[time-nuts] HP5328A & HP5328B option 040

[VK2DAP]

Dear time-nuts,

I have a question about the HP5328A and HP5328B universal counters.

1) Generally speaking, would it be correct to say that when a product model 
number changes from A to B, that represents an improvement or major update to a 
product?

2) I am interested in the "delay" option that is mentioned in the user manual 
for the HP5328A (option 040). My question is simple. Why does this option not 
feature in the HP5328B, but only as option 040 on the HP5328A?

My first post on the time-nuts forum. I'm sorry if this question has previously 
been addressed. I made a search but was unable to find an answer.

Regards,

Nick


Sent from my iPad
___
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] Leica AT-303

[Mark Sims]

At least with a Tbolt,  they do help... and quite a bit.   When I was writing 
Lady Heather's precision survey code I tested it with several antennas 
(comparing the results to a cm level L1/L2 survey).  The Leica antenna and a 
couple of other survey grade/choke ring antennas were,  by far,  the best 
(results with a foot or so).   Cheap patch antennas were the worst (with maybe 
5 foot errors).  

Some small L1 only survey grade antennas did pretty well... a couple of feet.  
They are about 6 inches in diameter and and inch thick and very light.  I use 
one as my standard antenna.

---
It’s not real clear that they have a significant advantage for L1 only 
operation with a Z3801.
___
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] Tuning a Trimble Thunderbolt

[Pete Stephenson]

On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 3:16 AM, Arthur Dent  wrote:
> wb6bnq  wrote:
> “I am a little confused.  In your screen shot the overdetermined clock
> says you are at precisely 46.00 North by 7.0 East at 547
> Meters.”
>
> I think I have the answer. I know when I was selling Tbolts I would
> PhotoShop out every digit after the decimal point so the displayed
> JPEG wouldn’t show my location. If Lat. was exactly 46.00  then
> it would show that, not just 46.(blank).

Precisely.

My apologies for the confusion: perhaps I shouldn't have used a black
rectangle on a black background to obfuscate the location.

The reported altitude at my location (which is just a few km outside
downtown Bern) is plausible. After additional surveys it shows as
being closer to 620m.

Cheers!
-Pete

-- 
Pete 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] Signal/Phase noise analyzer

[Vasco Soares]

Thank you all for your reply's!

It is for personal use, not a business. The budget it is very tight. I guess 
I can't find anything less that 2000-3000 euros even a second hand or a 
refurbished model.

The main problem is that I'm starting from scratch...
I found http://www.anapico.com/index.php/products/phase-noise-test-systems 
and the cheapest model (apph6000-is400) fits my needs (-160 dBc @ 100 Hz it 
is low enough) but it is too expensive (an outrageous of 18000 euros!). 
Their advantage, as in others, is to be a self contained analyzer with 
internal references.


I don't know the price range of the Holzworth analyzer's but surely they are 
affordable compared with the one above. The model HA7402B needs two tunable 
LO, which I don't have, so a lot of investment has to be done.


I can consider any setup as long as the above requirements are fulfilled and 
it is an affordable solution otherwise I've to wait for gather enough funds 
for this kind of investment.


Regards,
Vasco Soares





- Original Message - 
From: "Bob Camp" 
To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" 


Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 11:36 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Signal/Phase noise analyzer



Hi

Is this for a business or for a basement? Basement

Are you looking for new self contained gear or combinations of used gear?



Is a cross comparison device ok or do you need a stand alone device?

How low do you need to go how fast? Is -190 dbc/ Hz low enough? Is a 24 
hour run to long?


Lots of variables….

Bob

On Apr 22, 2015, at 10:07 AM, Vasco Soares  
wrote:


Hi All,



I'm searching for the less expensive signal analyzer to perform phase 
noise measurements on OCXO's. There is no need to go above 400 MHz - 1 
GHz. I'm particularly interested on low frequency offset and good close 
in phase noise specs. Any recommendations?




Best regards,

Vasco Soares
___
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.



___
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] Tuning a Trimble Thunderbolt

[Pete Stephenson]

On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 12:33 AM, Bob Camp  wrote:
> Hi
>
> Looking at that screen shot, something is *very* wrong with your GPS 
> reception. Your GPS
> is 10X worse than it should be.

You're right. The interference from the nearby Oncore UT+ seems to
have been the problem. Since I moved the antennas further apart the
signal strength for satellites in view of the Tbolt is 35-45 dBc and
it can routinely view 6-7 satellites simultaneously -- this is
essentially the same performance as when the Oncore is powered off and
the antenna removed, so I'm happy.

