Re: [time-nuts] FTS-4040/A - Looking for voltage on switching power supply

2019-03-17 Thread paul swed
I will believe if its the supply going to the inverter, the inverter is
flexible. Most offer a fairly wide range on the input. So 24-28 is most
likely very reasonable.
But continue to research and just maybe you will find better detail.
Pictures may also be helpful.
?? Is it a linear supply feeding the inverter?? That would make sense.
Regards
Paul.

On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 5:19 PM Taka Kamiya  wrote:

> Now it is certain the failure is power supply.  I fed 26V into DC port and
> everything is working as before.  I'd rather replace this faulty supply.
> Question is, 24V?  28V?  30V?  or 28.45V?  This power supply appears to be
> a custom unit.  Still looking for spec on power supply.
>
> At least it's not the cesium tube phew!
>
> ---
> (Mr.) Taka Kamiya
> I'm stuck in a wormhole  Hello, worms!
>
>
> On Sunday, March 17, 2019, 3:59:57 PM EDT, paul swed 
> wrote:
>
>
> Taka
> No familiarity with 4040 and I don't have schematics.
> But thats not unusual for a lot of time-nuts equipment.
> But happy to give a remote hand. (Travelling this coming week so slow
> responses)
> Others may have more useful details like a schematic.
> Regards
> Paul
> WB8TSL
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 3:02 PM Taka Kamiya via time-nuts <
> time-nuts@lists.febo.com> wrote:
>
> I have an FTS-4040/A Cesium Oscillator from Datum.  It was working last
> night and dead today.  A/C available LED is lit but nothing else.  Checking
> power supply, I read 8.9V.  (large switching supply on back panel)  Rather
> odd voltage I thought.  Checked some ICs on a board.  It's not getting
> power.
>
> Does anyone have this unit or know what this switching supply is supposed
> to output?  It is a single voltage supply.
>
> ---
> (Mr.) Taka Kamiya
> I'm stuck in a wormhole  Hello, worms!
> ___
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
> and follow the instructions there.
>
>
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Distribution amplifier for 10MHz and 1 pps

2019-03-17 Thread Bob kb8tq
Hi

CMOS is good. The faster the better. Go to your favorite vendor and find 
whatever is “king” this month
and that’s what you go with. HC has been around a *long* time and is about as 
slow as it gets in terms 
of 5V CMOS ( yes, 4000 series is slower still …).  Faster means less delay in 
the gate (so lower variation
in delay). It also turns out that faster means lower phase noise so lower 
jitter. 

Buffers are better than inverters, simply because they have higher output drive 
capability. One “favorite”
are the x125 and x126 tri-state buffers. NC7SZ125 and NC7SZ126 are two 
examples. 

If you want to drive 50 ohms, you likely will need to parallel gates in order 
to handle the current. There is 
an ongoing debate about source termination vs load termination vs “both 
termination” vs “don’t bother”. 
I would suggest that terminating one end or the other is a … errr …. really 
good idea. 

Lots more information in the archives.

Bob

> On Mar 17, 2019, at 6:39 PM, Taka Kamiya via time-nuts 
>  wrote:
> 
> I'm very curious, too.  Especially when I *just* built one using 74HC04N.  
> 
> --- 
> (Mr.) Taka Kamiya
> I'm stuck in a wormhole  Hello, worms! 
> 
>On Sunday, March 17, 2019, 4:01:26 PM EDT, Hal Murray 
>  wrote:  
> 
> 
>> For 1PPs the main goal is jitter and the selection of the ICs is very tricky 
> 
> Could you please say more?  Do you mean logic family selection, or chip 
> selection within a family?
> 
> Most modern digital chips are CMOS with an input threshold of VCC/2.  I'd 
> expect power supply noise to be important and families with faster switching 
> times probably make more noise.
> 
> 
> -- 
> These are my opinions.  I hate spam.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to 
> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
> and follow the instructions there.
> 
> ___
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to 
> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
> and follow the instructions there.


___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] FTS-4040/A - Looking for voltage on switching power supply

2019-03-17 Thread Taka Kamiya via time-nuts
Now it is certain the failure is power supply.  I fed 26V into DC port and 
everything is working as before.  I'd rather replace this faulty supply.  
Question is, 24V?  28V?  30V?  or 28.45V?  This power supply appears to be a 
custom unit.  Still looking for spec on power supply.
At least it's not the cesium tube phew!

--- 
(Mr.) Taka Kamiya
I'm stuck in a wormhole  Hello, worms! 

