Cadence® system design and verification solutions, integrated under our System Development Suite, provide the simulation, acceleration, emulation, and management capabilities.
System Development Suite Related Products A-Z
Cadence® digital design and signoff solutions provide a fast path to design closure and better predictability, helping you meet your power, performance, and area (PPA) targets.
Full-Flow Digital Solution Related Products A-Z
Cadence® custom, analog, and RF design solutions can help you save time by automating many routine tasks, from block-level and mixed-signal simulation to routing and library characterization.
Overview Related Products A-Z
Driving efficiency and accuracy in advanced packaging, system planning, and multi-fabric interoperability, Cadence® package implementation products deliver the automation and accuracy.
Cadence® PCB design solutions enable shorter, more predictable design cycles with greater integration of component design and system-level simulation for a constraint-driven flow.
An open IP platform for you to customize your app-driven SoC design.
Comprehensive solutions and methodologies.
Helping you meet your broader business goals.
A global customer support infrastructure with around-the-clock help.
24/7 Support - Cadence Online Support
Locate the latest software updates, service request, technical documentation, solutions and more in your personalized environment.
Cadence offers various software services for download. This page describes our offerings, including the Allegro FREE Physical Viewer.
Get the most out of your investment in Cadence technologies through a wide range of training offerings.
This course combines our Allegro PCB Editor Basic Techniques, followed by Allegro PCB Editor Intermediate Techniques.
Virtuoso Analog Design Environment Verifier 16.7
Learn learn to perform requirements-driven analog verification using the Virtuoso ADE Verifier tool.
Exchange ideas, news, technical information, and best practices.
The community is open to everyone, and to provide the most value, we require participants to follow our Community Guidelines that facilitate a quality exchange of ideas and information.
It's not all about the technlogy. Here we exchange ideas on the Cadence Academic Network and other subjects of general interest.
Cadence is a leading provider of system design tools, software, IP, and services.
Another newbie here! My issue goes as follows:
I am building my component symbols libraries for my project, and am working with the design guidelines from the PCB manufacturer. There, they require what they call a "Placement Keepout Area to Neighboring Component Placement Keepout Area", that is a placement keepout or courtyard from other component placement keepouts, to ensure certain clearance between components.
The question goes, which is the best way to define this clearance when creating the part symbols? The easiest way I guess would be to set the package boundary so that it cover the real physical boundary of the package plus the required clearance. The drawback of this, is that the 2-1/2 view will now display the package + clearance. Is there any other bound or keepout that would do the trick?
Thank you very much!
If you want specific spacing for different components, not sure how to set that up. If you are refering to a global spacing between parts on the PCB...Create the footprint with the boundry being the maximum size of the part. Then in PCB Editor open the contraint manager, select the Spacing tab on the left and entered the desired values for the various spacings.
I'm confused. Isn't this what PLACE_BOUND_TOP and PLACE_BOUND_BOTTOM used for?
In reply to redwire:
Thank you guys for your answer.
redwire: Yes, I guess that's what Place_bound_top and bottom are used for. The only reason I wanted to find a different was not to "alter" the 3d view, i.e. that in the 3d view I would get only the package surface and not package + clearance. However, I checked with the PCB manufacturer desing rules and these clearances are in general not that big (15 mils average) so it doesn't make a huge impact on the 3D view in my particular design.
I was also suggested to stack two Place_bound_top boundaries (they can be stacked to define different 3D shapes (other than a rectangle). So the idea would be to put one place boundary including the required inter-package clearance with a height of say 1 mil and then another place boundary with the real physical dimensions .
Another possiblity (I guess) would be to use the DFA feature... but I haven't got that far yet!