Re: [time-nuts] Excel logarithmic function (was Thermal impact on OCXO)

[Scott Stobbe]

Hi Lars,

There are a few other pieces I have yet to fully appreciate. One of which
is that Aln(Bt+1) isn't a time-invariant model. In the most common case
(for the mfg) the time scale aligns with infancy of the OCXO, when it's hot
off the line. However after pre-aging, perhaps some service life, what time
reference is best? Sometime I will try adding an additional parameter for
infancy time and see how that goes.

A fit of the full ten year data-set, attached in the two plots
"Lars_10Year.png", "Lars_10Year_45Day.png".

I would agree to your description of 1/sqrt(t) aging for the first 1000
days, but sometime after, it follows 1/t. Attached is plot of age rate
"Lars_AgeRate.png". You can see during the first 1000 days the age rate
declines at 1 decade for 2 decades time indicating t^(-1/2), but eventually
it follows 1/t.

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 3:57 PM, Lars Walenius 
wrote:

> Hi Scott.
>
>
>
> Here is a textfile with data for the 10 years (As in the graph 2001-2011).
>
>
>
> Also the ln(bt+1) fit, as Magnus said, has the derivate b/(b*t+1) that
> with b*t >>1 is 1/t. But my data has the aging between 1 and 10 years more
> like 1/sqrt(t) If I just have a brief look on the aging graph.
>
>
>
> Lars
>
>
>
> *Från: *Scott Stobbe 
> *Skickat: *den 19 november 2016 04:11
>
> Hi Lars,
>
>
>
> I agree with you, that if there is data out there, it isn't easy to find,
>
> many thanks for sharing!
>
>
>
> Fitting to the full model had limited improvements, the b coefficient was
>
> quite large making it essentially equal to the ln(x) function you fitted in
>
> excel. It is attached as "Lars_FitToMil55310.png".
>
>
>
> So on further thought, the B term can't model a device aging even faster
>
> than it should shortly after infancy. In the two extreme cases either B is
>
> large and (Bt)>>1 so the be B term ends up just being an additive bias, or
>
> B is small, and ln(x) is linearized (or slowed down) during the first bit
>
> of time.
>
>
>
> You can approximated the MIL 55310 between two points in time as
>
>
>
> f(t2) - f(t1) = Aln(t2/t1)
>
>
>
> A = ( f(t2) - f(t1) )/ln(t2/t1)
>
>
>
> Looking at some of your plots it looks like between the end of year 1 and
>
> year 10 you age from 20 ppb to 65 ppb,
>
>
>
> A ~ 20
>
>
>
> The next plot "Lars_ForceAcoef", is a fit with the A coefficient forced to
>
> be 2 and 20. The 20 doesn't end-up fitting well on this time scale.
>
>
>
> Looking at the data a little more, I wondered if the first 10 day are going
>
> through some behavior that isn't representative of long-term aging, like
>
> warm-up, retrace (I'm sure bob could name half a dozen more examples). So
>
> the next two plots are fits of the 4 data points after day10, and seem to
>
> fit well, "Lars_FitAfterDay10.png", "Lars_1Year.png".
>
>
>
> If you are willing to share the next month, we can add that to the fit.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Lars Walenius 
>
> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Hopefully someone can find the correct a and b for a*ln(bt+1) with
>
> stable32 or matlab for this data set:
>
> > Days ppb
>
> > 2   2
>
> > 4   3.5
>
> > 7   4.65
>
> > 8   5.05
>
> > 9   5.22
>
> > 12 6.11
>
> > 13 6.19
>
> > 25 7.26
>
> > 32 7.92
>
>
>
___
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] Inside of FT1200-100

[Charles Steinmetz]

Christopher wrote:


And of course it is a discontinued part.

Taking suggestions for a replacement.   COG(NP0)?


I applaud your ingenuity and resourcefulness in tackling this project! 
I just love seeing nice old tech restored to service.


Your three basic choices are mica, C0G/NP0 ceramic, and porcelain (a 
different type of ceramic).  For this application, you want the highest 
Q available (which is probably why the original is a glass capacitor). 
Porcelain wins that contest hands down, and all of its other specs are 
competitive with or superior to the others.  They are also free of 
microphonics.


Digi-Key carries the AVX SQ Series (AVX calls them "Microwave MLCs"):





There are other manufacturers, but I don't believe anyone makes 
porcelain through-hole parts anymore.  You will probably end  up 
soldering leads onto one or a stack of SMD chips.  It appears that the 
original capacitor is installed in sockets.  Measure the lead diameter, 
and use the same size wire.  Or just clip the leads off the original and 
re-use them.


Note that the original glass capacitor has a tempco of about +140 ppm/C, 
and the porcelain and C0G/NP0 parts are close to zero.  This raises the 
question whether the capacitor was intended to provide temperature 
compensation (or whether other circuit elements have tailored tempcos to 
offset the capacitor tempco).  Since the capacitor is in a 
temperature-stabilized environment, this is probably not critical.


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] Inside of FT1200-100

[paul swed]

yes 24 pf
Paul
WB8TSL

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 3:19 PM, Christopher Hoover 
wrote:

> OK, I think this folded-over cap sets the nominal XO frequency:
>
> (link in case it doesn't go through: https://goo.gl/photos/
> XHUCKTnC3NAB5rKD6
> )
>
> I read the p/n as CY06C240J.   24 pFs?  CGW would seem to be Corning Glass
> Works.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 8:57 AM, Tom Van Baak  wrote:
>
> > > Chris enjoying the pictures. Most likely I will never run into one of
> > these
> > > oscillators. But it is nice to know that you have gone "where no man
> has
> > > gone before". Star Trek? Not sure.
> > > Regards
> > > Paul
> > > WB8TSL
> >
> > Paul,
> >
> > I have quite a few vintage FTS 1200's here and will be doing a grand
> > comparison in a few months. They are known for extremely good ADEV, way
> > down in the -13's. I'll put your name on one of them.
> >
> > /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.
> >
>
> ___
> 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] Inside of FT1200-100

[Ed Palmer]

What value are you going to change it to?

Since the frequency is too low, you probably have to reduce the 
capacitance somewhere.  This one is only 24 pf 5% tolerance.  It seems 
unlikely that this by itself is setting the frequency.  It's rather 
small and the tolerance is rather large.  Is there another larger 
capacitor in parallel with this one?  This one might be the 'trimmer' 
they used to get the frequency within adjustment range. I've seen that 
idea used in my Sulzer 2.5  and Oscilloquartz 8601 - which both use the 
AVX glass capacitors, by the way!  If this is the 'trimmer', then just 
remove it.  That worked for my 8601.  I removed 91 pf that was in 
parallel with 1200 pf to raise the frequency enough to bring it back 
within adjustment range.


Ed

On 2016-11-23 5:04 PM, Christopher Hoover  wrote:

Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Inside of FT1200-100
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

And of course it is a discontinued part.

Taking suggestions for a replacement.   COG(NP0)?


On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Christopher Hoover
wrote:


>Part number decoder on page 4 of:
>
>http://www.mouser.com/catalog/supplier/library/pdf/AVXGlassDielectric.pdf
>
>CY = glass
>06 = case size
>C = operating temp (-55 C to +125 C)
>240 = 24 pF
>J =  tolerance (+/- 5%)
>


___
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] Inside of FT1200-100

[Christopher Hoover]

OK, I think this folded-over cap sets the nominal XO frequency:

(link in case it doesn't go through: https://goo.gl/photos/XHUCKTnC3NAB5rKD6
)

I read the p/n as CY06C240J.   24 pFs?  CGW would seem to be Corning Glass
Works.




On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 8:57 AM, Tom Van Baak  wrote:

> > Chris enjoying the pictures. Most likely I will never run into one of
> these
> > oscillators. But it is nice to know that you have gone "where no man has
> > gone before". Star Trek? Not sure.
> > Regards
> > Paul
> > WB8TSL
>
> Paul,
>
> I have quite a few vintage FTS 1200's here and will be doing a grand
> comparison in a few months. They are known for extremely good ADEV, way
> down in the -13's. I'll put your name on one of them.
>
> /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.
>
___
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] Lady Heather for Z3801A (and other devices)

[Bill Riches]

Thank you Mark,  Spend time with your family this Thanksgiving.  We will all 
appreciate it when it does arrive.

