Re: [time-nuts] HP 58503A
Azelio Boriani azelio.boriani@... writes: Why are you assuming this is a protocol or signal label? Maybe a maintenance or repair-by-exchange indication too. Because the label is above the bnc connector on the back side of the 58503A beside the bnc connector with an alarm label. The 58503A has the single option H14. May be this is a special output protocol on this connector like the IRIG protocol... Any ideas? Chris ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
[time-nuts] hp 3586 parts
I'd like to find a spare processor board for the 3586 to play with. Also I'd like to find the little metal piece that fits over the front panel between the keyboard area and the display area. I designed 6800 based comms equipment in the 70s. Would love to scarf the source code for the 3586. -- Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R c...@omen.com www.omen.com Developer of Industrial ZMODEM(Tm) for Embedded Applications Omen Technology Inc The High Reliability Software 10255 NW Old Cornelius Pass Portland OR 97231 503-614-0430 ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] HP 58503A
OK, it is in the place of the PPS output... can you hook an oscilloscope and see if there is any output? On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Christoph Kopetzky dekag...@gmail.comwrote: Azelio Boriani azelio.boriani@... writes: Why are you assuming this is a protocol or signal label? Maybe a maintenance or repair-by-exchange indication too. Because the label is above the bnc connector on the back side of the 58503A beside the bnc connector with an alarm label. The 58503A has the single option H14. May be this is a special output protocol on this connector like the IRIG protocol... Any ideas? Chris ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] HP 58503A
My guess is that it's a PP2S / Even Second output - that would also match with the label... On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 5:02 PM, Azelio Boriani azelio.bori...@screen.itwrote: OK, it is in the place of the PPS output... can you hook an oscilloscope and see if there is any output? On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Christoph Kopetzky dekag...@gmail.com wrote: Azelio Boriani azelio.boriani@... writes: Why are you assuming this is a protocol or signal label? Maybe a maintenance or repair-by-exchange indication too. Because the label is above the bnc connector on the back side of the 58503A beside the bnc connector with an alarm label. The 58503A has the single option H14. May be this is a special output protocol on this connector like the IRIG protocol... Any ideas? Chris ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] HP 58503A
OK, so a digital 'scope is needed or, at least, with memory. On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Peter Bell bell.pe...@gmail.com wrote: My guess is that it's a PP2S / Even Second output - that would also match with the label... On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 5:02 PM, Azelio Boriani azelio.bori...@screen.it wrote: OK, it is in the place of the PPS output... can you hook an oscilloscope and see if there is any output? On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Christoph Kopetzky dekag...@gmail.com wrote: Azelio Boriani azelio.boriani@... writes: Why are you assuming this is a protocol or signal label? Maybe a maintenance or repair-by-exchange indication too. Because the label is above the bnc connector on the back side of the 58503A beside the bnc connector with an alarm label. The 58503A has the single option H14. May be this is a special output protocol on this connector like the IRIG protocol... Any ideas? Chris ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] HP 58503A
Azelio Boriani azelio.boriani@... writes: OK, so a digital 'scope is needed or, at least, with memory. On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Peter Bell bell.peter@... wrote: My guess is that it's a PP2S / Even Second output - that would also match with the label... OK Azelio, good idea, I will check that if I am back in the lab... EverySECond... makes sense because the ESEC label really is over the original PPS labeling.. I will keep you up-to-date! Thanks for the answers! Chris ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
[time-nuts] FTS1200, OSA8600, OSA8601 phase noise and ADEV measures
