Re: [time-nuts] June 30 2015 leap second

2015-01-12 Thread Mike George
The referenced article indicates that they apply the smear to their NTP 
servers and allow
the clients to track the servers.  This approach would place some limits 
on the minimum

lead time you would need to implement the smear.

1) you would have to start early enough for the servers to detect the 
change.   Unless
Google has an internal policy to limit maxpoll you would expect the 
clients to be operating
at the default value of 1024 seconds.  They would have to start well 
before 1024 seconds

to allow the clients to detect the change and start tracking.

2) NTP has a maximum slew rate of 500ppm ( 
http://doc.ntp.org/4.1.0/ntpd.htm) .
In practice you wouldn't be able to use this full range because the 
clients would already

have some error in their clocks.

The scary part of the referenced article is in the third to last paragraph:

and Google engineers developing code don’t have to worry about leap 
seconds.


That seems like the kind of attitude that would have caused such a mess 
with computer

timekeeping in the first place.

On 1/11/2015 09:31, Tom Van Baak wrote:

The google code is lie(t) = (1.0 - cos(pi * t / w)) / 2.0 and they are wise 
not to publish the actual window value, w. If it were me I'd make it somewhere between a 
couple of seconds or couple of minutes but I too would not make it a published or 
hardcoded constant.

Here's the link again:
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/time-technology-and-leaping-seconds.html


___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] June 30 2015 leap second

2015-01-12 Thread Mark Spencer
I've often wondered why more systems don't use TAI or other similar time scales 
as their time source.   If needed the time displayed to end users or third 
parties could be converted to UTC just prior to presentation or transmittal.

For example a financial system that needs to time stamp individual transactions 
could sync their system clocks to TAI.   As the difference between TAI and UTC 
changed (or was scheduled to change) a lookup table could be updated that would 
provide the offset between UTC and TAI for given date ranges.

Sent from my iPad

On 2015-01-10, at 7:49 AM, Jim Lux jim...@earthlink.net wrote:

 On 1/9/15 4:57 PM, Henry Hallam wrote:
 Such slewing solutions are OK for Google.  They wouldn't work well for
 one of the systems I work with, which uses system time to calculate
 the position of a LEO satellite for purpose of pointing a 7.6 meter
 X-band dish.  Half a second of error corresponds to a pointing error
 of 0.5 degrees, well outside the main lobe of the antenna beam.
 
 
 Which is why we use TAI in the space business and don't fool with this 
 Greenwich Mean Time or Coordinated Universal Time which is discontinuous 
 and potentially non-monotonic.
 
 We DO need to compensate for the earth's varying rotational speed, though, 
 but that's just handled as a separate model for deep space, or for LEO, where 
 the coordinate system is Earth Centered, absorbed into the spacecraft orbital 
 elements.. nobody is going to use 1 year old ephemerides)
 
 
 I do find myself explaining exactly WHY we can't just use PC system time, 
 etc. and periodic leap seconds are an object lesson in why not.
 
 (or, you can arrange to not being doing any operations at the moment of 
 leap...that's been done too)
 ___
 time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
 To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
 and follow the instructions there.
 
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Sources for Mission Time Clock

2015-01-12 Thread David J Taylor

Martin,
[]
4) The television monitor ideas are an easy solution. Use a PC or Raspberry 
Pi. One example here:

   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBQ3uqMep58

/tvb
=

.. and a Raspberry Pi clock with source code you could easily modify:

 http://www.satsignal.eu/raspberry-pi/DigitalClock.html

Cheers,
David
--
SatSignal Software - Quality software written to your requirements
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
Email: david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk 


___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] June 30 2015 leap second

2015-01-12 Thread Hal Murray

martin.burni...@burnicki.net said:
 So I think they smeared it over more than just a few minutes. I'd expect
 some hours, so standard NTP clients would just notify this as clock  drift
 (oscillator frequency offset) which they'd have to compensate.  Since ntpd's
 control loop is pretty slow it wouldn't respond quickly to  smears over a
 few seconds our hours. 

NTP and/or most kernels have a limit on how far they are willing to push the 
clock.  ntpd's limit is 500 ppm.  It's common for normal clocks to be off 100 
ppm, so you can't use all of that for leap-smearing.

If you assume that you can slew at 100 ppm, then it will take 1 seconds 
to slew 1 second.  That's assuming a step function.  But Google uses cos to 
round off the corners, so the time will be longer.


-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.



___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.


[time-nuts] GPS 1PPS ultimate accuracy

2015-01-12 Thread Andrea Baldoni
Hello all.

I am planning to do some experiments to evaluate the aging of oscillators
(this one of the reasons I'm willing to buy the Milleren without EFC).
What I would like to do exactly is to sample the total of a counter (of
suitable number of bits, taking in account the fact that it will overflow)
whose clock is the DUT.

The sampling interval could come from a (long time based on a) sawtooth
uncorrected PPS from a cheap GPS, a sawtooth corrected from a good one (perhaps
the Lucent GPSDO), or a computer using NTP.

Each of these sources should reach a goal stability (say, 1 part in 10^13)
after averaging them on a different (and very high I suppose) number of
seconds (averaging them for an infinity number of seconds should give the
stability of the underlying reference clock, but I'm willing to stop sooner...).
I know there's no reason to go 1E-13 when the Milliren couldn't go that far,
but the DUT may be also something else like a FE-5680A).

The sawtooth uncorrected GPS receiver may never yeld a good stability in the
short term, but in the long one it should as well because the internal clock
jitter would average results.

