Hi Oleg,
On 06/06/2018 02:53 PM, Oleg Skydan wrote:
> Hi, Magnus!
>
> Sorry for the late answer, I injured my left eye last Monday, so had
> very limited abilities to use computer.
Sorry to hear that. Hope you heal up well and quick enough.
> From: "Magnus Danielson"
>> As long as the sums C
That is exactly what it should be doing... it shows the time of arrival of the
receiver time message is varying by around a millisecond.
---
> However, when entering this command the three
millisecond digits do appear but only alternate back and forth every
several seconds between
Hello, Time-Nutters
I recently updated an old version of Lady Heather that has been
running well 24/7/365 for a number of years (except during
prolonged power grid outages !). V5.0 is now installed and running.
Getting it to display full-screen takes a bit of fiddling with different
Hi, Magnus!
Sorry for the late answer, I injured my left eye last Monday, so had very
limited abilities to use computer.
From: "Magnus Danielson"
As long as the sums C and D becomes correct, your
path to it can be whatever.
Yes. It produces the same sums.
Yes please do, then I can
It appears that I replied to the wrong message, please ignore.
Glenn
On 5/27/2018 11:52 AM, Oleg Skydan wrote:
Hi!
From: "Magnus Danielson"
You build two sums C and D, one is the phase-samples and the other is
phase-samples scaled with their index n in the block.
The MSDS is here:
https://simplegreen.com/data-sheets/
They claim that it is non reactive and chemically stable.
It is for water tolerant surfaces and should be rinsed.
Probably due to the citric acid.
Glenn
On 5/27/2018 11:52 AM, Oleg Skydan wrote:
Hi!
From: "Magnus Danielson"
Hi Oleg,
On 05/27/2018 05:52 PM, Oleg Skydan wrote:
> Hi!
>
>>> It looks like the proposed method of decimation can be
>>> efficiently realized on the current HW.
>
> I had some free time yesterday and today, so I decided to test the new
> algorithms on the real hardware (the HW is still an old
Hi!
From: "Magnus Danielson"
You build two sums C and D, one is the phase-samples and the other is
phase-samples scaled with their index n in the block. From this you can
then using the formulas I provided calculate the least-square phase and
frequency, and using
Hi!
--
From: "Magnus Danielson"
From the 2.5 ns single shot resolution, I deduce a 400 MHz count
clock.
Yes. It is approx. 400MHz.
OK, good to have that verified. Free-running or locked to a 10 MHz
reference?
Hi Oleg,
On 05/18/2018 12:25 AM, Oleg Skydan wrote:
> Hi, Magnus!
>
> --
> From: "Magnus Danielson"
>>> 2. Study how PDEV calculation fits on the used HW. If it is possible to
>>> do in real time PDEV option can be
Hi, Magnus!
--
From: "Magnus Danielson"
2. Study how PDEV calculation fits on the used HW. If it is possible to
do in real time PDEV option can be added.
You build two sums C and D, one is the phase-samples and the
Hi,
On 05/13/2018 11:13 PM, Oleg Skydan wrote:
> Hi Magnus,
>
> From: "Magnus Danielson"
>> I would be inclined to just continue the MDEV compliant processing
>> instead. If you want the matching ADEV, rescale it using the
>> bias-function, which can be derived out
Hi
From: "Bob kb8tq"
What I’m suggesting is that if the hardware is very simple and very cheap,
simply put two chips on the board.
One runs at Clock A and the other runs at Clock B. At some point in the
process you move the decimated data
from B over to A and finish out all
Hi
> On May 14, 2018, at 1:50 PM, Oleg Skydan wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> From: "Bob kb8tq"
>>> If such conditions detected, I avoid problem by changing the counter clock.
>>> But it does not solve the effects at "about OCXO" * N or "about OCXO" / M.
>>> It is
Hi!
From: "Bob kb8tq"
If such conditions detected, I avoid problem by changing the counter
clock. But it does not solve the effects at "about OCXO" * N or "about
OCXO" / M. It is related to HW and I can probably control it only
partially. I will try to improve clock and
Hi
> On May 14, 2018, at 5:25 AM, Oleg Skydan wrote:
>
> Hi Bob!
>
> From: "Bob kb8tq"
>>> I think it will be more than enough for my needs, at least now.
>>>
From the 2.5 ns single shot resolution, I deduce a 400 MHz count clock.
>>>
>>> Yes. It is
Hi Bob!
From: "Bob kb8tq"
I think it will be more than enough for my needs, at least now.
From the 2.5 ns single shot resolution, I deduce a 400 MHz count clock.
Yes. It is approx. 400MHz.
I think I would spend more time working out what happens at “about 400
MHz” X N or
Hi
> On May 13, 2018, at 5:13 PM, Oleg Skydan wrote:
>
> Hi Magnus,
>
> From: "Magnus Danielson"
>> I would be inclined to just continue the MDEV compliant processing
>> instead. If you want the matching ADEV, rescale it using the
>>
Hi Magnus,
From: "Magnus Danielson"
I would be inclined to just continue the MDEV compliant processing
instead. If you want the matching ADEV, rescale it using the
bias-function, which can be derived out of p.51 of that presentation.
You just need to figure out the
Hi,
On 05/13/2018 08:09 PM, Bob kb8tq wrote:
>>> If so, that raises a whole added layer to this discussion in terms of “does
>>> it do
>>> what it says it does?”.
>>
>> This question is also important for amateur/hobby measurement equipment. I
>> do not need equipment that "does not do what it
Hi
> On May 13, 2018, at 1:31 PM, Oleg Skydan wrote:
>
> Hi Bob!
>
> From: "Bob kb8tq"
>> I guess it is time to ask:
>>
>> Is this a commercial product you are designing?
>
> No. I have no abilities to produce it commercially and I see no market for
>
Hi Bob!
From: "Bob kb8tq"
I guess it is time to ask:
Is this a commercial product you are designing?
No. I have no abilities to produce it commercially and I see no market for
such product. I will build one unit for myself, I may build several more
units for friends or if
Hi
I guess it is time to ask:
Is this a commercial product you are designing?
If so, that raises a whole added layer to this discussion in terms of “does it
do
what it says it does?”.
Bob
> On May 13, 2018, at 3:07 AM, Oleg Skydan wrote:
>
> Hi Bob!
>
> From: "Bob
Hi Oleg,
On 05/13/2018 09:31 AM, Oleg Skydan wrote:
> Hi Magnus!
>
> From: "Magnus Danielson"
>>> The leftmost tau values are skipped and they "stay" inside the counter.
>>> If I setup counter to generate lets say 1s stamps (ADEV starts at 1s) it
>>> will generate
Hi Magnus!
From: "Magnus Danielson"
The leftmost tau values are skipped and they "stay" inside the counter.
If I setup counter to generate lets say 1s stamps (ADEV starts at 1s) it
will generate internally 1/8sec averaged measurements, but export
combined data for
Hi Bob!
From: "Bob kb8tq"
It’s only useful if it is accurate. Since you can “do code” that gives you
results that are better than reality,
simply coming up with a number is not the full answer. To be useful as
ADEV, it needs to be correct.
I understand it, so I try to
On 05/12/2018 09:41 PM, Bob kb8tq wrote:
> Hi
>
>
>> On May 12, 2018, at 1:20 PM, Oleg Skydan wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> From: "Bob kb8tq"
>>> There is still the problem that the first post on the graph is different
>>> depending
>>> on the technique.
>>
>>
Hi,
On 05/12/2018 08:38 PM, Oleg Skydan wrote:
> Hi!
>
> From: "Magnus Danielson"
>> ADEV assumes brick-wall filtering up to the Nyquist frequency as result
>> of the sample-rate. When you filter the data as you do a Linear
>> Regression / Least Square estimation,
Hi
> On May 12, 2018, at 1:20 PM, Oleg Skydan wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> From: "Bob kb8tq"
>> There is still the problem that the first post on the graph is different
>> depending
>> on the technique.
>
> The leftmost tau values are skipped and they "stay"
Hi Oleg,
On 05/12/2018 07:20 PM, Oleg Skydan wrote:
> Hi!
>
> From: "Bob kb8tq"
>> There is still the problem that the first post on the graph is
>> different depending
>> on the technique.
>
> The leftmost tau values are skipped and they "stay" inside the counter.
> If I setup
Hi!
From: "Magnus Danielson"
ADEV assumes brick-wall filtering up to the Nyquist frequency as result
of the sample-rate. When you filter the data as you do a Linear
Regression / Least Square estimation, the actual bandwidth will be much
less, so the ADEV measures
Hi!
From: "Bob kb8tq"
There is still the problem that the first post on the graph is different
depending
on the technique.
The leftmost tau values are skipped and they "stay" inside the counter. If I
setup counter to generate lets say 1s stamps (ADEV starts at 1s) it will
Hi,
On 05/11/2018 05:35 PM, Bob kb8tq wrote:
> Hi
>
> If you do the weighted average as indicated in the paper *and* compare it to
> a “single sample” computation,
> the results are different for that time interval. To me that’s a problem. To
> the authors, the fact that the rest of
> the
Oleg,
On 05/11/2018 04:42 PM, Oleg Skydan wrote:
> Hi
>
> --
> From: "Bob kb8tq"
>> The most accurate answer is always “that depends”. The simple answer
>> is no.
>
> I have spent the yesterday evening and quite a bit of the night
Hi Dana,
On 05/10/2018 06:17 PM, Dana Whitlow wrote:
> I'm a bit fuzzy, then, on the definition of ADEV. I was under the
> impression that one measured a series of
> "phase samples" at the desired spacing, then took the RMS value of that
> series, not just a single sample,
> as the ADEV value.
Oleg,
On 05/10/2018 10:46 AM, Oleg Skydan wrote:
> Hi
>
> Now I have some questions. As you know I am experimenting with the
> counter that uses LR calculations to improve its resolution. The LR data
> for each measurement is collected during the gate time only, also
> measurements are
Hi
If you do the weighted average as indicated in the paper *and* compare it to a
“single sample” computation,
the results are different for that time interval. To me that’s a problem. To
the authors, the fact that the rest of
the curve is the same is proof that it works. I certainly agree
Hi
--
From: "Bob kb8tq"
The most accurate answer is always “that depends”. The simple answer is
no.
I have spent the yesterday evening and quite a bit of the night :) reading
many interesting papers and several related
Hi
> On May 10, 2018, at 1:44 PM, Oleg Skydan wrote:
>
> Bob, thanks for clarification!
>
> From: "Bob kb8tq"
>> If you collect data over the entire second and average that down for a
>> single point, then no, your ADEV will not be correct.
>
> That
Bob, thanks for clarification!
From: "Bob kb8tq"
If you collect data over the entire second and average that down for a
single point, then no, your ADEV will not be correct.
That probably explains why I got so nice (and suspicious) plots :)
There are a number of papers on
Hi
More or less:
ADEV takes the *difference* between phase samples and then does a standard
deviation on them. RMS of the phase samples makes a lot of sense and it was
used back in the late 50’s / early 60’s. The gotcha turns out to be that it is
an
ill behaved measure. The more data you
I'm a bit fuzzy, then, on the definition of ADEV. I was under the
impression that one measured a series of
"phase samples" at the desired spacing, then took the RMS value of that
series, not just a single sample,
as the ADEV value.
Can anybody say which it is? The RMS approach seems to make
Hi
If you collect data over the entire second and average that down for a single
point, then no, your ADEV will not be correct.
There are a number of papers on this. What ADEV wants to see is a single phase
“sample” at one second spacing. This is
also at the root of how you get 10 second ADEV.
Hi
I have got a pair of not so bad OCXOs (Morion GK85). I did some
measurements, the results may be interested to others (sorry if not), so I
decided to post them.
I ran a set of 5minutes long counter runs (two OCXOs were measured against
each other), each point is 1sec gate frequency
The CNT91 is really a CNT90 with some detailed improvements to reduce
time-errors to be conform with 50 ps rather than 100 ps resolution.
In the CNT90 the comparators where in the same IC, which caused
ground-bounce coupling between channels, but separating them was among
the things that went in.
Hi
As you have noticed already, it is amazingly easy to get data plots with more
than the
real number and less than the real number of digits. Only careful analysis of
the underlying
hardware and firmware will lead to an accurate estimate of resolution.
This is by no means unique to what
Hi
From: "Bob kb8tq"
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2018 4:38 PM
Consider a case where the clocks and signals are all clean and stable:
Both are within 2.5 ppb of an integer relationship. ( let’s say one is 10
MHz and the other is 400 MHz ). The amount of information in your
data
From: "Azelio Boriani"
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2018 12:16 AM
If your hardware is capable of capturing up to 10 millions of
timestamps per second and calculating LR "on the fly", it is not a so
simple hardware, unless you consider simple hardware a 5megagates
Spartan3
Hi
So what’s going on here?
With any of a number of modern (and not so modern) FPGA’s you can run a clock
in the 400 MHz region.
Clocking with a single edge gives you a 2.5 ns resolution. On some parts, you
are not limited to a single
edge. You can clock with both the rising and falling
i" <azelio.bori...@gmail.com>
> To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement"
> <time-nuts@febo.com>
> Sent: Friday, April 27, 2018 7:39 AM
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Question about frequency counter testing
>
>
> You can measure your clocks
sage -
From: "Azelio Boriani" <azelio.bori...@gmail.com>
To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" <time-nuts@febo.com>
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2018 7:39 AM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Question about frequency counter testing
You can measure your clocks do
You can measure your clocks down to the ps averaged resolution you
want only if they are worse than your one-shot base resolution one WRT
the other. In a resonable time, that is how many transitions in your
2.5ns sampling interval you have in 1 second to have a n-digit/second
counter.
On Fri, Apr
Yes, this is the problem when trying to enhance the resolution from a
low one-shot resolution. Averaging 2.5ns resolution samples can give
data only if clocks move one with respect to the other and "cross the
boundary" of the 2.5ns sampling interval. You can measure your clocks
down to the ps
> That might be an interesting way to analyze TICC data. It would work
> better/faster if you used a custom divider to trigger the TICC as fast as it
> can print rather than using the typical PPS.
Hi Hal,
Exactly correct. For more details see this posting:
Hi
Consider a case where the clocks and signals are all clean and stable:
Both are within 2.5 ppb of an integer relationship. ( let’s say one is 10
MHz and the other is 400 MHz ). The amount of information in your
data stream collapses. Over a 1 second period, you get a bit better than
9
olegsky...@gmail.com said:
> No, it is much simpler. The hardware saves time-stamps to the memory at each
> (event) rise of the input signal (let's consider we have digital logic input
> signal for simplicity). So after some time we have many pairs of {event
> number, time-stamp}. We can plot
Hi
The degree to which your samples converge to a specific value while being
averaged
is dependent on a bunch of things. The noise processes on the clock and the
measured
signal are pretty hard to avoid. It is *very* easy to over estimate how fast
things converge.
Bob
> On Apr 26, 2018, at
If your hardware is capable of capturing up to 10 millions of
timestamps per second and calculating LR "on the fly", it is not a so
simple hardware, unless you consider simple hardware a 5megagates
Spartan3 (maybe more is needed). Moreover: if your clock is, say, at
most in an FPGA, 300MHz, your
From: "Hal Murray"
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2018 10:28 PM
Is there a term for what I think you are doing?
I saw different terms like "omega counter" or multiple time-stamp
average counter, probably there are others too.
If I understand (big if), you are doing the
olegsky...@gmail.com said:
> The plots I showed were made with approx. 5*10^6 timestamps per second, so
> theoretically I should get approx. 4ps equivalent resolution (or 11+
> significant digits in one second).
Is there a term for what I think you are doing?
If I understand (big if), you
Hi
Even with a fast counter, there are going to be questions about clock jitter
and just
how well that last digit performs in the logic. It’s never easy to squeeze the
very last
bit of performance out …..
Bob
> On Apr 26, 2018, at 3:06 AM, Azelio Boriani wrote:
>
From: "Azelio Boriani"
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2018 10:06 AM
Very fast time-stamping like a stable 5GHz counter?
No, it is not 5GHz counter. It does the trick I first saw in CNT91
counters. The hardware is capable of capturing up to 10 millions
of timestamps per
Very fast time-stamping like a stable 5GHz counter? The resolution of
a 200ps (one shot) interpolator can be replaced by a 5GHz
time-stamping counter.
On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 12:28 AM, Bob kb8tq wrote:
> Hi
>
> Unfortunately there is no “quick and dirty” way to come up with an
Hi
Unfortunately there is no “quick and dirty” way to come up with an accurate
“number of digits” for a
math intensive counter. There are a *lot* of examples of various counter
architectures that have specific
weak points in what they do. One sort of signal works one way, another signal
works
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,
Let me tell a little story so you will be able to better understand what my
question and what I am doing.
I needed to check frequency in several GHz range from time to time. I do not
need high absolute precision (anyway this is a reference oscillator problem,
not
Hi,
Fortunately I have not had this problem but I did have to deal with a destroyed
SRD in a HP 5110A synthesizer driver a few years ago. The SRD in that device
is maintained at an elevated temperature in a little oven and as a result of a
thermostat failure it was reduced to a charred blob.
When working on the A4 assy. the ONLY adjustments you should make are:
- Cavity frequency, unscrew locking ring and while looking at the A7 J1
signal or 2nd harmonic reading adjust for max and then lock down.
- Attenuator, Unlock with allen, adjust for same, usually pulled all the
way out.
