Re: [time-nuts] U-blox teaser

2021-02-26 Thread John Ackermann N8UR
A while ago I tried doing a decidedly non-anechoic measurement with a 
VNA exciter going to a 1500 MHz ground plane and the receiver connected 
to the antenna (with a known delay cable) and I got a similar result, 
but there was enough noise that I didn't think I could nail it down to 
within 10 ns.


I've also measured GPS antenna splitters and they tend to have 20-ish ns 
delays, mainly due to the SAW filters.  I did surgery on an HP splitter 
to remove the filters so it could be used for L1 and L2 and that dropped 
the delay down to only 1 or 2 ns.


So there's definitely lots of stuff to calibrate if you want to get 
accurate time transfer.


John


On 2/26/21 8:02 PM, Michael Wouters wrote:

Typical L1 antenna delays range from 20 to 70 ns.
I know of only one antenna for which a delay is given by the vendor and the
technique used was just to measure the electronic delay ie by injecting a
signal into the circuit. To do it properly, you need a setup in a microwave
anechoic chamber with transmitting antenna etc. The practical difference
may be small though, 1 or 2 ns ( sample of one antenna!).

Cheers
Michael

On Sat, 27 Feb 2021 at 11:42 am, John Ackermann N8UR  wrote:


They're claiming "even better than" 5 ns for relative time, which given
the 4 ns jitter seems at least sort-of reasonable.  But until someone
shows me otherwise, I'm still thinking that getting better than 25 ns
absolute accuracy is a pretty good day's work.

John


On 2/26/21 5:26 PM, Bob kb8tq wrote:

Hi

I can’t think of many antennas (multi band or single band) that claim to

know their

delay to < 5 ns. Simply having a *differential* delay spec of < 5 ns is

quite good.

Same thing with delay ripple, you see specs out to around 15 ns on a lot

of antennas.

None of this is getting you to the actual total delay of the antenna.

It’s a pretty good

bet that number is a bit larger than either of these.

Some of the ripple probably comes out in the standard modeling. I’m not

sure that

the differential delay is taken out that way. Total delay, not taken out

in any obvious

fashion ( at least that I can see). If the F9 has a built in antenna

database, that’s not

mentioned in the doc’s. Any benefit from the corrections would have to

be part of

post processing.

No, that’s not the same as talking about the F9 it’s self doing X ns,

but it would be part

of any practical system trying to get close to 5 ns absolute accuracy.

5 ns *relative* accuracy between two F9’s? I probably could buy that if

the appropriate

one sigma / on a clear day / with the wind in the right direction sort

of qualifiers are

attached.

Bob


On Feb 26, 2021, at 4:27 PM, John Ackermann N8UR  wrote:

It's interesting that they talk about the F9 receivers offering 5 ns

absolute time accuracy.  Does anyone know of tests confirming that, and
what sort of care was required in the setup to get there?


John


On 2/26/21 9:34 AM, Robert LaJeunesse wrote:

FWIW. No detailed content, and a rather quick read. "Five key trends

in GPS".

https://www.u-blox.com/en/blogs/insights/five-key-trends-gps
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to

http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com

and follow the instructions there.


___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to

http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com

and follow the instructions there.



___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to

http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com

and follow the instructions there.



___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.



___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] U-blox teaser

2021-02-26 Thread Lux, Jim

On 2/26/21 4:00 PM, John Ackermann N8UR wrote:
They're claiming "even better than" 5 ns for relative time, which 
given the 4 ns jitter seems at least sort-of reasonable.  But until 
someone shows me otherwise, I'm still thinking that getting better 
than 25 ns absolute accuracy is a pretty good day's work.


John




And if the jitter is uniformly distributed (i.e. 1 clock cycle of some 
sort) - then the sd is 1/sqrt(12) of the extremes, so a "max 
uncertainty" of 5ns, is more like a 1.5 ns 1 sigma.



___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] U-blox teaser

2021-02-26 Thread Michael Wouters
Typical L1 antenna delays range from 20 to 70 ns.
I know of only one antenna for which a delay is given by the vendor and the
technique used was just to measure the electronic delay ie by injecting a
signal into the circuit. To do it properly, you need a setup in a microwave
anechoic chamber with transmitting antenna etc. The practical difference
may be small though, 1 or 2 ns ( sample of one antenna!).