73,

Bill, WA2DVU

-Original Message-
From: time-nuts [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On Behalf Of Mark Sims
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 11:14 AM
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Subject: [time-nuts] Lady Heather for Z3801A (and other devices)

I had hoped to get the 5.0 release out last weekend but got distracted...   
this weekend for sure... maybe...  perhaps...
___
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] Lady Heather for Z3801A (and other devices)

[Mark Sims]

Besides the Trimble devices, the other devices include the Z3801,  Z3811/Z3812 
(aka Lucent KS2),  Trimble/Symmetricom "UCCM" GPSDOs,  Oscilloquartz STAR-4 
GPSDO,  NEC GPSDO,  and NMEA, Ublox, Motorola, Venus, SIRF,  NVS, etc GPS 
receivers,  and GPSD.  It is probably compatible with the Z3805/Z3816/HP53xxx 
devices but has not been tested with them.

 In most cases it can auto-detect the device type and serial port configuration.

The code is compatible with Windoze, Linux, and macOS.   Runs well on the 
Raspberry PI...
 
---

> Would have been great to have the TBolt and Z3801 working.
___
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] Excel logarithmic function (was Thermal impact on OCXO)

[Magnus Danielson]

It really means that B will be harder to get a qualitative value for.

Also, you need to have "clean" data or else you will be far off.
Plot the estimated variant and also plot the difference.
As Jim Barnes used to teach, always check the whiteness of matching 
residues!


Cheers,
Magnus

On 11/23/2016 09:58 PM, Lars Walenius wrote:

Bob,
I have to ask about the B-term. In the paper that Scott started this with I see that 
B was 4.45. But if I understand you correct Bt<1 even at 30days is normal? That 
would mean a B of <0.033?

Lars


Bob wrote:
In a conventional fit situation, you have < 30 days worth of data and the “time 
constant”

is > 30 days. Put another way bt <= 1 in the normal case. It is only when you 
go out to years
that bt gets large.

Bob


On Nov 18, 2016, at 9:58 PM, Scott Stobbe  wrote:


Hi Lars,

I agree with you, that if there is data out there, it isn't easy to find,
many thanks for sharing!

Fitting to the full model had limited improvements, the b coefficient was
quite large making it essentially equal to the ln(x) function you fitted in
excel. It is attached as "Lars_FitToMil55310.png".

So on further thought, the B term can't model a device aging even faster
than it should shortly after infancy. In the two extreme cases either B is
large and (Bt)>>1 so the be B term ends up just being an additive bias, or
B is small, and ln(x) is linearized (or slowed down) during the first bit
of time.

You can approximated the MIL 55310 between two points in time as

f(t2) - f(t1) = Aln(t2/t1)

A = ( f(t2) - f(t1) )/ln(t2/t1)

Looking at some of your plots it looks like between the end of year 1 and
year 10 you age from 20 ppb to 65 ppb,

A ~ 20

The next plot "Lars_ForceAcoef", is a fit with the A coefficient forced to
be 2 and 20. The 20 doesn't end-up fitting well on this time scale.

Looking at the data a little more, I wondered if the first 10 day are going
through some behavior that isn't representative of long-term aging, like
warm-up, retrace (I'm sure bob could name half a dozen more examples). So
the next two plots are fits of the 4 data points after day10, and seem to
fit well, "Lars_FitAfterDay10.png", "Lars_1Year.png".

If you are willing to share the next month, we can add that to the fit.

Cheers,

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Lars Walenius 
wrote:


Hopefully someone can find the correct a and b for a*ln(bt+1) with

stable32 or matlab for this data set:

Days ppb
2   2
4   3.5
7   4.65
8   5.05
9   5.22
12 6.11
13 6.19
25 7.26
32 7.92

___
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] HP 55300A

[Richard (Rick) Karlquist]

When I was testing the E1938A I used to run the environmental
test chamber up to 85 degrees C, let the unit stabilize for
a while, and then dump liquid nitrogen into the chamber
to go to -55 degrees C in something like 2 minutes.  The
temperature inside the crystal oven fluctuated maybe a millidegree
and the frequency fluctuated maybe 5 parts in 10^-12 during
this event.  IE, you don't need to worry about a fan blowing
on your OCXO, if it is any good.

Rick

On 11/20/2016 6:41 AM, Gary Neilson wrote:

I recently got a HP55300A on ebay for parts. It works fine but runs on 48V.

I am going  to install a AC supply inside and also place a fan on the
top for cooling.

I hope the air flow will not cool the OCXO too much.

I am also looking for documentation. I have the User manual but am
looking for the Programming Manual.

Thanks

Gary Neilson

K5DSR

___
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] New Timestamping / Time Interval Counter: the TICC

[Peter Vince]

Fantastic John - well done!  Yes, I'll definitely put an order in as soon
as possible.

 Regards,

 Peter  (G8ZZR, London)
___
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] Excel logarithmic function (was Thermal impact on OCXO)

[Lars Walenius]

Hi Scott.

Here is a textfile with data for the 10 years (As in the graph 2001-2011).

Also the ln(bt+1) fit, as Magnus said, has the derivate b/(b*t+1) that with b*t 
>>1 is 1/t. But my data has the aging between 1 and 10 years more like 
1/sqrt(t) If I just have a brief look on the aging graph.

Lars

Från: Scott Stobbe
Skickat: den 19 november 2016 04:11

Hi Lars,

I agree with you, that if there is data out there, it isn't easy to find,
many thanks for sharing!

Fitting to the full model had limited improvements, the b coefficient was
quite large making it essentially equal to the ln(x) function you fitted in
excel. It is attached as "Lars_FitToMil55310.png".

So on further thought, the B term can't model a device aging even faster
than it should shortly after infancy. In the two extreme cases either B is
large and (Bt)>>1 so the be B term ends up just being an additive bias, or
B is small, and ln(x) is linearized (or slowed down) during the first bit
of time.

You can approximated the MIL 55310 between two points in time as

f(t2) - f(t1) = Aln(t2/t1)

A = ( f(t2) - f(t1) )/ln(t2/t1)

Looking at some of your plots it looks like between the end of year 1 and
year 10 you age from 20 ppb to 65 ppb,

A ~ 20

The next plot "Lars_ForceAcoef", is a fit with the A coefficient forced to
be 2 and 20. The 20 doesn't end-up fitting well on this time scale.

Looking at the data a little more, I wondered if the first 10 day are going
through some behavior that isn't representative of long-term aging, like
warm-up, retrace (I'm sure bob could name half a dozen more examples). So
the next two plots are fits of the 4 data points after day10, and seem to
fit well, "Lars_FitAfterDay10.png", "Lars_1Year.png".

If you are willing to share the next month, we can add that to the fit.

Cheers,

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Lars Walenius 
wrote:
>
> Hopefully someone can find the correct a and b for a*ln(bt+1) with
stable32 or matlab for this data set:
> Days ppb
> 2   2
> 4   3.5
> 7   4.65
> 8   5.05
> 9   5.22
> 12 6.11
> 13 6.19
> 25 7.26
> 32 7.92

daysppb
2   2
4   3.5
7   4.65
8   5.05
9   5.22
12  6.11
13  6.19
25  7.26
32  7.92
33  8.15
39  8.42
46  8.92
46  9.18
47  9.02
54  9.51
60  9.78
74  10.45
83  11.36
92  11.78
97  12.08
110 12.8
128 13.6
158 14.7
193 15.9
224 16.9
254 18
284 19.01
314 20
343 21.1
375 22.3
417 23.7
445 24.8
476 25.7
515 26.7
545 27.7
586 28.8
615 29.4
646 30.2
672 30.7
703 31.4
743 32.2
787 33.5
826 34.6
861 35.3
904 36.2
940 37
976 37.7
101038.5
104639.1
107239.5
108138.3
112438.6
116339.6
120140.5
123941.2
128542.2
132043
135743.6
139844.4
143245
146745.7
150146.3
153447.1
156047.7
159748.4
162848.9
165949.3
168749.9
171850.35
174850.7
177951.2
180951.5
185052
188652.6
191453
194753.45
198453.9
201954.3
204554.5
207154.7
211655.11
213254.97
216555.27
219855.63
223056
226556.5
230957
234657.4
238957.85
243458.35
247358.7
251359
255059.3
258759.65
262560
266460.35
269660.6
272960.85
276461.15
279661.4
282961.6
286361.85
289862.1
293562.4
297262.8
300763.12
304363.47
307863.73
311464.05
314964.3
318464.5
322464.75
325964.96
329565.23
333265.54
336865.82
340666.09
344166.33
348266.55
351966.72
356367.01
360467.22
364767.59
369268.02
___
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] Inside of FT1200-100

[Christopher Hoover]

And of course it is a discontinued part.

