Re: [time-nuts] Thermal effects on cables --> ADEV

[Azelio Boriani]

May I suggest to turn the 24 hours reset period into a parameter?

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 8:45 PM, Tom Van Baak  wrote:
> Mark, Ole,
>
> Yes, averaging can both enhance precision but also destroy information. In 
> many cases too much data is a bad thing. The solution is to add another 
> dimension to the plot. Stable32 does this with DAVAR (dynamic Allan 
> variance). TimeLab has a multi- "trace" feature. Both of these break large 
> data sets into smaller ones and display each in succession. This way you get 
> the best of both worlds; precision without long-term pollution and also a 
> view of long-term trends. Yes, there's an art to picking the right 
> parameters, but you get the idea. In some cases it is highly informative. The 
> color 3D DAVAR plots in particular can be a thing of beauty.
>
> So, in your case, save each of those 24 hour GIF's and then turn then into a 
> single animated GIF. That way not only do you get a fresh view of current 
> reception conditions, but also a time lapse view of changes over the 
> long-term.
>
> Another idea is to somehow 2D transform your polar plots into a horizontal 
> rectangular strip and then use elapsed time in the vertical. This would allow 
> a waterfall-style representation of GPS reception over time.
>
> /tvb
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Mark Sims" 
> To: 
> Sent: Friday, January 13, 2017 11:03 AM
> Subject: [time-nuts] Thermal effects on cables --> ADEV
>
>
>>I recently made a change in Lady Heather's satellite signal maps to help with 
>>a very similar issue.  Before, the maps were based upon the accumulated 
>>average value of the sat signals at each point in the sky.  Now, every 24 
>>hours, the signal level averages are reset to their current average and the 
>>sample counts are reset to 1.  That way any change is your antenna 
>>performance won't be masked by days/week/months of previous data.
>>
>> 
>>
>>> Don't use years worth of data.
>> Otherwise it could be days before the xDEV visually changes
>
> ___
> 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.
___
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.

Re: [time-nuts] Thermal effects on cables --> ADEV

[Scott Stobbe]

I think their advice was to limit the ADEV calculation for some tau to 300
bins. The standard error on estimating the standard deviation is ~ +- 5%
for 200 samples. So loosely speaking in the neighborhood of 100-300 bins
the resulting adev will have an rms uncertainty of roughly 5%. So limiting
the number of bins to 300 for any particular tau you wish to monitor, you
will see the ADEV wonder up and down over time, but if it exceeds say 5
sigma, 25% something is up.

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Ole Petter Rønningen <
opronnin...@gmail.com> wrote:

> That IS interesting.. It reads to me that the advice is to keep a "moving
> 300 pt ADEV" when continously monitoring a (pair of) frequency source in
> e.g a VLBI site - the reason for limiting it to 300 pts being that much
> more than that is likely to average out potential issues..
>
> Does that make sense?
>
> > Den 13. jan. 2017 kl. 17.04 skrev Bob Camp :
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > There’s an interesting comment buried down in that paper about limiting
> ADEV to
> > < 300 samples per point. Their objective is apparently to better
> highlight “systematic
> > errors”. I certainly agree that big datasets will swamp this sort of
> thing. I’m not quite
> > sure that I’d recommend ADEV to find these things in the first place. My
> guess is that
> > it’s the only spec they have to call the device good or bad in this case
> …They don’t seem
> > to have Hadamard in their list of variances. If I was going after
> systematics with a deviation,
> > that’s the one I’d use. Of course I probably would not use a
> something-dev in the first place.
> >
> > Bob
> >
> >
> >> On Jan 13, 2017, at 1:52 AM, Ole Petter Ronningen <
> opronnin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi, all
> >>
> >> The question of phase shifts in cables pops up every now and then on
> this
> >> list - I stumbled across a good table of measured phase shifts with
> >> temperature in different cable types in this paper:
> >> http://www.ira.inaf.it/eratec/gothenburg/presentations/ERATEC_2014_
> PresentationWSchaefer.pdf
> >> that I though would be of interest to others.
> >>
> >> A quick summary given below, see pdf for full details. Lots of other
> >> interesting stuff in there also.
> >>
> >> Values in ppm/K, for 10 Mhz except when otherwise stated. (The paper
> gives
> >> values for 5, 10 and 100Mhz)
> >>
> >> Huber-Suhner Multiflex 141: -6
> >> RG-223: -131.9
> >> Semiflex Cable: -11.5
> >> Huber-Suhner: -8.6
> >> Times Microwave LMR-240: -3.4
> >> Times Microwave SFT-205: 7.7
> >> Meggitt 2T693 SiO2: 30.6
> >> Andrew FSJ-1 (@5Mhz): 25
> >> Andrew FSJ-4 (@5Mhz): 10
> >> Andrew LDF-1P-50-42: 2.8
> >> Andrew LDF4-50A: 4.7
> >> Times Microwave TF4FLEX (@100Mhz):6.4
> >> Phasetrack PT210 (@100Mhz): 2
> >>
> >> Ole
> >> ___
> >> 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.
> >
> > ___
> > 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.
> ___
> 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.
>
___
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.

Re: [time-nuts] Thermal effects on cables --> ADEV

[Tom Van Baak]

Mark, Ole,

Yes, averaging can both enhance precision but also destroy information. In many 
cases too much data is a bad thing. The solution is to add another dimension to 
the plot. Stable32 does this with DAVAR (dynamic Allan variance). TimeLab has a 
multi- "trace" feature. Both of these break large data sets into smaller ones 
and display each in succession. This way you get the best of both worlds; 
precision without long-term pollution and also a view of long-term trends. Yes, 
there's an art to picking the right parameters, but you get the idea. In some 
cases it is highly informative. The color 3D DAVAR plots in particular can be a 
thing of beauty.

So, in your case, save each of those 24 hour GIF's and then turn then into a 
single animated GIF. That way not only do you get a fresh view of current 
reception conditions, but also a time lapse view of changes over the long-term.

Another idea is to somehow 2D transform your polar plots into a horizontal 
rectangular strip and then use elapsed time in the vertical. This would allow a 
waterfall-style representation of GPS reception over time.

/tvb

- Original Message - 
From: "Mark Sims" 
To: 
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2017 11:03 AM
Subject: [time-nuts] Thermal effects on cables --> ADEV


>I recently made a change in Lady Heather's satellite signal maps to help with 
>a very similar issue.  Before, the maps were based upon the accumulated 
>average value of the sat signals at each point in the sky.  Now, every 24 
>hours, the signal level averages are reset to their current average and the 
>sample counts are reset to 1.  That way any change is your antenna performance 
>won't be masked by days/week/months of previous data.
> 
> 
> 
>> Don't use years worth of data.
> Otherwise it could be days before the xDEV visually changes

___
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.

Re: [time-nuts] Thermal effects on cables --> ADEV

[Bob Camp]

Hi


That’s the way I read what they are saying. More or less: Keep the number of 
samples above
100, but below 300.

Bob

> On Jan 13, 2017, at 12:30 PM, Ole Petter Rønningen  
> wrote:
> 
> That IS interesting.. It reads to me that the advice is to keep a "moving 300 
> pt ADEV" when continously monitoring a (pair of) frequency source in e.g a 
> VLBI site - the reason for limiting it to 300 pts being that much more than 
> that is likely to average out potential issues.. 
> 
> Does that make sense?
> 
>> Den 13. jan. 2017 kl. 17.04 skrev Bob Camp :
>> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> There’s an interesting comment buried down in that paper about limiting ADEV 
>> to 
>> < 300 samples per point. Their objective is apparently to better highlight 
>> “systematic 
>> errors”. I certainly agree that big datasets will swamp this sort of thing. 
>> I’m not quite
>> sure that I’d recommend ADEV to find these things in the first place. My 
>> guess is that
>> it’s the only spec they have to call the device good or bad in this case 
>> …They don’t seem
>> to have Hadamard in their list of variances. If I was going after 
>> systematics with a deviation,
>> that’s the one I’d use. Of course I probably would not use a something-dev 
>> in the first place. 
>> 
>> Bob
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jan 13, 2017, at 1:52 AM, Ole Petter Ronningen  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi, all
>>> 
>>> The question of phase shifts in cables pops up every now and then on this
>>> list - I stumbled across a good table of measured phase shifts with
>>> temperature in different cable types in this paper:
>>> http://www.ira.inaf.it/eratec/gothenburg/presentations/ERATEC_2014_PresentationWSchaefer.pdf
>>> that I though would be of interest to others.
>>> 
>>> A quick summary given below, see pdf for full details. Lots of other
>>> interesting stuff in there also.
>>> 
>>> Values in ppm/K, for 10 Mhz except when otherwise stated. (The paper gives
>>> values for 5, 10 and 100Mhz)
>>> 
>>> Huber-Suhner Multiflex 141: -6
>>> RG-223: -131.9
>>> Semiflex Cable: -11.5
>>> Huber-Suhner: -8.6
>>> Times Microwave LMR-240: -3.4
>>> Times Microwave SFT-205: 7.7
>>> Meggitt 2T693 SiO2: 30.6
>>> Andrew FSJ-1 (@5Mhz): 25
>>> Andrew FSJ-4 (@5Mhz): 10
>>> Andrew LDF-1P-50-42: 2.8
>>> Andrew LDF4-50A: 4.7
>>> Times Microwave TF4FLEX (@100Mhz):6.4
>>> Phasetrack PT210 (@100Mhz): 2
>>> 
>>> Ole
>>> ___
>>> 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.
>> 
>> ___
>> 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.
> ___
> 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.

___
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.

Re: [time-nuts] Thermal effects on cables --> ADEV

[Ole Petter Rønningen]

That IS interesting.. It reads to me that the advice is to keep a "moving 300 
pt ADEV" when continously monitoring a (pair of) frequency source in e.g a VLBI 
site - the reason for limiting it to 300 pts being that much more than that is 
likely to average out potential issues.. 

Does that make sense?

> Den 13. jan. 2017 kl. 17.04 skrev Bob Camp :
> 
> Hi
> 
> There’s an interesting comment buried down in that paper about limiting ADEV 
> to 
> < 300 samples per point. Their objective is apparently to better highlight 
> “systematic 
> errors”. I certainly agree that big datasets will swamp this sort of thing. 
> I’m not quite
> sure that I’d recommend ADEV to find these things in the first place. My 
> guess is that
> it’s the only spec they have to call the device good or bad in this case 
> …They don’t seem
> to have Hadamard in their list of variances. If I was going after systematics 
> with a deviation,
> that’s the one I’d use. Of course I probably would not use a something-dev in 
> the first place. 
> 
> Bob
> 
> 
>> On Jan 13, 2017, at 1:52 AM, Ole Petter Ronningen  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi, all
>> 
>> The question of phase shifts in cables pops up every now and then on this
>> list - I stumbled across a good table of measured phase shifts with
>> temperature in different cable types in this paper:
>> http://www.ira.inaf.it/eratec/gothenburg/presentations/ERATEC_2014_PresentationWSchaefer.pdf
>> that I though would be of interest to others.
>> 
>> A quick summary given below, see pdf for full details. Lots of other
>> interesting stuff in there also.
>> 
>> Values in ppm/K, for 10 Mhz except when otherwise stated. (The paper gives
>> values for 5, 10 and 100Mhz)
>> 
>> Huber-Suhner Multiflex 141: -6
>> RG-223: -131.9
>> Semiflex Cable: -11.5
>> Huber-Suhner: -8.6
>> Times Microwave LMR-240: -3.4
>> Times Microwave SFT-205: 7.7
>> Meggitt 2T693 SiO2: 30.6
>> Andrew FSJ-1 (@5Mhz): 25
>> Andrew FSJ-4 (@5Mhz): 10
>> Andrew LDF-1P-50-42: 2.8
>> Andrew LDF4-50A: 4.7
>> Times Microwave TF4FLEX (@100Mhz):6.4
>> Phasetrack PT210 (@100Mhz): 2
>> 
>> Ole
>> ___
>> 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.
> 
> ___
> 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.
___
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.

Re: [time-nuts] Thermal effects on cables --> ADEV

[Scott Stobbe]

You are certainly justified to be cautious of only using an xDEV for state
of health. I don't know what GPS does for example to mark SV's as healthy
or not healthy.

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Bob Camp  wrote:

