Hi

Since we are now into the “system”……

Sometimes this alll gets easier at “standard” frequencies. Taking everything
down to 1 Hz ( = 1 pps ), 10 Hz, or 100 or 1k KHz might be worth thinking about.

Bob

> On Jun 21, 2020, at 3:46 PM, Gilles Clement <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Dear Ole,
> 
> Very interesting comments, thanks.
> I am currently servoing a home brewed local 162kHz oscillator to the incoming 
> radio signal. The phase difference looks quite clean during day time (ground 
> wave propagation), but quite dirty at night, (additional fading of such long 
> wave signals at night ?). Allows me to remove the time phase modulation, and 
> reach reasonable results.
> 
> What i am planning to do with the 81 divider, is to compare current output 
> with a « good » 10MHz OCXO (10811) to check with a TIC.
> 
> I am (was) also, indeed,  planning to try direct HF signal division to servo 
> the 10 MHz OCXO. But this may not work well, as you experienced...
> 
> Best,
> Gilles.
> 
> 
>> Le 21 juin 2020 à 16:14, Ole Stender Nielsen via time-nuts 
>> <[email protected]> a écrit :
>> 
>> Dear Gilles,
>> 
>> If I understand you correctly you will take the French time signal at 162 
>> kHz and divide the frequency with 81 in an attempt to compare two 2 kHz 
>> signals, one originating from the time signal, and another from an OCXO.
>> 
>> However, I would advice not to take the 162 kHz signal and try to divide it 
>> with 81. The 162 kHz signal you pick off the air is an analog signal, and it 
>> will suffer from all kinds of unwanted noise, dips and multipath phenomena. 
>> I assume you plan to condition the signal so that you can feed it to a 
>> digital divider. However, this is an invitation to cycle slips and jumps.
>> 
>> An off-air frequency reference receiver like the Halcyon OFS-1 fed an 
>> amplified and filtered 162 kHz signal directly to a divider, and the 
>> resulting performance was awful. Take a look at 
>> https://dabbledoo.weebly.com/halcyon-ofs-1.html
>> 
>> If you live very close to the transmitter site, it may work to condition and 
>> then divide the 162 kHz signal, but if not, you will not be happy.
>> 
>> Best regards
>> Ole
>> 
>>> Den 21-06-2020 kl. 09:30 skrev Gilles Clement:
>>> Hi,
>>> Comparing a reference signal at 162kHz with local 10MHz ocxo. Expected Adev 
>>> 10E-11 at 10sec.
>>> 162kHz / 81 = 2kHz = 10MHz / 5000
>>> GC
>>> 
>>>>> Le 21 juin 2020 à 05:49, Bob kb8tq <[email protected]> a écrit :
>>>> 
>>>> Hi
>>>> 
>>>> *Any* divide approach followed by a flip flop clocked by the input clock 
>>>> will meet
>>>> that same basic requirement. While it *sounds* like it would improve 
>>>> things, it
>>>> very much depends on the details.
>>>> 
>>>> What are you trying to do? What is the input frequency? What is the phase 
>>>> noise
>>>> requirement?
>>>> 
>>>> Bob
>>>> 
>>>>> On Jun 20, 2020, at 2:22 PM, Gilles Clement <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Robert,
>>>>> You are right, its the lambda divider that was discussed. Need to better 
>>>>> understand this approach....
>>>>> 74HC40103 could also do the 81 Pi-divide easily,  but I tend to prefer 
>>>>> the PICDIV concept where the controller is clocked by the signal to 
>>>>> divide (So limited or no noise is  added). AVR family could do it, as 
>>>>> most of the instructions take only one clock.
>>>>> Gilles.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Le 20 juin 2020 à 19:48, Robert LaJeunesse <[email protected]> a 
>>>>>>> écrit :
>>>>>> Gilles, if I read the Calosso-Rubiola paper correctly a Pi divider is 
>>>>>> pretty much your standard square-wave producing digital divider, such as 
>>>>>> a 74163 (for even divides). There's odd-value (3,5,7) Pi dividers shown 
>>>>>> at 
>>>>>> https://www.theremin.us/Circuit_Library/symmetrical_digital_dividers.html.
>>>>>>  What the Calosso-Rubiola paper promotes is the Lambda divider, which is 
>>>>>> depicted in figure 2 of the paper.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Bob L.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, June 19, 2020 at 10:27 AM
>>>>>>> From: "Gilles Clement" <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> To: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> Cc: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" 
>>>>>>> <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Frequency division by 81
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> Could you point me to a practical design example of a Pi divider ?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Envoyé de mon iPad
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Le 19 juin 2020 à 08:56, Poul-Henning Kamp <[email protected]> a 
>>>>>>>>> écrit :
>>>>>>>> --------
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I need to divide the output of an OCXO by a factor D=81 for testing 
>>>>>>>>> purposes. So with minimum added phase noise.
>>>>>>>> Two stages of divide by 9 PI-dividers ?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> http://rubiola.org/pdf-articles/conference/2013-ifcs-Frequency-dividers.pdf
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>> Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
>>>>>>>> [email protected]         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
>>>>>>>> FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
>>>>>>>> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by 
>>>>>>>> incompetence.
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, go to 
>>>>>>> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
>>>>>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, go to 
>>>>>> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
>>>>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
>>>>> To unsubscribe, go to 
>>>>> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
>>>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
>>>> To unsubscribe, go to 
>>>> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
>>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
>>> To unsubscribe, go to 
>>> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
>>> and follow the instructions there.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
>> To unsubscribe, go to 
>> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
>> and follow the instructions there.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe, go to 
> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
> and follow the instructions there.


_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.

Reply via email to