Taking suggestions for a replacement.   COG(NP0)?


On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Christopher Hoover 
wrote:

> Part number decoder on page 4 of:
>
> http://www.mouser.com/catalog/supplier/library/pdf/AVXGlassDielectric.pdf
>
> CY = glass
> 06 = case size
> C = operating temp (-55 C to +125 C)
> 240 = 24 pF
> J =  tolerance (+/- 5%)
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 12:19 PM, Christopher Hoover 
> wrote:
>
>> OK, I think this folded-over cap sets the nominal XO frequency:
>>
>> (link in case it doesn't go through: https://goo.gl/photos
>> /XHUCKTnC3NAB5rKD6 )
>>
>> I read the p/n as CY06C240J.   24 pFs?  CGW would seem to be Corning
>> Glass Works.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 8:57 AM, Tom Van Baak  wrote:
>>
>>> > Chris enjoying the pictures. Most likely I will never run into one of
>>> these
>>> > oscillators. But it is nice to know that you have gone "where no man
>>> has
>>> > gone before". Star Trek? Not sure.
>>> > Regards
>>> > Paul
>>> > WB8TSL
>>>
>>> Paul,
>>>
>>> I have quite a few vintage FTS 1200's here and will be doing a grand
>>> comparison in a few months. They are known for extremely good ADEV, way
>>> down in the -13's. I'll put your name on one of them.
>>>
>>> /tvb
>>> ___
>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
>>> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/m
>>> ailman/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] Excel logarithmic function (was Thermal impact on OCXO)

[Lars Walenius]

Bob,
I have to ask about the B-term. In the paper that Scott started this with I see 
that B was 4.45. But if I understand you correct Bt<1 even at 30days is normal? 
That would mean a B of <0.033?

Lars

>Bob wrote:
>In a conventional fit situation, you have < 30 days worth of data and the 
>“time constant”
is > 30 days. Put another way bt <= 1 in the normal case. It is only when you 
go out to years
that bt gets large.

Bob

>> On Nov 18, 2016, at 9:58 PM, Scott Stobbe  wrote:
>
> Hi Lars,
>
> I agree with you, that if there is data out there, it isn't easy to find,
> many thanks for sharing!
>
> Fitting to the full model had limited improvements, the b coefficient was
> quite large making it essentially equal to the ln(x) function you fitted in
> excel. It is attached as "Lars_FitToMil55310.png".
>
> So on further thought, the B term can't model a device aging even faster
> than it should shortly after infancy. In the two extreme cases either B is
> large and (Bt)>>1 so the be B term ends up just being an additive bias, or
> B is small, and ln(x) is linearized (or slowed down) during the first bit
> of time.
>
> You can approximated the MIL 55310 between two points in time as
>
> f(t2) - f(t1) = Aln(t2/t1)
>
> A = ( f(t2) - f(t1) )/ln(t2/t1)
>
> Looking at some of your plots it looks like between the end of year 1 and
> year 10 you age from 20 ppb to 65 ppb,
>
> A ~ 20
>
> The next plot "Lars_ForceAcoef", is a fit with the A coefficient forced to
> be 2 and 20. The 20 doesn't end-up fitting well on this time scale.
>
> Looking at the data a little more, I wondered if the first 10 day are going
> through some behavior that isn't representative of long-term aging, like
> warm-up, retrace (I'm sure bob could name half a dozen more examples). So
> the next two plots are fits of the 4 data points after day10, and seem to
> fit well, "Lars_FitAfterDay10.png", "Lars_1Year.png".
>
> If you are willing to share the next month, we can add that to the fit.
>
> Cheers,
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Lars Walenius 
> wrote:
>>
>> Hopefully someone can find the correct a and b for a*ln(bt+1) with
> stable32 or matlab for this data set:
>> Days ppb
>> 2   2
>> 4   3.5
>> 7   4.65
>> 8   5.05
>> 9   5.22
>> 12 6.11
>> 13 6.19
>> 25 7.26
>> 32 7.92
> ___
> 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] Inside of FT1200-100

[paul swed]

Thanks Tom.
I always like to see the insides of things. You just never know when
strange things show up in strange places like flea markets and they do. At
least at MIT. It gives you a clue.
Have a good thanks giving.
Regards
Paul

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Tom Van Baak  wrote:

> > Chris enjoying the pictures. Most likely I will never run into one of
> these
> > oscillators. But it is nice to know that you have gone "where no man has
> > gone before". Star Trek? Not sure.
> > Regards
> > Paul
> > WB8TSL
>
> Paul,
>
> I have quite a few vintage FTS 1200's here and will be doing a grand
> comparison in a few months. They are known for extremely good ADEV, way
> down in the -13's. I'll put your name on one of them.
>
> /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.
>
___
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] Thermal impact on OCXO

[Lars Walenius]

Thanks Azelio,

I have also thought that the EFC range probably says something. The datasheet 
for the OFC4834 says EFC range +-0.4ppm and that that should be enough for 15 
years. The OFC MC834, I have seems very similar, but without EFC. So my 68ppm 
drift is well within the +-400ppb

Lars

>From: Azelio Boriani
>Sent: den 19 november 2016 02:01
>One starting point to figure out the 10 years aging can be the
datasheet of an OCXO:
MTI240: per year, 3.0E-7, in 10 years must be less than 30.0E-7
MTI220: per year, 1.0E-6, in 10 years < 10.0E-6
Bliley NV26R: 17 years, 5.0E-6
OSA8663: per year, 3.0E-8, in 10 years < 30.0E-8

___
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] Do reflections up/down the antenna cable cause a problem, with GPS? (Bob Camp)

[John Haine]

Hello all, I'm a recent recruit to this list, it looks very interesting 
and I hope I can make a contribution.  Though now retired I'm an 
electronics & radio engineer and until last March worked for u-blox 
(though not on the GNSS side of the business).


Looking at their product integration guides they don't mention antenna 
match and cable length.  They do suggest inserting a SAW filter between 
the antenna and module especially with an active antenna, and of course 
the group delay of a SAW filter makes it equivalent to quite a long 
length of cable - at least 30 cm a nanosecond.  Multiple reflections 
will be attenuated at each reflection - if the return loss is say 6 dB 
then you lose that much at each reflection, plus the attenuation in the 
cable itself.  So the effect of the cable plus mismatches will be to add 
an extra channel impulse response that will be quite short as the 
various echoes decay.  Given that the system is working with wanted 
signals well below thermal anyway, a couple of reflections plus a dB or 
two of cable loss would make the largest echo ~15 dB below the wanted 
signal.  I suspect that this will cause rather small error in the 
device's estimate of pseudo-range  but this will be the same for each 
satellite.  Overall I doubt that the effect will be serious either for 
positioning or timing - if it were I think (knowing u-blox) they would 
make recommendations in the guide.  By the way they don't even mention 
it in the context of their high-precision devices.


(And I've just found an application note where they do discuss matching 
but only in the context of maximising SNR, i.e. power transfer.)


But if one is really concerned then the obvious thing to do is mount the 
module/chip right on the back of the antenna so there is no cable.




On 23/11/2016 12:00, time-nuts-requ...@febo.com wrote:

Re: Do reflections up/down the antenna cable cause a problem
   with GPS? (Bob Camp)


___
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] Thermal impact on OCXO

[Lars Walenius]

Hi Bob,

I was afraid that the answer should be like this (smile).

One paper from MTI that probably confirms that aging prediction is difficult:

http://www.mti-milliren.com/MTIPapers/Ext_Aging_Perf_Results.pdf

Lars


From: Bob Camp
Sent: den 19 november 2016 00:23

Hi
> On Nov 18, 2016, at 1:31 PM, Lars Walenius  wrote:
>
> Hi Bob (and all others),
>
> I agree to all your points but am curious to your comment: ”that OCXO is 
> aging a lot for one that has been on that long”.
> As I have only done this test and seen no other test of OCXO´s powered over 
> at least ten years, I have no idea what is reasonable. I also guess I will 
> not do another test of an OCXO powered and measured over ten years again.
>
> Could you give some examples what is reasonable for aging after ten years? 
> Maybe others have data? I have searched internet and it isn´t easy to find 
> long-term data on OCXO’s (at least for me).

The only people I know of that have the gear and the interest to run a number 
of OCXO’s are oscillator manufacturers. They also track parts
in the field by various methods. The data takes real effort to collect and thus 
is “part of our IP”.

Bob

___
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] New Timestamping / Time Interval Counter: the TICC

[Christopher Hoover]

That TI TDC7200 really is a nice part.