If I'm using the correct teminology, after what tau the ADEV graph of the
different references intersect the 1E-13?

By the way, the stability of the TAI is known or, because it's
the reference one, it has zero deviation for definition (so you can reach
its ultimate stability through GPS really only at the infinity...)?

Best regards,
Andrea Baldoni
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.


[time-nuts] In search of ways to improve Raspberry Pi stratum 1 server

2015-01-12 Thread Neil Green
Hi all,

This is my first post to the list. I have a Raspberry Pi B+ and a HAB Supplies 
U-Blox Max-M8Q set in stationary mode connected to a Virgin Media Superhub 
(broadband router) by a 0.5m cat7 ethernet cable. The GPS is attached to the 
Pi's GPIO and has an external active antenna placed on an inside window sill. 
The Pi is running Raspbian on a fast Class10 microSD card and has a kernel 
(Linux raspberrypi 3.12.35 #1 PREEMPT Sun Jan 11 17:40:22 GMT 2015 armv6l 
GNU/Linux) rebuilt to disable tickless, enable PHY timestamping and enable all 
appropriate PPS options, and has NTP 4.2.8p1-beta5 compiled with:

./configure --enable-linuxcaps --enable-ATOM --enable-NMEA --disable-ipv6 
--disable-all-clocks --disable-parse-clocks --disable-debugging

and with my ntp.conf file set up thus:

--
logfile /var/log/ntp.log
driftfile /var/lib/ntp/ntp.drift
statsdir /var/log/ntpstats/
statistics loopstats peerstats clockstats protostats
filegen loopstats file loopstats type day enable
filegen peerstats file peerstats type day enable
filegen clockstats file clockstats type day enable
filegen protostats file protostats type day enable
leapfile /home/time/leap-seconds.3629404800

server ntp0.catn.com iburst
server ntp2c.mcc.ac.uk iburst
server ntp1.luns.net.uk iburst
server ntp1.uk.uu.net iburst
server ntp.colinbarrett.co.uk iburst

server 127.127.20.0 mode 17 minpoll 4 maxpoll 4 prefer
fudge 127.127.20.0 flag1 0 flag2 0 flag3 0 flag4 0 time1 0.0 time2 0.1137

server 127.127.22.0 minpoll 4 maxpoll 4
fudge 127.127.22.0 refid PPS time1 0.000 flag2 0 flag3 1

restrict default limited kod nomodify notrap nopeer

restrict 127.0.0.1
--

After an hour or so, ntpq -crv -pn; ntptime; ntpq -c clockvar shows:

associd=0 status=011d leap_none, sync_pps, 1 event, kern,
version=ntpd 4.2.8p1-beta5@1.3265-o Sun Jan 11 19:10:22 UTC 2015 (1),
processor=armv6l, system=Linux/3.12.35, leap=00, stratum=1,
precision=-19, rootdelay=0.000, rootdisp=1.015, refid=PPS,
reftime=d85e39b2.e1489c74  Mon, Jan 12 2015 12:16:50.880,
clock=d85e39b4.0ea565be  Mon, Jan 12 2015 12:16:52.057, peer=4258, tc=4,
mintc=3, offset=-0.000466, frequency=-17.209, sys_jitter=0.001907,
clk_jitter=0.001, clk_wander=0.000, tai=35, leapsec=20150701,
expire=20151228
     remote           refid      st t when poll reach   delay   offset  jitter
==
*127.127.20.0    .GPS.            0 l    3   16  377    0.000   -1.066   2.801
o127.127.22.0    .PPS.            0 l    2   16  377    0.000    0.000   0.002
-87.124.126.49   195.66.241.3     2 u   34   64  377   29.758    8.186   0.977
-130.88.200.6    130.88.200.4     3 u   14   64  377   17.783    1.952   0.580
+217.114.59.3    158.43.192.66    2 u    7   64  377   15.947    4.033   0.814
+158.43.128.66   193.67.79.202    2 u   15   64  377   10.319    1.873   0.553
 81.174.247.243  .INIT.          16 u    - 1024    0    0.000    0.000   0.000
ntp_gettime() returns code 0 (OK)
  time d85e39b4.49e7c8d4  Mon, Jan 12 2015 12:16:52.288, (.288693882),
  maximum error 2000 us, estimated error 1 us, TAI offset 35
ntp_adjtime() returns code 0 (OK)
  modes 0x0 (),
  offset 0.000 us, frequency -17.209 ppm, interval 256 s,
  maximum error 2000 us, estimated error 1 us,
  status 0x2107 (PLL,PPSFREQ,PPSTIME,PPSSIGNAL,NANO),
  time constant 4, precision 0.001 us, tolerance 500 ppm,
  pps frequency -17.207 ppm, stability 0.004 ppm, jitter 0.507 us,
  intervals 73, jitter exceeded 45, stability exceeded 0, errors 0.
associd=0 status= no events, clk_unspec,
device=PPS Clock Discipline, timecode=, poll=828, noreply=0,
badformat=0, baddata=0, stratum=16, refid=80.80.83.0, flags=4

I've tried using Banana Pi and Beaglebone Black SBCs and have also used u-blox 
Max-7Q and Trimble Copernicus II GPS breakout boards with no improvement (The 
Banana Pi is the best but is stuck on the Allwinner 3.4 kernel, which I'm not 
thrilled about), leading me to believe the roadblock to a more precise clock 
lies in my less than ideal antenna setup, but my questions are: can I improve 
upon this and, if so, how? Have I made any obvious errors? I'm relatively new 
to this and would appreciate any advice I can get.