Fellow time-nuts, I have borrowed Björn's FTS1200 and OSA8600 and that complements my own OSA8600 and OSA8601. I use a HP5087A and one of the OSA8600 as references, such that I can cross-correlate out the reference oscillators. I'm still not quite satisfied just yet, so I may need to work some more to perfect this technique. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_1.png Here you see the phase-noise of the four oscillators. It is distinct how the white noise floor of the FTS1200 is around -141 dBc/Hz when the OSA8600s reach for -155 to -156 dBc/Hz. The spurs on the FTS1200 may trace back to the fact that the FTS1200 is -1.5 Hz of the references, but I like Johns comments on that. You can see that the older OSA8601 has better 1/f noise and that Björn's OSA8600 SN711 has higher 1/f^3 noise than any of the other three which seems comparable. The OSA8600 SN711 and SN817 has comparable 1/f noise. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_2.png The ADEV plot of the oscillators. The noise on the FTS1200 dominates, it's inital response, but it is more clearly seen that the flat section is better and the OSAs. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_3.png The Hadamard Deviation plot of the oscillators. The linear drift of the FTS1200 and OSA8601 is seen. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_4.png The phase difference plot of the oscillators: The linear drift noticed from the ADEV plot and mostly removed in the Hadamard plot is seen more clearly in the phase plot as quadratic phase-shifts, a slot tendency on the other oscillatos can also be seen. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_5.png The Frequency difference of the oscillators. The noise of the FTS1200 is visible. I haven't looked into it. As you may have noted, the measurement length varies, I haven't looked into it. My OSAs has been heated for a fairly long time, even if they had a short dip of voltage. Björns FTS1200 and OSA has been heated for almost 2 weeks now. Measurement files: http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_HP5065A_OSA86000_20120802_1.tim http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/OSA8600SN711_HP5065A_OSA86000_20120802_1.tim http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/OSA8600SN817_HP5065A_OSA86000_20120802_1.tim http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/OSA8601SN1314_HP5065A_OSA86000_20120802_1.tim Comments welcome. I will spend some more quality time on this now that I've made a first stab at it. Got to locate a cable so I can toss a well-heated 10811A into the battle. Cheers, Magnus ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] FTS1200, OSA8600, OSA8601 phase noise and ADEV measures
Hi Magnus; Very Nice Best Wishes; Thomas Knox Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 18:36:31 +0200 From: mag...@rubidium.dyndns.org To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: [time-nuts] FTS1200, OSA8600, OSA8601 phase noise and ADEV measures Fellow time-nuts, I have borrowed Björn's FTS1200 and OSA8600 and that complements my own OSA8600 and OSA8601. I use a HP5087A and one of the OSA8600 as references, such that I can cross-correlate out the reference oscillators. I'm still not quite satisfied just yet, so I may need to work some more to perfect this technique. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_1.png Here you see the phase-noise of the four oscillators. It is distinct how the white noise floor of the FTS1200 is around -141 dBc/Hz when the OSA8600s reach for -155 to -156 dBc/Hz. The spurs on the FTS1200 may trace back to the fact that the FTS1200 is -1.5 Hz of the references, but I like Johns comments on that. You can see that the older OSA8601 has better 1/f noise and that Björn's OSA8600 SN711 has higher 1/f^3 noise than any of the other three which seems comparable. The OSA8600 SN711 and SN817 has comparable 1/f noise. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_2.png The ADEV plot of the oscillators. The noise on the FTS1200 dominates, it's inital response, but it is more clearly seen that the flat section is better and the OSAs. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_3.png The Hadamard Deviation plot of the oscillators. The linear drift of the FTS1200 and OSA8601 is seen. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_4.png The phase difference plot of the oscillators: The linear drift noticed from the ADEV plot and mostly removed in the Hadamard plot is seen more clearly in the phase plot as quadratic phase-shifts, a slot tendency on the other oscillatos can also be seen. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_5.png The Frequency difference of the oscillators. The noise of the FTS1200 is visible. I haven't looked into it. As you may have noted, the measurement length varies, I haven't looked into it. My OSAs has been heated for a fairly long time, even if they had a short dip of voltage. Björns FTS1200 and OSA has been heated for almost 2 weeks now. Measurement files: http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_HP5065A_OSA86000_20120802_1.tim http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/OSA8600SN711_HP5065A_OSA86000_20120802_1.tim http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/OSA8600SN817_HP5065A_OSA86000_20120802_1.tim http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/OSA8601SN1314_HP5065A_OSA86000_20120802_1.tim Comments welcome. I will spend some more quality time on this now that I've made a first stab at it. Got to locate a cable so I can toss a well-heated 10811A into the battle. Cheers, Magnus ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] FTS1200, OSA8600, OSA8601 phase noise and ADEV measures
