wrote:
> I talked with Dan about it, we seem to think it's better to not use
> the ground plane for the return signal, and route the return the same
> way you route the audio. Think of it like a differential pair. That
> way, you get current balancing without breaking up your ground pl
DJ Delorie wrote:
> I talked with Dan about it, we seem to think it's better to not use
> the ground plane for the return signal,
Just for clarity sake, in this particular area there is not ground
plane. Just the ground plane layer. If I had zoomed out, you'd see
lots of copper in other areas.
I talked with Dan about it, we seem to think it's better to not use
the ground plane for the return signal, and route the return the same
way you route the audio. Think of it like a differential pair. That
way, you get current balancing without breaking up your ground plane.
Also, avoiding vias
DJ Delorie wrote:
> You want an audio-frequency microstrip then. Sounds like a Dan
> question, he's probably hit that already.
>
>
> ___
> geda-user mailing list
> geda-user@moria.seul.org
> http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
>
Yep
You want an audio-frequency microstrip then. Sounds like a Dan
question, he's probably hit that already.
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
>
> Perhaps if you explained *why* you're using a trace that way, we could
> help you figure out how PCB would prefer to handle that situation.
I figured that question was coming next :)
Those particular traces you see are low frequency audio. There's
several channels of it. In order to redu
Right, that's a fundamental difference between a trace and a polygon -
traces always connect two points together, polygons are for area
coverage and need to be more flexible.
Perhaps if you explained *why* you're using a trace that way, we could
help you figure out how PCB would prefer to handle
Maybe you could post a small picture of what's happening to
> help us understand what you're trying to accomplish?
>
Sure.
This picture shows a polygon on the ground layer. The via has a
clearance around it, as expected.
http://www.geocities.com/fazool1_2000/geda/route-with-polygon.png
Here'
> If I route a trace, not polygon, on the ground layer, and it passes
> by a via, the via connects to the trace. I don't want this to
> happen. Anyway to make it so ("make it so, number one")?
I don't understand - that's the whole point of traces and vias - they
connect. Maybe you could post a
If I route a trace, not polygon, on the ground layer, and it passes by a
via, the via connects to the trace. I don't want this to happen.
Anyway to make it so ("make it so, number one")?
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
http://www.
11 matches
Mail list logo
