Connect the Dots: How to Avoid Five Common Causes of Board Failure
Fresh PCB Concepts: Designing for Success at the Rigid-flex Transition Area 
Elementary Mr. Watson: Routing Hunger Games—May the Traces Be Ever in Your Favor
Why I Finally Embraced Autorouting
July 3, 2025 | Stephen V. Chavez, Siemens EDAEstimated reading time: 1 minute
Here is a common misconception held by those who don’t fully understand the PCB layout process or how to wield today’s high-level EDA tools: "All I need to do is push the autorouter button, let the computer route all the signal traces, and get the layout 100% routed. It’s a no-brainer. Anyone can do it. It should take less than a few hours.”
Well, sure, if you’re in a hurry to check the box indicating you’re finished with the layout. But your results will look like a plate of spaghetti and most likely not function correctly, if at all, while not passing SI/EMC testing. Good luck with that mindset and methodology.
As you can see, there’s a lot of confusion about autorouting. I will discuss routing and autorouting in general terms, my initial distrust of routers, and the “a-ha” moment that changed my mind. Then, for specific autorouting techniques, I will focus primarily on the Siemens router.
Routing vs. Autorouting
Let’s start by setting the baseline for “routing” regarding signal traces. Traditional routing is done by manually connecting (routing) all signal traces from point to point, mouse click by mouse click. Then, we manually make any trace constraint modifications/adjustments as necessary to meet the design requirements. Once 100% routing is achieved, a design rule check (DRC) is performed, and all flagged errors must be addressed—after the fact. This legacy methodology is very labor-intensive and time-consuming, to say the least.
The form of routing most utilized today is “manual interactive routing,” with only a few higher-end tools possessing automation-assisted interactive routing capabilities. This manual interactive routing is a combination of human effort, along with software tool utilization, and some limited automation. The key here is that the user is manually performing and controlling each and every mouse click of the routing process, but with the addition of tool automation assisting/restricting and guiding the user along the way, and according to the constraints that were implemented.
To read the entire article, which originally appeard in the June 2025 Design007 Magazine, click here.
Share on:
Testimonial
"We’re proud to call I-Connect007 a trusted partner. Their innovative approach and industry insight made our podcast collaboration a success by connecting us with the right audience and delivering real results."
Julia McCaffrey - NCAB GroupSuggested Items
Driving Innovation: Depth Routing Processes—Achieving Unparalleled Precision in Complex PCBs
09/08/2025 | Kurt Palmer -- Column: Driving InnovationIn PCB manufacturing, the demand for increasingly complex and miniaturized designs continually pushes the boundaries of traditional fabrication methods, including depth routing. Success in these applications demands not only on robust machinery but also sophisticated control functions. PCB manufacturers rely on advanced machine features and process methodologies to meet their precise depth routing goals. Here, I’ll explore some crucial functions that empower manufacturers to master complex depth routing challenges.
Mastering PCB Floor Planning
08/28/2025 | Stephen V. Chavez, Siemens EDAPlacement of PCB components is far more than just fitting components onto a board. It’s a strategic and critical foundational step, often called “floor planning,” that profoundly impacts the board’s performance, reliability, manufacturability, and cost. Floor planning ties into the solvability perspective, with performance and manufacturability being the other two competing perspectives for addressing and achieving success in PCB design.
Elementary Mr. Watson: Routing Hunger Games—May the Traces Be Ever in Your Favor
08/26/2025 | John Watson -- Column: Elementary, Mr. WatsonI’d like to share a harsh truth, and I say this as a friend: PCB designers are often their own worst enemy. It’s rarely the complexity of the circuit, the last-minute changes from mechanical, the limited enclosure space, or the ever-expanding list of design rules that send projects to the dust heap of failed boards. More often, it's our own decisions, made too quickly and narrowly, and with too little foresight, that sabotage an otherwise good design.
Happy’s Tech Talk #42: Applying Density Equations to UHDI Design
08/19/2025 | Happy Holden -- Column: Happy’s Tech TalkWith the need for faster speeds, more parts on an assembly, and the trend to make things smaller for portability, the printed circuit design and layout process is both creative and challenging. The process involves “applying the density equation” while considering certain boundary conditions, such as electrical and thermal performance. Unfortunately, many designers don’t realize there is a mathematical process to laying out a printed circuit.
Beyond Design: Effective Floor Planning Strategies
08/20/2025 | Barry Olney -- Column: Beyond DesignComponent placement on a printed circuit board is more involved than simply fitting parts into available space. It plays a pivotal role in determining the board’s overall manufacturability, performance, reliability, and cost. Poor placement can compromise even the most meticulously designed PCB. Effective component placement alleviates mechanical stress, promotes efficient thermal management, and helps prevent excessive heat buildup.