Hi. I'm on AD 25.0.2 and on an enterprise licence but in the standard rules editor I don't see the dynamic length compensation option. Too bad as I am very exited about this feature. I'm doing 10Gb signaling and have been manually adding compensation to the best of my ability. This feature will help me a lot if available to me?
Because it is a money grab. The Constraint Manager is a new shiny feature that requires a Pro subscription. Altium treats their customers like fools with a lot of money.
For dynamic length compensation, you also have to define transmitter and receiver, such that the dynamic compensation is done properly. Where do you define that?
You don''t have to define transmitter and receiver, the best practice is to place the length compensation section where the length mismatch arises. For some connectors and BGA pinouts in designs I have worked on, this more often happens be close to the transmitter side of the link, but technically the mismatch could arise anywhere. In the image at 2:14, the video shows an example where it happens at both sides.
The design rules in Altium, standard subscription are terrible! The priority is not respected, when many design rules are created, especially for internal and external layers! In addition, by some reason the polygons now need separate design rule, despite part of a net class! Altium introduced Constraint Manager, that supports matrix approach for the next classes. I assume, this happened, mainly, because the standard design rules concept is broken. Of course, the constraint manager is not included in the standard subscription...
I have never had a problem creating layer-specific design rules and I regularly define net-based clearance rules for polygons without using a polygon class. The reason the Constraint Manager was created is because users who convert from OrCAD or PADS will use a similar matrix approach as the Constraint Manager. If you have a specific question please feel free to ask and I would be happy to make a video about it.
@@Zachariah-Peterson Dear Zach, I am pleasantly surprised that you respond to my complaint! I have a HUGE PROBLEM WITH ALTIUM recently!!! The design rules just don't work. And it's not like I'm a newbie, I've been working with Protel/PCAD/Altium since 1999-2000. Since I am in the field of power electronics, I have to design boards with many requirements regarding coordination of insulation - insulation matrices with different clearance between net classes for outer and inner layers. Not only the clearances don't obey the priorities, even the connect style of the pad/via to polygon doesn't follow the rules I set. Polygons are not perceived by Altium as part of the design rules for net class, despite the polygon is assigned to a net, part of this net class. Therefore, I am forced to create more and more rules for all polygons, and they are several dozen for eight-layer boards. And finally I have 150-200 design rules. It's a big mess! I would like you to kindly ask you for a contact Email where I can describe to you the problem in more detail, at least as much as possible without giving away confidential information about our design. Your Altium-Support colleagues in Germany and England have been informed since May, but I have not yet received technical assistance on this matter. Many thanks in advance!
I'm here for the donut.
Hi. I'm on AD 25.0.2 and on an enterprise licence but in the standard rules editor I don't see the dynamic length compensation option.
Too bad as I am very exited about this feature. I'm doing 10Gb signaling and have been manually adding compensation to the best of my ability.
This feature will help me a lot if available to me?
I hate how they added constraint manager. Why not just stick with design rule?
I agree. Not a single person in my company uses constraint mananger and there no plan to use it either
Because it is a money grab. The Constraint Manager is a new shiny feature that requires a Pro subscription. Altium treats their customers like fools with a lot of money.
For dynamic length compensation, you also have to define transmitter and receiver, such that the dynamic compensation is done properly. Where do you define that?
You don''t have to define transmitter and receiver, the best practice is to place the length compensation section where the length mismatch arises. For some connectors and BGA pinouts in designs I have worked on, this more often happens be close to the transmitter side of the link, but technically the mismatch could arise anywhere. In the image at 2:14, the video shows an example where it happens at both sides.
The design rules in Altium, standard subscription are terrible! The priority is not respected, when many design rules are created, especially for internal and external layers! In addition, by some reason the polygons now need separate design rule, despite part of a net class! Altium introduced Constraint Manager, that supports matrix approach for the next classes. I assume, this happened, mainly, because the standard design rules concept is broken. Of course, the constraint manager is not included in the standard subscription...
I have never had a problem creating layer-specific design rules and I regularly define net-based clearance rules for polygons without using a polygon class. The reason the Constraint Manager was created is because users who convert from OrCAD or PADS will use a similar matrix approach as the Constraint Manager. If you have a specific question please feel free to ask and I would be happy to make a video about it.
@@Zachariah-Peterson Dear Zach, I am pleasantly surprised that you respond to my complaint! I have a HUGE PROBLEM WITH ALTIUM recently!!! The design rules just don't work. And it's not like I'm a newbie, I've been working with Protel/PCAD/Altium since 1999-2000. Since I am in the field of power electronics, I have to design boards with many requirements regarding coordination of insulation - insulation matrices with different clearance between net classes for outer and inner layers. Not only the clearances don't obey the priorities, even the connect style of the pad/via to polygon doesn't follow the rules I set. Polygons are not perceived by Altium as part of the design rules for net class, despite the polygon is assigned to a net, part of this net class. Therefore, I am forced to create more and more rules for all polygons, and they are several dozen for eight-layer boards. And finally I have 150-200 design rules. It's a big mess!
I would like you to kindly ask you for a contact Email where I can describe to you the problem in more detail, at least as much as possible without giving away confidential information about our design. Your Altium-Support colleagues in Germany and England have been informed since May, but I have not yet received technical assistance on this matter.
Many thanks in advance!
These AI-narrated videos are just awful to listen.
*Super, I like it!*