Hi Matt, > The via pad your discribing, 10 mil finished hole with a 24 mil > pad... The drill is actually 10. > is sized to > allow for tangency of the > hole to the pad edge. All the pad allows for is a 10 mil manufacturing > tolerance. The hole will be drilled with a 13 or 14 mil drill in > order to plate > and finish at 10. The hole can endup anywhere within that pad > including at the > edge. > > Under those conditions you do not gain any usable space by removing the > unconnected pads. > By removing unconnected pads, you get to use the designed in > space that was for > annular ring. In this case that is zero. You do gain clearance though...simply for DRC...doing it the way I described. The trace doesn't impinge on the actual pad area (if it was there), it simply has a clearance to it that is better done (IMO, from a DRC prospective) by removing/reducing the pad instead of setting up area constraints (as was suggested can be done), and then having the pad ring removed during manufacture. I've done many boards this way, and this technique seems to work just fine (never a failed board due to this issue)...and the PCB manufacturers have not had a problem with it. The drill can't hit the trace, as we specify a minimum amount of ring left, that includes all tolerances, just to avoid such potential problems. Regards, Austin ----------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe/unsubscribe: Send a message to icu-pcb-forum-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with a subject of subscribe or unsubscribe To view the archives of this list please login at //www.freelists.org. Our list name is icu-pcb-forum or go to //www.freelists.org/archives/icu-pcb-forum/ Problems or Questions: Send an email to icu-pcb-forum-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Want to post a job listing ? DON'T DO IT HERE! Better yet, join our jobs listing forum. SUBSCRIBE: icu-jobs-forum-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxx POST: icu-jobs-forum@xxxxxxxxxx -----------------------------------------------------------