Minimum drill size in 5.1.2

[KingJL]

Ok, I give up… how do you set minimum drill size in 5.1.2? Somewhere it is set to 0.3 mm, but I cannot find it anywhere.

[Efcis]

Try File / Board setup / Design rules. 0.3 mm is the minimum via drill.

[KingJL]

@Efcis, Thank you! I had been checking only the sub-items under design rules!

[GregM]

Perhaps this entry in the “Version Six Roadmap” means that some changes might be made to eliminate menu issues as described in this and other similar threads.

Clean up menu structure. Menus must allow access to all features of the program in a clear and logical way…

[Rene_Poschl]

What is logical to some might not be logical to others.

There are a lot of tools with preference dialogs very similar to the one in question here. Especially for tools with a lot of settings this seems to be kind of the goto solution. (eclipse and catia are just two examples that do it nearly exactly the same way including the fact that every layer of the tree view typically has settings associated with it.)

[dchisholm]

@Rene_Poschl

What is logical to some might not be logical to others. . . . .

Do I hear echos from the “Flipping the Y-axis” thread?

Dale

[KingJL]

I can deal with “what I am provided”, but I would think that ALL minimum/maximum board design parameters should be settable/viewable on a single page. And something like “minimum clearance” should not have to be deduced from the “Default net class”. My 2 cents.

[dchisholm]

@KingJL

And something like “minimum clearance” should not have to be deduced from the “Default net class”.

That coin has two sides, and your preference depends on individual work styles, and probably varies as an individual goes through his personal work flow. It can be frustrating to see that a certain net belongs to the “PwrDistribution” net class (for example) when what you REALLY want to know is “How much space should I leave between this trace and that ground trace?”.

On the other hand, the whole concept of “Net Classes” is a powerful tool when you make the effort to use it effectively. It’s efficient to apply all of the parameters associated with, say, the “HiVolt” netclass (or the “LoNoise” net class, or “HiFreq”, etc, etc) simply by assigning the net to a class. Then the dynamic DRC will enforce the parameters and I don’t have to remember all the mundane details for each net class.

[eelik]

Version 6 will probably have more advanced way of defining such values, maybe for example a clearance matrix. If you don’t want to write a bug report to remind the developers about this “minimum clearance” wish, maybe it fits in ERC / DRC user survey.

[KingJL]

My issue with the clearance was that I was trying to create a class “minimum” to deal with minimum clearances when needed, but could not create a clearance tighter than what was defined in the default class (unless I edited the “board” file).

[Rene_Poschl]

@KingJL

but could not create a clearance tighter than what was defined in the default class (unless I edited the “board” file).

The default class should not be what causes the problems here. If it does then this is a bug. There is however a place to set absolute minimums to ensure that one can not set the netclass settings too low.

[KingJL]

“There is however a place to set absolute minimums to ensure that one can not set the netclass settings too low.” Once I found it (thanks to @Efcis), I could set everything (minimum drill, track, etc.) except for minimum clearance. As a workaround to finish my project, I edited the board file.