Re: [time-nuts] Rack needed in SF Bay Area

[Lincoln]

There is also Halted off of central expressway


> On Jun 3, 2017, at 8:32 PM, Jerry Hancock  wrote:
> 
> Anyone in the SF bay area have a rack that is surplus to your needs?  
> 
> Please reply to cl...@hanler.com
> 
> thanks 
> 
> Jerry
> ___
> 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] The future of Telecom Frequency Standard surplus

[Lincoln]

> On May 31, 2017, at 7:07 PM, Bob kb8tq  wrote:
> 
> Many systems are indeed going to much tighter holdover numbers. That is 
> requiring either a much better OCXO or an Rb as a holdover 


So sync limits are going down. 4G-TDD has a node to node limit of 3µs / node to 
UTC of 1.5µs. 5g is looking at ± 500 / 400 ns node to node but hasn’t really 
been deployed on a large scale that I know of. I don’t know that much about the 
workings of 5G to comment. 

The density of traffic (think how many cell phones would be in a mall or a 
stadium event. ) are requiring more nodes but that cover small geographic area. 

This is providing economic motivations to separate the eNode B (cell radio) in 
to two units. The analog radio and ADC / DAC into a head unit that gets mounted 
on a pole ( RRH ) and then a base band unit (BBU) that will take the radio I/Q 
data streams and process them into network traffic. The BBU can process the 
data form a number of RRHs, The sync between these to units needs to be very 
tight, MTIE of ± 100ns is so far the leading contender for MTIE limit. This is 
called the CRAN model. 

There are a couple of different factions that champion how to achieve this in 
the industry. Some say PTP and the use of transparent switches. Others say the 
use of syncE to transfer frequency with PTP on top to transfer time. Others 
champion non ethernet solutions.  

Another thing that is affecting deployment  is the cost of deploying GPS 
antennas. An average for one carrier in Asia was about 12000 USD to instal an 
antenna and maintain it for three years. In there network they would see 9~10% 
of the nodes serviced by GNSS would have some fault directly relating to the 
GNSS cable / Antenna.  They are using PTP / IEEE 1588 as a way to distribute 
sync. 

The old way of doing things was to have 3 / 4 good clocks in the core of the 
network (Cs) and the sync flows out to the edge. ITU G.8261 has test cases that 
are to simulate 10 hops between the master / slave. Yes, 8261 is really for 
frequency but the test cases are also used of phase because it is what we have. 
  Now most operators are interested in putting smaller masters at the edge. 
Rather than serving 1000’s of clients, serve less than 100, maybe a low as 16. 
The edge master will have a local GPS reference but will also use PTP / syncE / 
BITS as a backup to when GPS fails.  If all sources fail we are seeing hold 
overs in the 4~8 hours. 

Keep in mind a carrier will have a huge number of clocks. I visited a cell 
operator in Asia that had over 1e6 clocks in there network. The size of the 
networks are staggering. 

So what dose this mean? Carers do not want to deploy Rb, are looking at other 
tecnologies to extend the stability of OCXOs and TCXOs.  I don’t know how far 
out 5G service is. Its not 100 % clear to me how the deployments will actually 
happen, depend if the base station MFGs will get CRAN up and running. We should 
have surplus Rb etc up until G5 is fully deployed. 10~15 years after that it 
will be OCXO and other switching equipment, that will probably be up to the 
community to support. 





___
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] Bay Area Maker Faire '17

[Lincoln]

I will be going, likely tomorrow…

> On May 12, 2017, at 7:46 AM, Nick Sayer via time-nuts  
> wrote:
> 
> Anybody else going to Bay Area Maker Faire next weekend? I’ll have a booth 
> there (heavy on clocks and GPS) and would love to meet anyone going.
> ___
> 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] Machining some aluminum help!

[Lincoln]

> 
> There are a lot of variables involved. Run the screws in and out of the 
> aluminum a number of times and 
> the holes will fail first ….There are other gotchas as well.
> 
> Bob
> 

This is where helicoils come in to play. They are used a lot on the CVD 
furnaces that I used to make parts for. They are not just for un-buggering a 
thread. They would be installed form the get go and could be replaced should 
something gall. 

