Hi Warren,
On 06/15/2010 08:49 PM, WarrenS wrote:
Magnus posted a bunch of good stuff,
Neither. It's a characteristic, it needs to be analyzed. If the DUT is
very sensitive, then additional care may be taken or maybe it just isn't
a very good solution.
We have little disagreements for the most part. Except maybe for if it
should be on 'the list'.
The characteristics are what makes the advantages and disadvantages, so
they belong on the list.
Well, it depends on the oscillators involved... so it is just not
given... but assuming a fairly typical oscillator for our world, then it
would end up on the advantage side.
The high natural rejection that the TPLL has to injection locking makes
it much less sensitive than any other system, so it lets one keep it
simple. TO me that is an advantage.
Hmm, yes... for the typical oscillator yes...
I did test for the effect by connecting the REF osc to the DUT osc with
a variable attenuator, and could not make the TPLL system start to fail
until I the coupling got so low that it started to short out the two
signals, and still it was working, just got a bit noisier
I called the results of that test good enough and moved on to other ways
of testing.
All of which it also passed with flying colors
Noiser as you added gain...
Another subtle side effect of that advantages is that the cables do not
to be shielded so well.
example:
If I bring a third osc's that is connect to a RG58 BNC shielded cable
and is offset in freq by 1 to 10 Hz
The effect of coupling (and or Injection locking) between to BNC
shielded cables can be seem at the Tester output.
What I have found is if I want to get the full accuracy of the TPLL, I
can not have an offset osc cable on the same table, unless it is fully
enclosed in a RF proof box.
That would help, definitly.
Cheers,
Magnus
_______________________________________________
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.