Thanks,
Neil. 
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] 53132A Cooling fan

2015-01-12 Thread Mod Mix

Hallo Stan
Anyone have any thoughts on exactly where to put a temperature sensor 
for a proportional fan controller?
I have some fans having a thermistor built in -like shown in 
http://img.techpowerup.org/091114/1114091748.jpg.

Seems to me to be a good enough place.

Rises the next question about the temprature threshold which should be 
set...


br,
Ulli

___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.


[time-nuts] Current state of optical clocks and the definition of the second

2015-01-12 Thread Attila Kinali
Hi,

I just stumbled over this [1] nice article by Fritz Riehle that might be
of interest to others as well.

Attila Kinali

[1] Towards a Re-definition of the Second Based on Optical Atomic Clocks,
by Fritz Riehle, 2015
http://arxiv.org/abs/1501.02068

-- 
It is upon moral qualities that a society is ultimately founded. All 
the prosperity and technological sophistication in the world is of no 
use without that foundation.
 -- Miss Matheson, The Diamond Age, Neil Stephenson
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Current state of optical clocks and the definition of the second

2015-01-12 Thread Attila Kinali
On Mon, 12 Jan 2015 13:34:03 +0100
Attila Kinali att...@kinali.ch wrote:

 I just stumbled over this [1] nice article by Fritz Riehle that might be
 of interest to others as well.

And while we are at it:

2e-18 total uncertainty in an atomic clock,
by T.L. Nicholson et.al., 2015
http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.8261

-- 
It is upon moral qualities that a society is ultimately founded. All 
the prosperity and technological sophistication in the world is of no 
use without that foundation.
 -- Miss Matheson, The Diamond Age, Neil Stephenson
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Arduino GPIB

2015-01-12 Thread Didier Juges
Yes, you can get an Arduino R3 on eBay for $4 with shipping...

The GPIB connector will cost you more!

Didier KO4BB


On January 12, 2015 8:45:12 AM CST, paul swed paulsw...@gmail.com wrote:
That certainly is a hack. But its something I have often thought about
and
never did. He is right its really a one instrument interface as it
doesn't
have the buffers to drive the load of multiple instruments.
But heavens that has to be a really cheap interface for a bit of
soldering
effort. My type of effort. :-)
Regards
Paul.
WB8TSL

On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 11:57 PM, Joseph Gray jg...@zianet.com wrote:

 I thought everyone here would find this of interest. I stumbled
across it a
 few days ago on the 'net. It is a Prologix GPIB-USB compatible made
with an
 Arduino Uno.



http://egirland.blogspot.com/2014/03/arduino-uno-as-usb-to-gpib-controller.html

 Like on his web site, I just took a cheap GPIB cable, cut off about
12
 inches and shoved the wires into the socket holes on an Uno. I
uploaded his
 program and did some minor testing so far. BTW, it didn't work the
first
 time due to poor contact. I shoved some pin headers in, after the
wires and
 now it works fine.

 John's Prologix config program works just fine with this cobbled
together
 GPIB adapter. I attached it to my HP 3457A and then ran the demo
program
 that comes with Ulrich's EZGPIB. It is logging data as I type this. I
will
 do more testing with other instruments, as I have time.

 As mentioned on the web page linked above, a few commands are not yet
 implemented, although they appear to be little used commands (except
 perhaps the ++savecfg command). I think I have a way to implement the
++rst
 command using the watchdog timer. For ++savecfg, it shouldn't be too
 difficult to store things in the Arduino EEPROM.

 I have some cheap Arduino Nano's and PCB-mount GPIB connectors on
order. I
 will be making a couple of these Proligix-compatible adapters with
those
 parts, so that they aren't just wires shoved into a board. I'll have
to
 find a small box to house things. I have also ordered some buffer
chips to
 add to the design. Total cost should be under $20 for each adapter.

 The firmware uses a serial baud rate of 115200, which I assume is the
same
 as a real Prologix. I'm going to try some higher baud rates to see
how fast
 the Arduino can push bits without losing them. I understand that with
the
 default 16 MHz clock, non-standard baud rates that are evenly
divisible
 into the clock rate should work even better I'll report back.

 One question about the baud rate - are there any reasons not to
change from
 115200? Since we are simply moving bits through a USB/Serial adapter,
does
 any software really care what the baud rate is, as long as we don't
drop
 any bits?

 Joe Gray
 W5JG
 ___
 time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
 To unsubscribe, go to
 https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
 and follow the instructions there.

___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.

-- 
Sent from my Motorola Droid Razr HD 4G LTE wireless tracker while I do other 
things.
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Arduino GPIB

2015-01-12 Thread Tom Van Baak
 Yes, you can get an Arduino R3 on eBay for $4 with shipping...
 
 The GPIB connector will cost you more!
 
 Didier KO4BB

A sandwich of two PCB is about the same thickness as the center plug of a GPIB 
male connector. So layout 2x12 pads to match the pins and you have a one-piece 
Arduino and GPIB connector board.

/tvb

___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] June 30 2015 leap second

2015-01-12 Thread Didier Juges
Hi Tom,

You are correct, but it does not really matter because it will not be 
instantaneous, and for a period of time that is well within the range of human 
perception, the clock will be off by more than you would normally expect.

