If you can understand the temperature effects and can model them accurately and you can measure temperatures and your DAC steps are small enough, then digital compensation can be "perfect". But you are unlikely to meet all those conditions. In theory if the problem is that the voltage diver's ratio is a function of temperature then you can epoxy the LM34 to the divider and adjust the output of the DAC based on the current divider ratio. But in the real word you don't know the exact function or temperature and the DAC might have larger steps. I think the best plan is to reduce the source of the error, (the analog fix) Then if there is still any error source you can measure and model to that too.
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Bob Stewart <b...@evoria.net> wrote: > I've been experimenting with digital thermal compensation on my GPSDO. The > results have been favorable for a 14 bit dithered PWM-based DAC, but leaves a > bit to be desired in the big picture. And it takes up a lot of program bytes > on my PIC.. What's the general consensus on this? Should thermal > compensation be completely analog? > > Bob - AE6RV > _______________________________________________ > 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. -- Chris Albertson Redondo Beach, California _______________________________________________ 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.