Peter Johnson
United Kingdom
498 Posts |
Posted - 05 Jan 2009 : 13:04:21
|
Yes, this is absolutely correct. It's because the method used to create basic powerplanes is much less sophisticated than that used for copper pour. It was (and is) intended for layers with either no, or at best minimal track coverage.
The problem is that even if there are isolated areas of copper, the method of producing output offers no way of removing them, so there's little point in checking for a problem that can't be resolved. As Iain says, if there are likely to be issues such as this, then copper pour is the safer option to use. |
|
|