Hi Magnus; Very Nice Best Wishes; Thomas Knox Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 18:36:31 +0200 From: mag...@rubidium.dyndns.org To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: [time-nuts] FTS1200, OSA8600, OSA8601 phase noise and ADEV measures Fellow time-nuts, I have borrowed Björn's FTS1200 and OSA8600 and that complements my own OSA8600 and OSA8601. I use a HP5087A and one of the OSA8600 as references, such that I can cross-correlate out the reference oscillators. I'm still not quite satisfied just yet, so I may need to work some more to perfect this technique. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_1.png Here you see the phase-noise of the four oscillators. It is distinct how the white noise floor of the FTS1200 is around -141 dBc/Hz when the OSA8600s reach for -155 to -156 dBc/Hz. The spurs on the FTS1200 may trace back to the fact that the FTS1200 is -1.5 Hz of the references, but I like Johns comments on that. You can see that the older OSA8601 has better 1/f noise and that Björn's OSA8600 SN711 has higher 1/f^3 noise than any of the other three which seems comparable. The OSA8600 SN711 and SN817 has comparable 1/f noise. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_2.png The ADEV plot of the oscillators. The noise on the FTS1200 dominates, it's inital response, but it is more clearly seen that the flat section is better and the OSAs. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_3.png The Hadamard Deviation plot of the oscillators. The linear drift of the FTS1200 and OSA8601 is seen. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_4.png The phase difference plot of the oscillators: The linear drift noticed from the ADEV plot and mostly removed in the Hadamard plot is seen more clearly in the phase plot as quadratic phase-shifts, a slot tendency on the other oscillatos can also be seen. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_5.png The Frequency difference of the oscillators. The noise of the FTS1200 is visible. I haven't looked into it. As you may have noted, the measurement length varies, I haven't looked into it. My OSAs has been heated for a fairly long time, even if they had a short dip of voltage. Björns FTS1200 and OSA has been heated for almost 2 weeks now. Measurement files: http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_HP5065A_OSA86000_20120802_1.tim http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/OSA8600SN711_HP5065A_OSA86000_20120802_1.tim http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/OSA8600SN817_HP5065A_OSA86000_20120802_1.tim http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/OSA8601SN1314_HP5065A_OSA86000_20120802_1.tim Comments welcome. I will spend some more quality time on this now that I've made a first stab at it. Got to locate a cable so I can toss a well-heated 10811A into the battle. Cheers, Magnus ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] FTS1200, OSA8600, OSA8601 phase noise and ADEV measures
On 08/02/2012 06:36 PM, Magnus Danielson wrote: Fellow time-nuts, I have borrowed Björn's FTS1200 and OSA8600 and that complements my own OSA8600 and OSA8601. I use a HP5087A and one of the OSA8600 as references, such that I can cross-correlate out the reference oscillators. I'm still not quite satisfied just yet, so I may need to work some more to perfect this technique. HP5065A... got that one wrong. Sorry. I will re-run the FTS1200 test EFC-steered onto 5 MHz. Cheers, Magnus ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] FTS1200, OSA8600, OSA8601 phase noise and ADEV measures
Hi Tom, On 08/02/2012 07:48 PM, Tom Knox wrote: Hi Magnus; Very Nice Thanks! Tom has very kindly provided some seriously good cables, which is being used for these measures. The TimePod comes straight out of the hands of the usual suspect John Miles, as part of out travel to Boulder. My rigging is still on the oh... I really need to rig this up quickly so there are things to improve on. I could work more carefully on the trimming of oscillators. When doing dual reference setups, one really should be using well heated oscillators and trimmed in such that they do not wrap around. I could spend more time on that. It would help if TimeLab would assist in that trimming. Also, I could more work on steering the oscillators over EFC trimmers, to put them at frequency. Regardless, my results so far should indicate in what neighbourhood these oscillators are. Cheers, Magnus ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
[time-nuts] Delay generator
