[orcad] Re: Re-numbering in Orcad V10.0

  • From: "Bill Hawkins" <BHawkins@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <orcad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 12:57:04 -0400


I don't actually go through the steps you are doing, but I do have a =
guess as to what may be happening.

The ECO operation may be bringing in part location attributes as well as =
updated reference designators.

It seems to me that way back in the v7 days, I always needed to back =
annotate before making changes in the schematic to prevent just this =
type of problem.   Orcad always gave me problems with any "cross" =
annotation (Pads does too - just different problems), so now I try to =
avoid this type of procedure as much as possible.    I haven't been =
having any troubles lately, but I suspect that I've just learned what =
not to do...

Just a guess, and your mileage may vary.

Good Luck,

----- Original Message -----=20
From: "Miswald, Ron" <RMiswald@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <orcad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, September 19, 2004 4:50 PM
Subject: [orcad] Re-numbering in Orcad V10.0

> We have a project in which we are trying to re-number a schematic so =
> all designators on the schematic agree with the page number it is on, =
> resistors on page 1 are R101, R102, etc.  We got into this mess when =
> original board schematic was renumbered in this fashion.  It worked.  =
I have
> the logs to prove it.  Later in the design process a number of other =
> had been made.   For these changes no attempt was made to preserve the =
> number integrity of the changes.  At this point when we tried to =
> the schematic the renumbered parts were moved off board.  I even asked =
> couple knowledgeable people outside my company if they had ideas.  =
They said
> it couldn't be done.  Due to pressure to ship we dropped the matter...
> Re-numbering the board to schematic, running the swap file, and then =
> ECO (schematic to layout) also makes the parts jump off board.  It
> definitely seems that not running the swap file is key so that =
> doesn't get screwed up.
>  The strange part of the re-numbering is that only a few parts jump =
> board.  These are a couple of moderate pin count parts (44 pin).  Most =
> not all passives and other ICs don't jump off board when renumbered. =20
> Unfortunately this renumbering had drawn some high profile internal
> attention...  I am in the process of manually renumbering the board =
> schematic.  I am about 1/3 of the way into the change process.  So far =
> appears to work.  This was accomplished by ignoring the warning to =
stop the
> ECO process and run swap properties (renumbering board to schematic =
with a
> swap file screwed up the existing values on the schematic, i.e. a =
> with the value "10.0K" was changed to the value "R".  For this reason =
I am
> not using the back annotation option.). =20
> Subsequent recreating the net list, and ECOing into the layout all =
> good.  This is not a process run by many due to its not adding much =
> Still if anyone has run it, and knows of specific gotcha's... =20

Other related posts: