What are the advantages and disadvantages of Manhattan-Style routing?What is Manhattan routing?What are the advantages of having two ground pours?Routing +12V and -12V for audio opamps?What are the advantages and disadvantages of thinner PCB thickness (<1.6 mm or 0.063'')?What is Manhattan routing?Tips on routing multiple powers(+5/-5/+15/-15/3.3 and etc. ) for a four-layer PCBAltium: PCB ground plane and routingEAGLE: Just Routing and DrillingHelp on defining the 8-layer stack-up for a high speed designWhat are the advantages of CPW over microstrip?Advantages/Disadvantages of ground fill on both layers (of a 2-layers-board)
Where can I find my serialized Sitecore items?
What happens if a caster is surprised while casting a spell with a long casting time?
What does 'in attendance' mean on an England death certificate?
Calculus, water poured into a cone: Why is the derivative non-linear?
Have any large aeroplanes been landed — safely and without damage — in locations that they could not be flown away from?
Could you fall off a planet if it was being accelerated by engines?
How soon after takeoff can you recline your airplane seat?
Dynamic Sql Query - how to add an int to the code?
Is it advisable to inform the CEO about his brother accessing his office?
How to count the number of bytes in a file, grouping the same bytes?
Why is my 401k manager recommending me to save more?
Is it OK to throw pebbles and stones in streams, waterfalls, ponds, etc.?
Does "boire un jus" tend to mean "coffee" or "juice of fruit"?
How useful would a hydroelectric power plant be in the post-apocalypse world?
Why am I getting an electric shock from the water in my hot tub?
Did the Russian Empire have a claim to Sweden? Was there ever a time where they could have pursued it?
Fast method to cut/shred glue stick into small pieces
Does a lens with a bigger max. aperture focus faster than a lens with a smaller max. aperture?
Checkmate in 1 on a Tangled Board
Why did the Apple //e make a hideous noise if you inserted the disk upside down?
Could all three Gorgons turn people to stone, or just Medusa?
Why wasn't ASCII designed with a contiguous alphanumeric character order?
Journal standards vs. personal standards
Why do movie directors use brown tint on Mexico cities?
What are the advantages and disadvantages of Manhattan-Style routing?
What is Manhattan routing?What are the advantages of having two ground pours?Routing +12V and -12V for audio opamps?What are the advantages and disadvantages of thinner PCB thickness (<1.6 mm or 0.063'')?What is Manhattan routing?Tips on routing multiple powers(+5/-5/+15/-15/3.3 and etc. ) for a four-layer PCBAltium: PCB ground plane and routingEAGLE: Just Routing and DrillingHelp on defining the 8-layer stack-up for a high speed designWhat are the advantages of CPW over microstrip?Advantages/Disadvantages of ground fill on both layers (of a 2-layers-board)
$begingroup$
Manhattan-Style routing being the use of expressly east-west planes and north-south planes, using a via and changing planes when a signal changes direction.
Comparing to freestyle routing, which lets define as routing signals in any direction on a given layer, would manhattan routing generally result in increased density, signal integrity, and more or less layers?
I know this is somewhat general and highly specific to a given application, but I'm generally interested in why one would decide to route in a manhattan-style -- surely the reasons relate to one or more of the above, and there should be some justification to that end.
One guess of mine is also that two adjacent layers, one E-W and one N-S would be fairly minimal in cross-talk due to the perpendicular nature of the traces, versus two adjacent layers where the layers are routed free-style. Would you agree?
pcb pcb-design pcb-layers routing
$endgroup$
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Manhattan-Style routing being the use of expressly east-west planes and north-south planes, using a via and changing planes when a signal changes direction.
Comparing to freestyle routing, which lets define as routing signals in any direction on a given layer, would manhattan routing generally result in increased density, signal integrity, and more or less layers?
I know this is somewhat general and highly specific to a given application, but I'm generally interested in why one would decide to route in a manhattan-style -- surely the reasons relate to one or more of the above, and there should be some justification to that end.
One guess of mine is also that two adjacent layers, one E-W and one N-S would be fairly minimal in cross-talk due to the perpendicular nature of the traces, versus two adjacent layers where the layers are routed free-style. Would you agree?
pcb pcb-design pcb-layers routing
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Related: electronics.stackexchange.com/q/79145/2028
$endgroup$
– JYelton
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
In your second paragraph, compared to what? Neater than what? More layers than what? Your statements about crosstalk assume that some signals are intentionally routed in perpendicular directions but that is not inherent in Manhattan routing. You are leaving too much unspoken to get a good answer.
$endgroup$
– Elliot Alderson
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@ElliotAlderson, updated to hopefully provide more clarity into what I'm trying to gain insight on.
$endgroup$
– Kirill Safin
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
Freestyle routing sounds to me as if the designer doesn't know what he/she is doing. But using Manhattan-style routing or just using a ground plane "because everyone does it",will not necessarily improve the design if you still don't know what you're doing.
$endgroup$
– Huisman
7 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
I often start routing manhattan-style, however, by the time I finish you wouldn't be able to tell!
$endgroup$
– evildemonic
7 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Manhattan-Style routing being the use of expressly east-west planes and north-south planes, using a via and changing planes when a signal changes direction.
Comparing to freestyle routing, which lets define as routing signals in any direction on a given layer, would manhattan routing generally result in increased density, signal integrity, and more or less layers?
I know this is somewhat general and highly specific to a given application, but I'm generally interested in why one would decide to route in a manhattan-style -- surely the reasons relate to one or more of the above, and there should be some justification to that end.
One guess of mine is also that two adjacent layers, one E-W and one N-S would be fairly minimal in cross-talk due to the perpendicular nature of the traces, versus two adjacent layers where the layers are routed free-style. Would you agree?
pcb pcb-design pcb-layers routing
$endgroup$
Manhattan-Style routing being the use of expressly east-west planes and north-south planes, using a via and changing planes when a signal changes direction.
Comparing to freestyle routing, which lets define as routing signals in any direction on a given layer, would manhattan routing generally result in increased density, signal integrity, and more or less layers?
I know this is somewhat general and highly specific to a given application, but I'm generally interested in why one would decide to route in a manhattan-style -- surely the reasons relate to one or more of the above, and there should be some justification to that end.
One guess of mine is also that two adjacent layers, one E-W and one N-S would be fairly minimal in cross-talk due to the perpendicular nature of the traces, versus two adjacent layers where the layers are routed free-style. Would you agree?
pcb pcb-design pcb-layers routing
pcb pcb-design pcb-layers routing
edited 8 hours ago
Kirill Safin
asked 8 hours ago
Kirill SafinKirill Safin
534 bronze badges
534 bronze badges
$begingroup$
Related: electronics.stackexchange.com/q/79145/2028
$endgroup$
– JYelton
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
In your second paragraph, compared to what? Neater than what? More layers than what? Your statements about crosstalk assume that some signals are intentionally routed in perpendicular directions but that is not inherent in Manhattan routing. You are leaving too much unspoken to get a good answer.
$endgroup$
– Elliot Alderson
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@ElliotAlderson, updated to hopefully provide more clarity into what I'm trying to gain insight on.
$endgroup$
– Kirill Safin
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
Freestyle routing sounds to me as if the designer doesn't know what he/she is doing. But using Manhattan-style routing or just using a ground plane "because everyone does it",will not necessarily improve the design if you still don't know what you're doing.
$endgroup$
– Huisman
7 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
I often start routing manhattan-style, however, by the time I finish you wouldn't be able to tell!
$endgroup$
– evildemonic
7 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Related: electronics.stackexchange.com/q/79145/2028
$endgroup$
– JYelton
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
In your second paragraph, compared to what? Neater than what? More layers than what? Your statements about crosstalk assume that some signals are intentionally routed in perpendicular directions but that is not inherent in Manhattan routing. You are leaving too much unspoken to get a good answer.
$endgroup$
– Elliot Alderson
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@ElliotAlderson, updated to hopefully provide more clarity into what I'm trying to gain insight on.
$endgroup$
– Kirill Safin
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
Freestyle routing sounds to me as if the designer doesn't know what he/she is doing. But using Manhattan-style routing or just using a ground plane "because everyone does it",will not necessarily improve the design if you still don't know what you're doing.
$endgroup$
– Huisman
7 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
I often start routing manhattan-style, however, by the time I finish you wouldn't be able to tell!
$endgroup$
– evildemonic
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Related: electronics.stackexchange.com/q/79145/2028
$endgroup$
– JYelton
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
Related: electronics.stackexchange.com/q/79145/2028
$endgroup$
– JYelton
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
In your second paragraph, compared to what? Neater than what? More layers than what? Your statements about crosstalk assume that some signals are intentionally routed in perpendicular directions but that is not inherent in Manhattan routing. You are leaving too much unspoken to get a good answer.
$endgroup$
– Elliot Alderson
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
In your second paragraph, compared to what? Neater than what? More layers than what? Your statements about crosstalk assume that some signals are intentionally routed in perpendicular directions but that is not inherent in Manhattan routing. You are leaving too much unspoken to get a good answer.
$endgroup$
– Elliot Alderson
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@ElliotAlderson, updated to hopefully provide more clarity into what I'm trying to gain insight on.
$endgroup$
– Kirill Safin
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@ElliotAlderson, updated to hopefully provide more clarity into what I'm trying to gain insight on.
$endgroup$
– Kirill Safin
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
Freestyle routing sounds to me as if the designer doesn't know what he/she is doing. But using Manhattan-style routing or just using a ground plane "because everyone does it",will not necessarily improve the design if you still don't know what you're doing.
$endgroup$
– Huisman
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Freestyle routing sounds to me as if the designer doesn't know what he/she is doing. But using Manhattan-style routing or just using a ground plane "because everyone does it",will not necessarily improve the design if you still don't know what you're doing.
$endgroup$
– Huisman
7 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
I often start routing manhattan-style, however, by the time I finish you wouldn't be able to tell!
$endgroup$
– evildemonic
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
I often start routing manhattan-style, however, by the time I finish you wouldn't be able to tell!
$endgroup$
– evildemonic
7 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The primary advantage of a Manhattan route is that it can always be completed. You just need to have enough board area to accommodate all of the traces — but otherwise, you'll never find yourself unable to complete a route. This can be important if you need to get a layout done on a fixed schedule — the amount of work is roughly proportional to the number of pins, and you won't spend days or weeks trying to complete the task because of blockages.
Other routing algorithms might be more efficient than Manhattan in terms of board area and the number of vias required (saving money on each board produced), but they cannot guarantee completion of the route in every case, which means that there's a nonrecurring cost risk in terms of the engineering effort required.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
That makes a lot of sense. Then if we take density and efficiency aside, are there any reasonable drawbacks to Manhattan?
$endgroup$
– Kirill Safin
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@KirillSafin: Yes, the routes will always be their Manhattan length at a minimum, and possibly longer. Other algorithms will be able to make some (many?) routes shorter than that.
$endgroup$
– Dave Tweed♦
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
In 1976 we did at least 1 PCB design a week with no simulators or tests with 30 or more DIPS in Manhattan style. Vias were free compared to the cost of copper and volume cost reductions. CMOS was slow rise time so adjacent trace crosstalk was rarely an issue. fast forward to the present with rise times reduced by x100 and dynamic currents now from 25 Ohm switches with 74ALC’ devices vs 300~1200 OHm CD4000 series CMOS switches thus producing 1000x more crosstalk and traces now routinely 3 mil track and gap instead of 20 mil increases crosstalk another order of magnitude. Manhattan Noise!!!
$endgroup$
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("schematics", function ()
StackExchange.schematics.init();
);
, "cicuitlab");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "135"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f445909%2fwhat-are-the-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-manhattan-style-routing%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The primary advantage of a Manhattan route is that it can always be completed. You just need to have enough board area to accommodate all of the traces — but otherwise, you'll never find yourself unable to complete a route. This can be important if you need to get a layout done on a fixed schedule — the amount of work is roughly proportional to the number of pins, and you won't spend days or weeks trying to complete the task because of blockages.
Other routing algorithms might be more efficient than Manhattan in terms of board area and the number of vias required (saving money on each board produced), but they cannot guarantee completion of the route in every case, which means that there's a nonrecurring cost risk in terms of the engineering effort required.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
That makes a lot of sense. Then if we take density and efficiency aside, are there any reasonable drawbacks to Manhattan?
$endgroup$
– Kirill Safin
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@KirillSafin: Yes, the routes will always be their Manhattan length at a minimum, and possibly longer. Other algorithms will be able to make some (many?) routes shorter than that.