We have been talking about NTP being able to keep the time to within uS or 
better and this is a system that deliberately introduces an error a million 
times bigger. I am just surprised Time-Nuts would not go nuts about it :)

Didier KO4BB



On January 11, 2015 8:31:12 AM CST, Tom Van Baak t...@leapsecond.com wrote:
 Keep in mind that this system drives you to having pretty bad time
for the
 better part of a whole day, on purpose... I realize that when the

Hi Didier,

The google article never claims the smear spans an entire day. I think
you may be confusing references to the leap smear with a DIY digital
clock someone on the list wanted to build (and they proposed using a
slow 86400 second slew).

The google code is lie(t) = (1.0 - cos(pi * t / w)) / 2.0 and they
are wise not to publish the actual window value, w. If it were me I'd
make it somewhere between a couple of seconds or couple of minutes but
I too would not make it a published or hardcoded constant.

Here's the link again:
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/time-technology-and-leaping-seconds.html

Again, I don't know what value they use, or even if they use the same
value from one leap second to the next. If any of you have inside
contacts with google and can find out let me know, off-list.

Regardless, it should be possible to experimentally determine the smear
duration by repeatedly using some google service that returns
time-stamps during the day, hours, minutes, or seconds before and after
June 30. It would make a nice posting for a time nut, or a research
paper for a high school student or undergrad: Experimental Confirmation
of Google's Leap Smear Algorithm.

/tvb

___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.

-- 
Sent from my Motorola Droid Razr HD 4G LTE wireless tracker while I do other 
things.
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] GPS 1PPS ultimate accuracy

2015-01-12 Thread Bob Camp
Hi

Actually it’s a bit worse than you might expect. 

The uncorrected sawtooth will give you about 20 ns of wander. At the one day 
level, GPS without some sort of ionosphere help (like a dual frequency 
receiver) will add another 10 ns or so to that. Net, your pps is spread over a 
30 ns range. 

The output of the OCXO is at 5 MHz, the Rb is at 10 MHz. Maybe you double the 
OCXO to 10 MHz. It only has a zero crossing every 100 ns. (200 ns if you don’t 
double it).  You will have a 100 ns “dead zone” in your counter. That assumes 
it’s synchronous. If it’s a ripple counter, who knows what it will do. 

Net result, You have 30 ns of error, and a 100 ns resolution. Net is 130 ns. 
You will hit 1x10^-9 at  a bit over 100 seconds. You will get to 1x10^-12 at 
around 13,000 seconds. Since it’s a dead zone, averaging really does not help 
you much. In fact, long averages will mess up the ADEV computations.  If you 
have a goal that resolution should be 5X your data, then you get to 1x10^-12 
data at around 80,000 seconds. For a good ADEV number, you would like about 100 
samples. This gets you out to a 100 day run. Even for a minimalist number, you 
are running for  10 days. Any time you have a power interruption, the process 
re-starts. 

With things like 5335’s running around for cheap prices, I would suggest doing 
this with a counter. You are going to spend a lot of days getting very much 
data. Your time’s got to be worth something …. 

Bob

 On Jan 12, 2015, at 9:10 AM, Attila Kinali att...@kinali.ch wrote:
 
 Ciao Andrea,
 
 On Mon, 12 Jan 2015 11:59:26 +0100
 Andrea Baldoni erm1ea...@ermione.com wrote:
 
 The sampling interval could come from a (long time based on a) sawtooth
 uncorrected PPS from a cheap GPS, a sawtooth corrected from a good one 
 (perhaps
 the Lucent GPSDO), or a computer using NTP.
 
 The GNSS Timing AppNote for the LEA6-T receiver[1] will give you an idea
 what jitter you get with GPS. Please be aware that these measurements
 were done with an antenna located at a _good_ position (ontop of a 4 story
 building with no other high buildings around). Unless you have a simlarly
 good location you will have worse performance.
 
 Said Jackson reported some time ago that he got around 1us of jitter for
 a GPS receiver (i presume it was either a LEA5-T or a LEA6-T) behind a
 window. After he averaged the position for a long time (several days)
 manually and stored that in the receiver he got much better performance
 (sorry i cannot find the mail at the moment, you have to look for it in
 the archives yourself).
 
 NTP will give you a jitter in the range of 1-100ms, depending on
 your internet connection and its conguestion. On a local network
 based NTP system, you can expect jitter in the range of 10-100us IIRC.
 
 
 Each of these sources should reach a goal stability (say, 1 part in 10^13)
 after averaging them on a different (and very high I suppose) number of
 seconds (averaging them for an infinity number of seconds should give the
 stability of the underlying reference clock, but I'm willing to stop 
 sooner...).
 I know there's no reason to go 1E-13 when the Milliren couldn't go that far,
 but the DUT may be also something else like a FE-5680A).
 
 To get to 1e-13 with GPS (assuming 1-10ns jitter) you need somewhere around
 10k to 100k seconds. At these time scales, the temperature dependent deviation
 of your OCXO is likely to dominate your measurement. I would rather do
 a two step measurement. If you have a FE-5680A measure its drift with a 
 tau in the 100ks-200ks region. Then use the FE-5680A as refrence to measure
 the drift of the OCXO in 10s-1000s timescales. If you do both continuously,
 you can apply some math and get out pretty good numbers (see three cornered
 hat method)
 
 Additional to GPS jitter you also have the deviation of GPS time in
 respect to TAI/UTC. This has been in recent years below 5ns (GPS vs 
 UTC(USNO)).
 But because GPS time is steered to be close to UTC it will oscillate slightly
 around it. How much, i do not know. (But then the deviation between the
 different UTC realizations is larger) [2]
 
 The sawtooth uncorrected GPS receiver may never yeld a good stability in the
 short term, but in the long one it should as well because the internal clock
 jitter would average results.
 
 It would average out if and only if the sawtooth correction would be 
 completely
 independent of anything else. But it isn't. This results in effects where the
 cycle to cycle jitter is quite low, but there is a large offset in the 
 sawtooth
 correction. This is know as hanging bridges in the GNSS world.
 
 
 By the way, the stability of the TAI is known or, because it's
 the reference one, it has zero deviation for definition (so you can reach
 its ultimate stability through GPS really only at the infinity...)?
 
 There is an uncertainty number attached to TAI, but i dont know any numbers
 from the top of my head. I'm sure it is mentioned in the BIPM report 
 somewhere.
 

[time-nuts] A novel use of Injection locking of ring oscillators

2015-01-12 Thread Mark Sims
Every good time nut knows about the hazards and subtle wonders of unintentional 
injection locking of oscillators.  Other people apparently don't...  How forced 
injection locking of ring oscillators can be hazardous to your wallet:

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~atm26/papers/markettos-ches2009-inject-trng.pdf

I saw a followup where they breached an ATM machine by modulating a 10 GHz 
microwave signal with the injection locking signal and beaming it into the ATM. 
   
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] In search of ways to improve Raspberry Pi stratum 1server

2015-01-12 Thread Chris Albertson
Your antenna could be better.  But really the bottle neck on any NTP
server is time stamping the PPS.  There is greater uncertainty in the
time stamp then of the PPS.   The best solution ever (I can't find the
link) was done using an external clock.  It was a low power Intel PC
running BSD and the system clock was an external counter running off
some kind of precision crystal oscillator.  The PPS would sample the
counter then interrupt the PC.  The PC could be as slow as it likes
responding to the interrupt because the time is already sampled.   The
OS got it's time from this earth clock too.   Yes some modification
the Kernel was required but it's simple.  This removed an unknowable
interrupt latency.

Look at the Linux PPS driver code.  It is very simple.  It samples the
internal counter then sets a flag to say a sample is received.  NTP
only has to be fast enough to read the sample before the next PPS.
What these guys did was make the counter external driven from
something like an OCXO.

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 7:25 AM, David J Taylor
david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
 Hi all,

 This is my first post to the list. I have a Raspberry Pi B+ and a HAB
 Supplies U-Blox Max-M8Q set in stationary mode connected to a Virgin Media
 Superhub (broadband router) by a 0.5m cat7 ethernet cable. The GPS is
 attached to the Pi's GPIO and has an external active antenna placed on an
 inside window sill. The Pi is running Raspbian on a fast Class10 microSD
 card and has a kernel (Linux raspberrypi 3.12.35 #1 PREEMPT Sun Jan 11
 17:40:22 GMT 2015 armv6l GNU/Linux) rebuilt to disable tickless, enable PHY
 timestamping and enable all appropriate PPS options, and has NTP
 4.2.8p1-beta5 compiled with:
 []
 I've tried using Banana Pi and Beaglebone Black SBCs and have also used
 u-blox Max-7Q and Trimble Copernicus II GPS breakout boards with no
 improvement (The Banana Pi is the best but is stuck on the Allwinner 3.4
 kernel, which I'm not thrilled about), leading me to believe the roadblock
 to a more precise clock lies in my less than ideal antenna setup, but my
 questions are: can I improve upon this and, if so, how? Have I made any
 obvious errors? I'm relatively new to this and would appreciate any advice I
 can get.

 Thanks,
 Neil.
 ===

 Neil,

 I see approximately the same here, with the exception of those systems using
 a kernel which /is/ tickless where the jitter is a factor of about two
 worse.  I can see anything wrong.

 I couldn't face recompiling the kernel another time, and have asked that
 nohz=no  be accepted by the stock kernel, particularly now that it includes
 PPS support.

 Based on plotting the jitter with MRTG the Raspberry Pi cards perform at
 least as well as an Intel Atom system running Linux.

  http://www.satsignal.eu/mrtg/performance_ntp.php

 The Intel system did work rather better with FreeBSD, so it would be
 interesting to know whether the Raspberry Pi is capable of improved
 performance using that OS.  I would be most interested to know the outcome.

 Cheers,
 David
 --
 SatSignal Software - Quality software written to your requirements
 Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
 Email: david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk
 ___
 time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
 To unsubscribe, go to
 https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
 and follow the instructions there.



-- 

Chris Albertson
Redondo Beach, California
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] June 30 2015 leap second

2015-01-12 Thread d0ct0r



Today, I did the check the settings for my BC637 card. I was surprised 
that its overwrite my manual setting for the Leap Event by following 
information:


Time Settings:

 Mode   : GPS
 Time Format: Binary
 Year   : 1995
 Local Offset   : 0.0
 Propagation Delay  : 0
 Current Leap Seconds   : 16
 Scheduled Leap Event Time  : 876614400
 Scheduled Leap Event Flag  : Insertion
 GPS Time Format: UTC Format
 IEEE Daylight Savings Flag : Enable


Sun, 12 Oct 1997 00:00:00 GMT. Its weird. I am going to re-insert it 
and will check it again later.