Link
___
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] Machining some aluminum help!

[Lincoln]

I agree, tapping that depth in aluminum is just asking to gall the threads. If 
you have a decent alloy (6061 7075) you only need 1/8” to hold what ever is 
save to hold with a #4. If you need more strength then it would be best to use 
helicoil inserts. 

Where are you located? There are a number of hacker spaces across the country / 
globe. If you are in the US, there is also "The Tech Shop”. If you are in the 
SF Bay Area I would take a look.

Link


> On May 18, 2017, at 11:16 AM, Tim Shoppa  wrote:
> 
> I'm very dubious that you need a tapped 4-40 hole to be threaded any deeper
> than 0.25". If you work with the machinist I'm sure you can come up with
> some reasonable spec that does not require a bottoming tap and will save
> you a lot of money.
> 
> I bet you went to 0.25" wall square tubing only because you want to tap the
> walls for 4-40. Alternative designs can let you use much thinner material
> and a very different flange on the ends, but the costs will likely move
> towards welding/brazing rather than machining.
> 
> Tim N3QE
> 
> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 12:54 PM,  wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I have a square aluminum tube 5" X 5" with a .25" wall it's 8 1/2" long.
>> 
>> I need 20 holes in each end tapped for 4/40 and 1/2" deep.
>> 
>> This is for a Rubidium project.
>> 
>> The local machine shop want's $360.00
>> 
>> Anyone have a machining setup that could do the work a bit cheaper?
>> 
>> If not I'll give it a try myself.
>> 
>> Please contact me off list.
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> 
>> Corby Dawson
>> 
>> ___
>> 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] M12+t breakout board, ITU G.8271

[Lincoln]

Hello,
I know that breakout boards for Motorola M12 have been done to death 
But…. I am doing a one that fits my needs. Primary to add a 1PPS + TOD as 
defined by ITU G.8271 Since most of the equipment I am working with has this as 
a standard interface. My plan is to have a AVR to do the protocal conversion as 
well as provide a USB management interface. 

Is there any interest form the group?

Thank you 
Lincoln
___
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] SR620: odd measurements when in remote control

[lincoln]

Hello, 
I have an SR620 that i am trying to get some more life out of. I have 
dedicated a raspberry pi 2 to recode data and make the files available through 
the network. I wrote a small c deamond that will setup the counter to make 
frequency measurements and  save the result to a file on the flash card. 

Overall it is basically working but on start up i have an odd behavior. 

My file format is a "two column " file, column 1 is elapsed system time in 
seconds,  and column 2 is the measurement returned by the counter.  When the 
program starts I get 2 to 5 measurements that are wrong. A number of 
measurement are returned in the first second, 

How I setup the counter: 
// get id of counter, if it is not an sr620, exit with error;
fprintf(stream,"*RST\n");  // system reset
sleep(10);
fprintf(stream,"CLCK 1\n"); // external timebase
fprintf(stream,"AUTM 0\n"); // automatic masurment off
fprintf(stream,"MODE 3\n"); // mesure freqency
fprintf(stream,"GATE1 E1\n"); // set for 10 second gate
fprintf(stream,"SIZE 1\n");// 1 sample per mesurment
fprintf(stream,"TERM 1, 0\n"); // 50 ohm termination for 
channel "A"
fprintf(stream,"LEVL 1, 0\n"); // trigger level 0.00
fprintf(stream,"TCPL 1, 1\n"); // AC coupling, channel A
sleep(4);
// pause for a bit

loop until quite {
fprintf(stream,"STRT;*WAI;XAVG?\n"); // start 
measurement, wait till complete, 
while ((bytesread = getline(from serial port stream) != 
-1) { // will block until full line 
if (bytesread >10) break;
}
// write data to file,
}

// close serial port
// close data file


example output:

#type=Freq
#start_date=1482003092 
#f_nom=2e+7
0, 1.99881895E+07
0, 1.99881912E+07
0, 1.99881757E+07
7, 1.99881856E+07
17, 1.99881878E+07
27, 1.99881900E+07
37, 1.99881877E+07
47, 1.99881908E+07
57, 1.99881921E+07

What do you think?

Link

___
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] Holdover

[lincoln]

Hello Bob,
At work we make internet clock that are governed by a number of ITU and 
IEEE standards. As others have stated correctly, there is no standard. There 
are a number of behaviors that can be configured depending on application.

1. Always a PPS out, TOD string carries a valid or "do not use" flag - 
default, actually used about 1/3 of the time
2. Output only when clock is "synced" , That is  the error is small and 
the slope of the changes made is small, for at least 4 observational windows. 
3. Like number 2 but adds the notion of Holdover. That is when sync is 
broken, if you had been synced for "enough" time, keep output if you hold over 
counter has not expired. 

Now what to do when your source is re-established..
If the offset is large, or if the PPS has been squelched, or the 
reference source has changed, jam the 1pps, and steer from there. 
If the offset is small, ( some µs, ) steer the 1pps , with the max rate 
of steering set by how much we can screw up the frequency, default is 10 ppb  

Loop bandwidth is set by the source, PTP / IEEE 1588 sources bandwidth 
can be as narrow as  1~3 mHz , GNSS has much wider bandwidth, 

All of the clock class mappings, limits and thresholds are configurable 
at some level.  

Link



On Aug 15, 2016, at 21:35 , Bob Stewart  wrote:

> It's been pointed out to me that I didn't understand the function of the 1PPS 
> of a time standard.  I confess that somehow I had confused the term to be 
> timing standard; which would be an entirely different thing.  But, this is 
> time-nuts, so I should have realized...
> Anyway, is there a standard, or at least an accepted practice, for how 
> holdover is handled in a time standard?  Not "how it's done", as in 
> algorithms, but what is expected by the user.  I can see at least 2 ways: 
> time warping (which would be especially bad if the time standard had gotten 
> ahead in time) and nudging back to the correct time.  The case of warping is 
> obvious.  But, are there other methods, and is there some standard for how 
> quickly the time output of the time standard, and of course the 1PPS pulse, 
> is nudged back to the correct time?
> Bob - AE6RV
> -
> AE6RV.com
> 
> GFS GPSDO list:
> groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/GFS-GPSDOs/info
> ___
> 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] PTP Grandmaster Clock using Macro Sniffing

[lincoln]

Hello,
   First full disclosure, I work for a PTP vendor. 
   A master is not that difficult. The protocol is well defined and there are a 
few open source stacks available. More and more PHYs have time stamping built 
in though each manufacturer has their own method for getting time stamps out of 
the PHY. Time stamping also can be done in the the ethernet MAC as well with a 
small FPGA. this is what we do. 

The hard part, even for large companies, is getting a good slave servo.  From 
an operator stand point just sync is not the goal, it is to pass traffic.  The 
loading of a carriers network can be quite large and the networks are big, 
staggeringly big.  China Unicom has over 1M clocks in their network. Now they 
have full on path support (transparent switches) and gateway clocks (node with 
GNSS as primary ref with PTP as backup) To see what kind of packet delay 
variation (PDV) slaves must cope with look at ITU G.8261 test case 12 through 
17.  Thees test cases try to put together to see what the worst PDV is for a 10 
switch between master and slave telco network. While G.8261 is specifically for 
transfer of frequency it has become the defacto test suite, common phase limits 
for 3g would be 1.5 us, lte 5g tdd is around 400 to 500 ns.

Now how good dose you slave have to be? If your slave will not see, say 80% 
load, or packet re-routing (floor jumps),  or have to cope with more than a few 
small switches, a relatively simple servo with a time constant of 100 to 300 
seconds will work fine and get you +- 100 ns across a number of nodes. 