On Sunday, March 17, 2019, 3:59:57 PM EDT, paul swed  
wrote:  
 
 TakaNo familiarity with 4040 and I don't have schematics.But thats not unusual 
for a lot of time-nuts equipment.But happy to give a remote hand. (Travelling 
this coming week so slow responses)Others may have more useful details like a 
schematic.RegardsPaulWB8TSL

On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 3:02 PM Taka Kamiya via time-nuts 
 wrote:

I have an FTS-4040/A Cesium Oscillator from Datum.  It was working last night 
and dead today.  A/C available LED is lit but nothing else.  Checking power 
supply, I read 8.9V.  (large switching supply on back panel)  Rather odd 
voltage I thought.  Checked some ICs on a board.  It's not getting power.  

Does anyone have this unit or know what this switching supply is supposed to 
output?  It is a single voltage supply.

--- 
(Mr.) Taka Kamiya
I'm stuck in a wormhole  Hello, worms!
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.

  
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Distribution amplifier for 10MHz and 1 pps

2019-03-17 Thread Bob kb8tq
Hi

Yup, pretty much the same questions each time. I’ve given up recommending
specific IC’s since the DIY approach does not seem to be what people are after. 
That’s not a problem, I do a *lot* of stuff on a “what’s on eBay?” basis.

Bob

> On Mar 17, 2019, at 4:56 PM, djl  wrote:
> 
> Gosh. this topic comes up at least once every 6 months. A diligent search of 
> the time-nuts database would turn up amazing things. . .
> 
> 
> On 2019-03-17 13:24, Hal Murray wrote:
>>> For 1PPs the main goal is jitter and the selection of the ICs is very tricky
>> Could you please say more?  Do you mean logic family selection, or chip
>> selection within a family?
>> Most modern digital chips are CMOS with an input threshold of VCC/2.  I'd
>> expect power supply noise to be important and families with faster switching
>> times probably make more noise.
> 
> -- 
> Dr. Don Latham  AJ7LL
> PO Box 404, Frenchtown, MT, 59834
> VOX: 406-626-4304
> 
> 
> ___
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to 
> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
> and follow the instructions there.


___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Distribution amplifier for 10MHz and 1 pps

2019-03-17 Thread Taka Kamiya via time-nuts
I'm very curious, too.  Especially when I *just* built one using 74HC04N.  

--- 
(Mr.) Taka Kamiya
I'm stuck in a wormhole  Hello, worms! 

On Sunday, March 17, 2019, 4:01:26 PM EDT, Hal Murray 
 wrote:  
 
 
> For 1PPs the main goal is jitter and the selection of the ICs is very tricky 

Could you please say more?  Do you mean logic family selection, or chip 
selection within a family?

Most modern digital chips are CMOS with an input threshold of VCC/2.  I'd 
expect power supply noise to be important and families with faster switching 
times probably make more noise.


-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.




___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.
  
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Frequency Ensemble

2019-03-17 Thread Bob kb8tq
Hi

TAPPR needs that order for 25 TICC’s …… :)

There are indeed many ways to do it and each has it’s advantages and 
disadvantages. 
With a DMTD sort of system, you can’t grab “off the shelf” hardware to get 
things up
and running quickly. Also the isolation / ground loop / spur problem is very 
likely to 
get you on a DMTD like system with 20 to 30 devices on the same “party line”.

No ideal answer, just a lot of tradeoff’s.

Bob

> On Mar 17, 2019, at 4:48 PM, Attila Kinali  wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 17 Mar 2019 10:58:49 -0400
> Bob kb8tq  wrote:
> 
>> The first thing you need (after all the standards) is a way to do precision 
>> comparisons of all your devices. There are an infinite number of ways to do
>> this. Let’s say you buy 26 TICC’s to do the job ( TAPPR needs 25 ordered to
>> get the next batch going so that would solve two problems at once :) ). A
>> PPS from a single source with good short term stability (maybe an OCXO) goes
>> into one side of all of them. A pps from a DUT goes in the other side (yes
>> there are other ways …TAPPR needs that order ….).
>> You then have 26 devices each reporting how a single standard compares to 
>> the “main OCXO”. 
> 
> 
> I would use here a variant of DMTD: Instead of comparing pairs
> of standards, have one offset frequency generator feed multiple
> mixers, one for each standard. This way, the standards can be
> compared to eachother more easily. Downside of this is, that
> the precision of this comparison depends on the stability of
> the distribution of the offset frequency signal. Though, under
> the assumption that ground loops can be kept in check, this
> should be easier to ensure than having pair wise comparisons
> not drifting away too much. When using TICCs, with their high
> measurement rate, I would also go for an offset frequency in
> the order of 1kHz instead of the customary 1-10Hz. This will
> help getting away from the flicker noise region and also give
> a much higher slope of the signal to work with, reducing the
> white noise of the measurement. Additonally, this should
> also give higher precision at tau = 1s, as the system is now
> averaging down from 1ms instead of 100ms (when using 10Hz),
> which could potentially give a boost of a factor of sqrt(100ms/1ms) = 10.
> 
>   Attila Kinali
> 
> -- 
>   The bad part of Zurich is where the degenerates
>throw DARK chocolate at you.
> 
> ___
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to 
> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
> and follow the instructions there.


