> You can do better than that, a single regenerative divider can be > configured to divide by 4. > A pair of parallel feedback paths (with amplifiers), one tuned to F/4 > and the other to 3F/4 are best. > NIST did some work (together with Indian collaborators) on this type of > generalised regenerative divider recently. > Papers are stored on my Windows machine, will boot it up and locate them.
Thanks much, Bruce. I suspected either you or Enrico R. would have some knowledge of that. Note that I need to end up with 40 *and* 20 MHz, hence the plan to cascade two /2 dividers. If there is a better topology for obtaining both of these outputs, it would be good to know. I'd imagine that a /4 divider running alongside a /2 divider would be better from the additive-noise perspective. I will probably end up wanting a 10-MHz output as well. The obvious question would be, should that be a separate F/8 + 7F/8 path, or a /2 divider following the /4 divider? I haven't seen many references to /8 regenerative dividers but I suppose they'd be workable. Availability of 8.75 MHz crystals might be what decides that question. -- john, KE5FX _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