$endgroup$
– Dave Tweed♦
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
In 1976 we did at least 1 PCB design a week with no simulators or tests with 30 or more DIPS in Manhattan style. Vias were free compared to the cost of copper and volume cost reductions. CMOS was slow rise time so adjacent trace crosstalk was rarely an issue. fast forward to the present with rise times reduced by x100 and dynamic currents now from 25 Ohm switches with 74ALC’ devices vs 300~1200 OHm CD4000 series CMOS switches thus producing 1000x more crosstalk and traces now routinely 3 mil track and gap instead of 20 mil increases crosstalk another order of magnitude. Manhattan Noise!!!
$endgroup$
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The primary advantage of a Manhattan route is that it can always be completed. You just need to have enough board area to accommodate all of the traces — but otherwise, you'll never find yourself unable to complete a route. This can be important if you need to get a layout done on a fixed schedule — the amount of work is roughly proportional to the number of pins, and you won't spend days or weeks trying to complete the task because of blockages.
Other routing algorithms might be more efficient than Manhattan in terms of board area and the number of vias required (saving money on each board produced), but they cannot guarantee completion of the route in every case, which means that there's a nonrecurring cost risk in terms of the engineering effort required.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
That makes a lot of sense. Then if we take density and efficiency aside, are there any reasonable drawbacks to Manhattan?
$endgroup$
– Kirill Safin
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@KirillSafin: Yes, the routes will always be their Manhattan length at a minimum, and possibly longer. Other algorithms will be able to make some (many?) routes shorter than that.
$endgroup$
– Dave Tweed♦
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
In 1976 we did at least 1 PCB design a week with no simulators or tests with 30 or more DIPS in Manhattan style. Vias were free compared to the cost of copper and volume cost reductions. CMOS was slow rise time so adjacent trace crosstalk was rarely an issue. fast forward to the present with rise times reduced by x100 and dynamic currents now from 25 Ohm switches with 74ALC’ devices vs 300~1200 OHm CD4000 series CMOS switches thus producing 1000x more crosstalk and traces now routinely 3 mil track and gap instead of 20 mil increases crosstalk another order of magnitude. Manhattan Noise!!!
$endgroup$
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The primary advantage of a Manhattan route is that it can always be completed. You just need to have enough board area to accommodate all of the traces — but otherwise, you'll never find yourself unable to complete a route. This can be important if you need to get a layout done on a fixed schedule — the amount of work is roughly proportional to the number of pins, and you won't spend days or weeks trying to complete the task because of blockages.
Other routing algorithms might be more efficient than Manhattan in terms of board area and the number of vias required (saving money on each board produced), but they cannot guarantee completion of the route in every case, which means that there's a nonrecurring cost risk in terms of the engineering effort required.
$endgroup$
The primary advantage of a Manhattan route is that it can always be completed. You just need to have enough board area to accommodate all of the traces — but otherwise, you'll never find yourself unable to complete a route. This can be important if you need to get a layout done on a fixed schedule — the amount of work is roughly proportional to the number of pins, and you won't spend days or weeks trying to complete the task because of blockages.
Other routing algorithms might be more efficient than Manhattan in terms of board area and the number of vias required (saving money on each board produced), but they cannot guarantee completion of the route in every case, which means that there's a nonrecurring cost risk in terms of the engineering effort required.
answered 7 hours ago
Dave Tweed♦Dave Tweed
129k10 gold badges162 silver badges276 bronze badges
129k10 gold badges162 silver badges276 bronze badges
$begingroup$
That makes a lot of sense. Then if we take density and efficiency aside, are there any reasonable drawbacks to Manhattan?
$endgroup$
– Kirill Safin
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@KirillSafin: Yes, the routes will always be their Manhattan length at a minimum, and possibly longer. Other algorithms will be able to make some (many?) routes shorter than that.
$endgroup$
– Dave Tweed♦
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
In 1976 we did at least 1 PCB design a week with no simulators or tests with 30 or more DIPS in Manhattan style. Vias were free compared to the cost of copper and volume cost reductions. CMOS was slow rise time so adjacent trace crosstalk was rarely an issue. fast forward to the present with rise times reduced by x100 and dynamic currents now from 25 Ohm switches with 74ALC’ devices vs 300~1200 OHm CD4000 series CMOS switches thus producing 1000x more crosstalk and traces now routinely 3 mil track and gap instead of 20 mil increases crosstalk another order of magnitude. Manhattan Noise!!!