___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Distribution amplifier for 10MHz and 1 pps

2019-03-17 Thread djl
Gosh. this topic comes up at least once every 6 months. A diligent 
search of the time-nuts database would turn up amazing things. . .



On 2019-03-17 13:24, Hal Murray wrote:
For 1PPs the main goal is jitter and the selection of the ICs is very 
tricky


Could you please say more?  Do you mean logic family selection, or chip
selection within a family?

Most modern digital chips are CMOS with an input threshold of VCC/2.  
I'd
expect power supply noise to be important and families with faster 
switching

times probably make more noise.


--
Dr. Don Latham  AJ7LL
PO Box 404, Frenchtown, MT, 59834
VOX: 406-626-4304


___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Frequency Ensemble

2019-03-17 Thread Attila Kinali
On Sun, 17 Mar 2019 10:58:49 -0400
Bob kb8tq  wrote:

> The first thing you need (after all the standards) is a way to do precision 
> comparisons of all your devices. There are an infinite number of ways to do
> this. Let’s say you buy 26 TICC’s to do the job ( TAPPR needs 25 ordered to
> get the next batch going so that would solve two problems at once :) ). A
> PPS from a single source with good short term stability (maybe an OCXO) goes
> into one side of all of them. A pps from a DUT goes in the other side (yes
> there are other ways …TAPPR needs that order ….).
> You then have 26 devices each reporting how a single standard compares to 
> the “main OCXO”. 


I would use here a variant of DMTD: Instead of comparing pairs
of standards, have one offset frequency generator feed multiple
mixers, one for each standard. This way, the standards can be
compared to eachother more easily. Downside of this is, that
the precision of this comparison depends on the stability of
the distribution of the offset frequency signal. Though, under
the assumption that ground loops can be kept in check, this
should be easier to ensure than having pair wise comparisons
not drifting away too much. When using TICCs, with their high
measurement rate, I would also go for an offset frequency in
the order of 1kHz instead of the customary 1-10Hz. This will
help getting away from the flicker noise region and also give
a much higher slope of the signal to work with, reducing the
white noise of the measurement. Additonally, this should
also give higher precision at tau = 1s, as the system is now
averaging down from 1ms instead of 100ms (when using 10Hz),
which could potentially give a boost of a factor of sqrt(100ms/1ms) = 10.

Attila Kinali

-- 
The bad part of Zurich is where the degenerates
throw DARK chocolate at you.

___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Frequency Ensemble

2019-03-17 Thread Attila Kinali
On Sun, 17 Mar 2019 12:00:11 -0700
"Tom Van Baak"  wrote:

> So yes, NIST, USNO, PTB, BIPM -- all the big boys -- use ensemble 
> techniques. But the key is that they mostly use cesium clocks, not OCXO or 
> Rb clocks from eBay. Laboratory cesium standards don't suffer from frequency 
> drift. The other key is that the clocks are independent. Under these 
> conditions one can obtain sqrt(N) advantage.

Most of the Cs beam standards contributing to TAI are 5071s.
And, unfortunately, they do drift. As do almost all of the
atomic clocks contributing to TAI. There are a handful of
labs (IIRC 8) that run "the primary standards" which have
a low enough uncertainty of influences to be considered
non-drifting. IIRC all of them are are Cs fountains.
Also unfortunately, most of these cannot or are not operated
continuously. But according to METAS they don't need to be
as the 5071s are stable enough that measuring their frequency
once a month is enough to keep the uncertainty below what
time and frequncy transfer can deliver today.


Attila Kinali

-- 
The bad part of Zurich is where the degenerates
throw DARK chocolate at you.

___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Distribution amplifier for 10MHz and 1 pps

2019-03-17 Thread Gerhard Hoffmann

Yes :-) another one of mine:

<    http://www.hoffmann-hochfrequenz.de/downloads/iso_amp.pdf     >

It is based on a NIST design and made from discrete transistors.

