Mail Archives: geda-user/2014/07/07/03:59:09
On 2014-07-07 02:57:19 AM, Peter Clifton wrote:
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Lilith Bryant <dark141 AT gmail DOT com>
> Date:06/07/2014 10:06 (GMT+00:00)
> To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
> Subject: Re: [geda-user] pour clearing around pads
>
> On 2014-07-06 08:10:49 PM, onetmt wrote:
> > On 06/07/2014 06:41, Lilith Bryant wrote:
>> Sorry to answer my own reply here, but I've just thought of a better way to
>> do this. If the raw polygon is first built with clearances of (P+L) instead
>>
>> of just P....
>>
>> (Where P=poly to line clearance, and L is the min line width)
>>
>> ... then that's the erosion step done right there, so would just need a
>> dilation
>> after that, and that can be handled by "union-ing" an L*2 width line around
>> the
>> perimeter(s) of the poly.
>>
>> Is this within the capabilities of the existing infrastructure?
>
>
> Not exactly, and it may not work when multiple different objects combine to
> create a thin feature.
Can you describe such a case. I can't see how this could be?
> Some polygon outlines and hole contours are also explicit, not created from
> clearances, so the rule could not be applied globally.
Explicit outlines could be simply cleared by L from the user placed edge.
The final dilation by L (i.e. by the perimeter augmentation method described above),
would then put the edge back in the right place.
- Raw text -