This is very interesting: I think you have a precision local clock source to accept a slowly varying input frequency and "clean" it for the transmission so that it is the clock source that ultimately dominates the output stability.
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Jim Lux <jim...@earthlink.net> wrote: > On 3/12/12 2:20 AM, Azelio Boriani wrote: > >> Yes, build three and compare them but your comparator has to have a very >> low noise floor. I think that in addition to building new higher precision >> clocks you need to build new lower noise TI counters. >> >> > This is part of the thrill (or frustration) of working at the state of the > art limit. > > At work we build state of the art deep space transponders with very low > added Allan deviation (4E-16 at 1000 sec). Figuring out a way to prove > that they work is often harder than designing and building the actual > article under test, particularly when you want to demonstrate that it will > do it with a slowly varying input frequency. > > > ______________________________**_________________ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/** > mailman/listinfo/time-nuts<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.