Unfortunately it also needs RF PNP transistors that are slowly going the 
way of the Dodo.


Luckily, I still have a reel of BFG31.


regards, Gerhard



Am 17.03.19 um 19:00 schrieb Anders Wallin:

I've tried to collect links to frequency/pulse distributor designs over
here:
https://www.ohwr.org/project/pda-8ch-fda-8ch/wikis/Similar-Projects
if something good is missing let me know!

AW




  > But how do I do this
  on 10MHz side?  I'd like to have minimal distortion
  (sine wave) and high isolation.  I acquired a few signal
  splitter and monolithic amplifiers.  Split first and
  amplify?  Amplify first and split?  Remember it's only
  2 to 3 channels.  Amplifier module has too much gain, so
  I'll probably have to use attenuators.
  >




___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Distribution amplifier for 10MHz and 1 pps

2019-03-17 Thread Hal Murray


> For 1PPs the main goal is jitter and the selection of the ICs is very tricky 

Could you please say more?  Do you mean logic family selection, or chip 
selection within a family?

Most modern digital chips are CMOS with an input threshold of VCC/2.  I'd 
expect power supply noise to be important and families with faster switching 
times probably make more noise.


-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.




___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Frequency Ensemble

2019-03-17 Thread Tom Van Baak
> Hi Everyone,I like to know if it possible to run let say 10 GPSDO, 16 Rb clock
> together and take the average to control 1 "master clock" and have better 
> stability ?
> like what BIPM or NIST doing.
> I have search about ensemble system but I have no idea how much advantage
> I get from some clock that I already have.Thank You Anton 

Anton,

The rule-of-thumb is that, *under the right conditions*, N clocks will perform 
sqrt(N) better than 1 clock.

So yes, NIST, USNO, PTB, BIPM -- all the big boys -- use ensemble techniques. 
But the key is that they mostly use cesium clocks, not OCXO or Rb clocks from 
eBay. Laboratory cesium standards don't suffer from frequency drift. The other 
key is that the clocks are independent. Under these conditions one can obtain 
sqrt(N) advantage.

The problem with using cheap OCXO or Rb clocks is that they drift, and this 
drift may depend on make / model / environment; all of which are possibly 
common mode for you. This means the full sqrt(N) assumption is likely not valid.

The problem with using GPSDO is that they are not independent clocks. In fact, 
they aren't clocks at all: they are just noisy radio receivers, implementing 
"time transfer" from the USNO GPS master clock, which is related to but not 
equal to UTC(USNO) which is related to but not equal to UTC itself. There's a 
lot of common mode error amongst a set of GPSDO. This means the full sqrt(N) 
assumption is likely not valid.

Those who use GPS for highest accuracy tend not to use GPSDO. Instead they just 
collect raw timing information and post-process it some hours to weeks later. 
That is, they want to know
what time-it-was-precisely
rather than
what time-it-is-approximately.
A GPSDO only does the latter.

/tvb


___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Frequency Ensemble

2019-03-17 Thread John Ackermann N8UR
Just a couple of other measurement options on top of Bob's excellent 
description.


You could half the number of TICCs by using them in timestamp mode with 
a common 10 MHz clock serving as the reference -- in that mode you can 
do two simultaneous measurements with each TICC.  There are some 
hardware and software hooks built into the TICC to allow multiple units 
to operate synchronously.  (But we still need 25 orders :-) ).


Second, as Bob mentions any PPS measurment is likely to be noisier at 1, 
10, or 100 seconds than the sources you want to measure.  If you decide 
to do one round of measurements every 1000 seconds, it's thoroughly 
practical to use some sort of switch matrix to measure each of the DUT 
in turn with a single TICC or other counter.  In other words, once each 
1000 seconds switch each DUT in turn to the TICC START input long enough 
to get one measurement.


That's what I designed the TAPR TASS coax switch system for -- it lets 
you switch 8 DUT to one common output under USB control, and the 
controller supports up to 4 switches so you can make a really big matrix 
if you want (my setup at home has jacks for 24 DUT and 8 references).


A project like this is ripe for all sorts of hardware hackery!

John


On 3/17/19 10:58 AM, Bob kb8tq wrote:

Hi

The answer is (of course) yes. The somewhat more detailed answer is that it 
actually is a practical basement sort of thing *if*
you have the space. I was headed off to do this and changed course. That’s just 
my lack of focus rather than it being an
un-doable sort of thing. What’s below is sort of a random walk through doing it.

