Hi

> On Aug 5, 2020, at 2:55 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> 
> 
>   I would like to share with you my thoughts on two important points that 
> concern a little all attempts to modify and upgrade the equipment.
> 
>   In general I am very reluctant to modify both the electrically and 
> mechanically, in this case, the HP5065A. Modifying, even completely a board, 
> I agree if there is a significant improvement, trying to use the existing 
> pinout and, in the need for additional connection points, use additional 
> connectors on the board. As regards the space on the pcb, smd components can 
> be used whenever possible or doughter boards.

Indeed this has been the debate on a *lot* of equipment as it gets old enough 
to be considered an
antique. Do you preserve it in original condition or do you keep it running ( 
or flying ….). Needless to
say, there is a lot of debate about this. 


> 
>   Remove boards, transformers or anything else I find reluctant, I would 
> prefer to have the possibility of being able to go back to the original 
> configuration if necessary.
>   The area occupied by the optional batteries, which I think almost nobody 
> uses, can be used for new electronics.
> 
>   Using a switching power supply with better performance I agree and since 
> there is already a dedicated DC input on the back of the 5065A I would prefer 
> to use the one to connect to an external box that contains the new power 
> supply and the management of a backup DC input. This eliminates the need to 
> dismantle anything inside the HP5065A.

If you look at the heat generated ( = wasted) running modern <= 3.3V supply 
parts off of the
20V bus, multiple switchers start to look very attractive. Bringing all that in 
from “outside” probably 
isn’t the best / safest way to do it. Using some of the “open space” for a set 
of supplies is probably
a better idea.


> 
>   Another important point is that of the certainty of the results of a 
> change. I mean that most hobbyists who have a 5065A, including me, do not 
> have the opportunity to measure the proposed improvement effects, first of 
> all because they do not have a reference such as an HMaser available, nor 
> even such a refined measuring system to appreciate the improvements made. I 
> want to remember that between zero and 8kseconds the GPS system (e.g. HP 
> GPSDO) in our laboratories has an Adev higher than that of the HP5065A and 
> therefore the measure we do in that range is that of GPS, not that of 
> rubidium.

The most common solution to this is to use multiple reference sources. Finding 
OCXO’s that are better
than a 5065 at 0.1 to 10 seconds is possible in a hobby environment. As mods 
are done, this is a pretty
critical region to examine. 

A DMTD isn’t a super exotic piece of gear anymore. There are a lot of them in 
basements. A single mixer
setup (which is even easier to build) is quite adequate for a 5065 <-> OCXO 
comparison. A triple channel
setup (still in range for a basement project) would let you do a three corner 
hat. (with some range to it).

If you have a three corner hat setup, the OCXO’s likely can be useful to 100 
seconds. Past that a couple 
of fairly good telecom Rb’s could get you a bit further. There is also the 
possibility of running more than 
one 5065 …

Not all parameters on the 5065 are at “near noise floor” levels. The close in ( 
< 20 Hz offset) phase noise
is not all that great. One does not need a -170 dbc / Hz floor sort of setup to 
check it out. As tweaks are 
done, noise in this region *is* of interest. Comparison against a pretty normal 
OCXO would be “good enough”
in this case as well. 

