TimjanQuestion for allegro experts:
If I have
1. an Orcad Capture schematic, which at some point, _presumably_ was translated to
2. a schematic in a different format, which I would have assumed would have had to have been edited into
3. an updated schematic, which was used to create
4. a layout in format X (which I do have access to, but only through a viewer, not as an editor), which was subsequently algorithmically translated into
5. an Allegro layout,
and I now want to get Capture to talk to the converted layout from (5), _what tools are there that would be able to clean up_ the absolute fustercluck of disagreeing netnames and footprint names and whatnots, between (1) and (5)?
So far, I've extracted footprints and footprint names from (5), and manually inserted them into (1).
I have then after some cussing got the original schematic (1) to acknowledge the existence of the layout (5), and the syncing process now only yeets (i.e. unplaces) about 15% of the components.
The result I get is
6. an Allegro layout with the right board outline, about 85% of the components placed, and about 95% of the connectivity correctly implemented (I suspect (3) to be the cause of many of the discrepancies; yeeted components could conceivably be a cause of traces no longer being associated with any net, perhaps?), of which about 3% has the same netnames as (5): the two layout tools uses different methods of naming unnamed nets (the original designer apparently didn't believe in naming things). Combine this with (3), and it turns out that (6) has a lot of traces with multiple netnames, and netnames associated with multiple traces.
Antonio Cirella
i4cy 📌
The Last Psion | Alex