Dynamic Footprint Adjustment for PCB Component Groups
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Conventional hierarchical group planning methodologies for printed circuit board (PCB) design require manual adjustment of component groups to resolve placement conflicts, which is inefficient and time-consuming, especially in modern electronic designs with numerous components.
Innovation Solution
The implementation of a dynamic adjustment process for component groups during the hierarchical group planning process, allowing for adjustment of footprint or placement location based on heuristics, such as adjusting the footprint of one group to accommodate another, while maintaining constant area or aspect ratio, or adhering to minimum width and length constraints, to resolve conflicts automatically.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Manufacturing precision
If manual adjustment of component groups is used to resolve placement conflicts, then placement accuracy can be achieved, but time consumption and labor effort increase significantly
Solution Approach 1:
The system enables automated self-adjustment of component groups through heuristic algorithms that automatically detect placement conflicts and resolve them by adjusting footprints or relocation, eliminating the need for manual intervention while maintaining placement accuracy
Solution Approach 2:
The system dynamically changes geometric parameters of component groups (footprint dimensions, area, aspect ratio) during the placement process to automatically resolve conflicts, allowing the component groups to adapt their parameters rather than requiring manual repositioning
2Productivity
If automated placement of component groups is implemented, then placement efficiency improves, but conflict resolution requires additional manual intervention
Solution Approach 1:
The automated system performs self-service by detecting placement conflicts and autonomously resolving them through heuristic-based adjustments to component group footprints or positions, eliminating the need for manual conflict resolution while maintaining high placement efficiency
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements feedback mechanisms where placement conflicts are detected and fed back into the placement algorithm, which then automatically adjusts component group parameters or positions to resolve conflicts, creating a closed-loop automated process
3Stability of the object's composition
If fixed footprint of component groups is maintained, then design constraints are satisfied, but placement flexibility is reduced leading to more conflicts
Solution Approach 1:
The system transitions from static fixed footprints to dynamic adjustable footprints, where component group dimensions can be automatically modified during placement to avoid conflicts while maintaining design constraints through heuristic rules and boundary conditions
Data Source
AI summary
Aspects of the invention are directed towards placing components within a layout design for a PCB. More specifically, various implementations of the invention provide methods and apparatuses that can dynamically adjust the shape or placement of component groups during an HGP process. With some implementations of the invention, an HGP process for planning the layout of a PCB is provided. Furthermore, component groups, which conflict, geographically, with either another component group or some other object within the layout design are allowed to be placed during the planning process. Subsequently, the placement locations for one or both of the conflicting component groups are adjusted to resolve the conflict. In some implementations, the geometric boundary, or footprint, of one or both of the component groups is adjusted to resolve the conflict.