Neat project!   Will buy .  Two thumbs up.


On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 7:48 AM, John Ackermann N8UR  wrote:

> Counters with resolution below 1 nanosecond are difficult.  They require
> either outrageous clock speeds, or interpolators that are typically a bunch
> of analog components mixed with black magic and stirred by frequent
> calibration.  The very best single-shot resolution that's been commercially
> available is 22 picoseconds in the HP 5370A/B, with jitter somewhat more
> than that.  My 5370B has an one-second noise ADEV of about 4x10e-11.
>
> With the help of some very talented friends, I've been working on a new
> counter called the "TICC" with <60ps resolution and similar jitter, based
> on the Texas Instruments TDC7200 time-to-data-converter chip.  The
> one-second noise ADEV is about 7x10e-11, not much worse than the 5370, but
> here's the trick:  the TICC is an Arduino shield (mounting on a Mega 2560
> controller) that weighs only a couple of ounces, requires *no* calibration,
> and is powered from a USB cable!
>
> The TICC is implemented as a two-channel timestamping counter.  That means
> it can measure one or two low-frequency (e.g., pulse-per-second) inputs
> against an external 10 MHz reference, or it can do a traditional time
> interval measurement of one input against the other.  It can also measure
> period, ratio, or any other function of two-channel  timestamp data.  (And
> by the way -- multiple TICCs can be connected to yield 4, 6, 8, or more
> synchronized channels, though we haven't tested this capability yet.)
>
> I've attached a picture of the TICC prototype as well as an ADEV plot of a
> 17+ day run of multiple measurements taken by two TICCs, and also showing
> the TICC noise floor.  The good news behind that plot is that there are
> more than 6 million data points behind these results, and there was not a
> single glitch or significant outlier among them.
>
> There's more information available at http://febo.com/pages/TICC
>
> The software is open source (BSD license) and is available at
> https://github.com/TAPR/TICC -- the current version seems be reliable but
> there are still features to add and a *lot* of cleanup to do; it's
> currently ugly and very much a work in process.
>
> As always, I'll be making the TICC available through TAPR.  We're still
> finalizing details, but we expect the price to be less than $200 for a
> turn-key system:  TICC mounted on an Arduino with software loaded and
> tested for basic functionality.  We hope to ship the TICC by February.
>
> I'll post a note in a week or two with final price and ordering
> information.  As a heads up, we will probably offer a small discount for
> pre-orders.  TAPR is a shoestring non-profit group and the up-front cost to
> manufacture this unit will frankly be a challenge for us.  Getting
> pre-orders will help our cash flow significantly, so we ask you to keep
> that in mind.
>
> John
>
>
> ___
> 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] Time, NTD, IoT and bug fixes

[Clint Jay]

Given recent discussions of IoT, NTP and wall clocks, this may be of
interest

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/11/23/ntp_patch_time_rolls_around_again/

And the vulnerabilities:

http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/633847

-- 
Clint.

*No trees were harmed in the sending of this mail. However, a large number
of electrons were greatly inconvenienced.*
___
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] New Timestamping / Time Interval Counter: the TICC

[Bob Camp]

Hi

Cool !!!

Bob

> On Nov 23, 2016, at 10:48 AM, John Ackermann N8UR  wrote:
> 
> Counters with resolution below 1 nanosecond are difficult.  They require 
> either outrageous clock speeds, or interpolators that are typically a bunch 
> of analog components mixed with black magic and stirred by frequent 
> calibration.  The very best single-shot resolution that's been commercially 
> available is 22 picoseconds in the HP 5370A/B, with jitter somewhat more than 
> that.  My 5370B has an one-second noise ADEV of about 4x10e-11.
> 
> With the help of some very talented friends, I've been working on a new 
> counter called the "TICC" with <60ps resolution and similar jitter, based on 
> the Texas Instruments TDC7200 time-to-data-converter chip.  The one-second 
> noise ADEV is about 7x10e-11, not much worse than the 5370, but here's the 
> trick:  the TICC is an Arduino shield (mounting on a Mega 2560 controller) 
> that weighs only a couple of ounces, requires *no* calibration, and is 
> powered from a USB cable!
> 
> The TICC is implemented as a two-channel timestamping counter.  That means it 
> can measure one or two low-frequency (e.g., pulse-per-second) inputs against 
> an external 10 MHz reference, or it can do a traditional time interval 
> measurement of one input against the other.  It can also measure period, 
> ratio, or any other function of two-channel  timestamp data.  (And by the way 
> -- multiple TICCs can be connected to yield 4, 6, 8, or more synchronized 
> channels, though we haven't tested this capability yet.)
> 
> I've attached a picture of the TICC prototype as well as an ADEV plot of a 
> 17+ day run of multiple measurements taken by two TICCs, and also showing the 
> TICC noise floor.  The good news behind that plot is that there are more than 
> 6 million data points behind these results, and there was not a single glitch 
> or significant outlier among them.
> 
> There's more information available at http://febo.com/pages/TICC
> 
> The software is open source (BSD license) and is available at 
> https://github.com/TAPR/TICC -- the current version seems be reliable but 
> there are still features to add and a *lot* of cleanup to do; it's currently 
> ugly and very much a work in process.
> 
> As always, I'll be making the TICC available through TAPR.  We're still 
> finalizing details, but we expect the price to be less than $200 for a 
> turn-key system:  TICC mounted on an Arduino with software loaded and tested 
> for basic functionality.  We hope to ship the TICC by February.
> 
> I'll post a note in a week or two with final price and ordering information.  
> As a heads up, we will probably offer a small discount for pre-orders.  TAPR 
> is a shoestring non-profit group and the up-front cost to manufacture this 
> unit will frankly be a challenge for us.  Getting pre-orders will help our 
> cash flow significantly, so we ask you to keep that in mind.
> 
> John
> 
> ___
> 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] Lady Heather for Z3801A (and other devices)

[paul swed]

Oh there is hope then.
That would be a good way to finish the year.
Thanks everyone.
Paul
WB8TSL

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Mark Sims  wrote:

> I had hoped to get the 5.0 release out last weekend but got distracted...
>  this weekend for sure... maybe...  perhaps...
> ___
> 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] Lady Heather for Z3801A (and other devices)

[Bob Camp]

Hi

Code as in firmware inside the Z3801 (the question I answered) or as in LH
(the question I didn’t answer).

Bob

> On Nov 23, 2016, at 11:31 AM, paul swed  wrote:
> 
> Bob,
> Thank you for the insight. When I was reading the thread about 2 months ago
> I was thinking this was official. (As far as it gets) OK can that thought.
> Would have been great to have the TBolt and Z3801 working.
> Regards
> Paul
> WB8TSL
> 
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Bob Camp  wrote:
> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> None of the code for any of these devices was ever “released” by it’s
>> owners /
>> creators. It appears that in many cases, the code in parts currently
>> shipping is *very*
>> similar to the code from decades ago …thus their reluctance to release the
>> old code.
>> 
>> Oddly enough some of the code is indeed out there on the net by virtue of
>> various
>> people doing things to pull it out of the memory chips it’s stored in. A
>> review of the
>> Time Nut archives has a number of bread crumbs that lead one off to
>> various likely
>> locations to find it. I suspect that the big guys are not to excited about
>> the code dumps
>> so being really public about it may not be a real good idea.
>> 
>> Bob
>> 
>>> On Nov 23, 2016, at 9:50 AM, paul swed  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Curious if the code for the z3801 was ever released?
>>> Thanks
>>> Paul
>>> WB8TSL
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Bill Riches 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
 Hi Mark,
 
 Will it work with Z3811 (KS24361)
 
 73,
 
 Bill, WA2DVU
 Cape May
 
 
 ___
 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.

___
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] Best replacement for Trimble Bullet antenna

[Russ Ramirez]

I think I'll stick with the bullet antenna. It's the right shape and has
been fine for the Thunderbolt to use. My TB is used for my NTP server and
for 10 MHz reference and I check it regularly with several tools.

I think it's somewhat of an apples to oranges comparison when considering
patch antennas in a window sill. The latter work great with the equipment
they are meant to, but the results definitely vary. As I said in my
original post, the Adafruit active antenna works exceptionally well
compared to any others I have tried before, so I'll probably just design an
active splitter/board (for fun) to get what I need - vs buying another
patch antenna from Adafruit.

Russ
K0WFS
___
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] Lady Heather for Z3801A (and other devices)

[Bill Riches]

Hi Paul,

Our LH Guru is working on an update for 3801 and 3811.  It will do all sort of 
things and even cook dinner.  He has not said when it will be available but it 
will be soon.