After moving the antennas further apart and doing a standard
2000-point site survey the 100-200ns phase offset spikes that occurred
when satellites were added/removed from the solution dropped to
5-10ns. The oscillator offset also decreased. I'm now doing a longer
precision survey to hopefully smooth those out more and get a better
average position over a few satellite orbits.

> I would bet that the amp on the “Oncore” antenna is oscillating. It may do it
> intermittently. The frequency may swing back and forth through the GPS band. 
> It
> may be the source of your GPS problem.

Interesting. I have a second identical Oncore UT+ and antenna and will
do some more tests to see if one of them is just being noisy, if it's
a fault of the Oncore module itself, or the antenna.

Many thanks to everyone on the list for the insight and assistance.

Cheers!
-Pete

-- 
Pete 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] HP5328A & HP5328B option 040

[Magnus Danielson]

Nick,

When HP step their product version, usually it is some significant 
changes to how the product is built. Some optional/new features 
sometimes get integrated in the process.


I don't know why the TI-averaging feature of the Option 040/041/042 
isn't available in the B version. Could be that when they got that far, 
they felt they had other products providing that feature and it was not 
widely used anyway. There can be many reasons why things get's dropped 
along the path.


Would be fun to have a GPIB interface in the HP5328A. :)

Cheers,
Magnus

On 04/23/2015 09:20 AM, VK2DAP wrote:

Dear time-nuts,

I have a question about the HP5328A and HP5328B universal counters.

1) Generally speaking, would it be correct to say that when a product model 
number changes from A to B, that represents an improvement or major update to a 
product?

2) I am interested in the "delay" option that is mentioned in the user manual 
for the HP5328A (option 040). My question is simple. Why does this option not feature in 
the HP5328B, but only as option 040 on the HP5328A?

My first post on the time-nuts forum. I'm sorry if this question has previously 
been addressed. I made a search but was unable to find an answer.

Regards,

Nick


Sent from my iPad
___
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] Signal/Phase noise analyzer

[Bob Camp]

Hi

Any new gear that is self contained for phase noise testing will be above a 
basement budget (> $10K, some > $100K). 

The simple approach is to use a single mixer / preamp and a second oscillator 
to do the measurement. You run the 
mixer output into an audio spectrum analyzer (possibly a sound card). Total 
cost for the setup can be < $100, not 
including the computer and sound card. 

Bob

> On Apr 23, 2015, at 5:43 AM, Vasco Soares  wrote:
> 
> Thank you all for your reply's!
> 
> It is for personal use, not a business. The budget it is very tight. I guess 
> I can't find anything less that 2000-3000 euros even a second hand or a 
> refurbished model.
> The main problem is that I'm starting from scratch...
> I found http://www.anapico.com/index.php/products/phase-noise-test-systems 
> and the cheapest model (apph6000-is400) fits my needs (-160 dBc @ 100 Hz it 
> is low enough) but it is too expensive (an outrageous of 18000 euros!). Their 
> advantage, as in others, is to be a self contained analyzer with internal 
> references.
> 
> I don't know the price range of the Holzworth analyzer's but surely they are 
> affordable compared with the one above. The model HA7402B needs two tunable 
> LO, which I don't have, so a lot of investment has to be done.
> 
> I can consider any setup as long as the above requirements are fulfilled and 
> it is an affordable solution otherwise I've to wait for gather enough funds 
> for this kind of investment.
> 
> Regards,
> Vasco Soares
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - Original Message - From: "Bob Camp" 
> To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" 
> 
> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 11:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Signal/Phase noise analyzer
> 
> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> Is this for a business or for a basement? Basement
>> 
>> Are you looking for new self contained gear or combinations of used gear?
> 
>> Is a cross comparison device ok or do you need a stand alone device?
>> 
>> How low do you need to go how fast? Is -190 dbc/ Hz low enough? Is a 24 hour 
>> run to long?
>> 
>> Lots of variables….
>> 
>> Bob
>> 
>>> On Apr 22, 2015, at 10:07 AM, Vasco Soares  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi All,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I'm searching for the less expensive signal analyzer to perform phase noise 
>>> measurements on OCXO's. There is no need to go above 400 MHz - 1 GHz. I'm 
>>> particularly interested on low frequency offset and good close in phase 
>>> noise specs. Any recommendations?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> 
>>> Vasco Soares
>>> ___
>>> 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.
> 
> ___
> 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] Leica AT-303

[Attila Kinali]

Hoi Mark,

On Thu, 23 Apr 2015 07:04:04 +
Mark Sims  wrote:

> At least with a Tbolt,  they do help... and quite a bit.   When I was writing 
> Lady Heather's precision survey code I tested it with several antennas 
[...]
> Cheap patch antennas were the worst (with  maybe 5 foot errors).  

