Re: [time-nuts] WWVB Antenna revisited/Spectracom 8182

[paul swed]

Martin
NIST did preserve the AM data so that the cheapy clocks typically worked.
But phase tracking receivers don't.
Regards
Paul
WB8TSL

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 5:35 AM, Martin Burnicki <
martin.burni...@burnicki.net> wrote:

> paul swed write:
> > I'll add to the comments the spectracoms are phase tracking receivers and
> > do not work on the new BPSK  signal.
>
> When the German PTB made effort to increase the accuracy and reliability
> of the DCF77 long wave receiver in the 1980s, they implemented thus in a
> way that old receivers of the original AM modulation would not be affected:
> https://www.ptb.de/cms/en/ptb/fachabteilungen/abt4/fb-44/ag-
> 442/dissemination-of-legal-time/dcf77/dcf77-phase-modulation.html
>
> If I remember correctly then there were some discussions with folks a
> NIST when they were going to introduce their new modulation scheme, but
> even though the guys at NIST knew that their approach would break
> existing receivers, they implemented it anyway that way, even though
> other (compatible) ways would have been available. :-(
>
> Martin
> ___
> 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] WWVB Antenna revisited/Spectracom 8182

[Bob kb8tq]

Hi

There is a *lot* of analysis on the WWVB change in the archives. The bottom 
line 
seems to be that the change did not impact wall clocks and watches. The number
of companies running WWVB phase synchronous gear *appears* to have been 
near zero at the time of the change. There certainly was no giant flood of gear 
onto eBay. There also does not seem to have been an uproar in the commercial 
sector. 

Bob

> On Mar 23, 2018, at 5:35 AM, Martin Burnicki  
> wrote:
> 
> paul swed write:
>> I'll add to the comments the spectracoms are phase tracking receivers and
>> do not work on the new BPSK  signal.
> 
> When the German PTB made effort to increase the accuracy and reliability
> of the DCF77 long wave receiver in the 1980s, they implemented thus in a
> way that old receivers of the original AM modulation would not be affected:
> https://www.ptb.de/cms/en/ptb/fachabteilungen/abt4/fb-44/ag-442/dissemination-of-legal-time/dcf77/dcf77-phase-modulation.html
> 
> If I remember correctly then there were some discussions with folks a
> NIST when they were going to introduce their new modulation scheme, but
> even though the guys at NIST knew that their approach would break
> existing receivers, they implemented it anyway that way, even though
> other (compatible) ways would have been available. :-(
> 
> Martin
> ___
> 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] WWVB Antenna revisited/Spectracom 8182

[Azelio Boriani]

The AM modulation stuff is not affected also by the new WWVB signal.
The WWVB problem affecting timing and frequency receivers is the
180deg phase modulation where the DFC77 is only 13deg and is
randomized so that the mean phase is zero.

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Martin Burnicki
 wrote:
> paul swed write:
>> I'll add to the comments the spectracoms are phase tracking receivers and
>> do not work on the new BPSK  signal.
>
> When the German PTB made effort to increase the accuracy and reliability
> of the DCF77 long wave receiver in the 1980s, they implemented thus in a
> way that old receivers of the original AM modulation would not be affected:
> https://www.ptb.de/cms/en/ptb/fachabteilungen/abt4/fb-44/ag-442/dissemination-of-legal-time/dcf77/dcf77-phase-modulation.html
>
> If I remember correctly then there were some discussions with folks a
> NIST when they were going to introduce their new modulation scheme, but
> even though the guys at NIST knew that their approach would break
> existing receivers, they implemented it anyway that way, even though
> other (compatible) ways would have been available. :-(
>
> Martin
> ___
> 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] WWVB Antenna revisited/Spectracom 8182

[Martin Burnicki]

paul swed write:
> I'll add to the comments the spectracoms are phase tracking receivers and
> do not work on the new BPSK  signal.

When the German PTB made effort to increase the accuracy and reliability
of the DCF77 long wave receiver in the 1980s, they implemented thus in a
way that old receivers of the original AM modulation would not be affected:
https://www.ptb.de/cms/en/ptb/fachabteilungen/abt4/fb-44/ag-442/dissemination-of-legal-time/dcf77/dcf77-phase-modulation.html

If I remember correctly then there were some discussions with folks a
NIST when they were going to introduce their new modulation scheme, but
even though the guys at NIST knew that their approach would break
existing receivers, they implemented it anyway that way, even though
other (compatible) ways would have been available. :-(

Martin
___
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] WWVB Antenna revisited/Spectracom 8182

[paul swed]

I'll add to the comments the spectracoms are phase tracking receivers and
do not work on the new BPSK  signal.
As mentioned over the years I and others have offered approaches to
correcting the carrier. My last approach that worked very well over great
distances was the cheatin d-psk-er. Works what can I say. But it was never
kit-ed or anything, nor did I want to get into that business. My hats off
to those who make that effort. But I released everything on time-nuts and
to other people who wanted to post it.
Essentially an arduino driven by gps for time and the tick that new how to
create the actual BPSK data stream and to undo what NIST did. It flipped it
back at the same time. The cheatin part was using GPS as the time source.
It also required a soldering iron...
Simple, dump, stupid. The best approach.

