First, a question of mine (for anybody): is there some theory that = declares that the effect I describe below (coupling across serpentine = legs causes part of the wave to bypass the serpentine) is zero in = stripline? Now that I've asked that, here's some of what I've found: ________________________________ No intense research here, but I did TDR the Front-Side Bus of a product = board that had a variety of serpentine types (a few loooong legs, many = short legs, some in-between), and here's what I found. Conclusions: 1. Serpentining was >80% effective on this Front Side Bus (FSB). I.E., = we achieved at least 80% of the expected delay from serpentines. 2. Vp variation due to serpentining induced about 30pS of skew on this = 3", 50ohm bus. 3. A few long legs of serpentining were better than several short ones. 4. There won't be any "Rules of Thumb" which will easily describe the = issue (how effective are serpentines?). When we need to worry about pS, = simulations have to be performed on expected worst-case nets. Other Notes 1. Only layer 1 was represented here. The effects have been less on = stripline. 2. The dielectric is 4mils thick; serpentine legs are separated by = 20mils center to center (same as trace-to-trace separation); trace width = =3D 7mils.=09 Some general conclusions of mine: Increasing trace length with serpentines (AKA "meanders") does not give = an increase in flight-time directly proportional to the increase in = trace length. Coupling across the serpentine legs causes part of the = wave to bypass the serpentine (I would refer to it as a "barreling = through the switchbacks" phenomena), reducing the flight-time. The = speed-up effects are reproducible in simulations and seem to be only = weakly tied to rise-time.=20 The effect can be lessened by separating serpentine legs, or routing in = stripline. A "flat spiral" (AKA "bifilar spiral") is an option mentioned = in some papers, but my experience with it has shown it to be terrible, = S.I.-wise. Take pains to avoid serpentines - they're not free.=20 If serpentining is necessary, keep the adjacent traces far apart - = perhaps an S/H (trace separation to dielectric thickness) ratio of about = 5 to 1.=20 Routing in stripline reduces the effect. Jeff Loyer -----Original Message----- From: Doug Brooks [mailto:doug@xxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2003 10:09 AM To: si-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [SI-LIST] Adding trace length for timing adjustment I know there are several different views on this subject. Suppose I need to add some additional length (time) to a trace and am=20 considering three different strategies: 1. a randomly meandering length 2. a "trombone-like" length down and back 3. more, shorter snake-like loops What do people see as the different trade-offs for these three different = strategies under differing conditions? Doug Brooks ------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe from si-list: si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field or to administer your membership from a web page, go to: //www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list For help: si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field List archives are viewable at: =20 //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list or at our remote archives: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages=20 Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu =20 ------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe from si-list: si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the Subject field or to administer your membership from a web page, go to: //www.freelists.org/webpage/si-list For help: si-list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'help' in the Subject field List archives are viewable at: //www.freelists.org/archives/si-list or at our remote archives: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/si-list/messages Old (prior to June 6, 2001) list archives are viewable at: http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu