Two pads assigned to the same schematic pin do not automatically prove that current can travel between them through the component. A library may represent multiple physical contacts, split copper lands, or internally connected terminals using similar-looking numbering. Determine the physical meaning before changing connectivity settings to remove unrouted indications.
The KiCad 10 PCB Editor manual documents jumper settings that can make duplicate-numbered pads count as connected. That is a modeling assertion. It must be supported by the component or footprint construction, rather than used solely to obtain a clean connection report.
Classify the repeated identifiers
Inspect the footprint and the manufacturer’s terminal description. Are the shapes parts of one continuous solder land, separate contacts joined inside the package, or separate power pins that the board is expected to connect? The same net name does not answer that question. Mark each separate physical contact on the drawing before deciding which relationships the CAD model should assume.
Consider a component with several supply contacts. They may all connect to one circuit rail, yet the board design may still need to route each contact appropriately. Treating them as a convenient internal jumper could hide a missing board connection or create an unintended current path through the device.
Write the connectivity assumption explicitly
| Question | Evidence to retain |
|---|---|
| Which physical contacts are involved? | Pad identifiers and package drawing |
| Is there an internal connection? | Manufacturer statement or applicable device documentation |
| What does the CAD setting assume? | Jumper group or duplicate-pad configuration |
| What must board copper still provide? | Reviewed power, signal, or thermal connection requirements |
Do not use a generic continuity assumption to infer a current rating. Even where an internal connection exists, its suitability as a board-level current path is a separate engineering question. Follow the component’s intended use and connection guidance.
Validate in a small review design
- Place the footprint in a disposable test board.
- Inspect connectivity with and without the proposed jumper setting.
- Confirm which unrouted indications disappear and why.
- Compare the result with the documented physical connection.
- Apply the approved representation to the real design and rerun checks.
This test makes the tool behavior observable without risking an unnoticed change in a dense board. Preserve a screenshot or report that identifies the tested library revision and setting.
Review other projects using the same object if the original assumption was wrong. Regenerate copper and assembly outputs where the correction changes the released design. See footprint update review for controlling that follow-on change.
Move from reading to a build-ready project
Use the fabrication and assembly checklists to prepare drawings, production files and test requirements.
Open the DFM checklist