> Hi
>
> I do agree with their point that systematics will get buried in giant data
> blocks.
> What I’m not quite as sure of is the utility of even 300 sample blocks to
> spot
> systematic issues.
>
> Bob
>
> > On Jan 13, 2017, at 1:08 PM, Scott Stobbe 
> wrote:
> >
> > I think you might be overthinking their point, that if you plan to use an
> > xDEV as a measure for state of health, don't use years worth of data.
> > Otherwise it could be days before the xDEV visually changes.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Bob Camp  wrote:
> >
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> There’s an interesting comment buried down in that paper about limiting
> >> ADEV to
> >> < 300 samples per point. Their objective is apparently to better
> highlight
> >> “systematic
> >> errors”. I certainly agree that big datasets will swamp this sort of
> >> thing. I’m not quite
> >> sure that I’d recommend ADEV to find these things in the first place. My
> >> guess is that
> >> it’s the only spec they have to call the device good or bad in this case
> >> …They don’t seem
> >> to have Hadamard in their list of variances. If I was going after
> >> systematics with a deviation,
> >> that’s the one I’d use. Of course I probably would not use a
> something-dev
> >> in the first place.
> >>
> >> Bob
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Jan 13, 2017, at 1:52 AM, Ole Petter Ronningen <
> opronnin...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi, all
> >>>
> >>> The question of phase shifts in cables pops up every now and then on
> this
> >>> list - I stumbled across a good table of measured phase shifts with
> >>> temperature in different cable types in this paper:
> >>> http://www.ira.inaf.it/eratec/gothenburg/presentations/ERATEC_2014_
> >> PresentationWSchaefer.pdf
> >>> that I though would be of interest to others.
> >>>
> >>> A quick summary given below, see pdf for full details. Lots of other
> >>> interesting stuff in there also.
> >>>
> >>> Values in ppm/K, for 10 Mhz except when otherwise stated. (The paper
> >> gives
> >>> values for 5, 10 and 100Mhz)
> >>>
> >>> Huber-Suhner Multiflex 141: -6
> >>> RG-223: -131.9
> >>> Semiflex Cable: -11.5
> >>> Huber-Suhner: -8.6
> >>> Times Microwave LMR-240: -3.4
> >>> Times Microwave SFT-205: 7.7
> >>> Meggitt 2T693 SiO2: 30.6
> >>> Andrew FSJ-1 (@5Mhz): 25
> >>> Andrew FSJ-4 (@5Mhz): 10
> >>> Andrew LDF-1P-50-42: 2.8
> >>> Andrew LDF4-50A: 4.7
> >>> Times Microwave TF4FLEX (@100Mhz):6.4
> >>> Phasetrack PT210 (@100Mhz): 2
> >>>
> >>> Ole
> >>> ___
> >>> 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.
> >>
> >> ___
> >> 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.
> >>
> > ___
> > 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.
>
> ___
> 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.
>
___
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.

Re: [time-nuts] Thermal effects on cables --> ADEV

[Bob Camp]

Hi

I do agree with their point that systematics will get buried in giant data 
blocks. 
What I’m not quite as sure of is the utility of even 300 sample blocks to spot
systematic issues.

Bob

> On Jan 13, 2017, at 1:08 PM, Scott Stobbe  wrote:
> 
> I think you might be overthinking their point, that if you plan to use an
> xDEV as a measure for state of health, don't use years worth of data.
> Otherwise it could be days before the xDEV visually changes.
> 
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Bob Camp  wrote:
> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> There’s an interesting comment buried down in that paper about limiting
>> ADEV to
>> < 300 samples per point. Their objective is apparently to better highlight
>> “systematic
>> errors”. I certainly agree that big datasets will swamp this sort of
>> thing. I’m not quite
>> sure that I’d recommend ADEV to find these things in the first place. My
>> guess is that
>> it’s the only spec they have to call the device good or bad in this case
>> …They don’t seem
>> to have Hadamard in their list of variances. If I was going after
>> systematics with a deviation,
>> that’s the one I’d use. Of course I probably would not use a something-dev
>> in the first place.
>> 
>> Bob
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jan 13, 2017, at 1:52 AM, Ole Petter Ronningen 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi, all
>>> 
>>> The question of phase shifts in cables pops up every now and then on this
>>> list - I stumbled across a good table of measured phase shifts with
>>> temperature in different cable types in this paper:
>>> http://www.ira.inaf.it/eratec/gothenburg/presentations/ERATEC_2014_
>> PresentationWSchaefer.pdf
>>> that I though would be of interest to others.
>>> 
>>> A quick summary given below, see pdf for full details. Lots of other
>>> interesting stuff in there also.
>>> 
>>> Values in ppm/K, for 10 Mhz except when otherwise stated. (The paper
>> gives
>>> values for 5, 10 and 100Mhz)
>>> 
>>> Huber-Suhner Multiflex 141: -6
>>> RG-223: -131.9
>>> Semiflex Cable: -11.5
>>> Huber-Suhner: -8.6
>>> Times Microwave LMR-240: -3.4
>>> Times Microwave SFT-205: 7.7
>>> Meggitt 2T693 SiO2: 30.6
>>> Andrew FSJ-1 (@5Mhz): 25
>>> Andrew FSJ-4 (@5Mhz): 10
>>> Andrew LDF-1P-50-42: 2.8
>>> Andrew LDF4-50A: 4.7
>>> Times Microwave TF4FLEX (@100Mhz):6.4
>>> Phasetrack PT210 (@100Mhz): 2
>>> 
>>> Ole
>>> ___
>>> 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.
>> 
>> ___
>> 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.
>> 
> ___
> 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.