The first thing you need (after all the standards) is a way to do precision 
comparisons of all your devices. There are an infinite
number of ways to do this. Let’s say you buy 26 TICC’s to do the job ( TAPPR 
needs 25 ordered to get the next batch going
so that would solve two problems at once :) ). A PPS from a single source with 
good short term stability (maybe an OCXO) goes
into one side of all of them. A pps from a DUT goes in the other side (yes 
there are other ways …TAPPR needs that order ….).
You then have 26 devices each reporting how a single standard compares to the 
“main OCXO”.

As. this chugs along you get a whole bunch of timestamps telling you how far 
your main OCXO is from each and every one of your
“standards”. Since 10 of them are GPSDO’s they likely will be doing some very 
similar things. For the moment let’s ignore that
and assume they are independent / uncorrelated sources. Since things like the 
Rb’s are free running data comes in spread out
over the second, collecting data and comparing it isn’t exact.

Once a second, you round up all the data and make a guess about what is 
correct. If everything is independent and equally
noisy and … and … and … your guess could be sqrt(N) better than any individual 
source. With 26 sources, you would be a bit
over 5X better than what you started with. You then diddle the EFC on an OCXO 
to put it inline with that estimate (yes that
may mean a 27th TICC).

Stepping back, there was a bit of hand waving going on there :

One assumption is that the TICC measurement noise at one second is better than 
the noise of the sources. That probably is
only true at much longer time spans (say >100 seconds). You can either upgrade 
the measurement or accept the longer time
span. (TICC is about 1x10^-10 at 1 sec, 1x10^-12 at 100 sec, and 1x10^-13 at 
1,000 sec)

The “independent / uncorrelated sources” part is very suspect with a group of 
(possibly same manufacture) GPSDO’s in the mix.
A burp here or there in the way GPS L1 (I’m guessing they are L1) is behaving 
can easily swing them all at the same time.. Things
like temperature (Rb’s have temperature dependence) also can get into the mix.

One alternate that might actually be easier to deal with: Run 10 free running 
OCXO’s and the 16 Rb’s. Add some number of
GPS modules (with PPS outputs) to the mix. That way you will not be constantly 
fighting the unknown loop dynamics of the
GPSDO’s.

Next, somebody is likely to raise their hand and ask if the noise really *is* 
gaussian (and thus goes down as fast as the square root).
The same things that get into making the sources correlated (and some other 
things) contribute to them being non-gaussian in
this regard. Simple answer is you likely will not quite get to the 5X 
improvement advertised above. One thing you *can* do for
  some effects is try to learn them via cross comparison. That gets into the 
guts of your software and how you decide to do this.

What the final result is at any specific tau will be very much a “that depends” 
sort of thing. The Rb’s have an ADEV curve that
should drop by sqrt(tau). ( 10X better ADEV at 100X tau). Most GPSDO’s fairly 
flat ADEV out to some “hump” and then they
follow GPS down from that point. If you actually steer an OCXO, the control 
loop will get into the act as well.

You might also look into ganging up the TICC’s 

[time-nuts] FTS-4040/A - Looking for voltage on switching power supply

2019-03-17 Thread Taka Kamiya via time-nuts
I have an FTS-4040/A Cesium Oscillator from Datum.  It was working last night 
and dead today.  A/C available LED is lit but nothing else.  Checking power 
supply, I read 8.9V.  (large switching supply on back panel)  Rather odd 
voltage I thought.  Checked some ICs on a board.  It's not getting power.  

Does anyone have this unit or know what this switching supply is supposed to 
output?  It is a single voltage supply.

--- 
(Mr.) Taka Kamiya
I'm stuck in a wormhole  Hello, worms!
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Distribution amplifier for 10MHz and 1 pps

2019-03-17 Thread Anders Wallin
I've tried to collect links to frequency/pulse distributor designs over
here:
https://www.ohwr.org/project/pda-8ch-fda-8ch/wikis/Similar-Projects
if something good is missing let me know!

AW



>
>  > But how do I do this
>  on 10MHz side?  I'd like to have minimal distortion
>  (sine wave) and high isolation.  I acquired a few signal
>  splitter and monolithic amplifiers.  Split first and
>  amplify?  Amplify first and split?  Remember it's only
>  2 to 3 channels.  Amplifier module has too much gain, so
>  I'll probably have to use attenuators.
>  >
>
>
>
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Frequency Ensemble

2019-03-17 Thread paul swed
Anton
Others will reply but my sense is that there is little advantage in doing
that.
Assuming everything is the same in all 10 systems then you would be
measuring the receiver behaviors at a given moment. I simply am unclear
that there is an advantage.
Regards
Paul.

