On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 04:05:29PM +0000, unruh wrote: > Except yo uknow that the typical computer clock is driven mostly by > temperature variations, and those are time of day dependent. People > tend to work during the day thus their computer works during the > day, and does not at night. Ie, there is a very strong daily cycle > in the temp of the computer. That is NOT within the Allan model, and > the Allan variation and minimum are really irrelevant with this > highly non-stochastic noise model.
At least in my tests, the effect of temperature varitions shows up as a huge bump in the plot. The oscillator's random-walk frequency noise normally shown as +1/2 slope may not be visible, but I don't really need it. >From comparing results from simulations on data captured from PPS and simulations on generated frequency noise, it seems that simply using a stronger frequency noise is good enough to get similar results as with real data. What I'm hoping to get from the survey is a range for random-walk frequency noise which will give results similar to real oscillators and which I should focus on in my simulations. -- Miroslav Lichvar _______________________________________________ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