Cheers
Michael

On Sat, 27 Feb 2021 at 11:42 am, John Ackermann N8UR  wrote:

> They're claiming "even better than" 5 ns for relative time, which given
> the 4 ns jitter seems at least sort-of reasonable.  But until someone
> shows me otherwise, I'm still thinking that getting better than 25 ns
> absolute accuracy is a pretty good day's work.
>
> John
> 
>
> On 2/26/21 5:26 PM, Bob kb8tq wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I can’t think of many antennas (multi band or single band) that claim to
> know their
> > delay to < 5 ns. Simply having a *differential* delay spec of < 5 ns is
> quite good.
> > Same thing with delay ripple, you see specs out to around 15 ns on a lot
> of antennas.
> > None of this is getting you to the actual total delay of the antenna.
> It’s a pretty good
> > bet that number is a bit larger than either of these.
> >
> > Some of the ripple probably comes out in the standard modeling. I’m not
> sure that
> > the differential delay is taken out that way. Total delay, not taken out
> in any obvious
> > fashion ( at least that I can see). If the F9 has a built in antenna
> database, that’s not
> > mentioned in the doc’s. Any benefit from the corrections would have to
> be part of
> > post processing.
> >
> > No, that’s not the same as talking about the F9 it’s self doing X ns,
> but it would be part
> > of any practical system trying to get close to 5 ns absolute accuracy.
> >
> > 5 ns *relative* accuracy between two F9’s? I probably could buy that if
> the appropriate
> > one sigma / on a clear day / with the wind in the right direction sort
> of qualifiers are
> > attached.
> >
> > Bob
> >
> >> On Feb 26, 2021, at 4:27 PM, John Ackermann N8UR  wrote:
> >>
> >> It's interesting that they talk about the F9 receivers offering 5 ns
> absolute time accuracy.  Does anyone know of tests confirming that, and
> what sort of care was required in the setup to get there?
> >>
> >> John
> >> 
> >>
> >> On 2/26/21 9:34 AM, Robert LaJeunesse wrote:
> >>> FWIW. No detailed content, and a rather quick read. "Five key trends
> in GPS".
> >>> https://www.u-blox.com/en/blogs/insights/five-key-trends-gps
> >>> ___
> >>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
> >>> To unsubscribe, go to
> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
> >>> and follow the instructions there.
> >>
> >> ___
> >> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
> >> To unsubscribe, go to
> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
> >> and follow the instructions there.
> >
> >
> > ___
> > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
> > To unsubscribe, go to
> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
> > and follow the instructions there.
> >
>
> ___
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
> and follow the instructions there.
>
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] U-blox teaser

2021-02-26 Thread John Ackermann
That's how I'd interpret it.

⁣Get BlueMail for Android ​

On Feb 26, 2021, 7:42 PM, at 7:42 PM, Bob kb8tq  wrote:
>Hi
>
>Would not “absolute” timing be referenced to UTC? (or something
>similar)
>
>Bob
>
>> On Feb 26, 2021, at 5:37 PM, ed breya  wrote:
>> 
>> John, if you look back at the recent GPSDO discussion initiated by
>"dandober" in hpaligent keysight group, you'll see a post by Leo
>Bodnar, linking a Ublox model here
>> 
>>
>https://www.u-blox.com/sites/default/files/products/documents/LEA-M8F_DataSheet_%28UBX-14001772%29.pdf
>> 
>> I looked it up, and I recall the PPS timing spec is +/- 5 nSec. After
>I studied it some, I replied back
>> 
>> "Thanks Leo, that's a great example of what I've been picturing. This
>is from the data sheet, regarding the PPS output:
>> 
>> "After an initial phase of acquisition the time-pulse becomes
>essentially jitter-free, generated coherently from the built-in
>reference oscillator and guaranteeing an exact number of reference
>frequency cycles between each time-pulse."
>> 
>> It looks like this is an implementation of what we've talked about
>here before a few times, for saw-tooth error reduction. BTW I didn't
>call it "1PPS" above, because it can be programmed for different rates
>- I don't recall what they are.
>> 
>> BTW, did dandober ever sign up here?
>> 
>> Ed
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
>http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
>> and follow the instructions there.
>
>
>___
>time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
>To unsubscribe, go to
>http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
>and follow the instructions there.
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] U-blox teaser

2021-02-26 Thread John Ackermann N8UR
You have to be careful comparing the LEA-M8F with other GPS units.  It 
does have low jitter because the "TIMEPULSE" signal is derived from the 
TCXO which is locked to the GPS time mark.