On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 11:00 PM Anton Moehammad via time-nuts <
time-nuts@lists.febo.com> wrote:

> Hi Everyone,I like to know if it possible to run let say 10 GPSDO, 16 Rb
> clock together and take the average to control 1 "master clock" and have
> better stability ?like what BIPM or NIST doing.
> I have search about ensemble system but I have no idea how much advantage
> I get from some clock that I already have.Thank YouAnton
> ___
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
> and follow the instructions there.
>
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Frequency Ensemble

2019-03-17 Thread Bob kb8tq
Hi

The answer is (of course) yes. The somewhat more detailed answer is that it 
actually is a practical basement sort of thing *if* 
you have the space. I was headed off to do this and changed course. That’s just 
my lack of focus rather than it being an
un-doable sort of thing. What’s below is sort of a random walk through doing 
it. 

The first thing you need (after all the standards) is a way to do precision 
comparisons of all your devices. There are an infinite
number of ways to do this. Let’s say you buy 26 TICC’s to do the job ( TAPPR 
needs 25 ordered to get the next batch going
so that would solve two problems at once :) ). A PPS from a single source with 
good short term stability (maybe an OCXO) goes
into one side of all of them. A pps from a DUT goes in the other side (yes 
there are other ways …TAPPR needs that order ….).
You then have 26 devices each reporting how a single standard compares to the 
“main OCXO”. 

As. this chugs along you get a whole bunch of timestamps telling you how far 
your main OCXO is from each and every one of your
“standards”. Since 10 of them are GPSDO’s they likely will be doing some very 
similar things. For the moment let’s ignore that
and assume they are independent / uncorrelated sources. Since things like the 
Rb’s are free running data comes in spread out
over the second, collecting data and comparing it isn’t exact. 

Once a second, you round up all the data and make a guess about what is 
correct. If everything is independent and equally 
noisy and … and … and … your guess could be sqrt(N) better than any individual 
source. With 26 sources, you would be a bit
over 5X better than what you started with. You then diddle the EFC on an OCXO 
to put it inline with that estimate (yes that
may mean a 27th TICC). 

Stepping back, there was a bit of hand waving going on there : 

One assumption is that the TICC measurement noise at one second is better than 
the noise of the sources. That probably is 
only true at much longer time spans (say >100 seconds). You can either upgrade 
the measurement or accept the longer time
span. (TICC is about 1x10^-10 at 1 sec, 1x10^-12 at 100 sec, and 1x10^-13 at 
1,000 sec)

The “independent / uncorrelated sources” part is very suspect with a group of 
(possibly same manufacture) GPSDO’s in the mix.
A burp here or there in the way GPS L1 (I’m guessing they are L1) is behaving 
can easily swing them all at the same time.. Things 
like temperature (Rb’s have temperature dependence) also can get into the mix. 

One alternate that might actually be easier to deal with: Run 10 free running 
OCXO’s and the 16 Rb’s. Add some number of 
GPS modules (with PPS outputs) to the mix. That way you will not be constantly 
fighting the unknown loop dynamics of the 
GPSDO’s. 

Next, somebody is likely to raise their hand and ask if the noise really *is* 
gaussian (and thus goes down as fast as the square root).
The same things that get into making the sources correlated (and some other 
things) contribute to them being non-gaussian in
this regard. Simple answer is you likely will not quite get to the 5X 
improvement advertised above. One thing you *can* do for 
 some effects is try to learn them via cross comparison. That gets into the 
guts of your software and how you decide to do this.

What the final result is at any specific tau will be very much a “that depends” 
sort of thing. The Rb’s have an ADEV curve that 
should drop by sqrt(tau). ( 10X better ADEV at 100X tau). Most GPSDO’s fairly 
flat ADEV out to some “hump” and then they
follow GPS down from that point. If you actually steer an OCXO, the control 
loop will get into the act as well. 

You might also look into ganging up the TICC’s to run 4 channels in one block. 
Unfortunately that would get the total order 
below what TAPPR needs … :) That would let you compare three standards against 
the master in one block and cut the 
total down to nine “pods” of two each. 

Indeed a fun project. There are a lot of papers out there on various aspects of 
it. Jim Barnes and David Allan authored a lot
of them, either together or independently. Since they both worked at NIST, the 
papers are in the public domain. 