73,

Bill, WA2DVU
Cape May

-Original Message-
From: time-nuts [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On Behalf Of paul swed
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 9:50 AM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Lady Heather for Z3801A (and other devices)

Curious if the code for the z3801 was ever released?
Thanks
Paul
WB8TSL

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Bill Riches 
wrote:

> Hi Mark,
>
> Will it work with Z3811 (KS24361)
>
> 73,
>
> Bill, WA2DVU
> Cape May
>
>
> ___
> 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] Lady Heather for Z3801A (and other devices)

[Mark Sims]

I had hoped to get the 5.0 release out last weekend but got distracted...   
this weekend for sure... maybe...  perhaps...
___
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] Lady Heather for Z3801A (and other devices)

[Bob Camp]

Hi

None of the code for any of these devices was ever “released” by it’s owners / 
creators. It appears that in many cases, the code in parts currently shipping 
is *very*
similar to the code from decades ago …thus their reluctance to release the old 
code. 

Oddly enough some of the code is indeed out there on the net by virtue of 
various
people doing things to pull it out of the memory chips it’s stored in. A review 
of the
Time Nut archives has a number of bread crumbs that lead one off to various 
likely
locations to find it. I suspect that the big guys are not to excited about the 
code dumps
so being really public about it may not be a real good idea.

Bob

> On Nov 23, 2016, at 9:50 AM, paul swed  wrote:
> 
> Curious if the code for the z3801 was ever released?
> Thanks
> Paul
> WB8TSL
> 
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Bill Riches 
> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Mark,
>> 
>> Will it work with Z3811 (KS24361)
>> 
>> 73,
>> 
>> Bill, WA2DVU
>> Cape May
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> 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] Best replacement for Trimble Bullet antenna

[Bob Camp]

Hi

Regardless of material the gotcha is that the plastic has a dielectric 
constant. That turns it into a lens and moves the phase center. 
If the phase center moves with sat angle, you get a different path length based 
on angle. That messes up your solution, even
for timing. Do you care about the amount it messes things up? This is Time Nuts 
…. There are indeed documents out there that
discuss the problems people have had putting radomes over GPS antennas. 

Bob

> On Nov 23, 2016, at 10:25 AM, Nick Sayer  wrote:
> 
> At work I have access to an industrial one that (I am told) uses lasers to 
> harden a liquid... something. I'm not a plastic expert. We use that stuff for 
> outdoor enclosures and it is UHF transparent, at least to some degree (it 
> would have to be given our use case). I used it once to make a couple of wall 
> mount J1772 fake inlets to hold our car charging plugs. Those have survived 
> outdoors without any issues. At some point in need to repaint them, as the 
> native color is battleship grey, and the white paint is starting to wear off.
> 
> If Tupperware made something conical, I'd chose that in a hurry. It may not 
> have a great deal of UV staying power, but "microwave safe" implies good RF 
> performance. I've used that solution to quickly weatherproof home brew stuff 
> before. 
> 
> Even if whatever the cap is made of isn't perfectly RF clear, I've certainly 
> got S/N margin for some attenuation, even if it isn't uniform. I would posit 
> that as long as it's performance doesn't alter over time scales shorter than 
> a few minutes that the impact would be immeasurable - certainly compared to 
> the ionosphere's.
> 
> I probably won't bother, though, as we don't seem to have bird trouble and it 
> doesn't snow here in Silicon Valley. If it were an unattended installation, 
> that might change things. 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Nov 23, 2016, at 5:07 AM, Bob Camp  wrote:
>> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> Ummm …. e …. radio transparent plastic. You want to avoid making a 
>> lens that distorts the paths over the antenna so it’s not just an issue of 
>> transparent. 
>> You also want it to be “clear” (non distorting). You need it to be stable in 
>> terms of UV,
>> humidity and temperature. The guys who made the antenna didn’t have it quite 
>> so tough, 
>> they could design the cover as part of what determined the pattern of the 
>> antenna.  
>> 
>> The short list of what your low cost printer will handle:
>> 
>> PLA
>> ABS
>> PETG
>> 
>> If it is really low cost, it will only handle the first one. All are a bit 
>> of a 
>> disaster at 1.5 GHz. PLA likely will not hold up outdoors, let alone do well 
>> at RF.
>> The other two are poor at RF. 
>> 
>> The longer list on a higher priced printer:
>> 
>> Nylon
>> Polycarbonate
>> HIPS
>> Flexable’s 
>> 
>> The last two are out right from the start. One dissolves in water, the other 
>> has no structural integrity. Nylon is hydroscopic 
>> and not all that great at 1.5 GHz. For what ever reason the polycarbonate 
>> that they sell also is a bit hydroscopic. It also is 
>> quite challenging to print unless you have a very fancy printer. 
>> 
>> Certainly not an easy thing to do.
>> 
>> Bob
>> 
>>> On Nov 23, 2016, at 1:05 AM, Nick Sayer via time-nuts  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
 On Nov 22, 2016, at 9:39 PM, Dennis Lloyd  wrote:
 
 Your problem will be Birds and Debris, it is flat and you will have 
 interruptions and phase shifts.
 
 Did you not understand why we use pointed antennas for timing and fixed 
 installations.
>>> 
>>> No, I guess I didn’t.
>>> 
>>> That said, our cats seem to be doing a good job discouraging any birds, and 
>>> I can see the antenna mornings when I go out to the car and there’s been no 
>>> debris problem I’ve been able to detect.
>>> 
>>> If it were required, I’d suspect it would be fairly easy to 3D print a 
>>> pointy hat from radio-transparent plastic.
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> 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] Best replacement for Trimble Bullet antenna

[Nick Sayer via time-nuts]

At work I have access to an industrial one that (I am told) uses lasers to 
harden a liquid... something. I'm not a plastic expert. We use that stuff for 
outdoor enclosures and it is UHF transparent, at least to some degree (it would 
have to be given our use case). I used it once to make a couple of wall mount 
J1772 fake inlets to hold our car charging plugs. Those have survived outdoors 
without any issues. At some point in need to repaint them, as the native color 
is battleship grey, and the white paint is starting to wear off.

If Tupperware made something conical, I'd chose that in a hurry. It may not 
have a great deal of UV staying power, but "microwave safe" implies good RF 
performance. I've used that solution to quickly weatherproof home brew stuff 
before. 

Even if whatever the cap is made of isn't perfectly RF clear, I've certainly 
got S/N margin for some attenuation, even if it isn't uniform. I would posit 
that as long as it's performance doesn't alter over time scales shorter than a 
few minutes that the impact would be immeasurable - certainly compared to the 
ionosphere's.

I probably won't bother, though, as we don't seem to have bird trouble and it 
doesn't snow here in Silicon Valley. If it were an unattended installation, 
that might change things. 


Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 23, 2016, at 5:07 AM, Bob Camp  wrote:
> 
> Hi
> 
> Ummm …. e …. radio transparent plastic. You want to avoid making a 
> lens that distorts the paths over the antenna so it’s not just an issue of 
> transparent. 
> You also want it to be “clear” (non distorting). You need it to be stable in 
> terms of UV,
> humidity and temperature. The guys who made the antenna didn’t have it quite 
> so tough, 
> they could design the cover as part of what determined the pattern of the 
> antenna.  
> 
> The short list of what your low cost printer will handle:
> 
> PLA
> ABS
> PETG
> 
> If it is really low cost, it will only handle the first one. All are a bit of 
> a 
> disaster at 1.5 GHz. PLA likely will not hold up outdoors, let alone do well 
> at RF.
> The other two are poor at RF. 
> 
> The longer list on a higher priced printer:
> 
> Nylon
> Polycarbonate
> HIPS
> Flexable’s 
> 
> The last two are out right from the start. One dissolves in water, the other 
> has no structural integrity. Nylon is hydroscopic 
> and not all that great at 1.5 GHz. For what ever reason the polycarbonate 
> that they sell also is a bit hydroscopic. It also is 
> quite challenging to print unless you have a very fancy printer. 
> 
> Certainly not an easy thing to do.
> 
> Bob
> 
>> On Nov 23, 2016, at 1:05 AM, Nick Sayer via time-nuts  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Nov 22, 2016, at 9:39 PM, Dennis Lloyd  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Your problem will be Birds and Debris, it is flat and you will have 
>>> interruptions and phase shifts.
>>> 
>>> Did you not understand why we use pointed antennas for timing and fixed 
>>> installations.
>> 
>> No, I guess I didn’t.
>> 
>> That said, our cats seem to be doing a good job discouraging any birds, and 
>> I can see the antenna mornings when I go out to the car and there’s been no 
>> debris problem I’ve been able to detect.
>> 
>> If it were required, I’d suspect it would be fairly easy to 3D print a 
>> pointy hat from radio-transparent plastic.
>> 
>> ___
>> 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] How can I measure GPS Antenna quality?

[David J Taylor]

The interpolation does not spread the data to where sats have not 
appeared...  what it effectively does is intelligently make the dots 
bigger...  but only along the azimuth "axis".


For each elevation angle, it starts at azimuth 0 degrees and searches 
forward until it sees a point with signal.  It then searches forward up to 
22.5 degrees looking for the next azimuth point at that elevation that has 
seen signals.  If it finds one, it colors in the arc between those two 
points (providing that the arc lies inside the clipping boundaries which 
prevents spreading the interpolation to areas that have not seen signals). 
As more sky data is collected over time  the space between adjacent azimuth 
points at a given elevation narrows and less "filling in" occurs.


Attached are two gifs,  one of the raw data from 24 hours and the other the 
interpolated data.  Note that areas near the horizon and to the north where 
no sats are seen are not colored.  The interpolation gives an excellent 
representation of your sky coverage.

=

Mark,

This looks to be a most useful and helpful display.  Will the program do the 
same from any serial NMEA source?


Thanks,
David
--
SatSignal Software - Quality software written to your requirements
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
Email: david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk
Twitter: @gm8arv 


___
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] Lady Heather for Z3801A (and other devices)

[paul swed]

Curious if the code for the z3801 was ever released?
Thanks
Paul
WB8TSL

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Bill Riches 
wrote:

> Hi Mark,
>
> Will it work with Z3811 (KS24361)
>
> 73,
>
> Bill, WA2DVU
> Cape May
>
>
> ___
> 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] Inside of FT1200-100

[Bob Camp]

Hi

…. but … you might *build* one of those oscillators.

The Dewar flask OCXO thing died out many decades ago. The main 
reason was size. A secondary reason was the fragile nature of a Dewar 
(they don’t take well to being dropped … I have empirical evidence). 
Neither one of these issues is particularly significant for a Time Nut basement
project. Since they tend to be a bit on the big side, super dense PCB’s are 
not a major advantage building them. The same auction sites that will sell 
you questionable OCXO’s will sell you nice working Dewars as components
for your build.

Bob


> On Nov 23, 2016, at 8:33 AM, paul swed  wrote:
> 
> Chris enjoying the pictures. Most likely I will never run into one of these
> oscillators. But it is nice to know that you have gone "where no man has
> gone before". Star Trek? Not sure.
> Regards
> Paul
> WB8TSL
> 
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 1:45 AM, Christopher Hoover 
> wrote:
> 
>> A Wiha nutdriver set later and I'm in:
>> 
>> https://goo.gl/photos/SDHtvgFmftQq6vYJA
>> 
>> See the last two pictures.
>> 
>> I will disassemble the board stack and work out some schematics next.
>> 
>> Thanks everyone.
>> -ch
>> 73 de AI6KG
>> 
>> On Nov 20, 2016 5:19 AM, "J. L. Trantham"  wrote:
>> 
>> Christopher,
>> 
>> Enjoyed the pictures.
>> 
>> You might want to look at these items on theBay.
>> 
>> 381408412092
>> 
>> 311736541103
>> 
>> I've had the same issue and broke down and bought a set of these small nut
>> drivers.
>> 
>> Good luck.
>> 
>> Joe
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: time-nuts [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On Behalf Of
>> Christopher Hoover
>> Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2016 11:45 PM
>> To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
>> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Inside of FT1200-100
>> 
>> tl;dr: I've made some progress and have the1200  oscillator core out of the
>> dewar:
>> 
>> https://goo.gl/photos/SDHtvgFmftQq6vYJA
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I got some 5 thou brass stock and worked it between the rubber sheet and
>> the dewar.
>> 
>> That seemed to help but it was insufficient free things up -- I busted off
>> the unused solder lug trying to pull the core out with it.
>> 
>> Having not a lot to lose, I took a chance that the screws going into the
>> TO-23 went into threaded holes (rather than being clearance holes with nuts
>> inside).  This was indeed the case.
>> 
>> With two 6-32 threaded rods into the TO-23 threaded holes and and an
>> appropriately machined piece of mild steel bar stock suspended across the
>> case , I was able to easily get
>> the oscillator core out of the dewar by evenly tightening the the nuts on
>> the bar.Really easily -- I might have been able to pull it out by just
>> pulling on the bar stock.  I don't know if the shim stock shenanigans were
>> even needed.
>> 
>> Despite running out the three sloted screws on the "top" around the
>> circumference,  I'm not into the inside yet.   I don't have the  right
>> thin-walled socket to remove the nuts at the opposite end.
>> 
>> I found an epoxy covered hole on the top.   It is/was under the green blob
>> midway between 1 and 2 o'clock in this picture here <
>> https://goo.gl/photos/
>> iHbSbqwBiKD7NRfJ6>..  There was something blue and
>> at this point crumbly underneath it.   Not sure yet what, if anything, is
>> beyond all of that.  I'm hoping for a trimmer cap.  :-)
>> 
>> -- Christopher.
>> 73 de AI6KG
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:24 PM, Chuck Harris  wrote:
>> 
>>> Back when I was going to work on mine, I was thinking of prying the
>>> rubber away from the aluminum oven with something like a feeler gauge,
>>> but also using some naptha (lighter fluid) to help release any
>>> adhesive...  I didn't get around to doing it, but that was the way I
>>> was going to progress.
>>> 
>>> -Chuck Harris
>>> 
>>> Ed Palmer wrote:
 
 
 On 2016-09-26 10:00 AM, Christopher Hoover  wrote:
>>> 
>>> You might be able to slide something like a feeler guage down
>>> between
>>> the
>>> oven and the rubber blanket to break the oscillator free.  The
>>> oven
>>> on mine
>>> is a plain metal cylinder.  This way, the rubber sheet should
>>> protect
>>> the
>>> Dewar from your feeler guage.  On mine, the mounting bolts for
>>> the
>>> 2N3792
>>> transistor both have ground lugs.  I think I see them on yours.
>>> You
>>> could
>>> hook something through the ground lugs and use that to pull the
>>> oscillator
>>> out of the rubber sheet and then remove the sheet later.
>>> 
> Thanks Ed,
> 
> I think the rubber sheet on mine is against metal.  I haven't yet
> seen
>>> the
> glass dewar.
> 
> The adhesion is huge.
> 
> Do you know if the holes opposite the 2N3792 are threaded?   If they
>>> are, I
> might try running the screws out and 

Re: [time-nuts] Need for a document comparing time interval counters

[Bob Camp]

Hi

In a market that only *has* two competitors doing new gear and each only has a 
single high end
counter …. there’s not a lot to talk about. At this point it’s not really clear 
if the Pendulum designs 
have a future at all. That would get you down to one still doing new designs. 

Sorting out surplus will always be a matter of “the new one is better” (as long 
as it’s higher priced). 

Bob

> On Nov 23, 2016, at 5:47 AM, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) 
>  wrote:
> 
> On 21 November 2016 at 21:10, Bob Camp  wrote:
> 
>> Hi
>> 
>> With both counters running on the same external standard (and no internal
>> OCXO), the 53230
>> beats the 53132 both on frequency and time. It also has slightly better
>> isolation of the 10 MHz
>> internals so the “dead zone” at 10 MHz is not quite as bad. I have no idea
>> how either one
>> works with the OCXO option … I’ve never seen either one with an OCXO.
>> 
>> Bob
>> 
> 
> This sort of information is useful. Perhaps a Wiki is the best document,
> where people can put comments like this. I don't have a Wiki set up myself,
> but I'd guess the sort of information one would want would be:
> 
> * Description
> Described what a TI counter is
> 
> * Uses
> No doubt with an emphasis on time nuts uses, but I don't see any need to
> restrict it just to that. (I did consider using one of mine to record the
> speed of the traffic near my house!)
> 
> * Understanding the specifications and their importance.
> Lots of them.
> 
> * Items to be considered when purchasing new vs used.
> 
> * Description of model X
> Include any options that are available for model X.
> Also any known issues - e.g. for both the SR620 and 8970B, they do in my
> experience run quite warm.
> 
> * Description of model Y
> * Description of model Z
> 
> Table comparing specifications between all models
> 
> * Models worth considering if your budget is < $250
> * Models worth considering if your budget is < $500
> * Models worth considering if your budget is < $1000
> * Models worth considering if your budget is < $2000
> * Models worth considering if you budget is unlimited.
> 
> * Conclusions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dave
> ___
> 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] Inside of FT1200-100

