Review Same-Net Clearance Rules Without Breaking Intended Copper Connections

Two copper objects assigned to the same net may still need a controlled gap for manufacturing or assembly reasons. Conversely, many same-net objects must touch to make the intended connection. A same-net clearance rule needs a narrower purpose than a general instruction to keep all copper apart.

Altium’s electrical-rule documentation distinguishes different-net, same-net, and broader connectivity scopes. It also describes object-pair-specific clearance settings. The chosen connectivity mode and object pairing both affect which geometry is checked.

State the physical requirement first

Identify the specific concern, such as the relationship between an exposed via and an assembly pad. Record the affected object types and the intended exception for a deliberately connected structure. Avoid selecting a broad rule merely because it removes an inconvenient warning elsewhere.

When a supplier requests a spacing change, clarify whether the request concerns copper, exposed mask openings, or a process-specific relationship. These boundaries are different and may require separate checks. Keep electrical isolation requirements separate from manufacturing geometry requirements. A short-circuit check cannot establish the adequacy of a same-net feature, while a same-net spacing warning does not automatically mean the circuit is electrically wrong.

Build representative geometry cases

Use a small review area containing the relevant object pairs: separated same-net objects, intentionally touching objects, different-net objects, and a known exception. Run the configured checks and inspect the reported rule identity for each case.

Inspect the actual objects

A region, polygon, track, pad, and via can look like similar copper on screen but participate differently in an object-pair matrix. Select the objects and inspect their types and net assignments before diagnosing an unexpected result.

Review rule priority and overlapping scopes after adding a specific rule. The new rule should enforce its intended purpose without replacing a stricter requirement on unrelated objects. Keep the validation cases with the rule rationale.

After changing the rule, regenerate affected copper fills and repeat the relevant checks. Review the final geometry in manufacturing outputs where the spacing matters. A rule configuration screenshot alone does not establish that the released copper satisfies the requirement.

The useful outcome is a documented relationship between a physical requirement, a bounded rule, and representative checked geometry. That makes future changes easier to assess than a growing collection of unexplained same-net exceptions.