Ron: 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, Bill ----- 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 = that > all designators on the schematic agree with the page number it is on, = i.e. > resistors on page 1 are R101, R102, etc. We got into this mess when = the > 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 = changes > had been made. For these changes no attempt was made to preserve the = page > number integrity of the changes. At this point when we tried to = re-number > the schematic the renumbered parts were moved off board. I even asked = a > 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... >=20 > Re-numbering the board to schematic, running the swap file, and then = running > ECO (schematic to layout) also makes the parts jump off board. It > definitely seems that not running the swap file is key so that = everything > doesn't get screwed up. > The strange part of the re-numbering is that only a few parts jump = off > board. These are a couple of moderate pin count parts (44 pin). Most = if > not all passives and other ICs don't jump off board when renumbered. =20 >=20 >=20 > Unfortunately this renumbering had drawn some high profile internal > attention... I am in the process of manually renumbering the board = and > schematic. I am about 1/3 of the way into the change process. So far = it > 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 = resistor > with the value "10.0K" was changed to the value "R". For this reason = I am > not using the back annotation option.). =20 >=20 > Subsequent recreating the net list, and ECOing into the layout all = looks > good. This is not a process run by many due to its not adding much = value. > Still if anyone has run it, and knows of specific gotcha's... =20 >=20 >=20 >