[paul swed]

Chris enjoying the pictures. Most likely I will never run into one of these
oscillators. But it is nice to know that you have gone "where no man has
gone before". Star Trek? Not sure.
Regards
Paul
WB8TSL

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 1:45 AM, Christopher Hoover 
wrote:

> A Wiha nutdriver set later and I'm in:
>
> https://goo.gl/photos/SDHtvgFmftQq6vYJA
>
> See the last two pictures.
>
> I will disassemble the board stack and work out some schematics next.
>
> Thanks everyone.
> -ch
> 73 de AI6KG
>
> On Nov 20, 2016 5:19 AM, "J. L. Trantham"  wrote:
>
> Christopher,
>
> Enjoyed the pictures.
>
> You might want to look at these items on theBay.
>
> 381408412092
>
> 311736541103
>
> I've had the same issue and broke down and bought a set of these small nut
> drivers.
>
> Good luck.
>
> Joe
>
> -Original Message-
> From: time-nuts [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On Behalf Of
> Christopher Hoover
> Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2016 11:45 PM
> To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Inside of FT1200-100
>
> tl;dr: I've made some progress and have the1200  oscillator core out of the
> dewar:
>
> https://goo.gl/photos/SDHtvgFmftQq6vYJA
>
>
>
> I got some 5 thou brass stock and worked it between the rubber sheet and
> the dewar.
>
> That seemed to help but it was insufficient free things up -- I busted off
> the unused solder lug trying to pull the core out with it.
>
> Having not a lot to lose, I took a chance that the screws going into the
> TO-23 went into threaded holes (rather than being clearance holes with nuts
> inside).  This was indeed the case.
>
> With two 6-32 threaded rods into the TO-23 threaded holes and and an
> appropriately machined piece of mild steel bar stock suspended across the
> case , I was able to easily get
> the oscillator core out of the dewar by evenly tightening the the nuts on
> the bar.Really easily -- I might have been able to pull it out by just
> pulling on the bar stock.  I don't know if the shim stock shenanigans were
> even needed.
>
> Despite running out the three sloted screws on the "top" around the
> circumference,  I'm not into the inside yet.   I don't have the  right
> thin-walled socket to remove the nuts at the opposite end.
>
> I found an epoxy covered hole on the top.   It is/was under the green blob
> midway between 1 and 2 o'clock in this picture here <
> https://goo.gl/photos/
> iHbSbqwBiKD7NRfJ6>..  There was something blue and
> at this point crumbly underneath it.   Not sure yet what, if anything, is
> beyond all of that.  I'm hoping for a trimmer cap.  :-)
>
> -- Christopher.
> 73 de AI6KG
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:24 PM, Chuck Harris  wrote:
>
> > Back when I was going to work on mine, I was thinking of prying the
> > rubber away from the aluminum oven with something like a feeler gauge,
> > but also using some naptha (lighter fluid) to help release any
> > adhesive...  I didn't get around to doing it, but that was the way I
> > was going to progress.
> >
> > -Chuck Harris
> >
> > Ed Palmer wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2016-09-26 10:00 AM, Christopher Hoover  wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> >You might be able to slide something like a feeler guage down
> > >>> >between
> > the
> > >>> >oven and the rubber blanket to break the oscillator free.  The
> > >>> >oven
> > on mine
> > >>> >is a plain metal cylinder.  This way, the rubber sheet should
> > >>> >protect
> > the
> > >>> >Dewar from your feeler guage.  On mine, the mounting bolts for
> > >>> >the
> > 2N3792
> > >>> >transistor both have ground lugs.  I think I see them on yours.
> > >>> >You
> > could
> > >>> >hook something through the ground lugs and use that to pull the
> > oscillator
> > >>> >out of the rubber sheet and then remove the sheet later.
> > >>> >
> > >> Thanks Ed,
> > >>
> > >> I think the rubber sheet on mine is against metal.  I haven't yet
> > >> seen
> > the
> > >> glass dewar.
> > >>
> > >> The adhesion is huge.
> > >>
> > >> Do you know if the holes opposite the 2N3792 are threaded?   If they
> > are, I
> > >> might try running the screws out and using those holes with longer
> > screws
> > >> as my pull points.I can't pull on the lugs hard enough -- I've
> > tried.
> > >>
> > >> -christopher.
> > >> 73 de AI6KG
> > >
> > > Yes, you have seen the Dewar.  The silvery ring that's outside the
> > rubber is the top
> > > of the Dewar.  What you have to do is unstick and unfold the rubber
> > starting from the
> > > open area in the center.  Work your way outward.  The rubber is only
> > > 2
> > or 3 mm
> > > thick.  Once you completely clear the rubber out of the way, you'll
> > > see
> > the edge of
> > > the oven.  The TO-3 transistor is mounted on top of the oven assembly.
> > Once you can
> > > see the edge, you have to slide something like a long feeler gauge
> > > down
> > along the
> > > edge of the 

Re: [time-nuts] Best replacement for Trimble Bullet antenna

[Bob Camp]

Hi

Ummm …. e …. radio transparent plastic. You want to avoid making a 
lens that distorts the paths over the antenna so it’s not just an issue of 
transparent. 
You also want it to be “clear” (non distorting). You need it to be stable in 
terms of UV,
humidity and temperature. The guys who made the antenna didn’t have it quite so 
tough, 
they could design the cover as part of what determined the pattern of the 
antenna.  

The short list of what your low cost printer will handle:

PLA
ABS
PETG

If it is really low cost, it will only handle the first one. All are a bit of a 
disaster at 1.5 GHz. PLA likely will not hold up outdoors, let alone do well at 
RF.
The other two are poor at RF. 

The longer list on a higher priced printer:

Nylon
Polycarbonate
HIPS
Flexable’s 

The last two are out right from the start. One dissolves in water, the other 
has no structural integrity. Nylon is hydroscopic 
and not all that great at 1.5 GHz. For what ever reason the polycarbonate that 
they sell also is a bit hydroscopic. It also is 
quite challenging to print unless you have a very fancy printer. 

Certainly not an easy thing to do.

Bob

> On Nov 23, 2016, at 1:05 AM, Nick Sayer via time-nuts  
> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Nov 22, 2016, at 9:39 PM, Dennis Lloyd  wrote:
>> 
>> Your problem will be Birds and Debris, it is flat and you will have 
>> interruptions and phase shifts.
>> 
>> Did you not understand why we use pointed antennas for timing and fixed 
>> installations.
> 
> No, I guess I didn’t.
> 
> That said, our cats seem to be doing a good job discouraging any birds, and I 
> can see the antenna mornings when I go out to the car and there’s been no 
> debris problem I’ve been able to detect.
> 
> If it were required, I’d suspect it would be fairly easy to 3D print a pointy 
> hat from radio-transparent plastic.
> 
> ___
> 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] Need for a document comparing time interval counters

[Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd)]

On 21 November 2016 at 21:10, Bob Camp  wrote:

> Hi
>
> With both counters running on the same external standard (and no internal
> OCXO), the 53230
> beats the 53132 both on frequency and time. It also has slightly better
> isolation of the 10 MHz
> internals so the “dead zone” at 10 MHz is not quite as bad. I have no idea
> how either one
> works with the OCXO option … I’ve never seen either one with an OCXO.
>
> Bob
>

This sort of information is useful. Perhaps a Wiki is the best document,
where people can put comments like this. I don't have a Wiki set up myself,
but I'd guess the sort of information one would want would be:

* Description
Described what a TI counter is

* Uses
No doubt with an emphasis on time nuts uses, but I don't see any need to
restrict it just to that. (I did consider using one of mine to record the
speed of the traffic near my house!)

* Understanding the specifications and their importance.
Lots of them.

* Items to be considered when purchasing new vs used.

* Description of model X
Include any options that are available for model X.
Also any known issues - e.g. for both the SR620 and 8970B, they do in my
experience run quite warm.

* Description of model Y
* Description of model Z

Table comparing specifications between all models

* Models worth considering if your budget is < $250
* Models worth considering if your budget is < $500
* Models worth considering if your budget is < $1000
* Models worth considering if your budget is < $2000
* Models worth considering if you budget is unlimited.

* Conclusions.




Dave
___
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] How can I measure GPS Antenna quality?

