Hi

I would not depend on the 10 MHz reference for my phase noise floor at 
microwaves. I'd do as Bert suggested and lock up a quiet 100 MHz oscillator to 
the 10 MHz. The "best of the best" 10 MHz OCXO isn't going to be able to beat a 
100 MHz over a 100 Hz to >=10 KHz bandwidth. The 100 MHz likely will beat the 
10 MHz by 10 to 20db.

Bob

On Mar 11, 2013, at 4:25 AM, Rex <[email protected]> wrote:

> I do the stuff on your list that is easy. Controlling the environment -- 
> orientation, ambient  temp, etc. -- is not worth the extra effort. Much of 
> what I discussed is that perfection isn't necessary.
> 
> The quality of the oscillator probably matters a good bit, but recently I am 
> learning, don't trust word of mouth or "specifications". Over the last few 
> years I have accumulated many "decent" OCXOs. But  I don't have a base 
> standard 10 MHz reference that I consider pristine phase-noise-wise and until 
> recently had no way that I trusted to make any kind of phase noise 
> measurements. Recently I got into a project where I built a board that uses a 
> LMX2541 chip to make 3600 MHz using a 10 MHz reference with a pretty wide 
> loop bandwidth. The board multiplies the 10 MHz reference up to a point where 
> a good SA can see the phase noise. Measuring that on my 8566 SA with John 
> Miles software, I learned a couple things.
> 
> First - My measurement setup doesn't give real accurate phase noise 
> measurements compared to passing my DUT and sources on to someone with real 
> quality instrumentation.
> 
> Second - Comparing my measurements to the very good equipment, it is clear 
> that my measurements give a close approximation to the good one's, only not 
> exact across 10 Hz to 10 KHz. But my measurements are good for a qualitative 
> feel within, say 5 dB, and certainly good for relative comparison of the 
> contribution from different 10 MHz reference sources.
> 
> So, I have bought a lot of 10 MHz OCXOs from eBay over the last few years. 
> The best phase noise baseline reference I have found so far is my Z3805. I 
> have lots of OCXOs in the 2x2x1.5 inch size. Many had good specs pointed at 
> by the listings or word of mouth. When I used them with my board and SA most 
> were pretty crappy compared to the Z3805. A couple of the ones I bought were 
> Morion MV89As. - supposedly good, but what I saw didn't look very great. One 
> of the best ones I have is a small 2x2x.75 inch Wenzel I bought a few years 
> back. It has a custom part number of 500-11935. But don't buy by name. I 
> recently picked up a 1x1x3 Wenzel 10 MHz with sma output connector and its 
> phase noise looks pretty horrible.
> 
> Some old Isotemps were decent, but not as good as the Z3805 and I haven't 
> measured some 10811s and 10554s I have in the back of my box because they are 
> harder to feed DC-wise.
> 
> My point is, I collected a lot of OCXOs that are not nearly as good as I 
> thought they would be. But all would probably make reasonable references for 
> frequency stability. Not sure if the level of not-great phase noise from many 
> of them would be noticeable if they were used to lock a good 10 GHz radio. If 
> I was younger, I'd probably go for that experiment. -- In reality, don't know 
> if I ever will.
> 
> -Rex
> 
> 
> 
> On 3/10/2013 5:15 PM, Bob Camp wrote:
>> Hi
>> 
>> If you go with one of the better DOCXO's on eBay (spend the full $30 not 
>> $15) you should get something that will hold < 0.3  ppb for 48 hours. You 
>> would have to do a few things:
>> 
>> 1) Keep it on power for a couple weeks ahead of time.
>> 2) Keep it on power the whole weekend.
>> 3) Make sure it's always in the same orientation (base down or whatever)
>> 4) Put it in something like a cooler to keep the drafts off of it
>> 5) Regulate the supply and efc tightly.
>> 
>> You might have to buy three and sort them, but I suspect not.
>> 
>> One ppb at 10 GHz would be 10 Hz. The carefully minded DOCXO should keep you 
>> within 3 Hz.
>> 
>> Bob
>>  On Mar 10, 2013, at 6:24 PM, Rex <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> I agree with using an OCXO for amateur radio operation.
>>> 
>>> The main activity in the US is the 10 GHz and Up contest which takes place 
>>> over two weekends, mid-August and mid-September. I've been active in most 
>>> of them for the last 15 years. Full participation requires operating 
>>> something like 12 hrs each of the two weekend days. Occasionally I have 
>>> operated into the wee hours Saturday night. Some people go to a high 