Have fun 

Bob



> On Mar 16, 2019, at 9:16 PM, Anton Moehammad via time-nuts 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hi Everyone,I like to know if it possible to run let say 10 GPSDO, 16 Rb 
> clock together and take the average to control 1 "master clock" and have 
> better stability ?like what BIPM or NIST doing.
> I have search about ensemble system but I have no idea how much advantage I 
> get from some clock that I already have.Thank YouAnton 
> ___
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to 
> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
> and follow the instructions there.


___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://

Re: [time-nuts] Frequency Ensemble

2019-03-17 Thread Mike Cook

> Le 17 mars 2019 à 02:16, Anton Moehammad via time-nuts 
>  a écrit :
> 
> Hi Everyone,I like to know if it possible to run let say 10 GPSDO, 16 Rb 
> clock together and take the average to control 1 "master clock" and have 
> better stability ?like what BIPM or NIST doing.

I think the answer to this is probably no but it would make a nice project. I 
say no because your GPSDO will already be benefiting the from the clocks in GPS 
constellation that are being steered, probably indirectly) by the UTC(NIST) 
clocks, steered by the AT1 time scale, created from a whole bunch of cesium , 
maser and optical clocks  , so your GPSDO is the equivalent of a master clock. 
This means that you only need one…well three to verify that one is not going on 
the blink. A GPSDO or Rubidium stability will probably be in the range of a few 
parts in 10^11 - 10^12. 
Measuring the phase offsets of a bunch go those and applying corrections to a 
another free running clock might buy you a zero but it is questionable I think. 
You are probably constrained by the quality of the chosen ‘master’. If there 
was a distinct advantage I would expect to see products on the market using 
this approach. I haven’t heard of any.

> I have search about ensemble system but I have no idea how much advantage I 
> get from some clock that I already have.Thank YouAnton 
> ___
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to 
> http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
> and follow the instructions there.

"Ceux qui sont prêts à abandonner une liberté essentielle pour obtenir une 
petite et provisoire sécurité, ne méritent ni liberté ni sécurité."
Benjimin Franklin


___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Distribution amplifier for 10MHz

2019-03-17 Thread Arnold Tibus

Ignacio,
you will find it looking on Didier's page under 'manuals'
and then searching e.g with 'steinmetz'.

saludos, 73
Arnold, DK2WT


Am 17.03.2019 um 12:15 schrieb EB4APL:

Hi,

It seems that Didier has changed his website somewhat and the links 
don't point to the referred documents. Either I was not able to find 
them navigating within the site.


Regards,
Ignacio, EB4APL



___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Distribution amplifier for 10MHz and 1 pps

2019-03-17 Thread JF PICARD via time-nuts
The main problem in the distribution amplifiers for 10 Mhz is phase noise. 
There are two appoaches :
the first one with a tuned amplifier like HP 5087A distribution amplifier. have 
a look at the manual
the second one is the Racal 9478 wit phase locked VCO.
For 1PPs the main goal is jitter and the selection of the ICs is very tricky

On Sun, 3/17/19, Joakim Langlet  wrote:

 Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Distribution amplifier for 10MHz and 1 pps
 To: "Taka Kamiya via time-nuts" 
 Date: Sunday, March 17, 2019, 7:55 AM
 
 Hi,
 
 I used a monolithic amp for 10MHz (and 20 MHz)
 in my design. Since it is 
 driven directly
 from a digital signal it uses a low-pass filter at its 
 input. I used a Mini-circuits splitter at the
 output. I have enclosed a 
 part of the
 drawing.
 
 In my case, I have
 two amplifiers (driven from two 180 degrees separated 
 signals) and four outputs. The level at each
 output is high enough to 
 use an external 1
 by 4 splitter on the outside of the box. This gives me 
 16 possible 10 MHz signal to instruments. I
 have never used this many of 
 course.
 
 Just as an example.
 
 Regards,
 Joakim Langlet (SM0OET)
 