But their claim of "essentially jitter free" depends on your definition 
of "essentially" -- attached is a comparison of LEA-M8F PPS jitter vs. 
NEO-M8T and ZED-F9T raw, and NEO-M8T and ZED-F9T sawtooth corrected PPS. 
 The M8F is definitely better than the raw M8T and even the raw F9T, 
but the corrected M8T and F9T are both much better than the M8F.  And 
the M8F does *not* have sawtooth correction available.


So, it's a neat implementation and has some applications (basically as a 
modest performance 30.72 MHz GPSDO), but TANSTAAFL.


John


On 2/26/21 5:37 PM, ed breya wrote:
John, if you look back at the recent GPSDO discussion initiated by 
"dandober" in hpaligent keysight group, you'll see a post by Leo Bodnar, 
linking a Ublox model here


https://www.u-blox.com/sites/default/files/products/documents/LEA-M8F_DataSheet_%28UBX-14001772%29.pdf 



I looked it up, and I recall the PPS timing spec is +/- 5 nSec. After I 
studied it some, I replied back


"Thanks Leo, that's a great example of what I've been picturing. This is 
from the data sheet, regarding the PPS output:


"After an initial phase of acquisition the time-pulse becomes 
essentially jitter-free, generated coherently from the built-in 
reference oscillator and guaranteeing an exact number of reference 
frequency cycles between each time-pulse."


It looks like this is an implementation of what we've talked about here 
before a few times, for saw-tooth error reduction. BTW I didn't call it 
"1PPS" above, because it can be programmed for different rates - I don't 
recall what they are.


BTW, did dandober ever sign up here?

Ed



___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com

and follow the instructions there.
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] U-blox teaser

2021-02-26 Thread John Ackermann N8UR
They're claiming "even better than" 5 ns for relative time, which given 
the 4 ns jitter seems at least sort-of reasonable.  But until someone 
shows me otherwise, I'm still thinking that getting better than 25 ns 
absolute accuracy is a pretty good day's work.


John


On 2/26/21 5:26 PM, Bob kb8tq wrote:

Hi

I can’t think of many antennas (multi band or single band) that claim to know 
their
delay to < 5 ns. Simply having a *differential* delay spec of < 5 ns is quite 
good.
Same thing with delay ripple, you see specs out to around 15 ns on a lot of 
antennas.
None of this is getting you to the actual total delay of the antenna. It’s a 
pretty good
bet that number is a bit larger than either of these.

Some of the ripple probably comes out in the standard modeling. I’m not sure 
that
the differential delay is taken out that way. Total delay, not taken out in any 
obvious
fashion ( at least that I can see). If the F9 has a built in antenna database, 
that’s not
mentioned in the doc’s. Any benefit from the corrections would have to be part 
of
post processing.

No, that’s not the same as talking about the F9 it’s self doing X ns, but it 
would be part
of any practical system trying to get close to 5 ns absolute accuracy.

5 ns *relative* accuracy between two F9’s? I probably could buy that if the 
appropriate
one sigma / on a clear day / with the wind in the right direction sort of 
qualifiers are
attached.

Bob


On Feb 26, 2021, at 4:27 PM, John Ackermann N8UR  wrote:

It's interesting that they talk about the F9 receivers offering 5 ns absolute 
time accuracy.  Does anyone know of tests confirming that, and what sort of 
care was required in the setup to get there?

John


On 2/26/21 9:34 AM, Robert LaJeunesse wrote:

FWIW. No detailed content, and a rather quick read. "Five key trends in GPS".
https://www.u-blox.com/en/blogs/insights/five-key-trends-gps
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.