Fellow time-nuts, I've finally got the time to unpack and start testing the SRS DG535 delay generator. It's a cool little box which lets me generate 4 different delay signals from a trigger, with a 0 delay output. The nice thing about this unit is that it allows me to program delays with 5 ps steps. Now, wrap a little software around it and one can track out the actual interpolation steps of many counters, and use that for adjustments of the interpolators. Won't quite cut it for the best counters, while you can still get some hints of their curve. At the same time, it's not perfectly linear either. For lesser counters, it will surely suffice. Cheers, Magnus ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Delay generator
Hi: http://www.prc68.com/I/TandFTE.shtml#DG535 Great instrument. Have Fun, Brooke Clarke http://www.PRC68.com http://www.end2partygovernment.com/2012Issues.html Magnus Danielson wrote: Fellow time-nuts, I've finally got the time to unpack and start testing the SRS DG535 delay generator. It's a cool little box which lets me generate 4 different delay signals from a trigger, with a 0 delay output. The nice thing about this unit is that it allows me to program delays with 5 ps steps. Now, wrap a little software around it and one can track out the actual interpolation steps of many counters, and use that for adjustments of the interpolators. Won't quite cut it for the best counters, while you can still get some hints of their curve. At the same time, it's not perfectly linear either. For lesser counters, it will surely suffice. Cheers, Magnus ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
[time-nuts] Crosscorrelation phase noise measurements
Hi, I've heard and read some documents about using cross-correlation using two distinct reference oscillators when trying to measure the phase noise from a source to reduce the influence of the reference oscillators phase noise. Unfortunately, it's still not exactly clear to me how it works ... does anyone have a concrete example maybe with data and the exact math that was done on them to get the result ? Cheers, Sylvain ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] FTS1200, OSA8600, OSA8601 phase noise and ADEV measures
Magnus, this is very cool. Can you describe your cross-correlation setup with the Time-Pod? I'd like to play with it here and compare notes. John On 8/2/2012 12:36 PM, Magnus Danielson wrote: Fellow time-nuts, I have borrowed Björn's FTS1200 and OSA8600 and that complements my own OSA8600 and OSA8601. I use a HP5087A and one of the OSA8600 as references, such that I can cross-correlate out the reference oscillators. I'm still not quite satisfied just yet, so I may need to work some more to perfect this technique. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_1.png Here you see the phase-noise of the four oscillators. It is distinct how the white noise floor of the FTS1200 is around -141 dBc/Hz when the OSA8600s reach for -155 to -156 dBc/Hz. The spurs on the FTS1200 may trace back to the fact that the FTS1200 is -1.5 Hz of the references, but I like Johns comments on that. You can see that the older OSA8601 has better 1/f noise and that Björn's OSA8600 SN711 has higher 1/f^3 noise than any of the other three which seems comparable. The OSA8600 SN711 and SN817 has comparable 1/f noise. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_2.png The ADEV plot of the oscillators. The noise on the FTS1200 dominates, it's inital response, but it is more clearly seen that the flat section is better and the OSAs. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_3.png The Hadamard Deviation plot of the oscillators. The linear drift of the FTS1200 and OSA8601 is seen. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_4.png The phase difference plot of the oscillators: The linear drift noticed from the ADEV plot and mostly removed in the Hadamard plot is seen more clearly in the phase plot as quadratic phase-shifts, a slot tendency on the other oscillatos can also be seen. http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_5.png The Frequency difference of the oscillators. The noise of the FTS1200 is visible. I haven't looked into it. As you may have noted, the measurement length varies, I haven't looked into it. My OSAs has been heated for a fairly long time, even if they had a short dip of voltage. Björns FTS1200 and OSA has been heated for almost 2 weeks now. Measurement files: http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_HP5065A_OSA86000_20120802_1.tim http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/OSA8600SN711_HP5065A_OSA86000_20120802_1.tim http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/OSA8600SN817_HP5065A_OSA86000_20120802_1.tim http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/OSA8601SN1314_HP5065A_OSA86000_20120802_1.tim Comments welcome. I will spend some more quality time on this now that I've made a first stab at it. Got to locate a cable so I can toss a well-heated 10811A into the battle. Cheers, Magnus ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
