Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM
Le 31 août 2014 à 16:22, Mike Seguin a écrit : I just started working with a Navsync CW12-TIM. I'm interested in programming the freq output. What's the best software to use? I was looking for an app for the CW46, which uses the same GPS engine. The Navsync doc mentions NS3KView and I eventually found a download link, via Connor Winfield. I couldn't see a link on the Navsync Site. http://www.navsync.com/NS3KviewInstaller103a.zip That is the installer. It installs OK on Win7 64bit with compatability options selected. Appears to work fine. TIA Mike -- 73, Mike, N1JEZ A closed mouth gathers no feet ___ 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] CW12-TIM
I just started working with a Navsync CW12-TIM. I'm interested in programming the freq output. What's the best software to use? TIA Mike -- 73, Mike, N1JEZ A closed mouth gathers no feet ___ 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] CW12-TIM
I got it. WinOncore. Frequency set. Mike On 8/31/2014 10:22 AM, Mike Seguin wrote: I just started working with a Navsync CW12-TIM. I'm interested in programming the freq output. What's the best software to use? TIA Mike -- 73, Mike, N1JEZ A closed mouth gathers no feet ___ 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] CW12-TIM
A frequency set command in WinOncore? The WinOncore was designed by Motorola for their receivers using their binary command set, it is very strange that this software can have a ConnorWinfield/Navsync proprietary command ($PRTHS,FRQD,frequency_in_MHz[*optional_checksum]crlf) to set the CW12 output frequency. A dedicated software is not needed: using whatever serial terminal program, you just send the above command using the keyboard and you can set any frequency upto 30MHz. For 10KHz just type $PRTHS,FRQD,0.01crlf (the serial port is 38400,N,8,1). The CW12-TIM must be the NMEA version. On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Mike Seguin n1...@burlingtontelecom.net wrote: I got it. WinOncore. Frequency set. Mike On 8/31/2014 10:22 AM, Mike Seguin wrote: I just started working with a Navsync CW12-TIM. I'm interested in programming the freq output. What's the best software to use? TIA Mike -- 73, Mike, N1JEZ A closed mouth gathers no feet ___ 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] CW12-TIM
You are right. There is no frequency set command in WinOnCore, but you can simply type in $PRTHS,FRQD,0.01 and press return to send the command from the command window. That's what did. WinOncore let me see the unit status - satellite tracking etc as did VisualGPS and Tac32. In the CW12 User manual, there are references to WinOnCore all through it. Mike On 8/31/2014 1:12 PM, Azelio Boriani wrote: A frequency set command in WinOncore? The WinOncore was designed by Motorola for their receivers using their binary command set, it is very strange that this software can have a ConnorWinfield/Navsync proprietary command ($PRTHS,FRQD,frequency_in_MHz[*optional_checksum]crlf) to set the CW12 output frequency. A dedicated software is not needed: using whatever serial terminal program, you just send the above command using the keyboard and you can set any frequency upto 30MHz. For 10KHz just type $PRTHS,FRQD,0.01crlf (the serial port is 38400,N,8,1). The CW12-TIM must be the NMEA version. On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Mike Seguin n1...@burlingtontelecom.net wrote: I got it. WinOncore. Frequency set. Mike On 8/31/2014 10:22 AM, Mike Seguin wrote: I just started working with a Navsync CW12-TIM. I'm interested in programming the freq output. What's the best software to use? TIA Mike -- 73, Mike, N1JEZ A closed mouth gathers no feet ___ 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. -- 73, Mike, N1JEZ A closed mouth gathers no feet ___ 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] CW12-TIM
