We have a feature that’s internally called SmartPads. It tries to be smart about how a track exits a pad to reduce acute angles, etc.
In the UI we named it “Automatic neckdown” and received a lot of grief. 
I’m proposing to rename it “Optimized breakout”. Better? Worse? Other suggestions?
Thanks,
Jeff.
Well neckdown would imply that the trace does reduce it’s width near the pad to allow thicker traces to be used where space permits it. That feature would have a similar function to thermals.
So if this feature does not change the trace width. Then the critique for the name of this feature is justified.
Assuming it “only” tries to find the optimal trace placement to reduce acute angles, then optimized breakout is better but might still oversell it.
I don’t know what the full feature set is. Maybe you could elaborate what else it does. (etc. would imply there is more to it then “simply” limiting angles.)
Every word between " " is there for lack of a better term. (Not a native speaker)
The algorithm is not mine, but as I understand it it’s slightly more sophisticated than just checking the angles at the pad. It also checks angles upstream, and tries to optimise their sharpness vs the length of the trace.
Optimised Pad Connect ?
I checked the dialog and the other settings are sentences, so it would need to be:
Optimize pad connections
But I’m not opposed to that. (Are our American users really a minority? Can I use the Queen’s English?)
It should be an app-wide choice, not developer-wide 
What would be the point of this?
From what you have described it has nothing to do with necking down, automatic or otherwise, besides that would be a feature of a “smart” trace not pad.
So far it sounds like a lot of effort for little benefit, if it had a clear purpose it would probably be easy to name.
The point is to avoid areas where the photo resist might peel away during processing. Eurocircuits calls them “peelables”: https://www.eurocircuits.com/pcb-design-guidelines/#copperlayers, but that doesn’t seem to be a standard term.
And no, it’s not neckdown. That’s the point of this whole thread.
Okay, but these are more likely to occur in areas other than pad entry, in fact the most common occurrence is probably in zones.
Just makes me wonder how that name came about in the first place.
Anyway, I hope this is one of those “features” that can be turned off.
Pad connection in the Modern canvas is a big pain in the the butt. Previously you had control over the track attitude, so by hitting “/” shortcut and the attitude of the track going into the pad would change and keep. However now it’s all up to the software. I can’t tell you how much time I spent trying to connect a pad in a way that I wanted it connected - starting from the track, then from the pad, then trying to go in segments. If this “feature” is going to make life easier in that area, I’d say make it part the way system operates and not an option. As far as the name goes, my vote goes for “Smart Breakout” (as opposed to the “Dumb breakout” that we have right now )
optimise their sharpness vs the length of the trace.
“Smooth pad connections” maybe then?
For me the term “optimise” applied to the traces without additional clarification means make shorter.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.