Link
   
On Mar 23, 2016, at 12:36 PM, Vlad  wrote:

> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Today I woke up with an idea to search the resources about PTP Grandmaster 
> Clock building.
> 
> However, its appeared, only commercial solutions is available now. Its pretty 
> common to see several NTP implementation using various HW (GPS is most 
> frequent now)
> But almost no "home-brew" projects for PTP GrandMaster clocks. I would assume 
> its too complex or just "geek toy" which has no sense to build.
> 
> Also, I am interesting if anybody tried  Macro Sniffing (sensing and slaving 
> to external macrocell broadcasts) for the time synchronization.
> 
> 
> -- 
> WBW,
> 
> V.P.
> ___
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

___
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] hp 5061b replacement tube

[lincoln]

Hello,
I'm guessing I all ready know the answer to this but:
A friend gave me a hp 5061b but in need a tube. Symmetricom was listing the 
price of a replacement at 35k before the go bought out by Microsemi. Given 
Microsemi has a tendency to rebrand equipment and then charge 4x the price, an 
official tube is likely a way non starter. Friend seemed to think there were 
other sources for tubes, but I am rather pessimistic.

What do you think? Is this thing junk? I would hate to scrap it. Maybe 
use it to house a GPSDO. 

Link 

On Jun 12, 2015, at 6:55 AM, Cube Central cubecent...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi Max!  Thanks for the information, I was wondering if you had documented 
 what you did to your Raspberry Pi so that it might be reproducible to someone 
 like me (a newcomer time-nut and intermediate Linux user) ... you had said:
 
 Here is what I have been able to do with a Motorola Oncore UT+ that I got 
 from Bob Stewart awhile back.  This is with a Raspberry PI 2 with a number 
 of tweaks and a custom compiled kernel.  Nothing too drastic... plus the 
 current Dev version of NTP compile on the Raspberry PI.
 
 What tweaks?  What options have you compiled?  What are the gritty details of 
 your setup?
 
 I'm getting better results letting ntpd discipline the clock over doing 
 kernel discipline...
 not surprising because the algorithms in the ntpd code are much more 
 sophisticated than the Linux kernel pps code... ntpd discipline provides much 
 lower jitter in my experience.
 
 what setting is this and how might I go about experimenting with it?  Is that 
 the flag3 option in the Generic NMEA GPS Receiver documented here?  
 https://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/ntp/html/drivers/driver20.html
 
 snip
 
 Not too shabby for a killer deal on an Oncore UT+ for $5 from Bob!  I'm 
 running the PPS out of the UT+ through a level converter to get the ~3.3v 
 PPS output... the serial output on the UT+ is also going through a level 
 converter direct into the Pi 2.  Using the oncore 127.127.30.0 ntpd driver 
 and again, i'm not using hardpps kernel discipline.
 
 I see word HARDPPS in the driver you mentioned 
 (https://www.eecis.udel.edu/~mills/ntp/html/drivers/driver30.html ) but that 
 documentation is a bit scarce... Could you fill me in on how you have it set 
 up?  Is the PPSAPI also used for the Generic NMEA GPS Receiver (driver 20) 
 or the PPS driver (driver 22)?
 
 Thanks so much for your assistance!  Sorry if these questions have been 
 posted before, but I am very curious about your setup as it nearly matches 
 mine!
 
-Randal r3 of CubeCentral
 
 
 
 ___
 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] Using CPLD/FPGA or similar for frequency

[lincoln]

Hello
 It also depends  on which device primitives you can use.  Xilinx spartan 
series has an SRL16, 16 bit shift register that can be ganged to form dividers 
/ pre scalers. It only takes up one lut or slice, I forget which.

Link

On Jun 11, 2015, at 4:11 AM, Bob Camp kb...@n1k.org wrote:

 Hi
 
 Depending on which chip you are using and how big it is, you can get into the 
 150 to
 500 ps range running a carry chain as a TDC.That’s without getting into 
 things like
 hand routing and temperature / voltage issues. 
 
 How big a chip you need will be a function of how high you can get the 
 internal PLL
 to run while packing a bunch of stuff in the chip. If you can hit 400 MHz, 
 each carry 
 chain will need to handle a bit more than 2.5 ns, but probably less than 5 
 ns. You 
 can do that with a carry chain a few hundred bits long. 
 