This might be due to the amount of side/back-lobes the patch antennas have.
They basically relly on an (infitely) large ground plane beneath the
antenna for back-lobe surpression. And most people I know use the patch
antennas without any ground plane at all (me included).

> Some small L1 only survey grade antennas did pretty well... a couple of 
> feet.  They are about 6 inches in diameter and and inch thick and very 
> light.  I use one as my standard antenna.

Which of the L1-only antennas did well?
And do you have an explanation why the L1/L2 antennas did better,
even for the L1-only reception case?


Attila Kinali


-- 
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] Leica AT-303

[Bob Camp]

Hi

I guess it comes down to “how good is good enough?”

With any L1 only system, you are up against uncorrectable ionosphere numbers in 
the >=10 ns range. At 3 ns meter that is a  > 3 meter “variation”. 

The ionosphere does tend to correlate with that big light in the sky, so 
averaging over multiple days can address it in a position solution. Your TBolt 
will still
wander around, since it’s loop time constant is  << 24 hours. 

If you are trying to take 12 -2/+40 ns per day down to 10 -2/+40 ns per day, 
then sure a ~5 mm accurate position will be better than a ~1 M location. It’s 
doubtful
that there will be any measurable change in the TBolt’s output as a result. 

For $100, sure it’s not an expensive thing to try. I ummm ….. e .. seem to 
have a room full of antennas. My point is *not* let’s not do this. The point is 
that
everybody does not need to run right out and go antenna crazy (like me). The 
TBolt works quite well on a proper outdoor timing antenna that has a very good 
view of the sky.  Those antennas are nice and compact and sell for < $50. 

Bob

> On Apr 23, 2015, at 3:04 AM, Mark Sims  wrote:
> 
> At least with a Tbolt,  they do help... and quite a bit.   When I was writing 
> Lady Heather's precision survey code I tested it with several antennas 
> (comparing the results to a cm level L1/L2 survey).  The Leica antenna and a 
> couple of other survey grade/choke ring antennas were,  by far,  the best 
> (results with a foot or so).   Cheap patch antennas were the worst (with 
> maybe 5 foot errors).  
> 
> Some small L1 only survey grade antennas did pretty well... a couple of feet. 
>  They are about 6 inches in diameter and and inch thick and very light.  I 
> use one as my standard antenna.
> 
> ---
> It’s not real clear that they have a significant advantage for L1 only 
> operation with a Z3801.  
> ___
> 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.

[time-nuts] I wish to shorten GPS antenna cable - should I let receiver find the position again?

[Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd)]

I have an HP 58503A which I am using as a frequency source only - not
to tell the time. I want to shorted the antenna cable a bit, but are
wondering if I should let the GPS receiver finds it position again. Or
either of the following better

* Remove antenna cable, put a new N plug on, and screw it back in with
the receiver kept powered up all the time.
* Power off GPS receiver and power it back on with the cable connected.

I'm not moving the antenna, so the actual position will not change,
but of course the signals will get to the receiver a bit sooner.

Dave, G8WRB
___
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] HP5328A & HP5328B option 040

[Alberto di Bene]

On 4/23/2015 9:20 AM, VK2DAP wrote:


/1) Generally speaking, would it be correct to say that when a product model 
number changes from A to B,//
//that represents an improvement or major update to a product?/


I remember having read (don't recall where...) that the HP5328B was a 
cost-reduction step wrt the A model...
I had a model A, then sold it and bought a B. The B has the 10811 instead of 
the 10544 as OCXO, and its
fan is much quieter than that of its older brother, very noisy.

All considered, I would not go back...

73  Alberto  I2PHD




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com

___
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] I wish to shorten GPS antenna cable - should I let receiver find the position again?

[Mike Cook]

> Le 23 avr. 2015 à 14:03, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) 
>  a écrit :
> 
> I have an HP 58503A which I am using as a frequency source only - not
> to tell the time. I want to shorted the antenna cable a bit, but are
> wondering if I should let the GPS receiver finds it position again. Or
> either of the following better
> 
> * Remove antenna cable, put a new N plug on, and screw it back in with
> the receiver kept powered up all the time.
> * Power off GPS receiver and power it back on with the cable connected.
> 
> I'm not moving the antenna, so the actual position will not change,
> but of course the signals will get to the receiver a bit sooner.

