Ttdfjt

What is the relationship between external and internal composition in a cartesian closed category?

Is it okay to use open source code to do an interview task?

Is it possible to complete a PhD in CS in 3 years?

Strong Password Detection in Python

Gory anime with pink haired girl escaping an asylum

Why won't the U.S. sign a peace treaty with North Korea?

How do "gefälligst" and "ruhig" have different tones?

aligning diagram with arrows

Can you create a free-floating MASYU puzzle?

Need a non-volatile memory IC with near unlimited read/write operations capability

How do I talk to my wife about unrealistic expectations?

Did depressed people far more accurately estimate how many monsters they killed in a video game?

My professor has told me he will be the corresponding author. Will it hurt my future career?

How many Jimmys can fit?

A ring of generalized power series

Why did Robert F. Kennedy loathe Lyndon B. Johnson?

Curly braces adjustment in tikz?

Is space division multiplexing really multiplexing?

What was the profession 芸者 (female entertainer) called in Russia?

This LM317 diagram doesn't make any sense to me

stuck in/at beta

How does one acquire an undead eyeball encased in a gem?

What factors could lead to bishops establishing monastic armies?

Interpretation of non-significant results as "trends"

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)

.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;

6

1

$begingroup$

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

share|improve this question

edited Jun 28 at 20:38

Kirill Safin

asked Jun 28 at 20:25

Kirill SafinKirill Safin

12866 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Related: electronics.stackexchange.com/q/79145/2028
  $endgroup$
  – JYelton
  Jun 28 at 20:34
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  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
  Jun 28 at 20:35
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @ElliotAlderson, updated to hopefully provide more clarity into what I'm trying to gain insight on.
  $endgroup$
  – Kirill Safin
  Jun 28 at 20:38
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  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
  Jun 28 at 21:03
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I often start routing manhattan-style, however, by the time I finish you wouldn't be able to tell!
  $endgroup$
  – evildemonic
  Jun 28 at 21:34
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 2 more comments

6

1

$begingroup$

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

share|improve this question

edited Jun 28 at 20:38

Kirill Safin

asked Jun 28 at 20:25

Kirill SafinKirill Safin

12866 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Related: electronics.stackexchange.com/q/79145/2028
  $endgroup$
  – JYelton
  Jun 28 at 20:34
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  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
  Jun 28 at 20:35
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @ElliotAlderson, updated to hopefully provide more clarity into what I'm trying to gain insight on.
  $endgroup$
  – Kirill Safin
  Jun 28 at 20:38
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  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
  Jun 28 at 21:03
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I often start routing manhattan-style, however, by the time I finish you wouldn't be able to tell!
  $endgroup$
  – evildemonic
  Jun 28 at 21:34
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
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

share|improve this question

edited Jun 28 at 20:38

Kirill Safin

asked Jun 28 at 20:25

Kirill SafinKirill Safin

12866 bronze badges

$endgroup$

share|improve this question

edited Jun 28 at 20:38

Kirill Safin

asked Jun 28 at 20:25

Kirill SafinKirill Safin

12866 bronze badges

share|improve this question

edited Jun 28 at 20:38

Kirill Safin

asked Jun 28 at 20:25

Kirill SafinKirill Safin

12866 bronze badges

asked Jun 28 at 20:25

Kirill SafinKirill Safin

12866 bronze badges

asked Jun 28 at 20:25

Kirill SafinKirill Safin

12866 bronze badges

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

10

$begingroup$

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.

share|improve this answer

answered Jun 28 at 21:21

Dave Tweed♦Dave Tweed

129k1010 gold badges164164 silver badges278278 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  That makes a lot of sense. Then if we take density and efficiency aside, are there any reasonable drawbacks to Manhattan?
  $endgroup$
  – Kirill Safin
  Jun 28 at 21:33
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @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♦
  Jun 28 at 22:02
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  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
  Jun 29 at 0:46
  

  
  
  
  

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
);



);

draft saved

draft discarded

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

Name

Email

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

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

10

$begingroup$

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.

share|improve this answer

answered Jun 28 at 21:21

Dave Tweed♦Dave Tweed

129k1010 gold badges164164 silver badges278278 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  That makes a lot of sense. Then if we take density and efficiency aside, are there any reasonable drawbacks to Manhattan?
  $endgroup$
  – Kirill Safin
  Jun 28 at 21:33
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @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♦
  Jun 28 at 22:02
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  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
  Jun 29 at 0:46
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

10

$begingroup$

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.

share|improve this answer

answered Jun 28 at 21:21

Dave Tweed♦Dave Tweed

129k1010 gold badges164164 silver badges278278 bronze badges

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  That makes a lot of sense. Then if we take density and efficiency aside, are there any reasonable drawbacks to Manhattan?
  $endgroup$
  – Kirill Safin
  Jun 28 at 21:33
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @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♦
  Jun 28 at 22:02
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  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
  Jun 29 at 0:46
  

  
  
  
  

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.

share|improve this answer

answered Jun 28 at 21:21

Dave Tweed♦Dave Tweed

129k1010 gold badges164164 silver badges278278 bronze badges

$endgroup$

share|improve this answer

answered Jun 28 at 21:21

Dave Tweed♦Dave Tweed

129k1010 gold badges164164 silver badges278278 bronze badges

answered Jun 28 at 21:21

Dave Tweed♦Dave Tweed

129k1010 gold badges164164 silver badges278278 bronze badges

answered Jun 28 at 21:21

Dave Tweed♦Dave Tweed

129k1010 gold badges164164 silver badges278278 bronze badges