Groups > sci.electronics.design > #741206

Re: another little 4-layer board

From	Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
Newsgroups	sci.electronics.design
Subject	Re: another little 4-layer board
Date	2026-03-03 13:57 -0700
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<10o7hus$2c97a$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	<tvq6qkd413pkrenhrtjlt5146ap55a1ag6@4ax.com> <8j3cqkp92mjha8qkq5hum6gc6ii2p17p3d@4ax.com> <10o5dve$1l87e$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

On 3/2/2026 6:36 PM, Lasse Langwadt wrote:
> afaict they can be pretty good, but in the time it take to setup all it needs 
> to know you could have been done doing it yourself

The advantage that an autorouter brings to the process is that it
is rerunnable.  You can rip up (and many routers do this as part of
their routing heuristics) portions of the circuit and reroute them
far easier (and more accurately) than doing a manual (re)route.

Routing an analog board is different than a digital as it tends
to be more sensitive to noise -- but, can often require fewer
layers as analog components inherently allow traces to "step over"
other traces without having to stitch to another layer.

Also, analog designs tend to "flow" in a single direction;
there are far fewer "backtracks" in analog signal paths.
You can see this by "picking up" a ratsnest and noticing
how "clumped" it is (or isn't).  Digital designs tend to be
more entangled.

Successfully using an autorouter typically involves understanding
the different types of routing algorithms available to it and
knowing how and when to apply each (e.g., it would be foolish to use
a maze router on a *typical* entire board).

You also need to know when the "rules" (which are actually just
guidelines) can be bent or ignored -- e.g., I often route certain
groups of signals on the "power layers".  This often lets me reduce
a 6-layer design to 4 layers with no real consequences (for a board
with no errors).

The days of a "single click" route are likely still far off -- for
all but simple designs.

Back to sci.electronics.design | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

another little 4-layer board john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-28 15:07 -0800
  Re: another little 4-layer board john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-02 14:34 -0800
    Re: another little 4-layer board Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net> - 2026-03-02 17:51 -0500
    Re: another little 4-layer board Lasse Langwadt <llc@fonz.dk> - 2026-03-03 02:36 +0100
      Re: another little 4-layer board Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-03-03 13:57 -0700
        Re: another little 4-layer board john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-03 19:16 -0800
          Re: another little 4-layer board Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-07 02:03 +1100
            Re: another little 4-layer board john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-06 07:35 -0800
              Re: another little 4-layer board Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-09 12:34 +1100
                Re: another little 4-layer board john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-08 18:44 -0700
                Re: another little 4-layer board Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-09 23:32 +1100
                Re: another little 4-layer board john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-09 09:16 -0700
                Re: another little 4-layer board Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-10 13:56 +1100
                Re: another little 4-layer board Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-03-10 01:25 +0000
                Re: another little 4-layer board Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-03-09 22:43 -0700
                Re: another little 4-layer board Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-03-09 19:06 +0000
                Re: another little 4-layer board john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-09 12:35 -0700
                Re: another little 4-layer board Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-03-10 14:02 +1100
                Re: another little 4-layer board Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-03-09 13:13 -0700
                Re: another little 4-layer board john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-09 16:04 -0700
                Re: another little 4-layer board John R Walliker <jrwalliker@gmail.com> - 2026-03-09 23:08 +0000
                Re: another little 4-layer board Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-03-09 16:45 -0700
                Re: another little 4-layer board john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-09 17:11 -0700
                Re: another little 4-layer board Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-03-10 02:23 +0000
                Re: another little 4-layer board Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-03-10 02:12 +0000
                Re: another little 4-layer board Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-03-09 21:40 -0700
                Re: another little 4-layer board Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-03-10 01:46 +0000
  Re: another little 4-layer board john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-06 09:47 -0800
    Re: another little 4-layer board Lasse Langwadt <llc@fonz.dk> - 2026-03-08 17:43 +0100
      Re: another little 4-layer board john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-03-08 10:56 -0700

csiph-web