Just reconfigure the cable delay according to its new length. 
IIRC is 58503A uses the same SCPI command set last the Z3801A, so if that is 
the case that would be the command:

:ptime:gpsystem:adelay  NS


> 
> Dave, G8WRB
> ___
> 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.

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

Re: [time-nuts] I wish to shorten GPS antenna cable - should I let receiver find the position again?

[Tim Shoppa]

I agree, used only for frequency reference you won't know the difference.
Still, to join the rank of true time (not just frequency) nuts, you can
configure the antenna cable delay!

Many (all?) of the HP GPS-based smartclock units use the command
:GPSYSTEM:REFERENCE:ADELAY to compensate for the antenna length delay.
After changing cable length, configure it as shown on page 1-22 of
http://www.leapsecond.com/museum/hp58503a/097-58503-12-iss-1.pdf

Tim N3QE

On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 8:03 AM, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) <
drkir...@kirkbymicrowave.co.uk> wrote:

> I have an HP 58503A which I am using as a frequency source only - not
> to tell the time. I want to shorted the antenna cable a bit, but are
> wondering if I should let the GPS receiver finds it position again. Or
> either of the following better
>
> * Remove antenna cable, put a new N plug on, and screw it back in with
> the receiver kept powered up all the time.
> * Power off GPS receiver and power it back on with the cable connected.
>
> I'm not moving the antenna, so the actual position will not change,
> but of course the signals will get to the receiver a bit sooner.
>
> Dave, G8WRB
> ___
> 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.

[time-nuts] Leica AT-303

[Mark Sims]

The L1 only antenna that did very well was an AeroAntenna 
AT575-75W-TNCF-000-RG-26-NM   Also a Racal LandStar MK4 did well.  These are 
both small L1 only survey antennas.

All my L1/L2 antennas are choke ring  survey/geodetic grade devices...  an 
equivalent  choke ring L1 only antenna should perform just as well on a 
Tbolt...  but I suspect very few people bother to make such a device.

--
Which of the L1-only antennas did well?
And do you have an explanation why the L1/L2 antennas did better,
even for the L1-only reception case?

  
___
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] HP5328A & HP5328B option 040

[Richard (Rick) Karlquist]

On 4/23/2015 7:17 AM, Alberto di Bene wrote:

On 4/23/2015 9:20 AM, VK2DAP wrote:


/1) Generally speaking, would it be correct to say that when a product
model number changes from A to B,//
//that represents an improvement or major update to a product?/


I remember having read (don't recall where...) that the HP5328B was a
cost-reduction step wrt the A model...


Oh, yes, now I remember.  The 5328B, 5334B, and one other counter
(maybe the 5335) were part of a cost reduction program that was
internally called the "killer B's".  I was the project manager
for the 5334B (see my previous posting).

Rick Karlquist N6RK
___
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] I wish to shorten GPS antenna cable - should I let receiver find the position again?

[Jianhui Luo]

Yes. You will get same location. Some GPS time receivers have cable length
compensation for 1PPS output.

Remember 1 foot is about 1 nano second error in 1PPS.

Tim
On Apr 23, 2015 1:15 PM, "Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd)" <
drkir...@kirkbymicrowave.co.uk> wrote:

> I have an HP 58503A which I am using as a frequency source only - not
> to tell the time. I want to shorted the antenna cable a bit, but are
> wondering if I should let the GPS receiver finds it position again. Or
> either of the following better
>
> * Remove antenna cable, put a new N plug on, and screw it back in with
> the receiver kept powered up all the time.
> * Power off GPS receiver and power it back on with the cable connected.
>
> I'm not moving the antenna, so the actual position will not change,
> but of course the signals will get to the receiver a bit sooner.
>
> Dave, G8WRB
> ___
> 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] HP5328A & HP5328B option 040

[Richard (Rick) Karlquist]

On 4/23/2015 12:20 AM, VK2DAP wrote:

Dear time-nuts,

I have a question about the HP5328A and HP5328B universal counters.

1) Generally speaking, would it be correct to say that when a product model 
number changes from A to B, that represents an improvement or major update to a 
product?

2) I am interested in the "delay" option that is mentioned in the user manual 
for the HP5328A (option 040). My question is simple. Why does this option not feature in 
the HP5328B, but only as option 040 on the HP5328A?