 There is a bit of handwaving already so this is indeed a guess rather than a 
 design. 
 If you run 320 bit chains and 8 inputs, you will need 2.5K registers for the 
 carry chains. 
 You also will need about 200 registers for the support of each chain, so that 
 adds another
 1.6K registers. Something in the 5K register range is a possible way to go 
 for 8 inputs.
 
 Bob
 
 On Jun 11, 2015, at 2:04 AM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com wrote:
 
 On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Alan Ambrose alan.ambr...@anagram.net 
 wrote:
 How about a 1pS resolution TIC? :)
 
 Or a 12 digit frequency counter? :) :)
 
 It's not a proper time-nut project unless there's a nutty element...
 
 Well, how complex? Front end with a fast ADC and make a DSP DMTD device?
 
 In terms of simpler things that (AFAIK) one can't go out and buy:  a
 TIC with 4 or 8 inputs would be an interesting piece of time nut
 gear.even if it was 'just' 1ns resolution
 
 Surplus lab TICs are easily had but become quite a pile of equipment
 when you want to concurrently measure a half dozen oscillators.
 ___
 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] Small time server for mobile use.

[lincoln]

Might look at this: 

http://qulsar.com/Products/Managed_Timing_Engines/MTE_Board_P6X.html

It has PTP, sNTP, comes with a TCXO, OCXO as an option or bring your own 
oscillator through the 40 pin connector. 

Link
On May 12, 2015, at 10:11 AM, Mark Spencer m...@alignedsolutions.com wrote:

 Hi sorry for a possibly OT post.   
 Has anyone had practical experience with small commercially available time 
 servers / ntp servers suitable for mobile  use in a vehicle.  
 
 The use case is I am in need of an accurate (ie.  within 100 ms) time source 
 for several pc's in moving vehicle.Being able to run directly off a 13.8 
 or 28 VDC  source would be a major plus but AC power is also available.
 
 Hold over if there are gaps in GPS coverage is also a major plus.
 
 We already have a GPS with a 1 pps output, but an integrated box with it's 
 own GPS would be best.
 
 Yes I am aware I could feed a 1 pps signal into a laptop and use that as a 
 time server and I may end up going that route.
 
 There is a small Ethernet LAN in the vehicle.  The pc's currently get their 
 time via a wireless connection to various NTP servers.   I need to be able to 
 ensure accurate time on the PC's if there is no wireless coverage.
 
 
 This is for a one off project so piecing together various parts is an option 
 but a single box COTS solution would be nice.  I've found a few candidates 
 via web searches but would welcome any feed back.
 
 Thanks in advance
 
 Mark Spencer
 ___
 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] TimeLab + sr620

[lincoln]

Hello Magnus,
It was a baud rate issue. Time Monitor defaults to 9600 and Time Lab 
uses 19200. Changed the counter and time monitor to use 19.2k and every body is 
happy. 

Now I have to figure out how to use time lab. My TIE plots just show as 
a strait line, I can zoom in to show detail but the y scale will go form 
+1.00E0 to  +1.00E0 . I'm sure its a setting.

Thank you


On May 4, 2015, at 10:40 PM, Magnus Danielson mag...@rubidium.dyndns.org 
wrote:

 Lincoln,
 
 Did you configure the coulder to use RS232 rather than GPIB?
 It's in the manual.
 
 Cheers,
 Magnus
 
 On 05/04/2015 07:28 AM, lincoln wrote:
 Hello,
  I've taken a first pass at using TimeLab over the weekend. I wasn't 
 able to get it to work with my SRS sr 620 over RS232.   I know that the com 
 port / serial cable and counter are working. I can open terminal, talk to 
 the counter, and make a measurement. When I setup a measurement in TimeLab 
 If I hit  the monitor button I don't see any activity. If I start the 
 measurement, Time lab never gets past trying to establish communication with 
 the counter. I'm sure its my fault.
 
