[email protected] said: > No, it is much simpler. The hardware saves time-stamps to the memory at each > (event) rise of the input signal (let's consider we have digital logic input > signal for simplicity). So after some time we have many pairs of {event > number, time-stamp}. We can plot those pairs with event number on X-axis and > time on Y-axis, now if we fit the line on that dataset the inverse slope of > the line will correspond to the estimated frequency.
I like it. Thanks. If you flip the X-Y axis, then you don't have to invert the slope. That might be an interesting way to analyze TICC data. It would work better/faster if you used a custom divider to trigger the TICC as fast as it can print rather than using the typical PPS. ------ Another way to look at things is that you have a fast 1 bit A/D. If you need results in a second, FFTing that might fit into memory. (Or you could rent a big-memory cloud server. A quick sample found 128GB for $1/hour.) That's with 1 second of data. I don't know how long it would take to process. What's the clock frequency? Handwave. At 1 GHz, 1 second of samples fits into a 4 byte integer even if all the energy ends up in one bin. 4 bytes, *2 for complex, *2 for input and output is 16 GB. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. _______________________________________________ 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.