>>> location like a mountain top and stay there all weekend. Many rove, driving 
>>> hundreds of miles, or some combination of the two strategies. Very few have 
>>> AC power available so operate on batteries for the two days, though 
>>> sometimes with the option of charging batteries between stops or by just 
>>> running your engine or a generator. By contest rules, to count as a new 
>>> contact, at least one of the two stations needs to move 10 miles or more 
>>> from a previous location -- hence the rover strategy.
>>> 
>>> To reduce your levels of uncertainty in making contacts, two things matter, 
>>> antenna pointing accuracy and frequency accuracy and stability. Being 
>>> exactly on frequency is nice, but being off a few hundred Hz at 10 GHz is 
>>> usually in the radio passband and good enough. So in my experience a good 
>>> OCXO is fine. It is accurate enough, very stable for many minutes of 
>>> contact operation, has good phase noise and moderate power consumption. I 
>>> think most people in the contest are using OCXOs. I never checked exact 
>>> accuracy, but I think, even with a lot of driving and temperature extremes 
>>> my rig stays within a few tens of Hz at 10 GHz. A few operators use 
>>> rubidiums. To my thinking, the extra accuracy is not really needed and the 
>>> extra power consumption is not worth going that way if you are running off 
>>> batteries. Usually, the ones available tend to have a bit worse phase noise 
>>> than a good OCXO too, though I'm not sure if enough worse to matter in real 
>>> contacts.
>>> 
>>> I have thought about taking a rubidium along to power on occasionally and 
>>> calibrate the OCXO but never found my OCXO frequency to be an issue so 
>>> never bothered to take the rubidium. There are applications like microwave 
>>> EME where very weak signals are extracted by post-processing the data of a 
>>> long contact in the noise level. In that case rubidium accuracy is needed 
>>> for very narrow bandwidth contacts.
>>> 
>>> You mentioned operating while driving. A few people have the omni antennas 
>>> to do that and I have worked some of them. For that the frequency accuracy 
>>> becomes moot. At freeway speeds the doppler shift at 10 GHz is very 
>>> significant in the audio range. Because of that, the mobile-while-moving 
>>> contacts are usually made in FM mode with wide bandwidths and no need for 
>>> very accurate frequency. That mode can't do the long distances of dishes 
>>> and narrow SSB or CW but it has worked better than I would have expected. 
>>> Also, the 10-mile rule tends to make the FM mobile less useful and it 
>>> usually happens as an experiment while someone is driving home at the end.
>>> 
>>> One side note about doppler. Often several guys roam in small packs. To 
>>> begin a contact, often one station will put up a steady carrier for the 
>>> other end stations to find. Often the rovers are set up near a freeway and 
>>> a station receiving near the guy sending steady carrier will hear whoops in 
>>> the steady tone caused by doppler bouncing of the signal off the freeway 
>>> traffic.
>>> 
>>> In my view, using GPS locked oscillators has the same disadvantage of power 
>>> consumption as the rubidiums. If you are in one location (a mountain top, 
>>> etc.) for long periods of time, it might work, especially if you have AC 
>>> available, but for roving, with the many locations, I would think it would 
>>> either not give you much accuracy or would cause a big operational time 
>>> penalty for multiple surveys. I'm not aware of any roving operators around 
>>> here using GPS (except for location, which almost everyone now uses to 
>>> determine their operating location).
>>> 
>>> A few operators, get by with an only moderately stabilized frequency. This 
>>> might be a "brick" oscillator with its so-so internal oven. It's better to 
>>> get out than to stay home thinking about better options. The poor frequency 
>>> control is usually on new operator's rigs and was more common 10 years 
>>> back. If the frequency is fairly stable, then the drifting can be reined in 
>>> by going out with other hams who have good frequency to calibrate from, or 
>>> if you have a beacon in range that you can find to establish your offset.
>>> 
>>> So, yes, OCXO is the way most hams lock their mobile microwave rigs.
>>> 
>>> -Rex, KK6MK
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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.

Reply via email to