 Any thoughs?
 
 thanks
 
 Lincoln
 ___
 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] TimeLab + sr620

[lincoln]

Hello,
I've taken a first pass at using TimeLab over the weekend. I wasn't 
able to get it to work with my SRS sr 620 over RS232.   I know that the com 
port / serial cable and counter are working. I can open terminal, talk to the 
counter, and make a measurement. When I setup a measurement in TimeLab If I hit 
 the monitor button I don't see any activity. If I start the measurement, 
Time lab never gets past trying to establish communication with the counter. 
I'm sure its my fault. 

Any thoughs? 

thanks

Lincoln
___
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] WSTS

[lincoln]

Hello,
Is anyone going to WSTS? 

Link
___
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] Can one update firmware of Stanford Research Systems SR620 time interval counter?

[lincoln]

Hello Dave,
That is the same firmware version as mine, I cant tell you if that is 
the most current.

Link


On Jan 2, 2015, at 12:50 PM, Dr. David Kirkby (Kirkby Microwave Ltd) 
drkir...@kirkbymicrowave.co.uk wrote:

 I'm just in the process of trying to look at writing some GPIB
 software for my SR620, which is a fairly new arrival. I paid $950 for
 it, which I think was pretty good, considering it has the high
 stability time base.
 
 Anyway, the first thing after setting the GPIB address to something
 that did not clash with other equipment I had, was to send it the
 usual *IDN? to hopefully get some response from it. Sure enough, it
 did respond with:
 
 drkirkby@buzzard:~/SR620-1/src$ ./tic  15
 StanfordResearchSystems,SR620,03154,1.48
 e
 
 I was a bit surprised by the letter e on another line, but anyway,
 that is what it did. According to the manual,
 
 This string is in the format:
 StanfordResearchSystems, SR620, serial number,
 version number. Where serial number is the five
 digit serial number of the particular unit, and
 version number is the 3 digit firmware version
 number.
 
 So it looks like I have firmware 1.48.
 
 Does anyone know the latest firmware, whether it is possible to update
 the firmware, and if so how? Also, does anyone have a lit of the
 changes between firmware releases? If there are some major bugs fixed,
 I'd be more keen to update, but if the changes are quite minor, I am
 less inclined to bother.
 
 
 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.

[time-nuts] up converting 10MHz to 20MHz

[lincoln]

Hello,
I'm having a dumb idea, I have an MCU that uses a 20 MHz VC-TCXO. The 
micro, among other things, runs a loop and correct the oscillator by using a 
1pps from a gps. I have a 10 MHz mv200 that I would like to try to use. I've 
got the control voltage handled but i will need to multiply its output up to 20 
MHz. What would be the most kosher way do do this? I was having a look at 
Cypress's CY22381 because I have the programmer but the chips are not widely 
distributed. But nether are mv200's Silicon labs also make all kinds of clock 
chips as well.

What do you guys think? What would be the best way to scale up by X 2? lowish 
phase noise / jitter is important, low power is not. 

Thank you,
Lincoln
___
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] FYI: Galileo satellite recovered and transmitting navigation signals

[lincoln]

Hello,
One vendor we starts nimea strings with BD and GN instead of GP ie 
$GPGGA,blab, blab becomes $BDGGA,blab and $GNGGA,blab

If all systems are selected and the receiver has enough of each system you can 
have up to three $*GGA messages per update.

Link  
On Dec 5, 2014, at 3:32 PM, Iain Young i...@g7iii.net wrote:

 On 05/12/14 22:40, Bob Camp wrote:
 
 Typically they let you selectively enable each of the major systems. As you 
 enable more systems, you get more sat’s in each of the messages. For most 
 users, there is not a lot of reason to enable multiple systems. If you want 
 UTC sync’d to USNO you enable one system. If you want to set your watch to 
 time from Moscow, you enable another system …. Setting your watch to both is 
 impractical.
 
 Time-nuts will buy multiple, enable one major system on each, and
 compare, and draw ADEV plots!
 
 
 Iain
 ___
 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.