Hi

With WWV you need to do it at the right time and the right frequency. There may 
not be a right combination every day. You want to do it when you have a stable 
path between you and them. That can (and does) happen, just not all the time. 

Bob

On Mar 1, 2014, at 9:55 PM, Alex Pummer <[email protected]> wrote:

> that WWV has some problem, the propagation path is not very stabile, 
> therefore the arriving signal is phase modulated, if you look it for short 
> time the phase modulation looks like frequency modulation it means the 
> frequency is changing = not stabile, WWVB is a bit better since it ha a more 
> stabile propagation path due to it's  much lower frequency, 60kHz but there 
> are al our nice switching mode power supplies which generating lots of 
> concurrence for WWVB, so it is not so simple task to receive it clean
> 73
> KJ6UHN
> Alex
> 
> On 3/1/2014 6:31 PM, Tom Van Baak wrote:
>> Hi Bob,
>> 
>> Everything about time & frequency is simply a matter of degree, of decimals 
>> points. If all you require is 1 second accuracy then any old WWVB RC clock 
>> will work.
>> 
>> If you want 0.1 second, or 10 ms, or 1 ms accuracy a PC running NTP should 
>> work.
>> 
>> As you push closer to the microsecond level you need a correspondingly 
>> better internal stable frequency source (e.g., rubidium) or external 
>> accurate time source (e.g., GPS). Most of us use GPS one way or another, 
>> achieving 100 ns accuracy with no effort and 10 ns with extreme effort.
>> 
>> Listening to WWV makes a nice example. Where I am near Seattle, say 1000 
>> miles from NIST, the radio wave delay from Ft Collins (due to speed of 
>> light, 1 ns/foot, or 5 us/mile) is about 5 ms. The delay from the WWV radio 
>> speaker to my ear (due to the speed of sound, 1 ms/foot, or 5 s/mile) is 
>> about 5 ms.
>> 
>> /tvb
>> 
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Bob Albert" <[email protected]>
>> To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" 
>> <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 6:04 PM
>> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Another "atomic" clock question
>> 
>> 
>> All this is very interesting. However, my interest is frequency. In other 
>> words, I want to know that my standard oscillators are as close to desired 
>> frequency as possible, and how close that turns out to be.
>> 
>> 
>> Yes, the Internet gives me time of day as close as I care to know. I have an 
>> 'atomic' clock from LaCrosse that resets itself nightly, although it's fussy 
>> about where in the house I put it. If I put it where I'd like, it won't 
>> receive WWVB, so I put it across the room. I called the company inquiring 
>> about augmenting the internal antenna but they were of no help.
>> 
>> 
>> While watching the clock and listening to WWV, it seems the clock is a 
>> fraction of a second behind. Even that doesn't matter, but calibrating the 
>> counter time base is another kind of thing.
>> 
>> I am trying to understand how this is done. Should I ever get a rubidium 
>> standard, I'd want to check its calibration, and that's not a trivial 
>> exercise.
>> 
>> Bob
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Saturday, March 1, 2014 4:56 PM, Paul Alfille <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>>  There are WWVB clocks with serial output. Arcron made one that I added
>> linux ntp support for some years back.
>> http://www.atomictimeclock.com/radsynarcron.htm
>> 
>> http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/ntp/html/drivers/driver27.html
>> 
>> As I recall, it was under $100, quite nicely styled, and is sitting here on
>> my desk. (Reception on the East Coast can be spotty, so I've switched to
>> standard internet net time source).
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 7:44 AM, Bob Camp <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi
>>> 
>>> Ok, so 0.1 second at the sync point is indeed a reasonable estimate. If
>>> that's all you need to deal with (you correct out the crystal offset one
>>> way or the other) then:
>>> 
>>> At 1 day you have 11.5 ppm accuracy. Roughly a 100 Hz beat note with WWV
>>> at 10 MHz.
>>> 
>>> At 10 days you have 1.15 ppm. Roughly a 1 Hz beat note at 10 MHz.
>>> 
>>> At 100 days you have 0.115 ppm. That would be about a 10 second period
>>> beat note.
>>> 
>>> None of that is to say that a beat note is all there is to getting
>>> accuracy off of WWV or that the two approaches deliver the same net
>>> accuracy. Yes I've done the 10 second beat thing, it can be done with care
>>> and a good stable WWV signal.
>>> 
>>> Bob
>>> 
>>> On Feb 23, 2014, at 5:21 PM, Tom Van Baak <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> Now that you have brought up this subject, do you know of any way to
>>> use these LaCrosse clocks to calibrate frequency standards?
>>>> I suggest using a direct electric (1.5 VDC high-Z) or indirect magnetic
>>> (high gain) pickup on the coil to get the +/- pulse per second. Compare
>>> this time with your local frequency standard and over several days you
>>> should get accuracy better than 10 ms per day (1e-7). Here's an example of
>>> a raw phase plot:
>>>> http://leapsecond.com/pages/Junghans/
>>>> 
>>>> /tvb
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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.

_______________________________________________
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