Bob



> 
>   For this reason I invite all those who dedicate themselves to these very 
> interesting changes proposed to test the results obtained in depth and to 
> share them with us with numerical and graphic elements. I take this 
> opportunity to thank them in advance for their scientific help.
> 
>   I want to specify that this is my point of view, it is not a rule and not 
> necessarily shared by other people.
> 
>   thankyou ,  Luciano
> 
>   Luciano P. S. Paramithiotti
>   [email protected]
>   www.timeok.it
> 
>   Da "time-nuts" [email protected]
>   A "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" 
> [email protected]
>   Cc
>   Data Tue, 4 Aug 2020 13:32:31 -0400
>   Oggetto Re: [time-nuts] "The Penultimate HP5065 A15"
>   Hi
> 
>   If a more extensive rebuild is in the works …..
> 
>   +/-20V is (as has been observed) not an ideal voltage for “modern” 
> electronics.
>   If you dig into each of the boards, there is a lot of “drop it down right 
> now” regulation
>   done on a board by board basis. More or less what might be there:
> 
>   A1 Synth
>   A2 Battery Charger
>   A3 60 MHz multiplier
>   A4 100 KHz divider
>   A5 Digital Divider (= clock)
>   A6 1 MHz divider
>   A7 AC amplifier
>   A8 Phase detector
>   A9 Integrator
>   A10 OCXO
>   A11 Rb temp control
>   A12 Rb assembly
>   A13 5 MHz buffer
>   A14 Logic
>   A15 Power supply
>   A16 Power for clock
>   A17 Terminal board
>   A18 Jumpers ( = alt for A2)
>   A19 Led Clock board
> 
>   For most uses, A4,A5,A6,A16,and A19 are not required. A2 is just a pair of 
> diodes (A18) rather than
>   a battery charger. A17 is more part of the wiring harness than anything 
> else. Looking at what’s left:
> 
>   A1 synth, this seems to be a target for various replacement schemes. Right 
> now, it has a bunch
>   of positive voltage rails with some circuits running on 20V. Replacement 
> likely would run on <= +12.
> 
>   A3 Multiplier. Again a target for replacement in some schemes. Same supply 
> as A1 for replacement.
>   Existing design runs +20 direct to a lot of circuits.
> 
>   A7 AC amplifier. Now runs +/-20V. Pretty much begs for a modern op-amp 
> based replacement
>   board. +/-12 probably is fine for that board. A *good* -15 would work for 
> the existing board with minor
>   mods.
> 
>   A8 Phase detector. Replacement probably is all digital. Now runs +20V A9 
> Later version of the board runs +/-15. Probably would work fine a good +/-12 
> with minor mods
> 
>   A10 If it’s a 10811, it’s going to need > +18 for the heater and +12 for 
> the OCXO. There are other
>   “at least as good” parts that work fine on +12.
> 
>   A11 Unless you want to redo the heater windings on A12, you are stuck with 
> +20 to +30V. Rest of the board
>   sort of begs for a modern op-amp approach.
> 
>   A12 Lamp assembly is the only load (other than heater windings and C 
> field). It does run on +20V.
> 
>   A13 +20V taken to +9 for everything on the board. Simple mod to run on +12 
> (or +15 or +10 …). Replacement
>   likely runs on +12
> 
>   A14 If the upstream boards get changed, this likely does as well. Sort of 
> begs for a $1 MCU and a handful of resistors
>   as a replacement.
> 
>   A15 ( the topic of discussion)
> 
>   So, there are two “customers” for -20V. Both would be happy with a fairly 
> good -15V instead. If the replacement
>   OCXO for A10 tunes 0 to 5V, the need for a negative supply becomes a bit 
> unclear.
> 
>   There are a couple of places you can’t easily get around 20 to 30V. The 
> heater windings on the physics
>   package are the biggie. The Rb lamp driver is probably not worth messing 
> with.
> 
>   If you keep A1, A3, A7, or A8, they will need the existing +20V. +12 or +15 
> makes more sense for their
>   replacements. A13 could easily be modified and run on +12 or +15.
> 
>   ====
> 
>   So why all this long winded yack?
> 
>   The ultimate need for +20 is really pretty small. The lamp still needs it. 
> The heaters need something
>   in that vicinity. They don’t need the super regulation or low noise that 
> the lamp needs.
> 
>   The -20 probably does at least as well as a -15 V supply, even as the 
> device sits right now.
>   Long term -15 makes more sense.
> 
>   A bulk +12 (and maybe +5) likely take up the heavy lifting for most of the 
> boards once they are
>   modified. Indeed they would be useful even on the existing boards.
> 
>   Does this change anything you do on the A15 right now? Maybe not. It is 
> worth thinking a bit on though.
> 
>   Bob
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Aug 4, 2020, at 6:35 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> --------
>> Magnus Danielson writes:
>> 
>>> If that is the range you aim to improve, then I strongly recommend you
>>> do re-read the postings I did about phase noise in detector range, as I
>>> have showed that phase-noise get's mixed down to DC and increase the
>>> noise there. With very ugly and hand-wavey hack I was able to
>>> significantly reduce that noise essentially by cleaning up the
>>> phase-noise.
>> 
>> Ohh, absolutely.
>> 
>> My plan is to put a modulated DDS synth in to get a much more modern
>> detector system.
>> 
>> But right now the zener on my a15 is better at measuring temperature
>> than holding voltage stable, so I'm addressing that first.
>> 
>> See the 3rd graph here:
>> 
>> http://phk.freebsd.dk/hacks/HP5065A/20150908_a15/
>> 
>>>>> I would go for the LTZ1000 if you can. The LM399 has gone out of
>>>>> fashion for a reason: [...]
>>>> Yes, I know, being also a volt-nut :-)
>>> 
>>> I have not yet jumped down that rabbit-hole as I am by far not done with
>>> the current one. :)
>>> 
>>> I've been looking at the LTZ1000 and one day I may get some.
>> 
>> You *really* want the version of it which is packaged in the attractive
>> and *incredibly* useful "HP3458A" cabinet :-)
>> 
>> --
>> 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.

Reply via email to