To bug or not to bug - Min. Width for Differential Pair

[mulfycrowh]

Hi everyone,

I wanted to make some tests: I set up the Min. Width on bottom layer in Differential Pair Routing rule to a lower value than previous one: 0.09 mm instead 0.23 mm.
Everything fine.
Then I wanted to set it up again to 0.23 mm.
AD tells me there is an error: Some rules have incorrect definitions.
Fixed when set up to 22.9 mm.


Did you already have this issue?

[qdrives]

22.9mm? That is even wider than my widest 'trace' of 14mm

Which version of AD?
The reason for me asking is that a colleague of mine recently updated to the latest 23.8.1 and had problems with sheet entries. Input sheet entries would not draw correctly when modified/added.

Oh, and make sure that the . or , (period and comma) for your language setting are not the problem.

[mulfycrowh]

I drink too much and it makes me see the tracks wider than they are...
Hawful...

But seriously speaking I don't understand the issue. I just changed the value from 0.23 mm to 0.09 mm and then back to 0.23 mm.
AD declares an error.
I don't think it is an issue with , or . because I made 2 times: one for DisplayPort, one for HDMI.
And then I set it to 0.229 mm and it is OK.
I also tried 0.2299, AD rounds it to 0.23 and triggers the same error.

[qdrives]

Does it give an error in the rules editor or with the DRC?
What happens if you set the rule to 0.25 or 0.3?