kicad-developers team mailing list archive

["hvontres@..." <hvontres@...>]

--- In kicad-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Dick Hollenbeck <dick@...> wrote:

> Regarding Netclasses:
> 
> After working on this for a couple of days now and thinking about it 
> extensively, I am having a hard time justifying both a "Track Width" and 
> a "Minimum Track Width" setting within a Netclass. I think that a 
> single "Track Width" is sufficient, which can serve as both the normal 
> width for a new segment, but also a minimum during DRC. If the user 
> wants to lay down a track larger than this and put that NET into a 
> CLASS, this is OK, as long as the track width is larger than the 
> netclass's "Track Width".   
---snip---
> Dick

Dick, one use for a minimum or alternate track width in a net class would be to support routers that allow for neck-downs between pins. I am not sureif any of the available routers offer this feature yet, but it might be good to keep this in mind during the initial design of the net class implementation.

Thank you for all of your hard work on kicad.

Henry von Tresckow