$endgroup$
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
That makes a lot of sense. Then if we take density and efficiency aside, are there any reasonable drawbacks to Manhattan?
$endgroup$
– Kirill Safin
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@KirillSafin: Yes, the routes will always be their Manhattan length at a minimum, and possibly longer. Other algorithms will be able to make some (many?) routes shorter than that.
$endgroup$
– Dave Tweed♦
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
In 1976 we did at least 1 PCB design a week with no simulators or tests with 30 or more DIPS in Manhattan style. Vias were free compared to the cost of copper and volume cost reductions. CMOS was slow rise time so adjacent trace crosstalk was rarely an issue. fast forward to the present with rise times reduced by x100 and dynamic currents now from 25 Ohm switches with 74ALC’ devices vs 300~1200 OHm CD4000 series CMOS switches thus producing 1000x more crosstalk and traces now routinely 3 mil track and gap instead of 20 mil increases crosstalk another order of magnitude. Manhattan Noise!!!
$endgroup$
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
That makes a lot of sense. Then if we take density and efficiency aside, are there any reasonable drawbacks to Manhattan?
$endgroup$
– Kirill Safin
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
That makes a lot of sense. Then if we take density and efficiency aside, are there any reasonable drawbacks to Manhattan?
$endgroup$
– Kirill Safin
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
@KirillSafin: Yes, the routes will always be their Manhattan length at a minimum, and possibly longer. Other algorithms will be able to make some (many?) routes shorter than that.
$endgroup$
– Dave Tweed♦
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
@KirillSafin: Yes, the routes will always be their Manhattan length at a minimum, and possibly longer. Other algorithms will be able to make some (many?) routes shorter than that.
$endgroup$
– Dave Tweed♦
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
In 1976 we did at least 1 PCB design a week with no simulators or tests with 30 or more DIPS in Manhattan style. Vias were free compared to the cost of copper and volume cost reductions. CMOS was slow rise time so adjacent trace crosstalk was rarely an issue. fast forward to the present with rise times reduced by x100 and dynamic currents now from 25 Ohm switches with 74ALC’ devices vs 300~1200 OHm CD4000 series CMOS switches thus producing 1000x more crosstalk and traces now routinely 3 mil track and gap instead of 20 mil increases crosstalk another order of magnitude. Manhattan Noise!!!
$endgroup$
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
In 1976 we did at least 1 PCB design a week with no simulators or tests with 30 or more DIPS in Manhattan style. Vias were free compared to the cost of copper and volume cost reductions. CMOS was slow rise time so adjacent trace crosstalk was rarely an issue. fast forward to the present with rise times reduced by x100 and dynamic currents now from 25 Ohm switches with 74ALC’ devices vs 300~1200 OHm CD4000 series CMOS switches thus producing 1000x more crosstalk and traces now routinely 3 mil track and gap instead of 20 mil increases crosstalk another order of magnitude. Manhattan Noise!!!
$endgroup$
– Sunnyskyguy EE75
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Electrical Engineering Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2felectronics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f445909%2fwhat-are-the-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-manhattan-style-routing%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Related: electronics.stackexchange.com/q/79145/2028
$endgroup$
– JYelton
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
In your second paragraph, compared to what? Neater than what? More layers than what? Your statements about crosstalk assume that some signals are intentionally routed in perpendicular directions but that is not inherent in Manhattan routing. You are leaving too much unspoken to get a good answer.
$endgroup$
– Elliot Alderson
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@ElliotAlderson, updated to hopefully provide more clarity into what I'm trying to gain insight on.
$endgroup$
– Kirill Safin
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
Freestyle routing sounds to me as if the designer doesn't know what he/she is doing. But using Manhattan-style routing or just using a ground plane "because everyone does it",will not necessarily improve the design if you still don't know what you're doing.
$endgroup$
– Huisman
7 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
I often start routing manhattan-style, however, by the time I finish you wouldn't be able to tell!
$endgroup$
– evildemonic
7 hours ago