List,
RDR electronics in Colorado has Motorola M12+ OnCore
GPS Timing Receiver 3V 1pps 100Hz for $20.
They also have other GPS units. Cheaper than chicoms and guaranteed. Stock
varies so check from time to time if you don't see what you need.
I'm a multiple happy camper customer.
Regards,
P
List,
60 KHz SYMTRIK Radio
Time Receiver..Item number: 230991713311
Regards,
Perrier
___
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 instructions there.
went to pv electronics direct. They are reasonably priced. But they don't
give the detail needed. I am pretty sure these are the old cmax or temic
chips. Since I don't have one can't really tell you.
Regards
Paul
WB8TSL
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:44 PM, paul swed wrote:
> I looked and did not s
I looked and did not see the radio
As to could it work yes. You might have to invert the data.
Regards
Paul
WB8TSL
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:35 PM, Perry Sandeen wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> List,
>
> On Ebay I stumbled upon a site called pv. electronics from England
>
>
Reasonable opens all kinds of doors.
The recvr is pretty simple so if it were 100 KC there would be a big 100KC
xtal.
That gets replaced with a 60 Khz and away you go.
However I think that switch selects sampling from an input reference so
would thinks its actually 60Khz
Regards
Paul.
On Tue, Jun
Not sure this went.
Reasonable opens all kinds of doors.
The recvr is pretty simple so if it were 100 KC there would be a big 100KC
xtal.
That gets replaced with a 60 Khz tuning fork and away you go.
However I think that switch selects sampling from an input reference so
would thinks its actually a
List,
On Ebay I stumbled upon a site called pv. electronics from England
The site offers a 60 KHz SYMTRIK Radio Time Receiver
Module W/100 MM Antenna for $25 delivered. I don't know if this will work with
Paul Sweed's circuits or not.
It looks like the stu
List, There are several Spectracom 8164 receiver available on Ebay.
My question: on the front panel bank of frequency selection switches, the left
hand switch is marked .1MHz. Is that really a 100 KHz (for LORAN) setting or
is it really tuned to WWVB?
If it truly is tuned to 100KHz can it be
Your "pi" example does not work. Pi is not a definition. the length of
an inch has changed many times over the centuries so there have been many
definitions. So yes 2.54 mm is the current definition but there are others
and you only have to go mack to 1958 to find that another definition of the
In the Austron 2110 is a dual D FF Mixer along with circuitry to get 100 Hz
out. I did a board using 2 XTAL Filter stages and you can get 1 E-12 using
a 100 MHz period counter. Using my previously mentioned Ping Pong counter
at 200 MHz and Offset of 1 Hz at 5 MHz you get 1 Hz out. Resolution
Hi Bob,
On 06/25/2013 06:17 PM, Bob Stewart wrote:
Hi Hal,
I had always used 25.4001 or .03937 to do my conversions. So, I looked online and found
the .039370078 and did the reciprocal. It is, indeed very very close to 25.4. If you
google "25.4001 conversion" you can find lots of tables us
It was a JOKE!!!
And, in fact, pi IS a definition: the ratio of the circumferance to the
diameter of a circle - whether it's measured in cubits, furlongs,
nanometers, or light years.
-John
==
> Your "pi" example does not work. Pi is not a definition. the length of
> an inch has
Chris Albertson wrote:
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 9:17 AM, Bob Stewart wrote:
Hi Hal,
I had always used 25.4001 or .03937 to do my conversions. So, I looked
online and found the .039370078 and did the reciprocal. It is, indeed very
very close to 25.4. If you google "25.4001 conversion" yo
(Original seems to have got lost. Try again)
> More recently we are using two D FF's for mixing in A/V
> applications and very high resolution frequency measurements with
> up to 1 E-15 a second using output frequencies from 0.5 Hz to 100
> Hz.
> Do to attachment limitati
(Original seems to have got lost - try again)
> More recently we are using two D FF's for mixing in A/V
> applications and very high resolution frequency measurements with
> up to 1 E-15 a second using output frequencies from 0.5 Hz to 100
> Hz.
> Do to attachment limitat
b...@evoria.net said:
> If you google "25.4001 conversion" you can find lots of tables using that as
> the conversion factor online. I don't know where the error came from or why
> it's quoted so regularly.
Thanks. I never would have thought to search for 25.4001. That's an amazing
calibrati
No. I'd say the electronics is several years more advanced. Not the
same company. However, the idea and construction is essentially the same.
73 de Brian/K3KO
On 6/25/2013 18:23, Mike Naruta AA8K wrote:
Could this be one of them Brian?
Mike - AA8K
On 06/24/2013 06:58 AM, Brian Alsop wro
No. It's THE definition... there is only one.
It's not like Pi, which equals 3 for small circles.
-John
===
> In message
>
> , Robert Darlington writes:
>
>>Machinists know that 1 inch is exactly 2.54cm or 25.4mm. It's a
>>definition, not a coincidence.
>
> The crucial word in
In message
, Robert Darlington writes:
>Machinists know that 1 inch is exactly 2.54cm or 25.4mm. It's a
>definition, not a coincidence.
The crucial word in that statement being "a" :-)
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956
Free
In message
, Jim Palfreyman writes:
>With a 3325B, a 5370B, and other time-nut miscellany, what's the quickest
>way you can come up with to measure the speed of light OR reproduce the
>metre.
Run a couple of meters bare wire across your table, terminate one
end in 50 Ohm and feed the other end w
Machinists know that 1 inch is exactly 2.54cm or 25.4mm. It's a
definition, not a coincidence.
-Bob
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Bob Stewart wrote:
> Hi Hal,
>
> I had always used 25.4001 or .03937 to do my conversions. So, I looked
> online and found the .039370078 and did the reciproc
Likely you had a very old perf board that was made before the 0.1" spacing
was common. Back in the vacuum tube days the solder strips had tabs on
3/8" centers and layouts were done on multiples of that. And then when the
early through hole chips came out they were on 0.1 centers. And you
couldn
Found book analysis of piezoelectric devices
https://rapidshare.com/files/4115908681/piezo.pdf
___
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 instructions ther
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 9:17 AM, Bob Stewart wrote:
> Hi Hal,
>
> I had always used 25.4001 or .03937 to do my conversions. So, I looked
> online and found the .039370078 and did the reciprocal. It is, indeed very
> very close to 25.4. If you google "25.4001 conversion" you can find lots
> of
Hi Hal,
I had always used 25.4001 or .03937 to do my conversions. So, I looked online
and found the .039370078 and did the reciprocal. It is, indeed very very close
to 25.4. If you google "25.4001 conversion" you can find lots of tables using
that as the conversion factor online. I don't kn
That's overstretched... eastern chips worked quite well, similarly to
western counterparts. Some faulty prototypes could have been distributed
through the black market, but none would've been incorporated in an
official product. Even the westerners had bugs...
CCCP, and PRL made intel clones, DD
Earthquakes, yes that range is one of the most active in the world. They
measure an uplift of as much as 2 inches per year, those mountains are
still getting taller.
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 3:54 AM, Jim Lux wrote:
> On 6/24/13 6:48 PM, Tom Miller wrote:
>
>> I wonder what the actual distance i
You are right, I was wrong. The Russian 8080 boards were made with 2.5mm, not
2.54.
- Original Message -
> From: MailLists
> To: j...@quikus.com; Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
>
> Cc:
> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 10:05 AM
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT Prot
b...@evoria.net said:
> OK, I see in the wiki that 0.1" is by definition 2.54mm. I was taught it
> was 2.54001, but that's not right, either. But, if industry says that
> they're defined as the same, then I'm the one out of date. =) I wonder
> what was with that old prototype board. I can't f
In the eastern block the customary pitch was exactly 2.5mm. At least
SSSR and DDR ICs were made so. For DIP40s it was a little of a stretch
(read pin bending) job to get them fit on .1" spaced boards...
