Interesting...

Fair point!   Perhaps some of your ICs are non-genuine, and have different
speed oscillators?  It seems very hard to explain!

On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 at 21:40, Paolo Cravero <[email protected]> wrote:

> Actually Maxim uses both 32K and 32.768 kHz in the same document, even
> paragraph:
>
> Bit 3: Enable 32kHz Output (EN32kHz).This bit con-trols the status of the
> 32kHz pin. When set to logic 1, the32kHz pin is enabled and outputs a 32.
> 768kHz square-wave signal. When set to logic 0, the 32kHz pin goes toa
> high-impedance state. The initial power-up state ofthis bit is logic 1,
> and a 32.768kHz square-wave signalappears at the 32kHz pin after a power
> source isapplied to the DS3231 (if the oscillator is running).
>
> Taken from the DS3231(SM) datasheet. I think it must be 32768 Hz in all
> cases because it is a power of 2 and can be divided down to 1 Hz. Search
> for "768" in both datasheets!
>
> Paolo
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2019 at 10:32 PM David Pye <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> So.
>>
>> The DS3231M datasheet specifically says it's internal clock output is
>> 32.768kHz (https://datasheets.maximintegrated.com/en/ds/DS3231M.pdf)
>>
>> whereas the other datasheet for SN (
>> https://docs-emea.rs-online.com/webdocs/0f6e/0900766b80f6ec88.pdf) says
>> its' clock should be 32KHz.
>>
>> So the two chips are supposed to have different internal oscillator
>> frequencies, but the datasheets suggest the other way round to what your
>> measurements suggest.
>>
>> David
>>
>> On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 at 21:22, Paolo Cravero <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello.
>>> One more thread on the subject of knock-off components...
>>>
>>> I use cheap RTC modules that use a DS3231 RTC chip (ZS-04). They are
>>> satisfactorily accurate and I haven't had surprises in their internal
>>> calendar.
>>>
>>> Today I measured the 32K output, which is supposed to be 32768 Hz, even
>>> though the datasheet often mentions 32K ... that I would read as 32000 Hz.
>>>
>>> Three out of four modules measured 32699 +/- 2 Hz, and just one was at
>>> 32768 Hz (500 MHz counter with OCXO, 10 seconds gate time and Nixies ;) ).
>>> This would mean loosing 179 seconds a day, which is not the case.
>>>
>>> One more info: the three slow guys are DS3231*M*, while the 32768 one
>>> is DS3231*SN*. I've never noticed this difference before because I use
>>> the 1 Hz output and both have it.
>>>
>>> Has someone measured the 32k output of their modules and/or can help me
>>> understand why the slow guys still keep up with the time?
>>>
>>> Paolo
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "neonixie-l" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to [email protected].
>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>>> To view this discussion on the web, visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/CABj2VaZ13z8DQsoBTp0o5jei945aTdtjJ7aJ3hYq%3DkUiPJAJ_w%40mail.gmail.com
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/CABj2VaZ13z8DQsoBTp0o5jei945aTdtjJ7aJ3hYq%3DkUiPJAJ_w%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "neonixie-l" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to [email protected].
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> To view this discussion on the web, visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/CAOQ6x0Hm38dGSanfnvDKDKbeX6MGDZ%3DdrThb3mC2fXHvBEuhgw%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/CAOQ6x0Hm38dGSanfnvDKDKbeX6MGDZ%3DdrThb3mC2fXHvBEuhgw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "neonixie-l" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion on the web, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/CABj2VaYxJD6TJwuz3xV16WnJPB5icNNQk-vLLsEJttVMc%2ByOaQ%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/CABj2VaYxJD6TJwuz3xV16WnJPB5icNNQk-vLLsEJttVMc%2ByOaQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"neonixie-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web, visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/neonixie-l/CAOQ6x0HuYnU-2eZFVNvw3fYppQY2fphbT2%3DofVvCE4%2BvMa8JnA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to