Kejia
Rick gave you some very good information. I have to agree that the SRDs are
pretty tough from my experience. I have several 5061s. But they do need the
bias and the RF at the level indicated in the manual. Not to much not to
little.
There is also a RF attenuator knob on the multiplier. So
Dear Richard,
Very nice to hear from you, and thank you a lot for the help!
Indeed, I have cleaned the erosion still not working.
I am trying to now* remeasure the break voltage of the diode*.
I suspect that the doping get diffused in the isolation layer after age,
which make it a good diode,
I extensively studied the 5061 harmonic generator when I
was designing the harmonic generator in the 5071A.
We are now going on 30 years since that work. The diode
had some HP part number. Even if you knew this part
number, you would need to have the Part Information Report
microfiche that gave
Dear All,
Happy Christmas!
May I know if anyone knows the part number or the specification of the step
recovery diode in the harmonic
generator for the old HP 5601A cesium frequency standard?
I recently received this toy. The cesium tube seems to be OK, and I had
located the problem being
no
Hi
> On Oct 17, 2017, at 12:37 AM, Hal Murray wrote:
>
>
> kb...@n1k.org said:
>> The gotcha is that the spur spec’s are not always met. As you might guess,
>> doing testing over really wide DDS ranges is impractical. Some designs use
>> cleanup loops. The gotcha then
On 10/16/17 9:37 PM, Hal Murray wrote:
kb...@n1k.org said:
The gotcha is that the spur spec’s are not always met. As you might guess,
doing testing over really wide DDS ranges is impractical. Some designs use
cleanup loops. The gotcha then becomes a spur (say at 0.053 Hz) that is
inside the
kb...@n1k.org said:
> The gotcha is that the spur specâs are not always met. As you might guess,
> doing testing over really wide DDS ranges is impractical. Some designs use
> cleanup loops. The gotcha then becomes a spur (say at 0.053 Hz) that is
> inside the cleanup loop bandwidth â¦.
How
Hi
> On Oct 15, 2017, at 12:47 PM, Hal Murray wrote:
>
>
> kb...@n1k.org said:
>> Today DDS based loops let manufacturers use a *lot* more cells than they
>> could use “back in the old days”.
>
> I'd expect that to produce close in spurs that would be ugly in some
>
kb...@n1k.org said:
> Today DDS based loops let manufacturers use a *lot* more cells than they
> could use âback in the old daysâ.
I'd expect that to produce close in spurs that would be ugly in some
applications.
Is that info in the data sheet and/or are designers clued in?
--
These
quency standards are primary standards. /tvb - Original Message - From:
"Jar Sun via time-nuts" <time-nuts@febo.com> To: <time-nuts@febo.com> Sent:
Saturday, October 07, 2017 8:27 PM Subject: [time-nuts] Question about SA.33 Rb clock Dear group: I
have got a SA.3
that they are special or more accurate, but this is not
>> the case. None of these compact low-power laser / VCSEL / CPT -based
>> frequency standards are primary standards. /tvb - Original Message -
>> From: "Jar Sun via time-nuts" <time-nuts@febo.com>
mpact low-power laser /
VCSEL / CPT -based frequency standards are primary standards. /tvb - Original Message - From:
"Jar Sun via time-nuts" <time-nuts@febo.com> To: <time-nuts@febo.com> Sent:
Saturday, October 07, 2017 8:27 PM Subject: [time-nuts] Question about SA.33
None of these compact low-power laser / VCSEL / CPT -based frequency standards
are primary standards. /tvb - Original Message - From: "Jar Sun via
time-nuts" <time-nuts@febo.com> To: <time-nuts@febo.com> Sent: Saturday,
October 07, 2017 8:27 PM Subject: [time-nuts]
Hi,
On 10/12/2017 06:06 PM, Tom Van Baak wrote:
Your use of the phrase "real cesium" may be the source of your confusion. The
SA.3x uses rubidium and the SA.4x uses cesium. They are all real atoms. These modern MAC
/ CSAC atomic standards compete with high-end DOCXO quartz oscillators with
nuts@febo.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2017 8:27 PM
Subject: [time-nuts] Question about SA.33 Rb clock
Dear group: I have got a SA.33 Rb module from a second hand GPS clock, at first
it works well, but soon after it was damaged that beacuse I was trying to
install a heat sink on it, unfortu
Dear group: I have got a SA.33 Rb module from a second hand GPS clock, at
first it works well, but soon after it was damaged that beacuse I was trying to
install a heat sink on it, unfortunately I used screws which its size too long,
so maybe the screws drilled into inside Rb lamp or inside
The option described in the utilities menu changes from US format 9. to
Euro format 9, (i.e. swapping commas and decimal points). What I am
looking for is how to change the display from 10.0 to 10.000,000,000
mode (enabling commas after the decimal point).