Now you have asked a very interesting question.  Since you
are new to time-nuts, you probably don't know I worked
for HP/Agilent/Keysight for 35 years.  It would be
a gross oversimplification to assume that an A/B change
is an improvement, although in some cases that may
be true.  Often it has more to do with certain parts
becoming unavailable.  You should also know that there
is typically a 5 year support life after the product
goes out of production.  It is very common that they
will increment the suffix to get the 5 year clock
running so they no longer have to support very old
instruments.  This was certainly the case with the
5061B cesium standard.  The nixie displays were
unobtainium and we couldn't support the 5061A because
of this.  I don't know specifically about the 5328A
vs B.  However, I was the project manager for the
5334B counter.  The way that came about was that I
just happened to notice that there were various design
aspects of the 5334A that wasted a lot of money.  I
didn't work in the counters section at the time, but
nevertheless I annoyed the R&D manager by pointing
out these money leaks.  I guess he got tired of hearing
me complain and one day he offered my the job of project
manager on a 5334B model.  We needed to reduce cost
because we were losing military contracts to Racal-Dana.
I changed certain design details in the B model where
I could save money.  The idea was to simply keep the
performance the same and not add features.  There were
many things I inherited from the A model that I left
alone if I couldn't reduce the cost.  We were also on
a very tight schedule.  This prevented me from replacing
the 4 separate microprocessors in the 34A with a single
one.  (Very long story as to why this was)

Now to get to your question about why a feature in the
A version would not carry through to the B version.
The 5334A had an option of a digital voltmeter, which was
put in essentially "because we could", but then justified
after the fact by claiming that customers wanted it
because some of them ordered the option.  I never thought
this made sense and used my authority as 5334B project manager
to get rid of it in the 5334B.  Since HP also sold
voltmeters, they could always buy a voltmeter from
our voltmeter division.  There are a bunch of reasons
why the 5328B would lose a feature that the 5328A had,
but the point is that this doesn't break any "rule".

Rick Karlquist N6RK
___
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] HP5328A & HP5328B

[Charles Steinmetz]

Magnus wrote:


Would be fun to have a GPIB interface in the HP5328A


???  I have 6 or 7 of these, and they all have HPIB interfaces.  It 
was option 011 for the 5328A.  I believe all 5328Bs had HPIB as 
standard.  Here is a link to the 5328A Opt 011 op/service manual:




I'm not sure I've ever seen a 5328 (A or B) that didn't have 
HPIB.  (It may be worth noting that ex-US military 5328As are very 
common here in the US, and I believe all of those had HPIB.)  The 
ex-military counters have a number of differences from the commercial versions.


Best regards,

Charles



___
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] I wish to shorten GPS antenna cable - should I let receiver find the position again?

[Henry Hallam]

On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 5:03 AM, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave
Ltd)  wrote:
> I have an HP 58503A which I am using as a frequency source only - not
> to tell the time. I want to shorted the antenna cable a bit, but are
> wondering if I should let the GPS receiver finds it position again. Or
> either of the following better
>
> * Remove antenna cable, put a new N plug on, and screw it back in with
> the receiver kept powered up all the time.
> * Power off GPS receiver and power it back on with the cable connected.
>
> I'm not moving the antenna, so the actual position will not change,
> but of course the signals will get to the receiver a bit sooner.

If the goal is minimizing downtime and duration of degraded quality
output, I would go with the former.  The 58503A will enter holdover
mode.  It will keep its oven warm and retain its learned oscillator
model parameters.  When you reconnect the antenna it will pick right
back up where it left off, with minimal settling time.

Henry
___
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] HP5328A & HP5328B

[Francesco Messineo]

On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 9:13 PM, Charles Steinmetz
 wrote:
> Magnus wrote:
>
>> Would be fun to have a GPIB interface in the HP5328A
>
>
> ???  I have 6 or 7 of these, and they all have HPIB interfaces.  It was
> option 011 for the 5328A.  I believe all 5328Bs had HPIB as standard.  Here
> is a link to the 5328A Opt 011 op/service manual:
>
> 
>
> I'm not sure I've ever seen a 5328 (A or B) that didn't have HPIB.  (It may
> be worth noting that ex-US military 5328As are very common here in the US,
> and I believe all of those had HPIB.)  The ex-military counters have a
> number of differences from the commercial versions.

5328A without HPIB indeed do exist. I've seen a few of them, these are
the no-options instruments usually.

Frank IZ8DWF
___
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] Leica AT-303

[Bob Camp]

Hi

There is indeed a Leica L1 choke ring antenna. It’s a big monster. Some of them 
were sold on 
the list a while back. 

