Routing is not using width of net class

[infinitemach]

I defined a net class rule with a width of 0.254mm. When I start routing a net of that class my expectation is that the width of the wire the routing is producing will change to that class width. This is not happening. Instead, I have to manually change the trace width to match the class width of the net.

[mtl_asm]

afaik the way it works is that the trace width will be the net class defined width or the selected route width, whichever is MORE. So if you have a width of .3mm selected then route a net that belongs to a class that has a width of .254mm defined, it will stay .3mm.

alternatively if you have .2mm trace width selected in route, then click on a net belonging to a class with width .254mm defined, then it will change the width to .254mm.

i agree with you that you would expect it take the width defined by the class as default, but this is not the case. it takes the max of the 2 values.   

[jorge_garcia · Accepted solution]

Hi @infinitemach,

Go into Preferences > Electronics > Misc and make sure that Auto Set Route Width and Drill is checked. Then it will behave as you expect.

Let me know if there's anything else I can do for you.

Best Regards,

[infinitemach]

Thank you, that setting worked. Seems like this should be the default behavior.

[lkhamad10]

When I use manual routing, even setting MIcs to auto is not working, is that expected? It only respects net classes in the autorouting.

[jorge_garcia]

Hi @lkhamad10,

I hope you're doing well. Remember that netclasses only define a minimum, you can make traces larger than that minimum. Additionally if you set the DRC min width to be larger than what is in your netclasses, then the netclass value will never be used.

Let me know if there's anything else I can do for you.

Best Regards,

[jm.wagenaar]

I would (and did) expect routing to always start with the netclass width (or maybe the DRC minimum width if that is more, debatable). Then during routing the width can be changed for the segments now being routed with a width from the menu. Once routing stops new routing would again start from the netclass. 
Editing existing traces should start with the current width of that segment (the current shift-route option)

[ronaldNTZLY]

Cannot not believe the default is to NOT check route and drill. Just wasted hours experimenting with design rules and net classes, only to find out it would never work because of this setting.

Come on Autodesk, be sensible.

[jorge_garcia]

Hi @ronaldNTZLY,

Keep an eye out for the next release of Fusion (will be out very soon), this has been fully resolved and improved. Now you'll know exactly what values are being used as you route, you'll also be able to easily switch between minimum and preferred values.

Let me know if there's anything else I can do for you.

Best Regards,

[ronaldNTZLY]

Sound like music to my ears.

Fusion 360 is such a great product, but the Eagle part is just horrendously difficult to use. You should really have rewritten the electronics parts from scratch.

Updating an old car will still make it an old car, and it will cost more than a new one. 

[jorge_garcia]

Hi @ronaldNTZLY ,

In general, electronics workflows are very different to mechanical. I'm not saying they are mutually exclusive, there is overlap and we still have areas where we can align much better. With that said, the car analogy is something that is very true when dealing with physical, tangible products but software is different. If you look at any major software product, they still contain and rely and foundational code written decades ago(Windows, Linux, AutoCAD, many more). Software products rely more on building from a base and constantly adding. Just some food for thought.

Let me know if there's anything I can do for you.

Best Regards,