Mauricio Jancic wrote:

> There is also a very anoying bug in protel sch that never was solved. It
> gave me 2 or 3 headaches in the past when I was not aware of it. Try it your
> self:
> 
> 1) on the SCH draw a wire, it doesn't have to be connected. Just one wire.
> 2) now, draw a second wire and conect it to the first one. Altium will
> automatically place a juntion.
> 3) now, you need to connect a second element to that node (junction) so
> start a new wire and end it on the junction. You will see that the junction
> y gone and there is no more electrical connection between the two wires. You
> can also start this new wire on the junction, the result is the same.

I can't reproduce this. The junction stays. Maybe it needs a specific
layout of the wires? Can you post the coordinates of the endpoints of the
three wires you place?

Here's my sequence:
- enter "place wire" mode (pw)
- place wire (40,40) to (100,40)
- place wire (100,70) to (100,30) to create a "T"; junction at (100,40)
gets automatically added
- place wire (130,40) to (100,40) to create a 4-wire connection; the
junction at (100,40) stays.


There are different standards to deal with the problem of differentiating
clearly between a wire crossing that is and one that isn't a connection.

Using only T connections is one. Using a kind of a bend in the wire when
there is no connection is another. (Visio for example supports this type of
routing.) Using thick, clearly visible connection dots (and adequate
printing :) is still another one. 

It doesn't seem that Protel enforces any particular type of wire routing. 

Gerhard

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist