Just to confirm: MC100LVEL16 solved the issue with signal levels.
On 2014-04-25 14:54, d0ct0r wrote:
AD was comparing apples and oranges. The LTC6957-3 has CMOS outputs,
which go from 0.2V to Vdd-0.3V (with a 3mA load). Perhaps they were
looking at the LTC6957-1 which is LVPECL and would have
On 04/25/2014 10:30 PM, Tom Van Baak wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I'm newer to this forum but I really enjoy reading the discussions. I have
a pretty basic question.
I'm wondering why one would chose an Rb Oscillator over a traditional OCXO?
It does not immediately appear there is a phase noise advantag
Hi
At least on the Rb I have seen, the phase noise (in to 1 Hz) is generally
better if the Rb loop is narrower rather than wider. That of course assumes
that the internal OCXO has pretty good phase noise to start. Maybe I’ve been
slumming it ….
Bob
On Apr 25, 2014, at 6:29 PM, Richard (Rick)
My understanding is that a really good Rb standard
use a fairly wide bandwidth loop to control its own
internal XO, and therefore improve its close in phase
noise to be better than you can get with quartz alone.
The Rb standard is able to do this because the S/N
ratio of its rubidium vapor frequen
Welcome to time-nuts. I have to agree with Tom for an out of the box
experience.
However as so many time-nuts experiment with GPS control of these
oscillators you really can get great stability with both today and I
believe even better in the future. I like the low power of the xtal
oscillator. Th
> Hi Everyone,
> I'm newer to this forum but I really enjoy reading the discussions. I have
> a pretty basic question.
> I'm wondering why one would chose an Rb Oscillator over a traditional OCXO?
> It does not immediately appear there is a phase noise advantage in the Rb..
> Thanks,
> ~Shane
Welc
Hi Everyone,
I'm newer to this forum but I really enjoy reading the discussions. I have
a pretty basic question.
I'm wondering why one would chose an Rb Oscillator over a traditional OCXO?
It does not immediately appear there is a phase noise advantage in the Rb..
Thanks,
~Shane
On Fri, Apr 25, 2
AD was comparing apples and oranges. The LTC6957-3 has CMOS outputs,
which go from 0.2V to Vdd-0.3V (with a 3mA load). Perhaps they were
looking at the LTC6957-1 which is LVPECL and would have a rather small
swing. The LTC6957-3 should drive the AD9852 if its requirements are
as noted below.
Some timing GPS units (eg Oncore UT) can be set to omit 1PPS pulses if
no satellites are being tracked, or if the RAIM alarm limit is exceeded.
Dave
On 4/25/2014 10:20 AM, Paul wrote:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 9:57 PM, Tom Van Baak wrote:
I have noticed skipped 1PPS on the Adafruit GPS also.
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2014 12:21:04 -0400 (EDT)
> gandal...@aol.com wrote:
>
>> Coincidentally, I came across this earlier today when looking for some
>> MMIC data, perhaps it might be worth a look?...
>>
>> http://lna4all.blogspot.co.uk/
>
> Now that's almost perfect! Only two modifications an
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 9:57 PM, Tom Van Baak wrote:
> I have noticed skipped 1PPS on the Adafruit GPS also.
I've always assumed this could happen but as a result of RF signal loss not
a glitch in the gps. So I've started recording event timestamp deltas
using the Linux kernel PPS interface.
AD was comparing apples and oranges. The LTC6957-3 has CMOS outputs, which go
from 0.2V to Vdd-0.3V (with a 3mA load). Perhaps they were looking at the
LTC6957-1 which is LVPECL and would have a rather small swing. The LTC6957-3
should drive the AD9852 if its requirements are as noted below.
Bo
To whom it may concern, here is the note regarding of CMOS level
difference for two product AD9852 from AD and LT6957 from Linear.