[time-nuts] problem with HP 59309A digital clock and HP IL/IB interface
hi all, i have a small collection of old HP calculators, with the hp 71b being my favourite. as a watchmaker i thought it might be a good idea to add a digital clock HP 59309A to my collection. but this cost my quite a few hours of sleep as i encountered an unexpectd problem that i can't solve. i have already posted this problem to the forum of the HP-Museum, but unfortunately i could not get a solution. so i thought i should try it here. i have an hp 71b connected via HP-IL (version 1B) to an hp 82169C HP-IL/HP-IB interface (DEVID$ is HP82169A, though). an HP digital clock HP59309A is connected to the HP-IB interface. the IL/IB interface is in translator mode, hp-il address 3. the clock is addressable, address is 11. i can control the clock (set time, stop etc.) without problem (e.g. OUTPUT 11;R resets the clock). but i am not able to read from the clock. my latest attempt to read from the clock looked like this: RESET HPIL RESTORE IO SEND TALK11 (ADDRESSED light of the clock is now permanently on) ENTER :11 USING #,9A;D$ (i also tried 10A, 11A etc. and ENTER LOOP) then the loop freezes, the hp71 does not respond to pressed keys, and the T/R light on the interface and the ADDRESSED light on the clock are permanently on. to continue i have to reset the hp-il interface. any help to solve this mistery would be much appreciated! thanks, hans ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] FTS1200, OSA8600, OSA8601 phase noise and ADEV measures
Hi John, On 08/02/2012 09:59 PM, John Ackermann N8UR wrote: Magnus, this is very cool. Can you describe your cross-correlation setup with the Time-Pod? I'd like to play with it here and compare notes. 1. Unscrew the hardwire jumpers on the input side of the TimePod. 2. Hook up two low (enough) noise oscillators on the two separated channels. 3. Trim the reference channel oscillators to be close, they should not wrap around during the measurement time. I know I am sloppy on the last digit of this detail. 4. Reconfigure the channel use to be 1-0 and 3-2 rather than standard 0-1 and 2-3. 5. Measure as you intend. The benefit is that I can de-correlate the reference oscillator noise, and measure near or even below it. I have just started doing this, so this is really my first sloppy measurements for you to see where I am heading. I expect John to chime in and comments on all my mistakes. Cheers, Magnus ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Crosscorrelation phase noise measurements
Hi Sylvain, On 08/02/2012 09:56 PM, Sylvain Munaut wrote: Hi, I've heard and read some documents about using cross-correlation using two distinct reference oscillators when trying to measure the phase noise from a source to reduce the influence of the reference oscillators phase noise. Unfortunately, it's still not exactly clear to me how it works ... does anyone have a concrete example maybe with data and the exact math that was done on them to get the result ? It's a combination of two techniques really, one is having two parallel input channels, being independent in oscillators etc. except for the input signal. These channels are typically exact replicas in design. Out of these channels comes CH1: N_DUT + N_CH1 CH2: N_DUT + N_CH2 Cross-correlation is then the mathematical tool to extract the signal that correlate between those channels, that of the DUT, and suppressing the noise of CH1 and CH2 which does not correlate, as they are independent noise sources. The mathematical cross-correlation can be calculated by convolving CH1(t)*CH2(x-t)* where t sweeps over time (samples). This can be done more efficiently using FFT by FFT CH1 and CH2, then multiply CH1 frequency components with the conjugate of the CH2 frequency components, and then do IFFT on the result. If you need the FFT of the cross correlation, skip the IFFT step. The propper formulas isn't very ASCII friendly, but cross-correlation is found in DSP books and Wikipedia. Doing cross-correlation with FFTW is trivial and efficient. To achieve the cross-correlation gain, average over many cross-correlation spectrums. A single sweep gives you 3 dB gain. Cheers, Magnus ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Crosscorrelation phase noise measurements
Hi Magnus, Thanks a lot for the concise and very clean explanation. The cross-correlation part between the two signal was clear enough in my head but I didn't really see how it would achieve much gain. I didn't think about averaging many resulting spectrum while they're still complex (and not just the amplitudes ... ). I assume that the cross correlation of the two measurement makes the phase of several consecutive measurement align so that the main signal accumulates over many averages while the noise is just averaged out. Cheers, Sylvain ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] problem with HP 59309A digital clock and HP IL/IB interface