[Christopher Hoover]

> I'd like to try something like a Voronoi tessellation,  but that gets
rather nasty to implement..

There's a boost library...
___
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] How can I measure GPS Antenna quality?

[Mark Sims]

The interpolation does not spread the data to where sats have not appeared...  
what it effectively does is intelligently make the dots bigger...  but only 
along the azimuth "axis".   

For each elevation angle, it starts at azimuth 0 degrees and searches forward 
until it sees a point with signal.  It then searches forward up to 22.5 degrees 
looking for the next azimuth point at that elevation that has seen signals.  If 
it finds one, it colors in the arc between those two points (providing that the 
arc lies inside the clipping boundaries which prevents spreading the 
interpolation to areas that have not seen signals).  As more sky data is 
collected over time  the space between adjacent azimuth points at a given 
elevation narrows and less "filling in" occurs.

Attached are two gifs,  one of the raw data from 24 hours and the other the 
interpolated data.  Note that areas near the horizon and to the north where no 
sats are seen are not colored.  The interpolation gives an excellent 
representation of your sky coverage.




It is unclear to me that interpolating the data 
to areas of the sky where satellites never appear has any utility.

I suppose it makes trends somewhat easier to spot -- but that could also 
be done just by making the dots on the raw chart a bit larger, without 
suggesting a continuity of reception-space that doesn't exist.___
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] Galileo launch (Fwd: [Nagu] NAGU 2016050)

[Magnus Danielson]

They launched the set of 4 Galileo satellites.

Cheers,
Magnus


 Forwarded Message 
Subject: [Nagu] NAGU 2016050
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 09:33:03 +0100
From: att...@kinali.ch
Reply-To: Distributor for Galileo NAGU in readable form 


To: n...@lists.kinali.ch

NOTICE ADVISORY TO GALILEO USERS (NAGU) 2016050
DATE GENERATED (UTC): 2016-11-22 08:20

NAGU TYPE:  GENERAL
NAGU NUMBER:2016050
NAGU SUBJECT:   LAUNCH OF GSAT0207, GSAT0212, GSAT0213 AND GSAT0214
NAGU REFERENCED TO: N/A
START DATE EVENT (UTC): 2016-11-17 13:06
END DATE EVENT (UTC):   N/A
SATELLITE AFFECTED: GSAT0207, GSAT0212, GSAT0213, GSAT0214

EVENT DESCRIPTION:	GALILEO SATELLITES GSAT0207 (SVID 07), GSAT0212 (SVID 
03), GSAT0213 (SVID 04) AND GSAT0214 (SVID 05) WERE LAUNCHED ON 
2016-11-17 AT 13:06 UTC.  GSAT0207, GSAT0212, GSAT0213 AND GSAT0214 ARE 
PLANNED TO BE POSITIONED IN SLOTS C06, C08, C03 AND C01 OF THE 
CONSTELLATION.  USERS WILL BE ADVISED OF AVAILABILITY OF SIGNALS 
FOLLOWING COMPLETION OF COMMISSIONING ACTIVITIES.

___
Nagu mailing list
n...@lists.kinali.ch
http://lists.kinali.ch/mailman/listinfo/nagu
___
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] Inside of FT1200-100

[Christopher Hoover]

A Wiha nutdriver set later and I'm in:

https://goo.gl/photos/SDHtvgFmftQq6vYJA

See the last two pictures.

I will disassemble the board stack and work out some schematics next.

Thanks everyone.
-ch
73 de AI6KG

On Nov 20, 2016 5:19 AM, "J. L. Trantham"  wrote:

Christopher,

Enjoyed the pictures.

You might want to look at these items on theBay.

381408412092

311736541103

I've had the same issue and broke down and bought a set of these small nut
drivers.

Good luck.

Joe

-Original Message-
From: time-nuts [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On Behalf Of
Christopher Hoover
Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2016 11:45 PM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Inside of FT1200-100

tl;dr: I've made some progress and have the1200  oscillator core out of the
dewar:

https://goo.gl/photos/SDHtvgFmftQq6vYJA



I got some 5 thou brass stock and worked it between the rubber sheet and
the dewar.

That seemed to help but it was insufficient free things up -- I busted off
the unused solder lug trying to pull the core out with it.

Having not a lot to lose, I took a chance that the screws going into the
TO-23 went into threaded holes (rather than being clearance holes with nuts
inside).  This was indeed the case.

With two 6-32 threaded rods into the TO-23 threaded holes and and an
appropriately machined piece of mild steel bar stock suspended across the
case , I was able to easily get
the oscillator core out of the dewar by evenly tightening the the nuts on
the bar.Really easily -- I might have been able to pull it out by just
pulling on the bar stock.  I don't know if the shim stock shenanigans were
even needed.

Despite running out the three sloted screws on the "top" around the
circumference,  I'm not into the inside yet.   I don't have the  right
thin-walled socket to remove the nuts at the opposite end.

I found an epoxy covered hole on the top.   It is/was under the green blob
midway between 1 and 2 o'clock in this picture here ..  There was something blue and
at this point crumbly underneath it.   Not sure yet what, if anything, is
beyond all of that.  I'm hoping for a trimmer cap.  :-)

-- Christopher.
73 de AI6KG




On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:24 PM, Chuck Harris  wrote:

> Back when I was going to work on mine, I was thinking of prying the
> rubber away from the aluminum oven with something like a feeler gauge,
> but also using some naptha (lighter fluid) to help release any
> adhesive...  I didn't get around to doing it, but that was the way I
> was going to progress.
>
> -Chuck Harris
>
> Ed Palmer wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2016-09-26 10:00 AM, Christopher Hoover  wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >You might be able to slide something like a feeler guage down
> >>> >between
> the
> >>> >oven and the rubber blanket to break the oscillator free.  The
> >>> >oven
> on mine
> >>> >is a plain metal cylinder.  This way, the rubber sheet should
> >>> >protect
> the
> >>> >Dewar from your feeler guage.  On mine, the mounting bolts for
> >>> >the
> 2N3792
> >>> >transistor both have ground lugs.  I think I see them on yours.
> >>> >You
> could
> >>> >hook something through the ground lugs and use that to pull the
> oscillator
> >>> >out of the rubber sheet and then remove the sheet later.
> >>> >
> >> Thanks Ed,
> >>
> >> I think the rubber sheet on mine is against metal.  I haven't yet
> >> seen
> the
> >> glass dewar.
> >>
> >> The adhesion is huge.
> >>
> >> Do you know if the holes opposite the 2N3792 are threaded?   If they
> are, I
> >> might try running the screws out and using those holes with longer
> screws
> >> as my pull points.I can't pull on the lugs hard enough -- I've
> tried.
> >>
> >> -christopher.
> >> 73 de AI6KG
> >
> > Yes, you have seen the Dewar.  The silvery ring that's outside the
> rubber is the top
> > of the Dewar.  What you have to do is unstick and unfold the rubber
> starting from the
> > open area in the center.  Work your way outward.  The rubber is only
> > 2
> or 3 mm
> > thick.  Once you completely clear the rubber out of the way, you'll
> > see
> the edge of
> > the oven.  The TO-3 transistor is mounted on top of the oven assembly.
> Once you can
> > see the edge, you have to slide something like a long feeler gauge
> > down
> along the
> > edge of the oven to break it free from the rubber.  Work your way
> > all
> around the
> > oven.  It's about 85 mm long.  It'll still be stuck on the bottom,
> > but
> you might be
> > able to pull it free.
> >
> > When I took mine apart, I ended up tearing off all the rubber at the
> > top
> and then
> > cutting out that ring of hard foam to get at the Dewar so I could
> > smash
> it more.  I'm
> > guessing you'd rather not do that! :)  But sacrificing the rubber on
> > the
> top might be
> > okay, if you have to.
> >
> > Sorry, but I don't know if the mounting 

Re: [time-nuts] Best replacement for Trimble Bullet antenna

[Nick Sayer via time-nuts]

> On Nov 22, 2016, at 9:39 PM, Dennis Lloyd  wrote:
> 
> Your problem will be Birds and Debris, it is flat and you will have 
> interruptions and phase shifts.
> 
> Did you not understand why we use pointed antennas for timing and fixed 
> installations.

No, I guess I didn’t.

That said, our cats seem to be doing a good job discouraging any birds, and I 
can see the antenna mornings when I go out to the car and there’s been no 
debris problem I’ve been able to detect.

If it were required, I’d suspect it would be fairly easy to 3D print a pointy 
hat from radio-transparent plastic.

___
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.