>
t;- Original Message -
>From: "Mark Sims" <hol...@hotmail.com>
>To: <time-nuts@febo.com>
>Sent: Monday, July 03, 2017 10:52 PM
>Subject: [time-nuts] Question about HP-53132A decimal display
>
>
>>I recently got in a 53132A with what I think is
055.
/tvb
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Sims" <hol...@hotmail.com>
To: <time-nuts@febo.com>
Sent: Monday, July 03, 2017 10:52 PM
Subject: [time-nuts] Question about HP-53132A decimal display
>I recently got in a 53132A with what I think is fairly early
I recently got in a 53132A with what I think is fairly early firmware (it's
tied up doing some measurements right now so I can't check the version number).
All the photos of the 53132A that I have seen show it with commas separating
groups of 3 digits after the decimal point. Mine does not
Hi
At the often quoted 1.5 ns / meter error level, that would be almost 3.5 ns. At
the “worst case” 3 ns / meter
you would almost get to 7 ns.
Bob
> On Dec 7, 2016, at 7:17 PM, Mark Sims wrote:
>
> It depends upon your lat and lon, but figure about 10 feet. Basically
It depends upon your lat and lon, but figure about 10 feet. Basically earth
circumference is 24,000 miles * 5280 feet per mile divided by (2**24) (bits in
the sign+significand of a 32 bit float). The math works out to 7.5 feet, but
one always has to pay some imprecise math tax...
One can
-nuts [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On Behalf Of Mark Sims
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 2:33 PM
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Subject: [time-nuts] Question on LH
No, the SL keyboard command on TSIP receivers should do the
"multiple-single-point-surveys-until-it-gets-close" thing to se
ch...@chriscaudle.org said:
> Mark has explained previously on the list, but it is actually kind of
> convoluted. The command to set the position does not accept enough numeric
> precision to accurately set the position which was determined from
> long term averaging...
What does the chop-off
No, the SL keyboard command on TSIP receivers should do the
"multiple-single-point-surveys-until-it-gets-close" thing to set the
lat/lon/alt to better than single precision floating point accuracy. .
The advantage of doing a full 48-hour survey is that the surveyed position was
calculated by
Lady Heather can only talk to one device at a time, but you can fire up
multiple copies of Lady Heather to control multiple devices. You would need to
specify a different serial port to use on the second instance's command line.
Version 5.0 will let you swap serial ports and receiver type on
So need to do two long surveys then - what a pain ...
Oh well
Dave
-Original Message-
From: time-nuts [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On Behalf Of Chris Caudle
Sent: 07 December 2016 19:54
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Question on LH
On Wed, December 7, 2016 12:51
On Wed, December 7, 2016 12:51 pm, David C. Partridge wrote:
> But in any case at the end of the LH 48 hr survey, the survey location
> will be stored into the currently connected TB. If both TBs are connected
> to the same antenna, I think you'll need manually to set the location of
> the second
-nuts] Question on LH
I'm using the latest version of LH connected to two Thunderbolts. Whenever I do
a precision 48-hour antenna survey, I'm confused on if the derived best
coordinates are automatically loaded into the Lat & Lon registers when it
completes. What is the procedure at the comple
I'm using the latest version of LH connected to two Thunderbolts. Whenever I
do a precision 48-hour antenna survey, I'm confused on if the derived best
coordinates are automatically loaded into the Lat & Lon registers when it
completes. What is the procedure at the completion of the precision
Well, here is response from ADI:
Quote:
If I remember correctly, this part implements a differential DAC current
source, but only one of the outputs is bonded externally.
In this case, the current settle by Rset should be divided by 2...,
which explain your results.
I'll update the DS as
Bruce, I assume you are talking about Figure 12 of UG-313.
If an LCD scope is not in single shot mode it will show a composite of many
cycles which will hide the stairsteps (especially if the frequency control
word is not a nice round binary number) in the fuzz.
I think the 0.1uF capacitor on
There is something wrong with the example. The output is single-ended,
so using info from the AD9832 data sheet with Rset=3.9K and Rload=300
ohms as shown in the EVB schematic, it should go from 0 to 3.88mA and 0
to 1.16V. Figure 12 shows only half this, including only about .3V DC
bias
1 - 100 of 568 matches
Mail list logo