On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 12:39 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton lkcl@lkcl.net wrote:
ok so just to check, are you recommending a multi-staggered approach, according to that table: 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 -1 1 2 3 4
[...]
8 -1 1 2 3 4
so that would be *eight* separate bring-ins?
Yes, 8 separate, small steps bringing the pairs closer.
or are you just recommending the *one* bring-in, where the table specifies how *much* each particular trace should be offset by?
You are missing the heading that specified: <step #> <north keepout> <TX1> <TX0> <TXC> <south keepout>
(bear in mind, like i mentioned, i am thinking of keeping TX1 where it is instead of TX2, because of the diff-pair VIA positions, i can adjust the offsets accordingly)
That would be fine to hold TX1 stationary instead of TX2, it even makes for a more symmetric taper thus the maximum offset will be smaller. <step#> <north keepout> <TX2> <TX0> <TXC> <south keepout> 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 -2 -1 1 2 3 2 -2 -1 1 2 3 3 -2 -1 1 2 3 4 -4 -2 2 4 6 5 -4 -2 2 4 6 6 -2 -1 1 2 3 7 -2 -1 1 2 3 8 -2 -1 1 2 3
P.S. See other post where I climbed out of the rabbit hole and recommend against doing the taper after all.