Tom,
thanks for sharing this! This was exactly what I was looking for.
Regards,
Matthias
Am 23.08.2015 um 19:19 schrieb Tom Van Baak:
To learn more, I think the best way would be to put the
counter into its fast binary mode and acquire 1k time
interval samples per second. That would give me loads of
data to play with and it would be easy to try out how
different averaging schemes affect the result.
Matthias,
See: http://leapsecond.com/pages/adev-avg/ for the results of a similar ADEV
averaging experiment. I can send you the raw data if you want.
What helped me understand the issue was to think in terms of frequency
*in*stability instead of frequency stability. We often use the words
interchangeably. But imagine that your goal is to measure oscillator noise, its
instability, not its stability. With this new mental image the last thing you
would do is average. By its very nature, averaging removes highs and lows and
smoothes things out. If your goal is to measure instability, averaging removes
the very thing you're trying to measure.
The plots in the above web page show this dramatically. You can make an
oscillator as good as you want if you average enough.
/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.