As others say the spectracoms certainly have a nice display but the new
WWVB clocks are pretty darn nice for $50-70 as I recall.

Regards
Paul
WB8TSL


On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 3:47 PM, Hal Murray  wrote:

>
> organli...@pacbell.net said:
> > One would think inexpensive products would be sacrificed verses the more
> > expensive equipment.
>
> There are many many the low cost units and only a few of the expensive
> ones.
>
> It would be interesting to see how many of the expensive WWVB boxes were
> still running when they made the switch in transmission format.  I expect
> most of the places that needed good time had already switched to GPS.
>
>
> --
> 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.
>
___
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] WWVB Antenna revisited/Spectracom 8182

[Hal Murray]

organli...@pacbell.net said:
> One would think inexpensive products would be sacrificed verses the more
> expensive equipment. 

There are many many the low cost units and only a few of the expensive ones.

It would be interesting to see how many of the expensive WWVB boxes were 
still running when they made the switch in transmission format.  I expect 
most of the places that needed good time had already switched to GPS.


-- 
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] WWVB Antenna revisited/Spectracom 8182

[Tom Van Baak]

Donald,

Your Skyscan radio clock, as well as all other consumer-grade WWVB clocks & 
watches, will continue to work. The new format was designed to be compatible 
with the old format so any receiver that gets time only from the AM subcode 
will continue to work.

It's the commercial time & *frequency* receivers that don't work anymore. This 
is because the new format creates rapid phase shifts in the 60 kHz carrier 
which break the PLL design used in legacy receivers.

There's tons of time-nuts postings over the years on the subject. If you want a 
fun h/w and s/w project you can solve the problem for your receiver. Or google 
a bit and find some WWVB emulator projects which mimic the old signal well 
enough to keep receivers like Spectracom happy. Plus you won't need to hunt for 
a loop antenna for your 8182.

If you just want a home clock that's accurate at the sub-second level, consider 
a computer (NTP) or time.gov or GPS or GPSDO or smart phone or even NIST 
dial-up. Over the decades we've lost Omega, GOES, Loran-C and the carrier part 
of WWVB. But when you think of it, cell phones, the internet, and GPS (and 
GLONASS, Galileo, Beidou) are a pretty good replacement for those vintage time 
services.

/tvb

- Original Message - 
From: "D. Resor" <organli...@pacbell.net>
To: "'Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement'" 
<time-nuts@febo.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2018 12:13 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] WWVB Antenna revisited/Spectracom 8182


I remember being told about this years ago, but it had not registered in my 
mind recently that it was the format which had changed.  For some reason I 
thought it was the transmission frequency.

I'm a little baffled though, I purchased both of my SkyScan clocks, prior to 
these changes.  Yet they both still set themselves (when propagation allows) 
correctly.   One would think inexpensive products would be sacrificed verses 
the more expensive equipment.

What are example(s) of the "gizmo" which will convert the new format to the old 
one?

I realized later after reading more about the antenna I am looking at that it 
has a DC blocking capacitor built in, therefore it should be fine.  This is 
what happens when I spend too much time during the wee hours of the 
night/morning with a mind which becomes even more cloudy.

Thanks

Donald Resor
N6KAW



-Original Message-
From: time-nuts <time-nuts-boun...@febo.com> On Behalf Of Bob kb8tq
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2018 8:13 AM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement <time-nuts@febo.com>
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] WWVB Antenna revisited/Spectracom 8182

Hi

You should DC block the output of the 8182 if you are going to run it straight 
to an antenna. 

The bigger issue is that WWVB changed their transmit format a couple years ago. 
The signal they now send is not compatible with a lot of gear out there. 
It turns out that the 8182 is included on that list:

https://spectracom.com/support/retired-products/netclock?field_product_availability_ref_tid=94
 
<https://spectracom.com/support/retired-products/netclock?field_product_availability_ref_tid=94>

There are gizmos you can build to convert the new transmit format to the old 
one, I’m not sure if you are interested in going to that extreme. 

Bob



___
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] WWVB Antenna revisited/Spectracom 8182

[D. Resor]

I remember being told about this years ago, but it had not registered in my 
mind recently that it was the format which had changed.  For some reason I 
thought it was the transmission frequency.

I'm a little baffled though, I purchased both of my SkyScan clocks, prior to 
these changes.  Yet they both still set themselves (when propagation allows) 
correctly.   One would think inexpensive products would be sacrificed verses 
the more expensive equipment.

