Richard,
One more thing, maybe I missed this earlier in the thread, but
can you really call it sawtooth correction when you apply a
receiver reported correction (with 1 ns granularity) to a 1PPS
signal (with 9 ns RMS or +/- 15 p-p jitter) as coarsely measured
by a 100 MHz TIC (with 10 ns
Hi Folks
snip/
http://www.synergy-gps.com/content/view/42/89/
snip/
http://www.rabel.org/archives/Motorola_Oncore/
snip/
Thanks for those - I put a few of those in my library and have also
downloaded winOncore12 - which also can't bring that one GT+ back to
life, even with the battery
Richard,
One more thing, maybe I missed this earlier in the thread, but
can you really call it sawtooth correction when you apply a
receiver reported correction (with 1 ns granularity) to a 1PPS
signal (with 9 ns RMS or +/- 15 p-p jitter) as coarsely measured
by a 100 MHz TIC (with 10 ns
From: Richard H McCorkle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [time-nuts] GPS noise reduction
Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2008 13:20:56 -0800 (AKDT)
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Richard,
Hello,
I looked at the dual standard data from yesterdays run, and
once again the predominance of the short-term variations in
From: Bruce Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] GPS noise reduction
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2008 11:16:36 +1200
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bruce,
The data I am trying to determine is the GPS short-term phase error
based on the results from comparing the same receiver to
From: Bruce Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] GPS noise reduction
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2008 14:30:52 +1200
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
METHOD 2:
If one uses an ADC to sample say a 1MHz sinewave (produced by dividing
down the OCXO frequency and low pass filtering) on the PPS
From: Tom Van Baak [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] GPS noise reduction
Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2008 23:02:34 -0700
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Richard,
One more thing, maybe I missed this earlier in the thread, but
can you really call it sawtooth correction when you apply a
receiver
Magnus Danielson wrote:
From: Bruce Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] GPS noise reduction
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2008 14:30:52 +1200
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
METHOD 2:
If one uses an ADC to sample say a 1MHz sinewave (produced by dividing
down the OCXO frequency and
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Magnus Danielson
Sent: Sunday, April 06, 2008 6:18 AM
To: time-nuts@febo.com; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] GPS noise reduction
Actually, in this application will a bit of
Actually, in this application will a bit of interlocking not
hurt, as the two oscillators should longterm have the same
frequency and interlocking will pull them together to their
average frequency. If you further aid this interlocking by
externally couple them together for higher
That also leads to a thought I've had -- if you have a pair of roughly
comparable oscillators at say 5 MHz, what about combining their outputs
in a mixer and using the 10 MHz sum output which (apart from noise added
by the mixer) ought to be sqrt-2 better than either unit alone?
John
Tom Van
Tom Van Baak wrote:
Actually, in this application will a bit of interlocking not
hurt, as the two oscillators should longterm have the same
frequency and interlocking will pull them together to their
average frequency. If you further aid this interlocking by
externally couple them
From: Bruce Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] GPS noise reduction
Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2008 09:19:11 +1200
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tom Van Baak wrote:
Actually, in this application will a bit of interlocking not
hurt, as the two oscillators should longterm have the
13 matches
Mail list logo
