Speaking with Tom recently impressed on me just how much I don't know about
what's normal for a GPSDO. The options on the LEA-6T are formidable and have
consequences for my GPSDO. The question I'm struggling with now is what's
normal during the survey process? The only example of a
Hi
Commercial GPSDO’s are manufactured to a specific customer requirement. The
application in the system dictates how it behaves
as it it powered up or power cycled. There is no single “always correct”
approach.
In a Time Nut environment, people seem to be quite happy setting up temperature
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
He everyone,
Just a few points/questions I would like to make regarding the discussion FLL
vs PLL vs my design.
One question that I have is regarding FLL vs PLL. The statement that a PLL is
better than a FLL on a GPSDO may
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
Bert
Bert wrote:
He everyone,
Just a few points/questions I would like to make regarding the discussion FLL
vs PLL vs my design.
One question that I have is regarding FLL vs PLL. The statement that a PLL is
better than
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
Tom Van Baak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jerry
It is amusing/distressing to see that the myth that using an FLL to lock
an oscillator to the PPS output of a GPS receiver is a good approach
still persists.
The optimum
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
In a message dated 9/2/2007 13:16:32 Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But for many frequency (e.g., transmitters) or time interval
applications (e.g., frequency counters with finite gate times),
I'd like
From: Poul-Henning Kamp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] GPSDO Question
Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2007 20:06:03 +
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
This brings up another question: how good are true
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
Bruce,
Yes, you're absolutely correct that PLL is the way to go if you need better
than 10e-10 but my counters are only able to read 10e-9 anyway :-)
Jerry
K1JOS
___
time-nuts
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
Jerry
It is amusing/distressing to see that the myth that using an FLL to lock
an oscillator to the PPS output of a GPS receiver is a good approach
still persists.
The optimum solution is a phase lock loop.
Whilst
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
Tom Van Baak wrote:
Jerry
It is amusing/distressing to see that the myth that using an FLL to lock
an oscillator to the PPS output of a GPS receiver is a good approach
still persists.
The optimum solution is a
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
From: Tom Van Baak [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] GPSDO Question
Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2007 13:13:39 -0700
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
Jerry
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of WB6BNQ
Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2007 4:48 PM
To: Tom Van Baak; Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] GPSDO Question
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
Tom
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Bruce Griffiths
Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2007 10:19 PM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] GPSDO Question
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
In a message dated 02/09/2007 04:20:54 GMT Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It is amusing/distressing to see that the myth that using an FLL to lock
an oscillator to the PPS output of a GPS receiver is a good
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
Tom Van Baak wrote:
Jerry
It is amusing/distressing to see that the myth that using an FLL to lock
an oscillator to the PPS output of a GPS receiver is a good approach
still persists.
The optimum solution is a phase lock
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps it depends on how you define a good approach.
If you're looking for the very best you can get then it probably isn't, but
I don't recall that being claimed in the
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
Thomas Linbeck wrote:
I am confused by the PLL vs. FFL lock discussion. Does this concern the
Schera board vs. the VE2ZAZ methods of time base discipline? Can someone
share their thoughts on the subject?
Thanks!
73 de
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Idaho State University version is reported on their web page for the
project as having been checked over a 13 day period, by the Idaho National
Laboratories Calibration Lab, and found to
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
73 de K1JOS (Jerry)
CCA #11906
CRA #1777
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2007 12:00 PM
To: time-nuts@febo.com
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
I have gathered everything I need to assemble a GPS
Disciplined Oscillator. I have the Brooks Shera
controller assembled, am about 99% done on the linear
power supplies for +/- 5V, 12V supplies and a separate
24V oven heater
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
If you use the HP Oscillator in your GPSDO, you can then use the
10 MHz output as an external reference for your counter.
I picked up a 10 MHz distribution amp and use the same GPSDO to
act as external reference on several
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
The HP-10811 oven is sitting happily in a working
5328A counter that I'm willing to cannibalize, but do
I need to? Is there any reason why I shouldn't put the
controler in the 5328 case so I can use it as a
counter as well
); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] RETRY
Tom Van Baak wrote:
The HP-10811 oven is sitting happily in a working
5328A counter that I'm willing to cannibalize, but do
I need to? Is there any reason why I shouldn't put the
controler in the 5328 case so I can
23 matches
Mail list logo