___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.



___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] U-blox teaser

2021-02-26 Thread Bob kb8tq
Hi

Would not “absolute” timing be referenced to UTC? (or something similar)

Bob

> On Feb 26, 2021, at 5:37 PM, ed breya  wrote:
> 
> John, if you look back at the recent GPSDO discussion initiated by "dandober" 
> in hpaligent keysight group, you'll see a post by Leo Bodnar, linking a Ublox 
> model here
> 
> https://www.u-blox.com/sites/default/files/products/documents/LEA-M8F_DataSheet_%28UBX-14001772%29.pdf
> 
> I looked it up, and I recall the PPS timing spec is +/- 5 nSec. After I 
> studied it some, I replied back
> 
> "Thanks Leo, that's a great example of what I've been picturing. This is from 
> the data sheet, regarding the PPS output:
> 
> "After an initial phase of acquisition the time-pulse becomes essentially 
> jitter-free, generated coherently from the built-in reference oscillator and 
> guaranteeing an exact number of reference frequency cycles between each 
> time-pulse."
> 
> It looks like this is an implementation of what we've talked about here 
> before a few times, for saw-tooth error reduction. BTW I didn't call it 
> "1PPS" above, because it can be programmed for different rates - I don't 
> recall what they are.
> 
> BTW, did dandober ever sign up here?
> 
> Ed
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to 
> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
> and follow the instructions there.


___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] U-blox teaser

2021-02-26 Thread ed breya
John, if you look back at the recent GPSDO discussion initiated by 
"dandober" in hpaligent keysight group, you'll see a post by Leo Bodnar, 
linking a Ublox model here


https://www.u-blox.com/sites/default/files/products/documents/LEA-M8F_DataSheet_%28UBX-14001772%29.pdf

I looked it up, and I recall the PPS timing spec is +/- 5 nSec. After I 
studied it some, I replied back


"Thanks Leo, that's a great example of what I've been picturing. This is 
from the data sheet, regarding the PPS output:


"After an initial phase of acquisition the time-pulse becomes 
essentially jitter-free, generated coherently from the built-in 
reference oscillator and guaranteeing an exact number of reference 
frequency cycles between each time-pulse."


It looks like this is an implementation of what we've talked about here 
before a few times, for saw-tooth error reduction. BTW I didn't call it 
"1PPS" above, because it can be programmed for different rates - I don't 
recall what they are.


BTW, did dandober ever sign up here?

Ed



___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] U-blox teaser

2021-02-26 Thread Bob kb8tq
Hi

I can’t think of many antennas (multi band or single band) that claim to know 
their
delay to < 5 ns. Simply having a *differential* delay spec of < 5 ns is quite 
good. 
Same thing with delay ripple, you see specs out to around 15 ns on a lot of 
antennas.
None of this is getting you to the actual total delay of the antenna. It’s a 
pretty good
bet that number is a bit larger than either of these. 

Some of the ripple probably comes out in the standard modeling. I’m not sure 
that 
the differential delay is taken out that way. Total delay, not taken out in any 
obvious 
fashion ( at least that I can see). If the F9 has a built in antenna database, 
that’s not 
mentioned in the doc’s. Any benefit from the corrections would have to be part 
of 
post processing. 

No, that’s not the same as talking about the F9 it’s self doing X ns, but it 
would be part 
of any practical system trying to get close to 5 ns absolute accuracy. 

5 ns *relative* accuracy between two F9’s? I probably could buy that if the 
appropriate 
one sigma / on a clear day / with the wind in the right direction sort of 
qualifiers are
attached. 

Bob

> On Feb 26, 2021, at 4:27 PM, John Ackermann N8UR  wrote:
> 
> It's interesting that they talk about the F9 receivers offering 5 ns absolute 
> time accuracy.  Does anyone know of tests confirming that, and what sort of 
> care was required in the setup to get there?
> 
> John
> 
> 
> On 2/26/21 9:34 AM, Robert LaJeunesse wrote:
>> FWIW. No detailed content, and a rather quick read. "Five key trends in GPS".
>> https://www.u-blox.com/en/blogs/insights/five-key-trends-gps
>> ___
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to 
>> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
>> and follow the instructions there.
> 
> ___
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to 
> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
> and follow the instructions there.


___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] U-blox teaser

2021-02-26 Thread John Ackermann N8UR
It's interesting that they talk about the F9 receivers offering 5 ns 
absolute time accuracy.  Does anyone know of tests confirming that, and 
what sort of care was required in the setup to get there?


John


On 2/26/21 9:34 AM, Robert LaJeunesse wrote:

FWIW. No detailed content, and a rather quick read. "Five key trends in GPS".

https://www.u-blox.com/en/blogs/insights/five-key-trends-gps

___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.



___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


[time-nuts] U-blox teaser

2021-02-26 Thread Robert LaJeunesse
FWIW. No detailed content, and a rather quick read. "Five key trends in GPS".

https://www.u-blox.com/en/blogs/insights/five-key-trends-gps

___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.