On Monday, March 25, 2019 at 7:39:08 PM UTC-4, kobuki wrote:
>
> Sorry, but what is "Oscillator Frequency"? It's not the tune-in frequency, 
> I assume?
>
> On Tuesday, March 26, 2019 at 12:36:35 AM UTC+1, rich T wrote:
>>
>> Kobuki
>>
>>  I use Kalibrate to determine the ppm.  Works pretty good.  The formula I 
>> used was ppm * Oscillator Frequency  / 1000000.
>>
>> Rich
>>
>> On Monday, March 25, 2019 at 7:21:40 PM UTC-4, kobuki wrote:
>>>
>>> Absolute error, based on PPM: measured_ppm / 1 000 000 * F - for F = 911 
>>> MHz or F = 911 000 000 Hz it gives 225.928 Hz. But any decent AFC should 
>>> correct differences of 5-10 kHz with ease, or even more. This is negligible.
>>>
>>> What are you calibrating with and what is the reference frequency 
>>> source? Just out of curiosity.
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, March 26, 2019 at 12:13:41 AM UTC+1, rich T wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Luc
>>>>
>>>> The dongle I'm using that been running for over a week now, so warming 
>>>> up should not be a issue.  The dongle ppm error is + 0.248.  I believe 
>>>> that 
>>>> is about 5 Hz, but I might be wrong. I also tried the RFM69 sources 
>>>> frequencies and get the same results.  Let go back to the original fc and 
>>>> change the timing just see what happens.
>>>>
>>>> Rich
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, March 25, 2019 at 6:45:05 PM UTC-4, [email protected] 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Rich and Paul,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am puzzled by the fact that after the first received message on 
>>>>> channel zero 5 messages in a row are missed AND after the next init NO 
>>>>> SINGLE message is missed for a long period..
>>>>>
>>>>> I Don't think it has to to with warming up of the dongle, but it can 
>>>>> have an influence.
>>>>>
>>>>> Another possibility is a to precise (time-out) timing. This is 
>>>>> important when the program has to scan more than one transmitter but is 
>>>>> less critical when only one transmitter is read.
>>>>>
>>>>> Could you both try to add the -ex parameter for extra loop timing?
>>>>>
>>>>> Try values such as '-ex 65' to '-ex 200' (ms). Maybe the percentage of 
>>>>> missed signals will drop then.
>>>>>
>>>>> Luc
>>>>>
>>>>

Reply via email to