On 6/25/2013 5:09 PM, J. Forster wrote:
It's not 'industry'. It's the international standar
With Glass/Epoxy protoboards being so expensive, I have bought several lots of
a phenolic perf board for prototypes off the web and they have been the most
inexpensive boards I have ever found. I don't feel bad about trashing failed
prototypes.. Search your favorite site for 7x9cm PCB Blank Ci
Brent,
I seem to remember a story about the early days of micro-computing, when Russia
was cloning 8080 chips. Their chips were of such poor quality that each chip
had a unique list of executions that could not be used. Anyway, the Russians
had sized their chip in metric measurements (2.54mm)
Maybe it was a 2 mm pitch, a somewhat common size. Others that come to mind
are 0.125 and 0.156 inches.
Tom
- Original Message -
From: "Bob Stewart"
To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement"
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 10:03 AM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT Prototyp
I once saw a board that was 2.5 mm, which would cause what you
describe. As soon as I figured out what the problem was, in the trash
it went.
Brent
On 6/25/2013 8:03 AM, Bob Stewart wrote:
OK, I see in the wiki that 0.1" is by definition 2.54mm. I was taught it was
2.54001, but that's not
It's not 'industry'. It's the international standards agency, whatever
it's called. The folks that define a meter as some number of wavelengths
of light in vacuo and so on.
There are some early perf boards that have holes on 1/16" centers, for use
w/flea clips'.
-John
===
> OK, I
OK, I see in the wiki that 0.1" is by definition 2.54mm. I was taught it was
2.54001, but that's not right, either. But, if industry says that they're
defined as the same, then I'm the one out of date. =) I wonder what was with
that old prototype board. I can't find it, so it must be in a l
2.54 mm is DEFINED as 0.1 inch. The conversion is EXACT.
-John
> 2.54 mm pitch is close enough to the .1 in "standard". The through-hole
> DIP chips will fit fine. I used to build stuff with .1 in perfboard,
> sockets, and wire-wrap but only use a very few glue chips now and
>
Forty years ago I did a digital mixer using three J K FF's to subtract the
IF from the LO for remote monitoring of radio stations. The output is not
symmetrical but great for a frequency counter. Shortly there after Motorola
introduced the MC12000 a D FF intended and widely used for PLL
appl
For the VCO, how about a reactance modulator. They were very popular for the
sweeping local oscillator in many a panadapter. Or perhaps one of the voice
coil based wobbulators?
John WA4WDL
Bob Camp wrote:
> Hi
>
> I believe that if you dig into it, the correlator is either running qui
On 6/24/13 6:48 PM, Tom Miller wrote:
I wonder what the actual distance is using current GPS survey processes?
Tom
SLightly different, because there are some faults running across there
and there have been some earthquakes with displacement.
___
Hi
I believe that if you dig into it, the correlator is either running quite fast
(in serial mode) or is pretty large (parallel processing).
Since you know neither the code nor the doppler (no almanac) you are sweeping
both the frequency and the code.
The VCO is a bit of a challenge (as menti
Thanks, Bruce, for that wonderful phase meter patent reference. Very
interesting.
BTW, if any of you are wondering why the patent mentions comparing 10.23 MHz
(GPS) with a "very accurate" 13.4 MHz, the following paper explains that our
favorite cesium frequency 9192.631770 MHz / 686 = 13.400...
Javier Serrano wrote:
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 4:36 AM, ed breya wrote:
4. It seems to me that whenever fd is much higher than fc (fd>>fc), that
fd could be used instead to trigger the second DFF, which would reduce the
metastability of the first DFF somewhat, and also synchronize the outpu
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 4:36 AM, ed breya wrote:
>
> 4. It seems to me that whenever fd is much higher than fc (fd>>fc), that
> fd could be used instead to trigger the second DFF, which would reduce the
> metastability of the first DFF somewhat, and also synchronize the output
> signal closer to
44 matches
Mail list logo
