KiCAD 5.1.6-1 is treating two separate nets as connected. Below is a montage of all of the places the two nets are used. Circuit passes ERC.
If I rename both of the hierarchical labels to add a ‘1’ to the ends then the problem goes away.
Any ideas?
Thanks.
A revolutionary idea: why not let it be that way?
Because I want to understand what is going on.
1 Like
What is your intention with this:
Looks like you connected local label _RD to hierarchical label _GN and vise versa.
In KiCad it is perfectly legal to connect differently named labels together, and KiCad just picks one of the names used for the net name itself (I think it’s alphabetical, but not entirely sure).
2 Likes
DOH! Thanks for spotting that! I stared at it so long I didn’t see it. Ooops. Thank you for taking the time to post a helpful answer. 
1 Like
In itself it should just swap the LED’s though,( [Edit] Oops, error, see Jons post below) and not connect them together, but that is under the assumption you have used hierarchical sheets and their labels properly. From your screenshot I can not see this, nor can I see what part of the schematic is on which (hierarchical) sheet.
1 Like
OK, I can confirm, that by swapping those two local labels around and removing the '1’s from the hierarchical names it now sees two separate nets.
The top level sheet only has the two signals going to the pin header. Everything else is on the same lower sheet.
Addition:
As a general rule I would avoid using local labels and hierarchical labels with the same name.
[Edit] Using different names for local and hierarchical labels simply avoids any ambiguity.
2 Likes
This is not the case: hierarchical labels and local labels are both local, and either will interconnect with the other on the same sheet.
2 Likes
So by swapping the names I joined the two nets together - makes sense. Thanks for explaining.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.