F Mitchell wrote:
Is there a common time standard that all of the timed
Olympic events are referenced to? I know that Omega
provides the timing, their logo is on every computer
that you see. If there is a common reference, how is
it distributed to all of the events?
The Omega
I read with interest about the new 10 MHz distribution amplifier.
But I agree with everyone, it's the specs that are missing that are
important.
But I wanted to take one comment up about AGC.
My company makes a nice distribution amplifier and we do have AGC. The nice
thing here is that a +7
Just wanted to remind everyone it's illegal to import any electronic devices
into Europe without them having a CE mark.
I see there have been many projects like the Jackson Labs unit that have
been imported into Europe. This is illegal.
I don't mean to knick pick, but it costs our company about
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Magnus Danielson writes:
F Mitchell wrote:
Is there a common time standard that all of the timed
Olympic events are referenced to?
I belive it is a requirement that there be no external inputs
(including power!) to the timing equipment, and therefore I would
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Martyn Smith wri
tes:
Just wanted to remind everyone it's illegal to import any electronic devices
into Europe without them having a CE mark.
That is not true.
It is illegal to *sell* things without CE marks to the unwashed
public, but you are allowed to import for
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Magnus Danielson
writes:
F Mitchell wrote:
Is there a common time standard that all of the timed
Olympic events are referenced to?
I belive it is a requirement that there be no external inputs
(including power!) to the timing equipment, and therefore I would
Martyn Smith wrote:
I don't mean to knick pick, but ...
I assume you didn't mean to nitpick either.
Sorry. Not really important. I know it's bad form to criticize grammar
on the internet but it caught my attention. Don't get me started on
there, their and they're.
Rick,
Compare, for example, the HP5087, a so-so design, to the
output amplifier design in the 5071A cesium, as documented
in my FCS paper in 1992. Huge difference in specs. The
5071A has 120 dB isolation between outputs.
If I look at your FCS92 paper and specially to figures 5 and 6: Do I
Hello Martyn,
Martyn Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Despite the AGC we still achieve good phase noise (-135 dBc/Hz @ 1 Hz
with
a -168 dBc noise floor) together with 130 dB isolation and 10 ps/C phase
stability.
I have problems to understand, how your amplifier can achieve phase
noise of -135
Bruce,
John,
...
And at smaller offsets like 100Hz and less ?
Shouldn't the improvement be even bigger ?
Closer to the carrier we are dealing with bigger signals
so the ADC issues like resolution should be less important,
and the limiting factor should really be the the
phase noise of the LO's
Yes, sadly this was a layout error that didn't get caught until too late
(I'm still not sure why the rules check in the board layout software
didn't catch it). Removing R4 if you're using DTR for power is the
correct answer.
John
Scott Mace wrote:
I found that on the two FatPPS units
LO phase noise is almost always what limits the noise floor at close-in
offsets, because of the narrow RBW (either analog or digital) typically used
at those offsets to keep the carrier out of the measurement.
Occasionally a high degree of RF attenuation might raise the equivalent
front-end noise
Luis Cupido wrote:
Bruce,
John,
...
And at smaller offsets like 100Hz and less ?
Shouldn't the improvement be even bigger ?
Closer to the carrier we are dealing with bigger signals
so the ADC issues like resolution should be less important,
and the limiting factor should really be the the
Martyn Smith wrote:
I read with interest about the new 10 MHz distribution amplifier.
But I agree with everyone, it's the specs that are missing that are
important.
But I wanted to take one comment up about AGC.
It depends how the AGC is done, there are some really poor examples for
My pet hate is loose and lose.
And there are many sufferers on this forum too...
But no names!
:-)
Jim
2008/8/15 Rex [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Martyn Smith wrote:
I don't mean to knick pick, but ...
I assume you didn't mean to nitpick either.
Sorry. Not really important. I know it's bad
Sorry you are wrong.
There is no exemtion for CE marking. Nothing is excempt. All test
equipment, all electronic equipment, even toothpaste must be CE marked.
There is no exemtion for personal use.
You maybe are getting confused with RoHS where test equipment is exempt.
Martyn
Hi All,
Yes I can't spell. I've just realised my spell checker isn't working.
Not only can't I spell, I can't type!!!
I did mean exemption if my previous email.
Best Regards
Martyn
Best Regards
___
time-nuts mailing list --
Jim Palfreyman wrote:
My pet hate is loose and lose.
Perhaps we could form a chapter of the ?
http://www.worldwidewords.org/articles/apostrophe.htm
Dave (G0DJA)
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
It depends on local interpretations of the CE rules. UK as usual in all
things emanating from the EU does it all to the letter, so yes, it is
illegal here (may be a bit more relaxed up your way Poul, as common sense
and EU don't seem to mix down here!).
One can get exceptions in a few cases,
Avian branch of the Apostrophe Police:
http://www.xertech.net/pub/puncbird2.jpg
-Rex
David Ackrill wrote:
Jim Palfreyman wrote:
My pet hate is loose and lose.
Perhaps we could form a chapter of the ?
http://www.worldwidewords.org/articles/apostrophe.htm
Dave (G0DJA)
Hello Martyn,
please keep in mind that CE marking is a self-certified mark. Not like the
FCC marking, that has to be officially tested and certified by a big lab. I
am sure a lot of products from Asia just have a label affixed to them, and
never underwent any real testing.
Also, most of
I'm not expert, but I suspect that this additional cost for electronic
equipment could be one of the major contributing reasons
that the time in some European countries can be up to 6 or even 8 hours off
compared to standard North American time (EST.)
I'm just sayin...
Mark
Message: 4
Date:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Martyn Smith wri
tes:
Sorry you are wrong.
There is no exemtion for CE marking. Nothing is excempt. All test
equipment, all electronic equipment, even toothpaste must be CE marked.
The CE rules only cover retail sale, it does not cover personal
imports from
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Rob Kimberley writes:
CE testing/marking is a mine field. Not as simple a statement as self
certifying! You need to tie in the CE certification with declarations of
conformity (safety, EMC etc etc), all of which need testing.
No, you only need to tie them to
Hi to all,
indeed, the CE-marking is quite complicated and sometimes a 'pain in the neck',
but obviously necessary as well.
I believe that all industrial manufactured products are affected, but I am not
anymore in touch with these regulations.
I found some pages with explanations and extracted
A summary somewhat easier to read you can find here:
CE Marking: Your Passport to the European Union
http://www.i-b-t.net/anm/templates/trade_article.asp?articleid=262zoneid=3
perhaps it can bring some more light into the darkness of the
worldtrade and the european market.
regards
Arnold,
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In the agreement with the Council, the European Parliament underlines
that importers must place only compliant products on the Community
market. Before placing a product on the market importers must ensure
that [...]
The important thing in this clause is placing a
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Forbes writes:
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In the agreement with the Council, the European Parliament underlines
that importers must place only compliant products on the Community
market. Before placing a product on the market importers must ensure
that [...]
David Forbes wrote:
This is interesting. It means that I, as an American exporter selling
directly
to end customers in the EU, do NOT need to CE mark my American made products.
I have bought several items from the US for personal use, and not for
resale, I don't remember any of them
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Arnold Tibus writes:
A summary somewhat easier to read you can find here:
CE Marking: Your Passport to the European Union
http://www.i-b-t.net/anm/templates/trade_article.asp?articleid=262zoneid=3
perhaps it can bring some more light into the darkness of the
Poul-Henning,
you are propably fully right!
And you caught the most important part:
Burden on importers
In the agreement with the Council, the European Parliament underlines
that importers must place only compliant products on the Community
market. Before placing a product on the market
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Arnold Tibus writes:
Poul-Henning,
[...] For the purpose of law all importers are treated as
producers. (Ref article 3 council directive (85/374/EEC) [!!!]
This is the reason that Importers in Europe are so much worried
about CE Marking on the product they import
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Ackrill writes:
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
Correct, provided if you don't otherwise end up placing the product
on the market, ie: by advertising directly in the EU or in global
media targeting EU audiences (ie: in native language).
That's interesting, given
And beware from the CE Mark on goods coming from China
What it does mean is just China Export, and I am not kidding...
73 Alberto I2PHD
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
Luis Cupido wrote:
Bruce,
John,
...
And at smaller offsets like 100Hz and less ?
Shouldn't the improvement be even bigger ?
Closer to the carrier we are dealing with bigger signals
so the ADC issues like resolution should be less important,
and the limiting factor should really be the the
Recently one of my LPRO-101 rubidium oscillators start acting flakey. First it
started to not lock if it was powered up hot (like if switched off for a few
seconds then switched back on). Next it started dropping out of lock while
running. I replaced it with one of those $100 units from
Didier,
Goofy is certainly an inappropriate engineering term. As I see it,
the MCS-51 is ill suited to programming with a C compiler because of
the small stack size and segmented RAM map. This makes writing an
efficient code generator more difficult, and you have to keep certain
Rob,
I have been using the Keil compiler for work and home for about 15 years and
only recently started using SDCC for home. They both do a fine job, even
though SDCC still goes through some growing pains.
I agree that having to keep track of data, idata and xdata is not a
desirable feature by
Robert Vassar wrote:
The PIC... I have no nice words for the PIC. It's a CPU architecture
kept alive by Donald Rumsfeld himself (He was the CEO of G.I. back in
the '70's), and surely he must have made a deal with the Devil to
make it as successful as it is. How's that for a
39 matches
Mail list logo