___
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.

Re: [time-nuts] Thermal effects on cables --> ADEV

[Scott Stobbe]

I think you might be overthinking their point, that if you plan to use an
xDEV as a measure for state of health, don't use years worth of data.
Otherwise it could be days before the xDEV visually changes.

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Bob Camp  wrote:

> Hi
>
> There’s an interesting comment buried down in that paper about limiting
> ADEV to
> < 300 samples per point. Their objective is apparently to better highlight
> “systematic
> errors”. I certainly agree that big datasets will swamp this sort of
> thing. I’m not quite
> sure that I’d recommend ADEV to find these things in the first place. My
> guess is that
> it’s the only spec they have to call the device good or bad in this case
> …They don’t seem
> to have Hadamard in their list of variances. If I was going after
> systematics with a deviation,
> that’s the one I’d use. Of course I probably would not use a something-dev
> in the first place.
>
> Bob
>
>
> > On Jan 13, 2017, at 1:52 AM, Ole Petter Ronningen 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi, all
> >
> > The question of phase shifts in cables pops up every now and then on this
> > list - I stumbled across a good table of measured phase shifts with
> > temperature in different cable types in this paper:
> > http://www.ira.inaf.it/eratec/gothenburg/presentations/ERATEC_2014_
> PresentationWSchaefer.pdf
> > that I though would be of interest to others.
> >
> > A quick summary given below, see pdf for full details. Lots of other
> > interesting stuff in there also.
> >
> > Values in ppm/K, for 10 Mhz except when otherwise stated. (The paper
> gives
> > values for 5, 10 and 100Mhz)
> >
> > Huber-Suhner Multiflex 141: -6
> > RG-223: -131.9
> > Semiflex Cable: -11.5
> > Huber-Suhner: -8.6
> > Times Microwave LMR-240: -3.4
> > Times Microwave SFT-205: 7.7
> > Meggitt 2T693 SiO2: 30.6
> > Andrew FSJ-1 (@5Mhz): 25
> > Andrew FSJ-4 (@5Mhz): 10
> > Andrew LDF-1P-50-42: 2.8
> > Andrew LDF4-50A: 4.7
> > Times Microwave TF4FLEX (@100Mhz):6.4
> > Phasetrack PT210 (@100Mhz): 2
> >
> > Ole
> > ___
> > 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.
>
> ___
> 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.
>
___
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.

Re: [time-nuts] Thermal effects on cables --> ADEV

[Bob Camp]

Hi

There’s an interesting comment buried down in that paper about limiting ADEV to 
< 300 samples per point. Their objective is apparently to better highlight 
“systematic 
errors”. I certainly agree that big datasets will swamp this sort of thing. I’m 
not quite
sure that I’d recommend ADEV to find these things in the first place. My guess 
is that
it’s the only spec they have to call the device good or bad in this case …They 
don’t seem
to have Hadamard in their list of variances. If I was going after systematics 
with a deviation,
that’s the one I’d use. Of course I probably would not use a something-dev in 
the first place. 

Bob


> On Jan 13, 2017, at 1:52 AM, Ole Petter Ronningen  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi, all
> 
> The question of phase shifts in cables pops up every now and then on this
> list - I stumbled across a good table of measured phase shifts with
> temperature in different cable types in this paper:
> http://www.ira.inaf.it/eratec/gothenburg/presentations/ERATEC_2014_PresentationWSchaefer.pdf
> that I though would be of interest to others.
> 
> A quick summary given below, see pdf for full details. Lots of other
> interesting stuff in there also.
> 
> Values in ppm/K, for 10 Mhz except when otherwise stated. (The paper gives
> values for 5, 10 and 100Mhz)
> 
> Huber-Suhner Multiflex 141: -6
> RG-223: -131.9
> Semiflex Cable: -11.5
> Huber-Suhner: -8.6
> Times Microwave LMR-240: -3.4
> Times Microwave SFT-205: 7.7
> Meggitt 2T693 SiO2: 30.6
> Andrew FSJ-1 (@5Mhz): 25
> Andrew FSJ-4 (@5Mhz): 10
> Andrew LDF-1P-50-42: 2.8
> Andrew LDF4-50A: 4.7
> Times Microwave TF4FLEX (@100Mhz):6.4
> Phasetrack PT210 (@100Mhz): 2
> 
> Ole
> ___
> 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.

___
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.