New Time Settings are:

 Mode   : GPS
 Time Format: Binary
 Year   : 2015
 Local Offset   : 0.0
 Propagation Delay  : 0
 Current Leap Seconds   : 16
 Scheduled Leap Event Time  : 1435708799
 Scheduled Leap Event Flag  : Insertion
 GPS Time Format: UTC Format
 IEEE Daylight Savings Flag : Enable

Also, my NTP, which rely on that card,  didn't get the value for leap 
second event yet:


# ntpq -c rv

associd=0 status=0028 leap_none, sync_unspec, 2 events, no_sys_peer,
version=ntpd 4.2.6p5@1.2349 Mon Sep 22 20:41:39 UTC 2014 (14),
processor=x86_64, system=Linux/3.2.0-74-generic, leap=00, stratum=1,
precision=-23, rootdelay=0.000, rootdisp=8248.907, refid=BTFP,
reftime=d85e7526.957a1b17  Mon, Jan 12 2015 11:30:30.583,
clock=d85ec544.e1effe31  Mon, Jan 12 2015 17:12:20.882, peer=0, tc=4,
mintc=3, offset=3.757, frequency=-243.698, sys_jitter=0.000,
clk_jitter=1.328, clk_wander=15.616


Regards,
Vlad



It's fragile enough that there have been accidental false leap-second 
events.


Yes, for example if there have been GPS receivers which decoded the
UTC parameters incorrectly, and started to announce a leap second when
there wasn't one (end of September).

That's why, for example, ntpd's leap second handling code has been
changed in v4.2.6 to accept a leap second warning only if the warning
is received from a majority of the configured servers.

If you want to be sure you can also provide ntpd with a leap second
file which is then (in current versions) considered as authentic
source for leap second information.

Martin

___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to 
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts

and follow the instructions there.


--
WBW,

V.P.
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] Arduino GPIB

2015-01-12 Thread Chris Albertson
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 6:45 AM, paul swed paulsw...@gmail.com wrote:
 its really a one instrument interface as it doesn't
 have the buffers to drive the load of multiple instruments.
 But heavens that has to be a really cheap interface for a bit of soldering
 effort. My type of effort. :-)

With Arduinos going for well under $10 You could afford to place one
Aruino INSIDE your test instrument.  Those old instruments usually
have some air space inside and a power supply suitable for an Arduino.
Now you have added a USB port to some 1980's vintage test gear.   If
the Arduino is inside you may not even need the GPIB connector.You
could do this to many older instruments then use USB to a USB hub,
then to a computer.

-- 

Chris Albertson
Redondo Beach, California
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] GPS 1PPS ultimate accuracy

2015-01-12 Thread Attila Kinali
Ciao Andrea,

On Mon, 12 Jan 2015 11:59:26 +0100
Andrea Baldoni erm1ea...@ermione.com wrote:
 
 The sampling interval could come from a (long time based on a) sawtooth
 uncorrected PPS from a cheap GPS, a sawtooth corrected from a good one 
 (perhaps
 the Lucent GPSDO), or a computer using NTP.

The GNSS Timing AppNote for the LEA6-T receiver[1] will give you an idea
what jitter you get with GPS. Please be aware that these measurements
were done with an antenna located at a _good_ position (ontop of a 4 story
building with no other high buildings around). Unless you have a simlarly
good location you will have worse performance.

Said Jackson reported some time ago that he got around 1us of jitter for
a GPS receiver (i presume it was either a LEA5-T or a LEA6-T) behind a
window. After he averaged the position for a long time (several days)
manually and stored that in the receiver he got much better performance
(sorry i cannot find the mail at the moment, you have to look for it in
the archives yourself).

NTP will give you a jitter in the range of 1-100ms, depending on
your internet connection and its conguestion. On a local network
based NTP system, you can expect jitter in the range of 10-100us IIRC.

 
 Each of these sources should reach a goal stability (say, 1 part in 10^13)
 after averaging them on a different (and very high I suppose) number of
 seconds (averaging them for an infinity number of seconds should give the
 stability of the underlying reference clock, but I'm willing to stop 
 sooner...).
 I know there's no reason to go 1E-13 when the Milliren couldn't go that far,
 but the DUT may be also something else like a FE-5680A).

To get to 1e-13 with GPS (assuming 1-10ns jitter) you need somewhere around
10k to 100k seconds. At these time scales, the temperature dependent deviation
of your OCXO is likely to dominate your measurement. I would rather do
a two step measurement. If you have a FE-5680A measure its drift with a 
tau in the 100ks-200ks region. Then use the FE-5680A as refrence to measure
the drift of the OCXO in 10s-1000s timescales. If you do both continuously,
you can apply some math and get out pretty good numbers (see three cornered
hat method)

Additional to GPS jitter you also have the deviation of GPS time in
respect to TAI/UTC. This has been in recent years below 5ns (GPS vs UTC(USNO)).
But because GPS time is steered to be close to UTC it will oscillate slightly
around it. How much, i do not know. (But then the deviation between the
different UTC realizations is larger) [2]

 The sawtooth uncorrected GPS receiver may never yeld a good stability in the
 short term, but in the long one it should as well because the internal clock
 jitter would average results.

It would average out if and only if the sawtooth correction would be completely
independent of anything else. But it isn't. This results in effects where the
cycle to cycle jitter is quite low, but there is a large offset in the sawtooth
correction. This is know as hanging bridges in the GNSS world.

 
 By the way, the stability of the TAI is known or, because it's
 the reference one, it has zero deviation for definition (so you can reach
 its ultimate stability through GPS really only at the infinity...)?

There is an uncertainty number attached to TAI, but i dont know any numbers
from the top of my head. I'm sure it is mentioned in the BIPM report somewhere.