Good point. I am a sucker for great surplus equipment too, in fact I have two rooms full of stuff most of which is used from time to time.. I envy Tom's collection. I think we need to have a Time Nuts For Dummies article written that takes J. Vig's writing and puts it into much less of a technically rigorous 3 to 10 page article that makes timing accessible to the average product manager or systems engineer, and adds a hole bunch of GPS Disciplining explanation as well. This should be non-academic (who cares about Leesson's formulas digested to the N'th degree when simply looking for a lab reference) and should be fun and easy to read, but still get all the important points across. bye, Said In a message dated 7/12/2014 15:01:33 Pacific Daylight Time, mag...@rubidium.dyndns.org writes: Said, ... and deprive us from cheap surplus oscillators of good performance? What where you thinking? :) But I agree fully with your point, people don't understand how their poorly speced requirements translate into cost and design-time. Accurate time to the fs for no budget is what you can expect if they push their wishlist, but they have seen the E-18 numbers in some fancy article, so as is now possible. I think not (mixing time and frequency numbers is just what you can expect among other things). Also, ADEV numbers isn't everything, it can be a splendid answer to the incomplete and incorrect asked question. Cheers, Magnus On 07/12/2014 10:44 PM, saidj...@aol.com wrote: Graham, I think that is the real challenge here: most folks don't know what precise means for them. Timing is such a novel technology that most folks are amazed that we are trying to get parts per trillion (or better) accuracy and stability! We get customers all the time that want very precise timing, very good phase noise, and overall very good performance but are only used to TCXO's with maybe 10ppm frequency accuracy and cannot specify anything beyond that. The challenge is to explain the cost-benefit to them, like: 1ppm == $1 0.01ppm = $300 10ppt == $1500 0.1ppt == $$$ etc. Once dollars are mentioned, desired specifications usually are attained at fairly quickly :) We recently had an inquiry that we forwarded to a major atomic oscillator vendor, and the estimated $10 Million design cost and 10 year design time quickly shut that idea down.. bye, Said In a message dated 7/12/2014 08:54:09 Pacific Daylight Time, gh78...@gmail.com writes: Shane: The question I think that is being asked is ... What does precise mean to you? To the nearest order of magnitude, what kind of accuracy are you looking for on your three signals. This defines the kind of system you will need. This group normally aspires to the more accurate end of the scale. If you are doing simple time logging of some process, then you are probably at the other end of the possible accuracy scale, and can do things much more simply and cheaply. So ... 1 PPS: +/- 1 ns? 10 ns? 100 ns? 1 us? 10 us ? NTP: +/-10 ms? 100 ms? 1 second? 10 MHz: +/- 10E-6?10E-9? 10E-12? 10E-14? --- Graham == On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 3:57 AM, Shane Morris edgecombe...@gmail.com wrote: Hal, As much as I'd like to explain the big picture in list, it would make God awful noise - if you wish to know any details, I encourage you to respond to me off list. Given the fact that the robotics is so totally off topic, I'm not willing to discuss them here. Thats only out of respect to the topic of the list. The only real stipulations at this design part of the project is 10MHz out, 1PPS out, and NTP out. Please don't think I'm being narqy, I'm really not going to pollute the list with off topic chatter. I am more than happy to discuss off list, as and when. David, I was planning to use RaspberryPis in some part of the network, and of course, I must be silly, they have ethernet, and can run Real Time Linux (the LinuxCNC distros that have been made for control of CNC machines). By the way, the whole network uses heterogeneous CPU types, I'm pretty agnostic to CPU type, as long as it does the job I need it to. The actual ethernet interface won't be as deterministic as we'd like, being chained to the USB bus, but if one was not to put any other USB devices on, nor attach anything that draws power, the USB performance would be good enough for second accuracy NTP frames. This is without any real analysis of any spec sheets, although I have this link: http://www.synclab.org/?tag=raspberry%20pi Thats an interesting read in and of itself. An additional link is: http://www.geekroo.com/products/795 Which is a Mini ITX motherboard for RaspberryPi, which can then go nicely into a 1RU case. Add LCDs and other bits and bobs as needed (I saw a nice little LCD
Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM
At 04:09 PM 7/14/2014, saidj...@aol.com wrote: I think we need to have a Time Nuts For Dummies article written that takes J. Vig's writing and puts it into much less of a technically rigorous And maybe a recommended list of simple experiments that new time-nuts can perform. -- newell N5TNL ___ 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] CW12-TIM
yes you are right On 7/14/2014 2:41 PM, Scott Newell wrote: At 04:09 PM 7/14/2014, saidj...@aol.com wrote: I think we need to have a Time Nuts For Dummies article written that takes J. Vig's writing and puts it into much less of a technically rigorous And maybe a recommended list of simple experiments that new time-nuts can perform. ___ 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] CW12-TIM
Sounds like a great idea, Maybe I can venture beyond the Raspberry Pi with NTP and PPS GPS ..how far does the rabbit hole go? Frits On 7/14/14, Scott Newell newell+timen...@n5tnl.com wrote: At 04:09 PM 7/14/2014, saidj...@aol.com wrote: I think we need to have a Time Nuts For Dummies article written that takes J. Vig's writing and puts it into much less of a technically rigorous And maybe a recommended list of simple experiments that new time-nuts can perform. -- newell N5TNL ___ 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. -- vbradio.wordpress.com ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM
I think we need to have a Time Nuts For Dummies article written that takes J. Vig's writing and puts it into much less of a technically rigorous And maybe a recommended list of simple experiments that new time-nuts can perform. There's quite a list of resources at the main time-nuts page: http://leapsecond.com/time-nuts.htm If playing with NTP is your interest, David Taylor's site is superb: http://www.satsignal.eu/ntp/ Maybe I can venture beyond the Raspberry Pi with NTP and PPS GPS ..how far does the rabbit hole go? Newcomers and experimenters also enjoy the powers of ten PDF: http://leapsecond.com/ten/ /tvb ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM
Hi As I recall from conversations with John over the years, the presentation he wrote was (for the most part) an effort to “dumb down” the subject for a more general audience … Bob On Jul 14, 2014, at 9:00 PM, Tom Van Baak t...@leapsecond.com wrote: I think we need to have a Time Nuts For Dummies article written that takes J. Vig's writing and puts it into much less of a technically rigorous And maybe a recommended list of simple experiments that new time-nuts can perform. There's quite a list of resources at the main time-nuts page: http://leapsecond.com/time-nuts.htm If playing with NTP is your interest, David Taylor's site is superb: http://www.satsignal.eu/ntp/ Maybe I can venture beyond the Raspberry Pi with NTP and PPS GPS ..how far does the rabbit hole go? Newcomers and experimenters also enjoy the powers of ten PDF: http://leapsecond.com/ten/ /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] CW12-TIM
Hello Time Nuts (and Time Lords!), This is my first real post here, and I understand fully, I am but a grasshopper when it comes to some of the messages I have seen on the list. I am needing a GPS source of precise time, in three flavours - 10MHz (or so), 1PPS, and ethernet NTP. In the beginning, the NTP will be most important, and as time goes on, I'll need the 1PPS signal. For my clock, I was wanting to use a Timesync CW12-TIM module, set it to 10MHz, and attach its serial output to an Arduino (or similar) with ethernet capabilities to provide the NTP packets to the network. If a static CW12-TIM ethernet clock could be made, I would be willing to try my hand at mounting them to mobile robots, again, for synchronised timing of events. Does anyone have any thoughts on this project? Many thanks! Shane. ___ 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] CW12-TIM
Hello Time Nuts (and Time Lords!), This is my first real post here, and I understand fully, I am but a grasshopper when it comes to some of the messages I have seen on the list. I am needing a GPS source of precise time, in three flavours - 10MHz (or so), 1PPS, and ethernet NTP. In the beginning, the NTP will be most important, and as time goes on, I'll need the 1PPS signal. For my clock, I was wanting to use a Timesync CW12-TIM module, set it to 10MHz, and attach its serial output to an Arduino (or similar) with ethernet capabilities to provide the NTP packets to the network. If a static CW12-TIM ethernet clock could be made, I would be willing to try my hand at mounting them to mobile robots, again, for synchronised timing