My DRC error check is returning several ErrType(2) “Unconnected pads” and states the violation on on a non-copper layer. Can someone explain why DRC happens, in this case on a non-copper layer? Is it saying my non-copper pads should be connected?
I think a similar situation was reported in a thread from a few weeks back.
The final consensus was that it’s a poorly-worded error message. (At least in English. It may be quite clear and unambiguous in another language.)
The first message is NOT telling you that there is an error on a Non-copper layer! Instead, it is identifying the affected pad (“Pad 4” of “Q15”), and giving you some additional information about which layers have some association with that particular pad. (E.g., the pad definition may include some special treatment on a soldermask layer.) An accurate interpretation of that squawk is “There is a problem with the “GND” connection between Q15/Pin 4, and C21/Pin 2.”
Dale
Yes, they should really fix that.
Smarter to have the Pad & RefName closer together, and the ‘Non-Copper’ is plainly mangled.
They layer names show they are actually copper. F.Cu etc