Bob

> On Apr 23, 2015, at 2:37 PM, Mark Sims  wrote:
> 
> The L1 only antenna that did very well was an AeroAntenna 
> AT575-75W-TNCF-000-RG-26-NM   Also a Racal LandStar MK4 did well.  These are 
> both small L1 only survey antennas.
> 
> All my L1/L2 antennas are choke ring  survey/geodetic grade devices...  an 
> equivalent  choke ring L1 only antenna should perform just as well on a 
> Tbolt...  but I suspect very few people bother to make such a device.
> 
> --
> Which of the L1-only antennas did well?
> And do you have an explanation why the L1/L2 antennas did better,
> even for the L1-only reception case?
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] HP5328A & HP5328B option 040

[Bob Albert via time-nuts]

>From your comments, it seems that finding a voltmeter board to add to my 5328A 
>isn't worth the trouble.  I have been looking for one even though I have 
>plenty of voltmeters.  I assume the option allows measurement of the signal 
>inputs but still probably isn't worth all the agony of changing the panel, etc.

Am I making sense?
Bob K6DDX 


 On Thursday, April 23, 2015 12:48 PM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist 
 wrote:
   

 On 4/23/2015 12:20 AM, VK2DAP wrote:
> Dear time-nuts,
>
> I have a question about the HP5328A and HP5328B universal counters.
>
> 1) Generally speaking, would it be correct to say that when a product model 
> number changes from A to B, that represents an improvement or major update to 
> a product?
>
> 2) I am interested in the "delay" option that is mentioned in the user manual 
> for the HP5328A (option 040). My question is simple. Why does this option not 
> feature in the HP5328B, but only as option 040 on the HP5328A?
>


Now you have asked a very interesting question.  Since you
are new to time-nuts, you probably don't know I worked
for HP/Agilent/Keysight for 35 years.  It would be
a gross oversimplification to assume that an A/B change
is an improvement, although in some cases that may
be true.  Often it has more to do with certain parts
becoming unavailable.  You should also know that there
is typically a 5 year support life after the product
goes out of production.  It is very common that they
will increment the suffix to get the 5 year clock
running so they no longer have to support very old
instruments.  This was certainly the case with the
5061B cesium standard.  The nixie displays were
unobtainium and we couldn't support the 5061A because
of this.  I don't know specifically about the 5328A
vs B.  However, I was the project manager for the
5334B counter.  The way that came about was that I
just happened to notice that there were various design
aspects of the 5334A that wasted a lot of money.  I
didn't work in the counters section at the time, but
nevertheless I annoyed the R&D manager by pointing
out these money leaks.  I guess he got tired of hearing
me complain and one day he offered my the job of project
manager on a 5334B model.  We needed to reduce cost
because we were losing military contracts to Racal-Dana.
I changed certain design details in the B model where
I could save money.  The idea was to simply keep the
performance the same and not add features.  There were
many things I inherited from the A model that I left
alone if I couldn't reduce the cost.  We were also on
a very tight schedule.  This prevented me from replacing
the 4 separate microprocessors in the 34A with a single
one.  (Very long story as to why this was)

Now to get to your question about why a feature in the
A version would not carry through to the B version.
The 5334A had an option of a digital voltmeter, which was
put in essentially "because we could", but then justified
after the fact by claiming that customers wanted it
because some of them ordered the option.  I never thought
this made sense and used my authority as 5334B project manager
to get rid of it in the 5334B.  Since HP also sold
voltmeters, they could always buy a voltmeter from
our voltmeter division.  There are a bunch of reasons
why the 5328B would lose a feature that the 5328A had,
but the point is that this doesn't break any "rule".

Rick Karlquist N6RK
___
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] HP5328A & HP5328B option 040

[Mark Spencer]

If anyone has a burning desire for a HP5328 with a volt meter module (and a 
GPIB board) please contact me off list.

