Author Message
 Post subject: "Passive" vs "Passive High" vs "Passive Low" in Pin Electric
PostPosted: 20 Dec 2016, 20:41 
Offline

Joined: 20 Dec 2016, 20:31
Posts: 2
I was working on creating some additional components in my personal DipTrace component library and noticed there is three passive options electric options for the schematic ERC; "Passive", "Passive High", and "Passive Low". The default ERC has "Passive High" and "Passive Low" setup to throw errors for just "Power", though just straight "Passive" is set not to throw any errors based on pin type interconnection. Electrically speaking, what use-case did your designers have mind for "Passive High" and "Passive Low"? Thanks!

-EM


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: "Passive" vs "Passive High" vs "Passive Low" in Pin Elec
PostPosted: 22 Dec 2016, 05:56 
Offline
Technical Support

Joined: 14 Jun 2010, 06:43
Posts: 2762
Passive electric type is supposed to be inactive, non-connected, floating pin or pin of passive components.
Passive high is similar electric type but pin is internally tied to voltage source. Passive low pin is tied to ground. Connecting passive high/low pins to power pins may lead to current sinking.
Anyway, you can open ERC setup in Schematic and change ERC rules.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: "Passive" vs "Passive High" vs "Passive Low" in Pin Elec
PostPosted: 24 Dec 2016, 18:14 
Offline

Joined: 20 Dec 2016, 20:31
Posts: 2
Thanks Alex! It would make sense that you would want a ERC error if a pin with an internal pull up/down was tied to a power rail.

-EM


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group