Before I buy one for the usual auction site does some have the manual
for one of these oldies
-pete
___
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
Hi
At least the way I read the pdf's NIST seems to believe that GPS is legally
traceable to NIST. It is the same measure and then look up the data sort of
thing that LORAN used to be. Took a while to read through them all…
Bob
On May 31, 2013, at 4:37 PM, Charles P. Steinmetz
On Wed, 29 May 2013 01:59:12 +0200
Magnus Danielson mag...@rubidium.dyndns.org wrote:
On 05/28/2013 07:55 PM, Attila Kinali wrote:
http://www.pttimeeting.org/archivemeetings/1984papers/Vol%2016_10.pdf
See also
http://www.pttimeeting.org/archivemeetings/1979papers/Vol%2011_25.pdf
Hi
The electronics in an SC based OCXO will be different from the stuff in an AT
based part. At the very least you need additional traps for the SC. You also
need to do something to accommodate it's significantly higher resistance. On
the plus side, the SC probably can take 4X higher drive
On 06/01/2013 04:54 PM, Bob Camp wrote:
Hi
At least the way I read the pdf's NIST seems to believe that GPS is legally traceable to
NIST. It is the same measure and then look up the data sort of thing that
LORAN used to be. Took a while to read through them all…
However, just taking time
Yep, Phase plot is like a Saw tooth.
I plugged the house standard as external reference (I am sure I did that
already) and it still drifts so there is something wrong there somewhere.
I also measured the DAC voltage going to the FRK and it's not moving from 0.95
volt.
Without schematics I am
On Tue, 28 May 2013 20:23:06 -0700
Jim Lux jim...@earthlink.net wrote:
The USO's we got for GRAIL from APL have ADEV1E-13 from 1 to 1000
seconds, and then heads up at 1 decade/decade. The lowest ADEV is about
5E-14 at around 50 seconds, but it's pretty flat. See the paper by
Enzer et al.
Moin,
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 11:21:44 -0400
Bob Camp li...@rtty.us wrote:
The electronics in an SC based OCXO will be different from the stuff
in an AT based part. At the very least you need additional traps for the SC.
You also need to do something to accommodate it's significantly higher
Attila,
On 06/01/2013 05:11 PM, Attila Kinali wrote:
On Wed, 29 May 2013 01:59:12 +0200
Magnus Danielsonmag...@rubidium.dyndns.org wrote:
On 05/28/2013 07:55 PM, Attila Kinali wrote:
http://www.pttimeeting.org/archivemeetings/1984papers/Vol%2016_10.pdf
See also
On 06/01/2013 05:21 PM, Bob Camp wrote:
Hi
The electronics in an SC based OCXO will be different from the stuff
in an AT based part. At the very least you need additional traps for
the SC. You also need to do something to accommodate it's significantly
higher resistance. On the plus side, the
Hi
On Jun 1, 2013, at 12:21 PM, Magnus Danielson mag...@rubidium.dyndns.org
wrote:
Attila,
On 06/01/2013 05:11 PM, Attila Kinali wrote:
On Wed, 29 May 2013 01:59:12 +0200
Magnus Danielsonmag...@rubidium.dyndns.org wrote:
On 05/28/2013 07:55 PM, Attila Kinali wrote:
Hi
On Jun 1, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Magnus Danielson mag...@rubidium.dyndns.org
wrote:
On 06/01/2013 04:54 PM, Bob Camp wrote:
Hi
At least the way I read the pdf's NIST seems to believe that GPS is legally
traceable to NIST. It is the same measure and then look up the data sort
of thing
Far more significant than any of that - marketing may well have asked that
the part be optimized in a different way so it would sell better. Phase
noise often seen as a better bragging rights spec than ADEV. My personal
opinion is that this bias is driven more by the fact that fewer people
Hi
On Jun 1, 2013, at 12:04 PM, Attila Kinali att...@kinali.ch wrote:
Moin,
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 11:21:44 -0400
Bob Camp li...@rtty.us wrote:
The electronics in an SC based OCXO will be different from the stuff
in an AT based part. At the very least you need additional traps for the SC.
On 6/1/2013 9:47 AM, Mark C. Stephens wrote:
Yep, Phase plot is like a Saw tooth.
So, despite the 'lock' LED, it isn't locked. Well, maybe something's
locked, but we're not sure what.
I plugged the house standard as external reference (I am sure I did that
already) and it still drifts
On 06/01/2013 07:18 PM, Bob Camp wrote:
Hi
On Jun 1, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Magnus Danielsonmag...@rubidium.dyndns.org
wrote:
On 06/01/2013 04:54 PM, Bob Camp wrote:
Hi
At least the way I read the pdf's NIST seems to believe that GPS is legally traceable to
NIST. It is the same measure and
Ed, I am sure it will be back to haunt us as soon as I clear down the backlog
of stuff waiting to get on the workbench :)
The problem with the GPS RX is its upside down on the main system board
platform.
It can't be reached unless everything is unplugged and the platform turned
upside down.
A Man has got to have his toys and I have a HP 59503A GPIB clock...
Has anyone seen software to maybe sync the clock with an NTP server or
something :)
Windows, Linux, it's all good!
-marki
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To
In the 5950x line there is a display unit. IMO, that would be a lot easier.
YMMV.
-John
==
A Man has got to have his toys and I have a HP 59503A GPIB clock...
Has anyone seen software to maybe sync the clock with an NTP server or
something :)
Windows, Linux, it's all good!
True
However with LORAN and to a lesser extent WWVB traceability process was
well/known and documented and had been in place for decades and was easy to
implement correctly With GPS not so much especially with S/A. Supposedly
the new satellites don't have S/A but since the GPS satellites
On 06/01/2013 09:02 PM, Scott McGrath wrote:
True
However with LORAN and to a lesser extent WWVB traceability process was
well/known and documented and had been in place for decades and was easy to
implement correctly With GPS not so much especially with S/A. Supposedly
the new
Hi
Well, back in the day:
Check your gizmo versus LORAN station(s) over time period what ever. Get the
report in the mail from USNO a while later. Check your numbers against theirs.
Do the math. You have traceability. Yes there's a bit more to it in terms of
verifying measurement techniques.
On 6/1/13 8:49 AM, Attila Kinali wrote:
On Tue, 28 May 2013 20:23:06 -0700
Jim Lux jim...@earthlink.net wrote:
The USO's we got for GRAIL from APL have ADEV1E-13 from 1 to 1000
seconds, and then heads up at 1 decade/decade. The lowest ADEV is about
5E-14 at around 50 seconds, but it's pretty
That's the One, a 53509A.
It is a quarter width 2RU unit (a bit higher with its feet on)
Has GPIB on rear.
Set via buttons behind a small hinged flap on the front.
My 59503A drifts a lot and I seem to remember it wasn't y2K compliant.
I want to have some software send out a request for time over
On 6/1/13 10:35 AM, Bob Camp wrote:
Both suffer from people talking about levels (-120 dbc or 1x10^-11) without mentioning
the offset or tau. Since both are highly dependent on the offset or tau that's not a good
thing. My observation is that ADEV is much more likely to be mentioned without
Typo - HP 59309A.
-Original Message-
From: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On Behalf
Of Mark C. Stephens
Sent: Sunday, 2 June 2013 6:25 AM
To: j...@quikus.com; Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] 59503A GPIB clock
The 59309A can be updated via HPIB.
I did it two ways. The first was to use windows system time and then write
to the instrument. The other was to poll a M12+T and get the proper time.
Sadly, both are in Labview, and as such probably aren't much help.
On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Mark C.
Hi
On Jun 1, 2013, at 4:24 PM, Jim Lux jim...@earthlink.net wrote:
On 6/1/13 10:35 AM, Bob Camp wrote:
Both suffer from people talking about levels (-120 dbc or 1x10^-11) without
mentioning the offset or tau. Since both are highly dependent on the offset
or tau that's not a good thing.
I have Labview 8 already installed?
-Original Message-
From: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On Behalf
Of Lizeth Norman
Sent: Sunday, 2 June 2013 6:30 AM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] 59503A GPIB clock
Then that's what you'll need. Let me fish around and I'll see what I can
find. The original uses a mathscript node to get the system time.
If you have a M12+t and a serial port that LV recognizes, then the second
is for you.
Norm
On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Mark C. Stephens
Hi
On Jun 1, 2013, at 3:34 PM, Magnus Danielson mag...@rubidium.dyndns.org wrote:
On 06/01/2013 09:02 PM, Scott McGrath wrote:
True
However with LORAN and to a lesser extent WWVB traceability process was
well/known and documented and had been in place for decades and was easy to
i use a 59309A as a time and date display in a setup of old HP devices:
10 mhz are taken from a fury gpsdo to keep the clock stable. an HP 71B
reads the time from the gpsdo via an HP-IL/RS-232 interface and delivers
it to the clock via an HP-IL/HPIB interface. setting the clock looks
pretty
On 06/01/2013 11:27 PM, Bob Camp wrote:
Hi
On Jun 1, 2013, at 3:34 PM, Magnus Danielsonmag...@rubidium.dyndns.org wrote:
On 06/01/2013 09:02 PM, Scott McGrath wrote:
True
However with LORAN and to a lesser extent WWVB traceability process was
well/known and documented and had been in
Hi
On Jun 1, 2013, at 5:51 PM, Magnus Danielson mag...@rubidium.dyndns.org wrote:
On 06/01/2013 11:27 PM, Bob Camp wrote:
Hi
On Jun 1, 2013, at 3:34 PM, Magnus Danielsonmag...@rubidium.dyndns.org
wrote:
On 06/01/2013 09:02 PM, Scott McGrath wrote:
True
However with LORAN and to a
Bob wrote:
At least the way I read the pdf's NIST seems to
believe that GPS is legally traceable to NIST.
It is the same measure and then look up the
data sort of thing that LORAN used to
be. Took a while to read through them all
Yes, that is correct.
Magnus wrote:
However, just
On May 27, 2013, at 8:21 AM, Eric Williams wd6...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm happy with my OnTime dial clock.
I have been very happy with the ones I've gotten as well. That said, I have
one that my wife managed to snag the Ethernet cord on, ripping the Ethernet
jack off the motherboard. It's free
On 06/02/2013 12:19 AM, Charles P. Steinmetz wrote:
Bob wrote:
At least the way I read the pdf's NIST seems to believe that GPS is
legally traceable to NIST. It is the same measure and then look up
the data sort of thing that LORAN used to be. Took a while to read
through them all…
Yes,
So, legal traceability requires many steps described in obscure
documents
where one missing step invalidates all of the others.
Sounds like a religious discussion.
What was I doing when I compared 60 KHz derived from a 10 MHz output
from a Caesium standard with WWVB and recorded the rate of
On 6/1/13 1:46 PM, Bob Camp wrote:
Hi
For ADEV, a lot of oscillators have a sort of floor where the
ADEV is relatively constant, say from tau in the range10-1000
seconds, and then it rises up (from thermal effects and such), so
the shorthand is that the number quoted is that floor value
You
Yes, but the new BPSK modulation defeats the ability of most carrier
tracking receivers to lock up on the carrier.
It requires something like a Costas Loop receiver, designed to handle
BPSK, to extract the unmodulate carrier.
-John
==
So, legal traceability requires many steps
In the case the lab in question was accredited and we went through the audits
of process and procedure and go through them to this day and we have the nice
certs on the wall.
When LORAN went away we then had to use very expensive processes to MAINTAIN
that traceability and accreditation which
Hi
But remember - the original post was indeed a religious question.
Bob
On Jun 1, 2013, at 6:47 PM, Bill Hawkins b...@iaxs.net wrote:
So, legal traceability requires many steps described in obscure
documents
where one missing step invalidates all of the others.
Sounds like a religious
On 6/1/13 12:02 PM, Scott McGrath wrote:
True
However with LORAN and to a lesser extent WWVB traceability process
was well/known and documented and had been in place for decades and
was easy to implement correctly With GPS not so much especially
with S/A. Supposedly the new satellites don't
Hi
The cost of initially setting up your gear to run to LORAN was more than the
cost today of setting up similar gear to GPS. If you were doing it right, the
LORAN system was no more / or less free than the same thing with GPS.
Simply running a couple SRS LORAN's was not in it's day compliant
On 6/1/13 2:51 PM, Magnus Danielson wrote:
On 06/01/2013 11:27 PM, Bob Camp wrote:
Hi
On Jun 1, 2013, at 3:34 PM, Magnus
Danielsonmag...@rubidium.dyndns.org wrote:
On 06/01/2013 09:02 PM, Scott McGrath wrote:
True
However with LORAN and to a lesser extent WWVB traceability process
was
Hi
On Jun 1, 2013, at 7:38 PM, Jim Lux jim...@earthlink.net wrote:
On 6/1/13 12:02 PM, Scott McGrath wrote:
True
However with LORAN and to a lesser extent WWVB traceability process
was well/known and documented and had been in place for decades and
was easy to implement correctly With
Hi
On Jun 1, 2013, at 7:42 PM, Jim Lux jim...@earthlink.net wrote:
On 6/1/13 2:51 PM, Magnus Danielson wrote:
On 06/01/2013 11:27 PM, Bob Camp wrote:
Hi
On Jun 1, 2013, at 3:34 PM, Magnus
Danielsonmag...@rubidium.dyndns.org wrote:
On 06/01/2013 09:02 PM, Scott McGrath wrote:
True
jim...@earthlink.net said:
It's also the knowledge of the process yield at each step which means you
can stay in business. APL knows how many to start at the beginning to
insure they'll have 4 at the end, 2 years later.
I assume there is a distribution. Anything published on that? How
On 06/02/2013 12:58 AM, Jim Lux wrote:
On 6/1/13 1:46 PM, Bob Camp wrote:
Hi
For ADEV, a lot of oscillators have a sort of floor where the
ADEV is relatively constant, say from tau in the range10-1000
seconds, and then it rises up (from thermal effects and such), so
the shorthand is that the
On 6/1/13 4:46 PM, Bob Camp wrote:
That is, NIST certifies publicly that WWV is on frequency and on time with
a certain precision. Do I need to go to NIST and pay them to give ma piece of paper that says
this, or can I use their published data?
Remember - the original post (and thus the
On 6/1/13 4:50 PM, Hal Murray wrote:
jim...@earthlink.net said:
It's also the knowledge of the process yield at each step which means you
can stay in business. APL knows how many to start at the beginning to
insure they'll have 4 at the end, 2 years later.
I assume there is a
On 6/1/13 4:52 PM, Magnus Danielson wrote:
So, what was your engineering question, really?
responding to Bob's comment that people just say ADEV 1E-15 without
specifying a tau.
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe,
Jim wrote:
If I receive WWV, and measure it appropriately, can I say that my
time, accurate to 1 second, is traceable to NIST, since they
broadcast it quite accurately, and I can bound the uncertainty
contribution from the propagation and electronics to less than a second.
That is, NIST
The key is the nice letter from NIST proving to the auditors that you followed
the procedure.
That's the piece that's harder to get today than in the LORAN days unless I am
missing something here like a website where you enter your measurements and
they certify and send the nice letter back
54 matches
Mail list logo
