0
\$\begingroup\$

I'm designing a board that links sets of three Anderson PowerPole connectors to each other.

I traced the physical outline of the PowerPoles in the tDocu layer, but originally I did it incorrectly. I deleted the original wire in tDocu and drew a new one. In the package editor, it looks correect:

the package viewed from the package editor, with the correct rectangle in tDocu

but in the layout editor, and when previewing the package from the layout editor, it has retained a portion of the original, incorrect rectangle (the thicker one):

the package as viewed from the layout editor, with the remnant incorrect tDocu rectangle overlapping the correct one

Is this a common problem? Or am I doing something obviously wrong? I'm fairly new to EAGLE.

I have the library, board, and schematic files in a GitHub repo here.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ The different editors have independent layer controls. Perhaps the package editor isn't displaying all layers? \$\endgroup\$ – bitsmack Mar 16 '17 at 3:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ @bitsmack interesting. I can check on that. I did draw both in the same layer in the package editor, however. It's also interesting how I apparently succeeded in deleting part of the original rectangle, just not all of it. \$\endgroup\$ – Jack Lynch Mar 16 '17 at 3:43
3
\$\begingroup\$

Whenever you modify a package or symbol that is already in use in a board or schematic, you have to update the library so that the changes will take place on your current design (Library > Update... / Update all):

enter image description here

Depending on the changes you made, Eagle will suggest you to run DRC/ERC due to the modifications.

You can update the specific library you modified, but I usually use "Update all" cause it is faster.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ thanks so much! That fixed it. DRC threw around 250 default dimension errors, but those were intentional -- I'm placing copper pads over dimension holes to comply with manufacturer design stipulations for plated slots \$\endgroup\$ – Jack Lynch Mar 16 '17 at 15:05
  • \$\begingroup\$ Another interesting point: even though I didn't see it with all layers displayed, if I delete-clicked around where the old footprint was supposed to be, incrementally, and updated, this actually deleted it, piece by piece. So the wire had certainly moved Somewhere haha \$\endgroup\$ – Jack Lynch Mar 16 '17 at 15:15

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.