 
 Den 2019-03-16 kl. 19:01, skrev Taka Kamiya via
 time-nuts:
 > Hello
 > I am thinking about distribution amplifier
 of a sort.  Not a kind with 8 or more output but just 2 or
 3.
 >
 > As you know,
 most timing equipment comes with just one output of a
 kind.  Say one 10MHz and 1 PPS.  This is rather
 inconvenient. If I want to scope it without disturbing the
 setup, I cannot.  On my home brew Rb setup, I made sure I
 am going to put in 2 of each.
 > 1 pps was
 easy.  Use 74HC04N.  Signal comes into a register and to
 one inverter.  Output of this inverter goes to all input of
 channel amplifiers.  Each channel consists of parallel
 inverters with output going to resisters, then tied
 together. Works well.  (amplifier meaning NOT gate)
 >
 > But how do I do this
 on 10MHz side?  I'd like to have minimal distortion
 (sine wave) and high isolation.  I acquired a few signal
 splitter and monolithic amplifiers.  Split first and
 amplify?  Amplify first and split?  Remember it's only
 2 to 3 channels.  Amplifier module has too much gain, so
 I'll probably have to use attenuators.
 >
 > Have anyone run into
 this kind of thing?  Is there an existing design? 
 Anything anyone would like to share?
 >
 > ---
 > (Mr.) Taka Kamiya
 >
 I'm stuck in a wormhole  Hello, worms!
 >
 ___
 > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
 > To unsubscribe, go to 
 > http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
 > and follow the instructions there.
 ___
 time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
 To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
 and follow the instructions there.
 
 -Inline Attachment Follows-
 
 

___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Distribution amplifier for 10MHz

2019-03-17 Thread DM
Yep, been there, done that! 
I used a modified Extron ADA 3-80, then replaced it with an ADA 6, both of 
which did have the CLC409 amps. Eventually, I replaced all with a real DA from 
Montronics (Fluke). Had to modify it for 10 MHz, since it maxed out at 5 MHz. 
Changing capacitors in tuned circuits fixed that problem, Using a Spectracom DA 
now, but I believe the old Montronics unit is a better DA. Might bring it back 
to life and see how they compare. 

Thanks for the trip down memory lane! 
Dave M 

- Original Message -

From: "Charles Steinmetz"  
To: time-nuts@lists.febo.com 
Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2019 10:57:49 PM 
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Distribution amplifier for 10MHz 

Dave M wrote: 

> Excellent advice from Charles, especially concerning isolation criteria. 
> Should you be looking to distribute a standard 10 MHz frequency to various 
> bench instruments, I'd recommend that you take a look at Extron video 
> distribution amps. Several models on Ebay right now, at reasonable prices. 

One particular series of Extrons is the subject of the modification 
instructions in my second link. 

One caveat -- there are at least two "generations" of Extron video DAs. 
Some have discrete circuits, and some are built using high-speed, 
high-current opamps (the now-obsolete Comlinear CLC409). 

The discrete circuits are all unmitigated CRAP. Horrible video DAs, 
unworkable as 10MHz/+13dBm DAs without major efforts and headaches. 
Absolutely not recommended. 

So, if you intend to convert an Extron video DA for 50 ohm use, make 
sure it is one based on high-speed opamps. 

To make everything just that little bit more fun, *NOTE* that Extron 
used some model numbers for first-generation discrete products and 
*re-used* the same model numbers for later-generation opamp products. 
One product number I'm sure this is true of is "ADA 3 180." Another may 
be "ADA 3 80." 

I'm pretty sure that all of the models named on the cover page of my 
modification instructions are opamp-only. 

Best regards, 

Charles 

___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Distribution amplifier for 10MHz

2019-03-17 Thread EB4APL

Hi,

It seems that Didier has changed his website somewhat and the links 
don't point to the referred documents. Either I was not able to find 
them navigating within the site.


Regards,
Ignacio, EB4APL



El 17/03/2019 a las 4:57, Charles Steinmetz escribió:

Dave M wrote:


Excellent advice from Charles, especially concerning isolation criteria.
Should you be looking to distribute a standard 10 MHz frequency to 
various bench instruments, I'd recommend that you take a look at 
Extron video distribution amps. Several models on Ebay right now, at 
reasonable prices.


One particular series of Extrons is the subject of the modification 
instructions in my second link.


One caveat -- there are at least two "generations" of Extron video 
DAs.  Some have discrete circuits, and some are built using 
high-speed, high-current opamps (the now-obsolete Comlinear CLC409).


The discrete circuits are all unmitigated CRAP.  Horrible video DAs, 
unworkable as 10MHz/+13dBm DAs without major efforts and headaches. 
Absolutely not recommended.


So, if you intend to convert an Extron video DA for 50 ohm use, make 
sure it is one based on high-speed opamps.


To make everything just that little bit more fun, *NOTE* that Extron 
used some model numbers for first-generation discrete products and 
*re-used* the same model numbers for later-generation opamp products. 
One product number I'm sure this is true of is "ADA 3 180."  Another 
may be "ADA 3 80."


I'm pretty sure that all of the models named on the cover page of my 
modification instructions are opamp-only.


Best regards,

Charles



___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com

and follow the instructions there.



---
El software de antivirus Avast ha analizado este correo electrónico en busca de 
virus.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.