of events. Does anyone have any thoughts on this project? Many thanks! Shane. === Welcome, Shane. Two possibilities for you: - ublox modules can give PPS and a frequency (8 MHz IIRC). Here's one example - ready-made for a Raspberry Pi, although I recall you may need a different module than the 7Q shown here. The module accepts an external antenna, http://ava.upuaut.net/store/index.php?route=product/productpath=59_60product_id=95 Using the RPi you could then make an Ethernet NTP server. http://www.satsignal.eu/ntp/Raspberry-Pi-NTP.html#no-soldering - for PPS alone, with a built-in antenna: http://www.adafruit.com/products/746 It might help to know any other requirements like internal/external antenna, level of accuracy required, etc. etc. Cheers, David -- SatSignal Software - Quality software written to your requirements Web: http://www.satsignal.eu Email: david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM
edgecombe...@gmail.com said: I am needing a GPS source of precise time, in three flavours - 10MHz (or so), 1PPS, and ethernet NTP. In the beginning, the NTP will be most important, and as time goes on, I'll need the 1PPS signal. ... If a static CW12-TIM ethernet clock could be made, I would be willing to try my hand at mounting them to mobile robots, again, for synchronised timing of events. I'm missing the big picture. Are the robots the end target? What are you going to do before that? Do the robots have a network connection? (maybe only WiFi to a local PC controlling them) How accurately do the robots have to be synchronized? -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM
Hal, As much as I'd like to explain the big picture in list, it would make God awful noise - if you wish to know any details, I encourage you to respond to me off list. Given the fact that the robotics is so totally off topic, I'm not willing to discuss them here. Thats only out of respect to the topic of the list. The only real stipulations at this design part of the project is 10MHz out, 1PPS out, and NTP out. Please don't think I'm being narqy, I'm really not going to pollute the list with off topic chatter. I am more than happy to discuss off list, as and when. David, I was planning to use RaspberryPis in some part of the network, and of course, I must be silly, they have ethernet, and can run Real Time Linux (the LinuxCNC distros that have been made for control of CNC machines). By the way, the whole network uses heterogeneous CPU types, I'm pretty agnostic to CPU type, as long as it does the job I need it to. The actual ethernet interface won't be as deterministic as we'd like, being chained to the USB bus, but if one was not to put any other USB devices on, nor attach anything that draws power, the USB performance would be good enough for second accuracy NTP frames. This is without any real analysis of any spec sheets, although I have this link: http://www.synclab.org/?tag=raspberry%20pi Thats an interesting read in and of itself. An additional link is: http://www.geekroo.com/products/795 Which is a Mini ITX motherboard for RaspberryPi, which can then go nicely into a 1RU case. Add LCDs and other bits and bobs as needed (I saw a nice little LCD with an ATMega driver taking TTY strings in the ODROID Magazine earlier today - it was meant for an ODROID, but it will work with anything that'll output VT100 codes). Once in an 1RU case, it looks neat, and would work just as well as a $500 NTP ethernet time source second hand off eBay, if not much more configurable and hackable. Many thanks for the thoughts! Shane. On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote: edgecombe...@gmail.com said: I am needing a GPS source of precise time, in three flavours - 10MHz (or so), 1PPS, and ethernet NTP. In the beginning, the NTP will be most important, and as time goes on, I'll need the 1PPS signal. ... If a static CW12-TIM ethernet clock could be made, I would be willing to try my hand at mounting them to mobile robots, again, for synchronised timing of events. I'm missing the big picture. Are the robots the end target? What are you going to do before that? Do the robots have a network connection? (maybe only WiFi to a local PC controlling them) How accurately do the robots have to be synchronized? -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts 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] CW12-TIM