Regards
Mark Spencer

Sent from my iPad

On 2015-04-23, at 3:18 PM, Bob Albert via time-nuts  wrote:

> From your comments, it seems that finding a voltmeter board to add to my 
> 5328A isn't worth the trouble.  I have been looking for one even though I 
> have plenty of voltmeters.  I assume the option allows measurement of the 
> signal inputs but still probably isn't worth all the agony of changing the 
> panel, etc.
> 
> Am I making sense?
> Bob K6DDX 
> 
> 
> On Thursday, April 23, 2015 12:48 PM, Richard (Rick) Karlquist 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> On 4/23/2015 12:20 AM, VK2DAP wrote:
>> Dear time-nuts,
>> 
>> I have a question about the HP5328A and HP5328B universal counters.
>> 
>> 1) Generally speaking, would it be correct to say that when a product model 
>> number changes from A to B, that represents an improvement or major update 
>> to a product?
>> 
>> 2) I am interested in the "delay" option that is mentioned in the user 
>> manual for the HP5328A (option 040). My question is simple. Why does this 
>> option not feature in the HP5328B, but only as option 040 on the HP5328A?
>> 
> 
> 
> Now you have asked a very interesting question.  Since you
> are new to time-nuts, you probably don't know I worked
> for HP/Agilent/Keysight for 35 years.  It would be
> a gross oversimplification to assume that an A/B change
> is an improvement, although in some cases that may
> be true.  Often it has more to do with certain parts
> becoming unavailable.  You should also know that there
> is typically a 5 year support life after the product
> goes out of production.  It is very common that they
> will increment the suffix to get the 5 year clock
> running so they no longer have to support very old
> instruments.  This was certainly the case with the
> 5061B cesium standard.  The nixie displays were
> unobtainium and we couldn't support the 5061A because
> of this.  I don't know specifically about the 5328A
> vs B.  However, I was the project manager for the
> 5334B counter.  The way that came about was that I
> just happened to notice that there were various design
> aspects of the 5334A that wasted a lot of money.  I
> didn't work in the counters section at the time, but
> nevertheless I annoyed the R&D manager by pointing
> out these money leaks.  I guess he got tired of hearing
> me complain and one day he offered my the job of project
> manager on a 5334B model.  We needed to reduce cost
> because we were losing military contracts to Racal-Dana.
> I changed certain design details in the B model where
> I could save money.  The idea was to simply keep the
> performance the same and not add features.  There were
> many things I inherited from the A model that I left
> alone if I couldn't reduce the cost.  We were also on
> a very tight schedule.  This prevented me from replacing
> the 4 separate microprocessors in the 34A with a single
> one.  (Very long story as to why this was)
> 
> Now to get to your question about why a feature in the
> A version would not carry through to the B version.
> The 5334A had an option of a digital voltmeter, which was
> put in essentially "because we could", but then justified
> after the fact by claiming that customers wanted it
> because some of them ordered the option.  I never thought
> this made sense and used my authority as 5334B project manager
> to get rid of it in the 5334B.  Since HP also sold
> voltmeters, they could always buy a voltmeter from
> our voltmeter division.  There are a bunch of reasons
> why the 5328B would lose a feature that the 5328A had,
> but the point is that this doesn't break any "rule".
> 
> Rick Karlquist N6RK
> ___
> 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.
> 
___
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] HP5328A & HP5328B option 040

[Gary Chatters]

On 04/23/2015 06:18 PM, Bob Albert via time-nuts wrote:

 From your comments, it seems that finding a voltmeter board to add to my 5328A 
isn't worth the trouble.  I have been looking for one even though I have plenty 
of voltmeters.  I assume the option allows measurement of the signal inputs but 
still probably isn't worth all the agony of changing the panel, etc.

Am I making sense?
Bob K6DDX




To throw in my $0.02 worth:

I have the DVM option on a couple of my counters, but never pay much 
attention to it.  I have DMMs and a couple of Simpson 260s.  However, 
the discussion made me curious so I checked on what they do.  Two things 
of interest:

- They only measure DC. (The ones I have).
- The one in the 5328A will also "Read A" or "Read B".  This reads the 
level of the trigger voltage (DC).  The catalog says this is really 
helpful for setup.  I'll have to give it a try sometime.
- Others are just a separate input and don't measure anything on the AC 
input signal.


On the topic of suffix letters: Sometimes the suffix letter indicates a 
variation in the basic model.  For example, the 3336 synthesizer/level 
generator:

- 3336A - CCITT version
- 3336B - Bell system version
- 3336C - General purpose version.


Gary

___
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] Tuning a Trimble Thunderbolt

[Bryan _]

Bob from the screenshot what is it that shows the GPS reception as very wrong. 
just curious.