Attila Kinali


[1] 
http://www.u-blox.com/images/downloads/Product_Docs/Timing_AppNote_%28GPS.G6-X-11007%29.pdf

[2] GPS time and its steering to UTC(USNO), presentatin by Edward Powers, 2009
http://www.gps.gov/multimedia/presentations/2009/09/ICG/powers.pdf

-- 
It is upon moral qualities that a society is ultimately founded. All 
the prosperity and technological sophistication in the world is of no 
use without that foundation.
 -- Miss Matheson, The Diamond Age, Neil Stephenson
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] In search of ways to improve Raspberry Pi stratum 1server

2015-01-12 Thread David J Taylor

Hi all,

This is my first post to the list. I have a Raspberry Pi B+ and a HAB 
Supplies U-Blox Max-M8Q set in stationary mode connected to a Virgin Media 
Superhub (broadband router) by a 0.5m cat7 ethernet cable. The GPS is 
attached to the Pi's GPIO and has an external active antenna placed on an 
inside window sill. The Pi is running Raspbian on a fast Class10 microSD 
card and has a kernel (Linux raspberrypi 3.12.35 #1 PREEMPT Sun Jan 11 
17:40:22 GMT 2015 armv6l GNU/Linux) rebuilt to disable tickless, enable PHY 
timestamping and enable all appropriate PPS options, and has NTP 
4.2.8p1-beta5 compiled with:

[]
I've tried using Banana Pi and Beaglebone Black SBCs and have also used 
u-blox Max-7Q and Trimble Copernicus II GPS breakout boards with no 
improvement (The Banana Pi is the best but is stuck on the Allwinner 3.4 
kernel, which I'm not thrilled about), leading me to believe the roadblock 
to a more precise clock lies in my less than ideal antenna setup, but my 
questions are: can I improve upon this and, if so, how? Have I made any 
obvious errors? I'm relatively new to this and would appreciate any advice I 
can get.


Thanks,
Neil.
===

Neil,

I see approximately the same here, with the exception of those systems using 
a kernel which /is/ tickless where the jitter is a factor of about two 
worse.  I can see anything wrong.


I couldn't face recompiling the kernel another time, and have asked that 
nohz=no  be accepted by the stock kernel, particularly now that it includes 
PPS support.


Based on plotting the jitter with MRTG the Raspberry Pi cards perform at 
least as well as an Intel Atom system running Linux.


 http://www.satsignal.eu/mrtg/performance_ntp.php

The Intel system did work rather better with FreeBSD, so it would be 
interesting to know whether the Raspberry Pi is capable of improved 
performance using that OS.  I would be most interested to know the outcome.


Cheers,
David
--
SatSignal Software - Quality software written to your requirements
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
Email: david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk 


___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.


Re: [time-nuts] In search of ways to improve Raspberry Pi stratum 1 server

2015-01-12 Thread paul swed
Neil
Welcome to time-nuts. You say that your antenna is less then ideal. OK on
time-nuts your going to find out details matter. So what does that mean?
Typically the antenna needs to be high enough to have a clear view of the
sky and it does matter.
But there have been posts in the past about the Pi and I think there are
internal issues with the Pi itself that may limit its use. Not an expert
and maybe one day I will build a Pi NTP server. To many other things
cooking.
Regards
Paul
WB8TSL

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 7:30 AM, Neil Green nc...@hotmail.co.uk wrote:

 Hi all,

 This is my first post to the list. I have a Raspberry Pi B+ and a HAB
 Supplies U-Blox Max-M8Q set in stationary mode connected to a Virgin Media
 Superhub (broadband router) by a 0.5m cat7 ethernet cable. The GPS is
 attached to the Pi's GPIO and has an external active antenna placed on an
 inside window sill. The Pi is running Raspbian on a fast Class10 microSD
 card and has a kernel (Linux raspberrypi 3.12.35 #1 PREEMPT Sun Jan 11
 17:40:22 GMT 2015 armv6l GNU/Linux) rebuilt to disable tickless, enable PHY
 timestamping and enable all appropriate PPS options, and has NTP
 4.2.8p1-beta5 compiled with:

 ./configure --enable-linuxcaps --enable-ATOM --enable-NMEA --disable-ipv6
 --disable-all-clocks --disable-parse-clocks --disable-debugging

 and with my ntp.conf file set up thus:

 --
 logfile /var/log/ntp.log
 driftfile /var/lib/ntp/ntp.drift
 statsdir /var/log/ntpstats/
 statistics loopstats peerstats clockstats protostats
 filegen loopstats file loopstats type day enable
 filegen peerstats file peerstats type day enable
 filegen clockstats file clockstats type day enable
 filegen protostats file protostats type day enable
 leapfile /home/time/leap-seconds.3629404800

 server ntp0.catn.com iburst
 server ntp2c.mcc.ac.uk iburst
 server ntp1.luns.net.uk iburst
 server ntp1.uk.uu.net iburst
 server ntp.colinbarrett.co.uk iburst

 server 127.127.20.0 mode 17 minpoll 4 maxpoll 4 prefer
 fudge 127.127.20.0 flag1 0 flag2 0 flag3 0 flag4 0 time1 0.0 time2
 0.1137

 server 127.127.22.0 minpoll 4 maxpoll 4
 fudge 127.127.22.0 refid PPS time1 0.000 flag2 0 flag3 1

 restrict default limited kod nomodify notrap nopeer

 restrict 127.0.0.1
 --

 After an hour or so, ntpq -crv -pn; ntptime; ntpq -c clockvar shows:

 associd=0 status=011d leap_none, sync_pps, 1 event, kern,
 version=ntpd 4.2.8p1-beta5@1.3265-o Sun Jan 11 19:10:22 UTC 2015 (1),
 processor=armv6l, system=Linux/3.12.35, leap=00, stratum=1,
 precision=-19, rootdelay=0.000, rootdisp=1.015, refid=PPS,
 reftime=d85e39b2.e1489c74  Mon, Jan 12 2015 12:16:50.880,
 clock=d85e39b4.0ea565be  Mon, Jan 12 2015 12:16:52.057, peer=4258, tc=4,
 mintc=3, offset=-0.000466, frequency=-17.209, sys_jitter=0.001907,
 clk_jitter=0.001, clk_wander=0.000, tai=35, leapsec=20150701,
 expire=20151228
  remote   refid  st t when poll reach   delay   offset
  jitter