My attempts to feed AD9852 directly from LTC6857-3 has failed. AD9852
just ignored the REFCLOCK signal coming from LTC6957-3. So, I'll need to
think about some s
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 9:04 AM, Attila Kinali wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2014 08:42:16 -0700
> Chris Albertson wrote:
>
> > You best bet is to change out the antenna. You can buy them with a
> higher
> > built-in gain up to about 40dB.
>
> Buying a better antenna is also on the list. But i would
On Fri, 25 Apr 2014 12:21:04 -0400 (EDT)
gandal...@aol.com wrote:
> Coincidentally, I came across this earlier today when looking for some
> MMIC data, perhaps it might be worth a look?...
>
> http://lna4all.blogspot.co.uk/
Now that's almost perfect! Only two modifications and it does
Coincidentally, I came across this earlier today when looking for some
MMIC data, perhaps it might be worth a look?...
http://lna4all.blogspot.co.uk/
Regards
Nigel
GM8PZR
In a message dated 25/04/2014 14:28:57 GMT Daylight Time, att...@kinali.ch
writes:
Hi,
I recently bought
On Fri, 25 Apr 2014 08:42:16 -0700
Chris Albertson wrote:
> You best bet is to change out the antenna. You can buy them with a higher
> built-in gain up to about 40dB.
Buying a better antenna is also on the list. But i would still like to
have an LNA, even if it's just to see that it doesn't
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 6:28 AM, Attila Kinali wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I recently bought a bladeRF[1] to experiment a bit with GPS decoding.
>
> I tried to get GNSS-SDR[2] which seems quite good, but has its flaws.
> One of the things was that i cannot seem to get a fix in my environment.
> One of the p
The best way is to place the temperature sensor near the part or parts that are
the most temperature sensitive. When dealing with something that is already in
an oven, that may not be so easy.
Didier KO4BB
On April 23, 2014 9:37:29 PM CDT, Chris Albertson
wrote:
>I have both an OCXO and an FE
For the sake of discussion let me just add that even if medesigns comments were
true of Microsemi, the Microsemi responses on this form have been from long
time Time-Nuts who have for years contributed their knowledge to the betterment
of the community in the proudest traditions of acadimia. Nev
Hi,
I recently bought a bladeRF[1] to experiment a bit with GPS decoding.
I tried to get GNSS-SDR[2] which seems quite good, but has its flaws.
One of the things was that i cannot seem to get a fix in my environment.
One of the problems seems that my antenna position is far from optimal.
Aparentl
Said: I wish you well in your 'recovery.'
My past careers also took me through many of these types of 'anomalies.'
Seemingly disastrous in the moment; but, ... then, one goes off to form "GO"
teams (or whatever the buzz-word was at the time.) Problems get fixed;
designs change; production st
On 4/24/14, 11:43 PM, Magnus Danielson wrote:
Jim,
On 04/25/2014 05:32 AM, Jim Lux wrote:
On 4/24/14, 6:26 PM, Said Jackson wrote:
Hi Magnus, Bob,
Thanks much for your kind words.
The failure rate is thankfully so low that we are not greatly alarmed,
and Microsemi has been a champ in resolvi
Time for TVB to unsubscribe this Anonymous Coward.
-Chuck Harris
MailLists wrote:
What can be read between the lines:
The recently acquired cash cow isn't working exactly as expected/advertised. We
still
don't have a clue when/if the fundamental (as in physics laws) design (we can't
officiall
On 4/24/14, 11:14 PM, Attila Kinali wrote:
On Fri, 25 Apr 2014 08:33:06 +0300
MailLists wrote:
The recently acquired cash cow isn't working exactly as
expected/advertised. We still don't have a clue when/if the fundamental
(as in physics laws) design (we can't officially blame the cheap Chines
Hi
If you go back to the original EMXO work done by PTI and Bendix - they had a
very similar issue with seals. They worked fine, ran through all the testing,
met all the mil spec testing. After sitting on aging for months / years the
seal would go “pop” (a nice loud pop) and the vacuum when awa
26 matches
Mail list logo
