For software I'm using PN3048 from k35fx's site together with an Aglient 82347b GPIB interface running thru Virtual Box. Other than not recognizing the instruments once and a while, its been pretty reliable. I've also gotten the original BASIC program to work under HT BASIC and surprisingly is more reliable in terms of communicating with the devices. I ran the test at 10mhz against the builtin oscillator that comes with the hp11848a. I also ran a test against a Fluke 6070a at 100mhz and got almost the exact same results from 1khz on out. Maybe I got lucky with my 8660c. It would be interesting to see measurements from a few other units. David
> From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2016 04:21:40 +0000 > Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Phase Noise Comparisons > > Hi Dave, > > Very good. Interesting you data is better than any typical data I could find > on the web which was -105 to -107 dBc/Hz at 10 kHz. > > I need N0QO to get his 3048A up and running again so we can test some other > equipment. > > What are you using for software? > At what frequency was this plot made? > > I tried to send a moderate size PDF, but it at least temporarily has been > blocked. > > Rob > NC0B > > -----Original Message----- > From: time-nuts [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bob Bob > Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2016 8:37 PM > To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement > Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Phase Noise Comparisons > > > > > > > > > > Actually, I just acquired a HP3048a phase measurement system and I'm > measuring all of the my signal generators, one of which is an 8660c with the > 86603 plugin. Attached (ignore the caption) is the result compared against > the 3048a internal 10mhz low noise reference. > > > David > > From: [email protected] > > To: [email protected] > > Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2016 20:05:18 +0000 > > Subject: [time-nuts] Phase Noise Comparisons > > > > I did some interpolation to compare the specs for phase noise of the 8660 > > the way it was done then to the present method. I think it is going to be > > something like -105 dBc/Hz to -110 dBc/Hz at 10 kHz offset at 14 MHz > > carrier frequency. > > > > > > > > As a comparison, the 8662A is about -135 dBc/Hz and the 8642A is better > > than -150 dBc/Hz. > > > > Actual measurements on multiple generators in my lab. Unfortunately I have > > never used or measured an 8660. > > > > > > > > 3335A -128 dBc/Hz > > > > 3336C -120 dBc/Hz > > > > 3325A -115 dBc/Hz (original version. Later improved by 4 pr 5 dB > > after the 3336C came out.) > > > > > > > > As a comparison a Rigol DG4162 is -115 dBc/Hz All at 10 kHz offset and on > > the 20 meter band. > > > > > > > > It depends what you are trying to measure. Sensitivity or noise floor, > > anything will work within the range of specified output accuracy and > > leakage. On the other hand, if you are trying to measure the dynamic range > > of a receiver, or its phase noise characteristics, you cannot do that with > > most generators. > > > > > > > > Rob, NC0B > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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. > > > > -- > If this email is spam, report it to > https://support.onlymyemail.com/view/report_spam/ODExMjI6MTg0MzU3MjgwMDpyb2JAbmMwYi5jb206ZGVsaXZlcmVk > _______________________________________________ > 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.