 ==
 *127.127.20.0.GPS.0 l3   16  3770.000   -1.066
 2.801
 o127.127.22.0.PPS.0 l2   16  3770.0000.000
 0.002
 -87.124.126.49   195.66.241.3 2 u   34   64  377   29.7588.186
 0.977
 -130.88.200.6130.88.200.4 3 u   14   64  377   17.7831.952
 0.580
 +217.114.59.3158.43.192.662 u7   64  377   15.9474.033
 0.814
 +158.43.128.66   193.67.79.2022 u   15   64  377   10.3191.873
 0.553
  81.174.247.243  .INIT.  16 u- 102400.0000.000
 0.000
 ntp_gettime() returns code 0 (OK)
   time d85e39b4.49e7c8d4  Mon, Jan 12 2015 12:16:52.288, (.288693882),
   maximum error 2000 us, estimated error 1 us, TAI offset 35
 ntp_adjtime() returns code 0 (OK)
   modes 0x0 (),
   offset 0.000 us, frequency -17.209 ppm, interval 256 s,
   maximum error 2000 us, estimated error 1 us,
   status 0x2107 (PLL,PPSFREQ,PPSTIME,PPSSIGNAL,NANO),
   time constant 4, precision 0.001 us, tolerance 500 ppm,
   pps frequency -17.207 ppm, stability 0.004 ppm, jitter 0.507 us,
   intervals 73, jitter exceeded 45, stability exceeded 0, errors 0.
 associd=0 status= no events, clk_unspec,
 device=PPS Clock Discipline, timecode=, poll=828, noreply=0,
 badformat=0, baddata=0, stratum=16, refid=80.80.83.0, flags=4

 I've tried using Banana Pi and Beaglebone Black SBCs and have also used
 u-blox Max-7Q and Trimble Copernicus II GPS breakout boards with no
 improvement (The Banana Pi is the best but is stuck on the Allwinner 3.4
 kernel, which I'm not thrilled about), leading me to believe the roadblock
 to a more precise clock lies in my less than ideal antenna setup, but my
 questions are: can I improve upon this and, if so, how? Have I made any
 obvious errors? I'm relatively new to this and would appreciate any advice
 I can get.

 Thanks,
 Neil.
 ___
 time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
 To unsubscribe, go 

Re: [time-nuts] Arduino GPIB

2015-01-12 Thread paul swed
That certainly is a hack. But its something I have often thought about and
never did. He is right its really a one instrument interface as it doesn't
have the buffers to drive the load of multiple instruments.
But heavens that has to be a really cheap interface for a bit of soldering
effort. My type of effort. :-)
Regards
Paul.
WB8TSL

On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 11:57 PM, Joseph Gray jg...@zianet.com wrote:

 I thought everyone here would find this of interest. I stumbled across it a
 few days ago on the 'net. It is a Prologix GPIB-USB compatible made with an
 Arduino Uno.


 http://egirland.blogspot.com/2014/03/arduino-uno-as-usb-to-gpib-controller.html

 Like on his web site, I just took a cheap GPIB cable, cut off about 12
 inches and shoved the wires into the socket holes on an Uno. I uploaded his
 program and did some minor testing so far. BTW, it didn't work the first
 time due to poor contact. I shoved some pin headers in, after the wires and
 now it works fine.

 John's Prologix config program works just fine with this cobbled together
 GPIB adapter. I attached it to my HP 3457A and then ran the demo program
 that comes with Ulrich's EZGPIB. It is logging data as I type this. I will
 do more testing with other instruments, as I have time.

 As mentioned on the web page linked above, a few commands are not yet
 implemented, although they appear to be little used commands (except
 perhaps the ++savecfg command). I think I have a way to implement the ++rst
 command using the watchdog timer. For ++savecfg, it shouldn't be too
 difficult to store things in the Arduino EEPROM.

 I have some cheap Arduino Nano's and PCB-mount GPIB connectors on order. I
 will be making a couple of these Proligix-compatible adapters with those
 parts, so that they aren't just wires shoved into a board. I'll have to
 find a small box to house things. I have also ordered some buffer chips to
 add to the design. Total cost should be under $20 for each adapter.

 The firmware uses a serial baud rate of 115200, which I assume is the same
 as a real Prologix. I'm going to try some higher baud rates to see how fast
 the Arduino can push bits without losing them. I understand that with the
 default 16 MHz clock, non-standard baud rates that are evenly divisible
 into the clock rate should work even better I'll report back.

 One question about the baud rate - are there any reasons not to change from
 115200? Since we are simply moving bits through a USB/Serial adapter, does
 any software really care what the baud rate is, as long as we don't drop
 any bits?

 Joe Gray
 W5JG
 ___
 time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
 To unsubscribe, go to
 https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
 and follow the instructions there.

___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.