Have you joined and posted your question to the Yahoo Agilent/HP group ? It is a much bigger group and has been very helpful to me in the past -pete On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Hans Holzach h.holz...@vtxmail.ch wrote: hi all, i have a small collection of old HP calculators, with the hp 71b being my favourite. as a watchmaker i thought it might be a good idea to add a digital clock HP 59309A to my collection. but this cost my quite a few hours of sleep as i encountered an unexpectd problem that i can't solve. i have already posted this problem to the forum of the HP-Museum, but unfortunately i could not get a solution. so i thought i should try it here. i have an hp 71b connected via HP-IL (version 1B) to an hp 82169C HP-IL/HP-IB interface (DEVID$ is HP82169A, though). an HP digital clock HP59309A is connected to the HP-IB interface. the IL/IB interface is in translator mode, hp-il address 3. the clock is addressable, address is 11. i can control the clock (set time, stop etc.) without problem (e.g. OUTPUT 11;R resets the clock). but i am not able to read from the clock. my latest attempt to read from the clock looked like this: RESET HPIL RESTORE IO SEND TALK11 (ADDRESSED light of the clock is now permanently on) ENTER :11 USING #,9A;D$ (i also tried 10A, 11A etc. and ENTER LOOP) then the loop freezes, the hp71 does not respond to pressed keys, and the T/R light on the interface and the ADDRESSED light on the clock are permanently on. to continue i have to reset the hp-il interface. any help to solve this mistery would be much appreciated! thanks, hans ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Delay generator
Not much time ago a length of coaxial cable was enough to test the single shot resolution of our counters... On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Brooke Clarke bro...@pacific.net wrote: Hi: http://www.prc68.com/I/TandFTE.shtml#DG535 Great instrument. Have Fun, Brooke Clarke http://www.PRC68.com http://www.end2partygovernment.com/2012Issues.html Magnus Danielson wrote: Fellow time-nuts, I've finally got the time to unpack and start testing the SRS DG535 delay generator. It's a cool little box which lets me generate 4 different delay signals from a trigger, with a 0 delay output. The nice thing about this unit is that it allows me to program delays with 5 ps steps. Now, wrap a little software around it and one can track out the actual interpolation steps of many counters, and use that for adjustments of the interpolators. Won't quite cut it for the best counters, while you can still get some hints of their curve. At the same time, it's not perfectly linear either. For lesser counters, it will surely suffice. Cheers, Magnus ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Delay generator
On 08/03/2012 01:06 AM, Azelio Boriani wrote: Not much time ago a length of coaxial cable was enough to test the single shot resolution of our counters... The shape of the non-linearity is quite interesting. Among other things it helps to to understand the interpolator non-linearity and cross-talk between channels. Being able to dial in different delays really helps, especially to separate different effects. Cheers, Magnus ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Crosscorrelation phase noise measurements
Hi Sylvain, On 08/02/2012 11:24 PM, Sylvain Munaut wrote: Hi Magnus, Thanks a lot for the concise and very clean explanation. You are welcome! The cross-correlation part between the two signal was clear enough in my head but I didn't really see how it would achieve much gain. I didn't think about averaging many resulting spectrum while they're still complex (and not just the amplitudes ... ). I assume that the cross correlation of the two measurement makes the phase of several consecutive measurement align so that the main signal accumulates over many averages while the noise is just averaged out. Because they correlate, they add up, because the noise does not correlate, it flattens out. You should look up what is written by NIST on this technique. They have a nice online archive. They also demoed it on the NIST seminar. Cheers, Magnus ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Delay generator
OK, to go beyond the simple see-your-resolution, the 535 is needed (and a very very good oscillator, of course). On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 1:24 AM, Magnus Danielson mag...@rubidium.dyndns.org wrote: On 08/03/2012 01:06 AM, Azelio Boriani wrote: Not much time ago a length of coaxial cable was enough to test the single shot resolution of our counters... The shape of the non-linearity is quite interesting. Among other things it helps to to understand the interpolator non-linearity and cross-talk between channels. Being able to dial in different delays really helps, especially to separate different effects. Cheers, Magnus ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Crosscorrelation phase noise measurements
