Hi They all get better as time increases. 20 ps always beats 200 ps. 200 ps always beats 2 ns. What level you do or don't need at what tau will always be a "that depends" sort of thing. Pictic's resolution is a "that depends" thing as well.
The idea is to have one gizmo do the whole range of tau's from very short times to very long times. It's tough to do that with other solutions and have zero dead time. Bob -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ed Palmer Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2011 12:45 PM To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement Subject: Re: [time-nuts] HP 5372A vs. 5370A I don't understand why you need something like the 537x counters for long-term measurement. The 200 ps resolution of the 5372A gives you a noise floor of about 5e-14 @ 4000 seconds. Something like the Pictic II gives you better resolution at a fraction of the size, heat, noise, and power. Even a Racal-Dana 1992 with it's 1 ns resolution gives you 2.5 e-13 @ 4000 seconds and it gets better as Tau increases. Am I missing something? Ed Bob Camp wrote: > Hi > > The 5371 / 5372 are never going to be as popular as the 5370 in terms of people needing support. They just aren't that common. > > Getting binary dumps into one of the software packages would be very nice. The rest of the stuff is much further down my list. Without a binary dump, you can't do anything that runs over a long period of time. I'm not sure what HP really wanted you to do in that case. They may have planed a PC software package and then not followed through with it. > > Bob _______________________________________________ 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. _______________________________________________ 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.