-=Bryan=-

> From: kb...@n1k.org
> Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 18:33:09 -0400
> To: time-nuts@febo.com
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Tuning a Trimble Thunderbolt
> 
> Hi
> 
> Looking at that screen shot, something is *very* wrong with your GPS 
> reception. Your GPS
> is 10X worse than it should be. 
> 
> > On Apr 22, 2015, at 9:37 AM, Pete Stephenson  wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Bob Camp  wrote:
> >> Hi
> >> 
> >> Backing up a bit to “getting a TBolt running”.
> >> 
> >> 1) instal Lady Heather and get it connected to the TBolt
> >> 2)  does it fire up and find any sats?
> > 
> > Yes. It had been working consistently for several days prior to my
> > first message.
> > 
> >> 3) are the power supplies holding regulation?
> > 
> > Yes.
> > 
> >> 4) nail down the antenna in the best fixed location you can find
> > 
> > Done.
> > 
> >> 5) run the auto-calibration feature in LH
> > 
> > Done. This changed the gain from -5.0Hz/V to -3.132Hz/V and changed
> > the initial voltage to 0.347V. I switched the time constant and
> > damping values back to their defaults of 100 seconds and 1.200,
> > respectively.
> > 
> >> 6) run a 48 hour survey with LH and write the location to ee memory
> > 
> > Done. The location matches the averaged location surveyed from my
> > Motorola Oncore UT+ (the antenna for which was about 10cm away from
> > that for the Tbolt, some no-name mushroom-type antenna) and a handheld
> > Garmin eTrex 20 (with GPS+GLONASS+WAAS) within a few meters. It also
> > matches with Google Maps.
> > 
> > In the attached screenshot you can clearly see the field of view from
> > the antenna's current location over the last ~20 hours.
> > 
> > Interestingly, the Oncore antenna (a cheap patch antenna from eBay)
> > seems to be causing some intermittent issues with the Tbolt: if the
> > antennas are too close there appears to be some sort of interference
> > emitted by the Oncore antenna that makes it difficult for the Tbolt to
> > lock onto the GPS signal and the Tbolt goes into holdover. Oddly, this
> > is not consistent: the Tbolt and Oncore had coexisted for a few days
> > with no problems but today some of the problems started up again.
> 
> I would bet that the amp on the “Oncore” antenna is oscillating. It may do it
> intermittently. The frequency may swing back and forth through the GPS band. 
> It
> may be the source of your GPS problem. 
> 
> Bob
> 
> > 
> > The same issue occured if the Oncore antenna was too close to my
> > Garmin GPS 18x LVC. I have since moved the Oncore antenna further away
> > (it's now about 50cm) and signal reception for the Tbolt is much
> > better. Weird, but distance seems to resolve the issue, so not really
> > a problem anymore.
> > 
> >> 7) Then check the EFC voltage, it should be fairly close to 0V, and not 
> >> over 2.5
> >> If you are > 2.5, that’s probably a broken unit.
> > 
> > Doesn't seem to be a problem.
> > 
> >> 8) Now start watching the EFC voltage for a few days and see that it’s 
> >> leveling
> >> out and not spiking. Again spikes = something broke.
> > 
> > See the attached screenshot. There's a few small EFC voltage spikes
> > when the unit enters or leaves holdover, but otherwise it seems
> > reasonably smooth in my (admittedly untrained) view.
> > 
> >> Until that’s all done, I would not dig to deep into the workings of the 
> >> gizmo. It
> >> needs to be set up first.
> > 
> > Other than the intermittent issues with the Oncore antenna, everything
> > seems to be working reasonably well -- there's no obvious failures
> > that I can spot.
> > 
> > Cheers!
> > -Pete
> > 
> >> Bob
> >> 
> >> 
> >>> On Apr 21, 2015, at 4:30 AM, Pete Stephenson  wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 4:25 AM, Charles Steinmetz
> >>>  wrote:
>  Pete wrote:
>  
> > On a related note, is it possible to extract any data regarding the
> > training from the unit?
>  
>  Not as far as the time-nuts community knows, no (other than looking at 
>  the
>  DAC voltage and temperature reporting during holdover and attempting to
>  reverse engineer the prediction algorithm by correlating those with the
>  long-term DAC voltage -- good luck).
> >>> 
> >>> Finishing my PhD is enough work already. I don't think I'll try
> >>> reverse-engineering the prediction algorithm quite yet. Perhaps later
> >>> in my Copious Free Time(tm)?
> >>> 
> > Are the training parameters saved periodically to non-volatile memory,
> > or are they purely stored in RAM and so will be lost if powered down?
> > If the latter, does the RAM have any provisions for backup power
>  
>  I doubt it -- mine always act as if they are training from zero if they 
>  have
>  been powered down.  Because of the lack of precise retrace of quartz
>  crystals, I don't think you'd want old (pre-power-down) data, anyway.  
>  Some
>  crystals w