What are example(s) of the "gizmo" which will convert the new format to the old 
one?

I realized later after reading more about the antenna I am looking at that it 
has a DC blocking capacitor built in, therefore it should be fine.  This is 
what happens when I spend too much time during the wee hours of the 
night/morning with a mind which becomes even more cloudy.

Thanks

Donald Resor
N6KAW



-Original Message-
From: time-nuts <time-nuts-boun...@febo.com> On Behalf Of Bob kb8tq
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2018 8:13 AM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement <time-nuts@febo.com>
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] WWVB Antenna revisited/Spectracom 8182

Hi

You should DC block the output of the 8182 if you are going to run it straight 
to an antenna. 

The bigger issue is that WWVB changed their transmit format a couple years ago. 
The signal they now send is not compatible with a lot of gear out there. 
It turns out that the 8182 is included on that list:

https://spectracom.com/support/retired-products/netclock?field_product_availability_ref_tid=94
 
<https://spectracom.com/support/retired-products/netclock?field_product_availability_ref_tid=94>

There are gizmos you can build to convert the new transmit format to the old 
one, I’m not sure if you are interested in going to that extreme. 

Bob



___
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] WWVB Antenna revisited/Spectracom 8182

[Bob kb8tq]

Hi

You should DC block the output of the 8182 if you are going to run it straight 
to an antenna. 

The bigger issue is that WWVB changed their transmit format a couple years
ago. The signal they now send is not compatible with a lot of gear out there. 
It turns out that the 8182 is included on that list:

https://spectracom.com/support/retired-products/netclock?field_product_availability_ref_tid=94
 


There are gizmos you can build to convert the new transmit format to the old 
one, I’m not sure if you are interested in going to that extreme. 

Bob


> On Mar 22, 2018, at 6:25 AM, D. Resor  wrote:
> 
> I've been reading and researching what I will need to connect a Spectracom
> 8182 Netclock/2 for use here at home as a WWV(B) clock.
> 
> 
> 
> I found a post response from Feb 23, 2005 by Brian Kirby which includes the
> a link for a preamplifier schematic here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  hment-0008.pdf>
> http://www.febo.com/pipermail/time-nuts/attachments/20050223/94b9bd2c/attach
> ment-0008.pdf 
> 
> 
> 
> According to all information I have been able to gather, in California I
> really don't a preamplifier.   However the Spectracom 8182 manual discusses
> the use of a preamplifier (8207) with their antenna as "part of the system".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My train of thought is, the 8182 superimposes 10.7vdc on the antenna BNC for
> powering the inline preamplifier.  If I do not use the preamplifier will
> this DC voltage create problems and attenuate the RF signal? Will the
> comparator circuit in the 8182 show the antenna to be open and therefore not
> operate correctly?  Would a decoupling network to prevent the DC voltage
> from reaching the antenna create the same problem?
> 
> 
> 
> Lastly I see in the preamplifier schematic DC power is used to power the
> transistors (+9 input) and how 60Khz is 80 mV P-P amplified signal is shown
> as an output signal (near Q4).  I must be missing something as it doesn't
> show how the RF signal coupled back to the input, unless of course C8 (the
> 1.0uf capacitor) is how it is coupled back.
> 
> 
> 
> There are several jumpers within the 8182 but the manual does not seem
> discuss these. The datasheet for the 8165 disciplined oscillator discusses
> on Page 5 about the "Switch A1S1" which will appears to enable/disable the
> DC preamplifier voltage.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.atecorp.com/ATECorp/media/pdfs/data-sheets/Spectracom-8206_Manua
> l.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> Donald Resor
> 
> N6KAW
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] WWVB Antenna revisited/Spectracom 8182

[Ruslan Nabioullin]

On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 6:25 AM, D. Resor  wrote:

> I've been reading and researching what I will need to connect a Spectracom
> 8182 Netclock/2 for use here at home as a WWV(B) clock.
>

from Spectracom's official website:

``
8182 NetClock/2
WWVB referenced master clock. Will no longer operate as intended due to the
changes in the WWVB signal in 2012. Successor product is the SecureSync
time and frequency reference system [not true, at least in our enlightened
context---the SecureSync system is merely GNSS; the only terrestrial signal
that it's capable of is eLoran, but even that requires a separate receiver
unit].
''

The best approach would be to set up at least one HF AM receiver tuned to
WWV or CHU (preferably using a jamming-resistant antenna configuration),
connecting it to your NTP server, the daemon of which would use the NTP
WWV/CHU decoder modules.

-Ruslan

-- 
Ruslan Nabioullin
Wittgenstein Laboratories
rnabioul...@gmail.com
(508) 523-8535
50 Louise Dr.
Hollis, NH 03049
___
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.