Excuse my pop-up into this topic, just let me try to complete: you cross-correlate and obtain the most probable samples and then do your phase noise process on those samples. The cross-correlation is only a filter, a preprocessor for the samples. Am I on the right way? On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 1:31 AM, Magnus Danielson mag...@rubidium.dyndns.org wrote: Hi Sylvain, On 08/02/2012 11:24 PM, Sylvain Munaut wrote: Hi Magnus, Thanks a lot for the concise and very clean explanation. You are welcome! The cross-correlation part between the two signal was clear enough in my head but I didn't really see how it would achieve much gain. I didn't think about averaging many resulting spectrum while they're still complex (and not just the amplitudes ... ). I assume that the cross correlation of the two measurement makes the phase of several consecutive measurement align so that the main signal accumulates over many averages while the noise is just averaged out. Because they correlate, they add up, because the noise does not correlate, it flattens out. You should look up what is written by NIST on this technique. They have a nice online archive. They also demoed it on the NIST seminar. Cheers, Magnus ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Delay generator
On 08/03/2012 01:36 AM, Azelio Boriani wrote: OK, to go beyond the simple see-your-resolution, the 535 is needed Or something similar, its a good help to illustrate the issues. (and a very very good oscillator, of course). It's not that good as an oscillator, but you can do some nice tricks. Then again, look at the oscillators I compare to. For shorter delays, it can be free-running, but longer delays needs the better oscillator or even external clocking. The trigger jitter (alignment error between internal 80 MHz and trigger pulse) has an analogue fast-forward over to the output analogue delays, which is neat, but for better performance the trigger should preferably be done in the 10 MHz clock provided externally. Cheers, Magnus ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Crosscorrelation phase noise measurements
On 08/03/2012 01:47 AM, Azelio Boriani wrote: Excuse my pop-up into this topic, just let me try to complete: you cross-correlate and obtain the most probable samples and then do your phase noise process on those samples. The cross-correlation is only a filter, a preprocessor for the samples. Am I on the right way? To some degree. The cross-correlation processing is a tool to break free of the channels added noise and go below it. It doesn't (significantly) shift your amplitude response in the passband, but you can calibrate and compensate that. It's thus a de-noiser tool inserted into the process pipe-line, but other than that the phase-noise calculations is about the same. To some degree the DMTD technique is somewhat related, but some of the correlation gain is usually lost. Cheers, Magnus ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] HP 58503A
If it is, then you should see a pulse every 2 seconds, lined up with the even seconds in GPS time. This might seem a rather strange signal to provide, but it's what the IS-95 derived CDMA systems use to trigger the start of another 100 block signalling frame. It also tends to suggest that the unit you have was originally being used as part of a CDMA system. Regards, Pete On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 8:00 PM, Christoph Kopetzky dekag...@gmail.comwrote: Azelio Boriani azelio.boriani@... writes: OK, so a digital 'scope is needed or, at least, with memory. On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Peter Bell bell.peter@... wrote: My guess is that it's a PP2S / Even Second output - that would also match with the label... OK Azelio, good idea, I will check that if I am back in the lab... EverySECond... makes sense because the ESEC label really is over the original PPS labeling.. I will keep you up-to-date! Thanks for the answers! Chris ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] HP 58503A
My guess is that it's a PP2S / Even Second output - that would also match with the label... azelio.bori...@screen.it said: OK, so a digital 'scope is needed or, at least, with memory. We discussed this area a week or three ago. You don't need a digital scope to determine if there is a pulse. A digital scope may help to see the pulse and figure out what it looks like. With an analog scope, you can either look at the blinking light that tells you it's triggering, or you can reduce the sweep speed until you can easily see the (flat) line from the beam each time it triggers. I can see a 10 microsecond pulse with my old Tek 465. It blinks and I roughly remember what the picture looks like. If I want to know a detail, I have to look at the right spot and wait for the next pulse. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Crosscorrelation phase noise measurements
I've heard and read some documents about using cross-correlation using two distinct reference oscillators when trying to measure the phase noise from a source to reduce the influence of the reference oscillators phase noise. Unfortunately, it's still not exactly clear to me how it works ... does anyone have a concrete example maybe with data and the exact math that was done on them to get the result ? Cross correlation is a fancy term for taking the dot product of two spectra, in this case two FFTs measured simultaneously by two different instruments. Recall that the dot product of two 2D vectors is a measure of how close the vectors are to each other in 2D space. The I,Q vectors from two hypothetical noiseless instruments making the same measurement will be identical, with no distance between them, so the magnitude of their dot product would simply be the same 'correct' value. The key idea is that if the instrument noise is randomly distributed in 2D space, the I and Q components measured by each instrument at any given time will be perturbed by a random amount in a random direction. If averaged over time, the individual I and Q components of the dot product in each bin should approach the correct values for that bin, assuming each instrument's additive noise is truly random and uncorrelated with respect to the other instrument. The magnitude of that average value can be plotted on a dB scale. Cross correlation is one of life's few free lunches, but you do have to wait for it to work. Magnus is correct in that you can get a 3 dB advantage in noise reduction per sweep, but that only applies to the first sweep. The actual improvement in the instrument noise is related to the square root of the number of averages taken. This means that a cross-correlating phase noise analyzer is very effective for broadband noise, where minimal decimation has to be done prior to the FFT. The input buffers fill up very rapidly in that case, and you can get hundreds of thousands of averages in just a few minutes. But measurement of low levels of 1/f^n noise close to the carrier can take a lot longer. As an example, one customer just sent me a plot of the residual noise of a high-quality distribution amplifier. The indicated PN was below -160 dBc/Hz at 10 Hz, but the instrument floor at 10 Hz was still -165 dBc/Hz after a 50-hour run! Over that time, the 10 kHz-100 kHz FFT segment had undergone almost 30 million averages, improving the instrument floor in that region by over 35 dB. But the segment containing 10 Hz had been averaged only 17000 times for a 21 dB improvement. As far as concrete examples go, in addition to Magnus's suggestion of the NIST documents, I'd recommend this one: http://www.congrex.nl/EFTF_Proceedings/Papers/Session_14_Oscillators_and_Noi se/14_04_Bale.pdf Here, the authors use a pair of 1980s-vintage HP 3048A phase noise measurement systems with a newer signal analyzer that performs cross-correlation. They are measuring additive noise from two-port devices, rather than oscillator noise, but the same principles apply to both. http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-1617EN.pdf The modern E5052A/B signal analyzers do the same thing in one box, basically. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1003.0113v1.pdf A good introductory article by Enrico Rubiola, with more specific math than the other two links. -- john, KE5FX www.miles.io ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] FTS1200, OSA8600, OSA8601 phase noise and ADEV measures
Bottom line, the large low-frequency spurs in the FTS plot at 1.4 and 2.9 Hz will be caused by one of these conditions: 1) A problem with the reference source(s) 2) A problem with the FTS oscillator itself 3) A normal characteristic of the FTS oscillator (maybe its spur specs weren't very good to begin with?) It seems the FTS1200 is only slightly out of spec compared to http://www.ece.gatech.edu/academic/courses/ece4007/08fall/ece4007l01/al4/datasheets/symmetricon_oscillator_instructionsheet.pdf http://rubidium.dyndns.org/~magnus/time/timelab/FTS1200_OSA8600_OSA8601_20120802_1.png 4) An RF crosstalk or leakage problem with the cables/adapters used 5) A power-supply regulation issue 6) Coupling between inadequately-bypassed power leads. This is a big problem with some OCXOs where they apparently forgot to use bypass capacitors inside the can. I usually solder a 0.1 uF ceramic chip cap right at the point of entry, if in doubt. 7) Some as-yet-unexplored effect related to beatnotes in dual-reference measurements. It may be possible to rule out cases (2) and (3), and definitely case (7), by temporarily switching back to the normal single-reference configuration. -- john, KE5FX www.miles.io -- Björn ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
