Tracks Ripped Up With Renew Design from Schematic (both options)

Report bugs here
Post Reply
Message
Author
kscidmore
Posts: 1
Joined: 09 Dec 2019, 12:55

Tracks Ripped Up With Renew Design from Schematic (both options)

#1 Post by kscidmore » 10 Dec 2019, 13:15

Here's the sequence of events:

1. I enlarged my via sizes on a finished design then fixed the DRC errors this introduced. Before doing this, all verification checks for the layout passed without problems and renew design from schematic had been successfully performed many times.
2. After fixing the DRC errors I renewed the design from schematic. The microcontroller and one bypass cap appeared outside the board boundary and all trace segments connected to these two parts were ripped up even if they were locked. I used undo to restore the parts and tracks.
3. At this I noticed that the two parts that were ripped up were missing reference designators. I found that the footprints had been converted to lines and pads. No library changes had been made. The pads had the right pin numbers but the desigator numbers on the pads had been replaced with a number.
4. I deleted all the lines and pads for the 2 parts lacking designation then added the parts back manually making sure the proper connectivity was restored.
5. I ran verification to find that 3 other parts were also converted to lines and pads but renew design from schematic didn't result in the corresponding components appearing outside the board boundary. I deleted the pads and lines for these parts also and then also added them back manually.
5. The design layout now passes DRC, net connectivity check, and verification against the schematic without errors. Renew Design from Schematic by RefDes no longer removes the 5 parts I added back and no parts appear outside the board limits, but the tracks connected to the 5 parts I added back are still ripped up. With the microcontroller being one of these in a very tight layout days of work must be redone, so I used undo to backout the Renew Design from Schematic layout changes to restore the layout but the schematic and layout are now out of sync and there is no clear way to fix this.
6. As an experiment I tried re-synchig the design and schematic using back-annotation. When this is done, I get a warning that the netlists for the schematic and layout don't match despite the check in the layout saying they do. After clicking 'okay' to continue back annotation despite the warning the dialogue box vanishes and the back annotation doesn't seem to run.

Any suggestions would be appreciated. The design files for both the schematic and layout are attached. Also, please note that I have tried Renew Design from Schematic by RefDes so this isn't a problem with matching up hidden desigators and the problem no longer part and tracks being ripped up, but only the tracks.
-kscidmore
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Alex
Technical Support
Posts: 3170
Joined: 14 Jun 2010, 06:43

Re: Tracks Ripped Up With Renew Design from Schematic (both options)

#2 Post by Alex » 11 Dec 2019, 07:29

I think you ungrouped 5 parts by accident. That converted 5 patterns to primitives (pads and shapes). Instead of deleting them you could group them back into patterns (select pads and shapes and choose "Group into pattern" from submenu), then rename RefDes of grouped pattern and renew layout from schematic by RefDes. Unless it is too late, try to recover the layout this way. Because once you deleted individual pads that destroyed connected nets. Renewing design from schematic couldn't associate new layout nets with old schematic nets and just replaced them. As result, it ripped up existing traces.

Tomg
Expert
Posts: 1462
Joined: 20 Jun 2015, 14:39

Re: Tracks Ripped Up With Renew Design from Schematic (both options)

#3 Post by Tomg » 11 Dec 2019, 11:19

C30, C42, C47, C53 and U8 have lost their links to their schematic counterparts. Run the Renew Layout from Schematic tool using the "By RefDes..." option to fix those links. After that, using the normal "By Components..." option should work fine. Don't forget to run all verification checks to make sure everything is OK.
Tom

Post Reply