I am needing a GPS source of precise time, in three flavours - 10MHz (or so), 1PPS, and ethernet NTP. In the beginning, the NTP will be most important, and as time goes on, I'll need the 1PPS signal. I know DIY is always lots of fun, but if you want to get up and running quick with little to no fuss... Consider grabbing a Tymserve TS2100 GPS model from eBay... (There are IRIG GPS models. The IRIG model you can tell because it is missing the GPS SMA connector on the back). Usually they sell for around $200 or less. They provide NTP, 10MHz, 1PPS, and IRIG-B output. Nothing fancy but they work. They come in TCXO (most common), OCXO, and Rb flavors too... ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM
Shane: The question I think that is being asked is ... What does precise mean to you? To the nearest order of magnitude, what kind of accuracy are you looking for on your three signals. This defines the kind of system you will need. This group normally aspires to the more accurate end of the scale. If you are doing simple time logging of some process, then you are probably at the other end of the possible accuracy scale, and can do things much more simply and cheaply. So ... 1 PPS:+/- 1 ns? 10 ns? 100 ns? 1 us? 10 us ? NTP: +/-10 ms? 100 ms? 1 second? 10 MHz: +/- 10E-6? 10E-9? 10E-12? 10E-14? --- Graham == On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 3:57 AM, Shane Morris edgecombe...@gmail.com wrote: Hal, As much as I'd like to explain the big picture in list, it would make God awful noise - if you wish to know any details, I encourage you to respond to me off list. Given the fact that the robotics is so totally off topic, I'm not willing to discuss them here. Thats only out of respect to the topic of the list. The only real stipulations at this design part of the project is 10MHz out, 1PPS out, and NTP out. Please don't think I'm being narqy, I'm really not going to pollute the list with off topic chatter. I am more than happy to discuss off list, as and when. David, I was planning to use RaspberryPis in some part of the network, and of course, I must be silly, they have ethernet, and can run Real Time Linux (the LinuxCNC distros that have been made for control of CNC machines). By the way, the whole network uses heterogeneous CPU types, I'm pretty agnostic to CPU type, as long as it does the job I need it to. The actual ethernet interface won't be as deterministic as we'd like, being chained to the USB bus, but if one was not to put any other USB devices on, nor attach anything that draws power, the USB performance would be good enough for second accuracy NTP frames. This is without any real analysis of any spec sheets, although I have this link: http://www.synclab.org/?tag=raspberry%20pi Thats an interesting read in and of itself. An additional link is: http://www.geekroo.com/products/795 Which is a Mini ITX motherboard for RaspberryPi, which can then go nicely into a 1RU case. Add LCDs and other bits and bobs as needed (I saw a nice little LCD with an ATMega driver taking TTY strings in the ODROID Magazine earlier today - it was meant for an ODROID, but it will work with anything that'll output VT100 codes). Once in an 1RU case, it looks neat, and would work just as well as a $500 NTP ethernet time source second hand off eBay, if not much more configurable and hackable. Many thanks for the thoughts! Shane. On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote: edgecombe...@gmail.com said: I am needing a GPS source of precise time, in three flavours - 10MHz (or so), 1PPS, and ethernet NTP. In the beginning, the NTP will be most important, and as time goes on, I'll need the 1PPS signal. ... If a static CW12-TIM ethernet clock could be made, I would be willing to try my hand at mounting them to mobile robots, again, for synchronised timing of events. I'm missing the big picture. Are the robots the end target? What are you going to do before that? Do the robots have a network connection? (maybe only WiFi to a local PC controlling them) How accurately do the robots have to be synchronized? -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts 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] CW12-TIM
Graham, I think that is the real challenge here: most folks don't know what precise means for them. Timing is such a novel technology that most folks are amazed that we are trying to get parts per trillion (or better) accuracy and stability! We get customers all the time that want very precise timing, very good phase noise, and overall very good performance but are only used to TCXO's with maybe 10ppm frequency accuracy and cannot specify anything beyond that. The challenge is to explain the cost-benefit to them, like: 1ppm == $1 0.01ppm = $300 10ppt == $1500 0.1ppt == $$$ etc. Once dollars are mentioned, desired specifications usually are attained at fairly quickly :) We recently had an inquiry that we forwarded to a major atomic oscillator vendor, and the estimated $10 Million design cost and 10 year design time quickly shut that idea down.. bye, Said In a message dated 7/12/2014 08:54:09 Pacific Daylight Time, gh78...@gmail.com writes: Shane: The question I think that is being asked is ... What does precise mean to you? To the nearest order of magnitude, what kind of accuracy are you looking for on your three signals. This defines the kind of system you will need. This group normally aspires to the more accurate end of the scale. If you are doing simple time logging of some process, then you are probably at the other end of the possible accuracy scale, and can do things much more simply and cheaply. So ... 1 PPS:+/- 1 ns? 10 ns? 100 ns? 1 us? 10 us ? NTP: +/-10 ms? 100 ms? 1 second? 10 MHz: +/- 10E-6? 10E-9? 10E-12? 10E-14? --- Graham == On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 3:57 AM, Shane Morris edgecombe...@gmail.com wrote: Hal, As much as I'd like to explain the big picture in list, it would make God awful noise - if you wish to know any details, I encourage you to respond to me off list. Given the fact that the robotics is so totally off topic, I'm not willing to discuss them here. Thats only out of respect to the topic of the list. The only real stipulations at this design part of the project is 10MHz out, 1PPS out, and NTP out. Please don't think I'm being narqy, I'm really not going to pollute the list with off topic chatter. I am more than happy to discuss off list, as and when. David, I was planning to use RaspberryPis in some part of the network, and of course, I must be silly, they have ethernet, and can run Real Time Linux (the LinuxCNC distros that have been made for control of CNC machines). By the way, the whole network uses heterogeneous CPU types, I'm pretty agnostic to CPU type, as long as it does the job I need it to. The actual ethernet interface won't be as deterministic as we'd like, being chained to the USB bus, but if one was not to put any other USB devices on, nor attach anything that draws power, the USB performance would be good enough for second accuracy NTP frames. This is without any real analysis of any spec sheets, although I have this link: http://www.synclab.org/?tag=raspberry%20pi Thats an interesting read in and of itself. An additional link is: http://www.geekroo.com/products/795 Which is a Mini ITX motherboard for RaspberryPi, which can then go nicely into a 1RU case. Add LCDs and other bits and bobs as needed (I saw a nice little LCD with an ATMega driver taking TTY strings in the ODROID Magazine earlier today - it was meant for an ODROID, but it will work with anything that'll output VT100 codes). Once in an 1RU case, it looks neat, and would work just as well as a $500 NTP ethernet time source second hand off eBay, if not much more configurable and hackable. Many thanks for the thoughts! Shane. On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote: edgecombe...@gmail.com said: I am needing a GPS source of precise time, in three flavours - 10MHz (or so), 1PPS, and ethernet NTP. In the beginning, the NTP will be most important, and as time goes on, I'll need the 1PPS signal. ... If a static CW12-TIM ethernet clock could be made, I would be willing to try my hand at mounting them to mobile robots, again, for synchronised timing of events. I'm missing the big picture. Are the robots the end target? What are you going to do before that? Do the robots have a network connection? (maybe only WiFi to a local PC controlling them) How accurately do the robots have to be synchronized? -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM
Said, ... and deprive us from cheap surplus oscillators of good performance? What where you thinking? :) But I agree fully with your point, people don't understand how their poorly speced requirements translate into cost and design-time. Accurate time to the fs for no budget is what you can expect if they push their wishlist, but they have seen the E-18 numbers in some fancy article, so as is now possible. I think not (mixing time and frequency numbers is just what you can expect among other things). Also, ADEV numbers isn't everything, it can be a splendid answer to the incomplete and incorrect asked question. Cheers, Magnus On 07/12/2014 10:44 PM, saidj...@aol.com wrote: Graham, I think that is the real challenge here: most folks don't know what precise means for them. Timing is such a novel technology that most folks are amazed that we are trying to get parts per trillion (or better) accuracy and stability! We get customers all the time that want very precise timing, very good phase noise, and overall very good performance but are only used to TCXO's with maybe 10ppm frequency accuracy and cannot specify anything beyond that. The challenge is to explain the cost-benefit to them, like: 1ppm == $1 0.01ppm = $300 10ppt == $1500 0.1ppt == $$$ etc. Once dollars are mentioned, desired specifications usually are attained at fairly quickly :) We recently had an inquiry that we forwarded to a major atomic oscillator vendor, and the estimated $10 Million design cost and 10 year design time quickly shut that idea down.. bye, Said In a message dated 7/12/2014 08:54:09 Pacific Daylight Time, gh78...@gmail.com writes: Shane: The question I think that is being asked is ... What does precise mean to you? To the nearest order of magnitude, what kind of accuracy are you looking for on your three signals. This defines the kind of system you will need. This group normally aspires to the more accurate end of the scale. If you are doing simple time logging of some process, then you are probably at the other end of the possible accuracy scale, and can do things much more simply and cheaply. So ... 1 PPS:+/- 1 ns? 10 ns? 100 ns? 1 us? 10 us ? NTP: +/-10 ms? 100 ms? 1 second? 10 MHz: +/- 10E-6? 10E-9? 10E-12? 10E-14? --- Graham == On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 3:57 AM, Shane Morris edgecombe...@gmail.com wrote: Hal, As much as I'd like to explain the big picture in list, it would make God awful noise - if you wish to know any details, I encourage you to respond to me off list. Given the fact that the robotics is so totally off topic, I'm not willing to discuss them here. Thats only out of respect to the topic of the list. The only real stipulations at this design part of the project is 10MHz out, 1PPS out, and NTP out. Please don't think I'm being narqy, I'm really not going to pollute the list with off topic chatter. I am more than happy to discuss off list, as and when. David, I was planning to use RaspberryPis in some part of the network, and of course, I must be silly, they have ethernet, and can run Real Time Linux (the LinuxCNC distros that have been made for control of CNC machines). By the way, the whole network uses heterogeneous CPU types, I'm pretty agnostic to CPU type, as long as it does the job I need it to. The actual ethernet interface won't be as deterministic as we'd like, being chained to the USB bus, but if one was not to put any other USB devices on, nor attach anything that draws power, the USB performance would be good enough for second accuracy NTP frames. This is without any real analysis of any spec sheets, although I have this link: http://www.synclab.org/?tag=raspberry%20pi Thats an interesting read in and of itself. An additional link is: http://www.geekroo.com/products/795 Which is a Mini ITX motherboard for RaspberryPi, which can then go nicely into a 1RU case. Add LCDs and other bits and bobs as needed (I saw a nice little LCD with an ATMega driver taking TTY strings in the ODROID Magazine earlier today - it was meant for an ODROID, but it will work with anything that'll output VT100 codes). Once in an 1RU case, it looks neat, and would work just as well as a $500 NTP ethernet time source second hand off eBay, if not much more configurable and hackable. Many thanks for the thoughts! Shane. On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote: edgecombe...@gmail.com said: I am needing a GPS source of precise time, in three flavours - 10MHz (or so), 1PPS, and ethernet NTP. In the beginning, the NTP will be most important, and as time goes on, I'll need the 1PPS signal. ... If a static CW12-TIM ethernet clock could be made, I would be willing to try my hand at mounting them to mobile robots, again, for synchronised timing of events. I'm missing the big picture. Are the robots the end target? What are you
Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM
Graham, Yeah, I suppose I'm not aspiring to the most precise of the measurements, I want something that'll give me a reasonable accuracy on a budget. Inside the RaspberryPi is a free running 1MHz oscillator - if I could train it with a 1PPS to a good degree of accuracy (say 10ns to 100ns or so) I'd be a happy man. My synchronisation signal across the network is 10kHz, so accuracies would need to reflect say twice that for sampling purposes. The 10kHz is a best case - most equipment will respond slower over network links, and thus not generate as much traffic. Additionally, a no change in sensor reading generates no message over the network, it'll intelligently trim that to reduce overhead. Jason, I like DIY. I'm sold on this idea of hacking my RPi to get it to provide my cluster with NTP signals, and have the 1PPS and 10MHz pop out of a PCI slot bracket with BNC connectors in it. I'm even going to buy an 8RU desktop rack to put on top of my 18RU baby rack to put the RPis in 1RU rackmount cases and the 2RU 12VDC power supply shelf in. I'm going to be running Plan 9 CPU server on the other RPis, and thats where the NTP data will terminate. I hope I learn something good from this! On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Graham Haddock gh78...@gmail.com wrote: Shane: The question I think that is being asked is ... What does precise mean to you? To the nearest order of magnitude, what kind of accuracy are you looking for on your three signals. This defines the kind of system you will need. This group normally aspires to the more accurate end of the scale. If you are doing simple time logging of some process, then you are probably at the other end of the possible accuracy scale, and can do things much more simply and cheaply. So ... 1 PPS:+/- 1 ns? 10 ns? 100 ns? 1 us? 10 us ? NTP: +/-10 ms? 100 ms? 1 second? 10 MHz: +/- 10E-6? 10E-9? 10E-12? 10E-14? --- Graham == On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 3:57 AM, Shane Morris edgecombe...@gmail.com wrote: Hal, As much as I'd like to explain the big picture in list, it would make God awful noise - if you wish to know any details, I encourage you to respond to me off list. Given the fact that the robotics is so totally off topic, I'm not willing to discuss them here. Thats only out of respect to the topic of the list. The only real stipulations at this design part of the project is 10MHz out, 1PPS out, and NTP out. Please don't think I'm being narqy, I'm really not going to pollute the list with off topic chatter. I am more than happy to discuss off list, as and when. David, I was planning to use RaspberryPis in some part of the network, and of course, I must be silly, they have ethernet, and can run Real Time Linux (the LinuxCNC distros that have been made for control of CNC machines). By the way, the whole network uses heterogeneous CPU types, I'm pretty agnostic to CPU type, as long as it does the job I need it to. The actual ethernet interface won't be as deterministic as we'd like, being chained to the USB bus, but if one was not to put any other USB devices on, nor attach anything that draws power, the USB performance would be good enough for second accuracy NTP frames. This is without any real analysis of any spec sheets, although I have this link: http://www.synclab.org/?tag=raspberry%20pi Thats an interesting read in and of itself. An additional link is: http://www.geekroo.com/products/795 Which is a Mini ITX motherboard for RaspberryPi, which can then go nicely into a 1RU case. Add LCDs and other bits and bobs as needed (I saw a nice little LCD with an ATMega driver taking TTY strings in the ODROID Magazine earlier today - it was meant for an ODROID, but it will work with anything that'll output VT100 codes). Once in an 1RU case, it looks neat, and would work just as well as a $500 NTP ethernet time source second hand off eBay, if not much more configurable and hackable. Many thanks for the thoughts! Shane. On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote: edgecombe...@gmail.com said: I am needing a GPS source of precise time, in three flavours - 10MHz (or so), 1PPS, and ethernet NTP. In the beginning, the NTP will be most important, and as time goes on, I'll need the 1PPS signal. ... If a static CW12-TIM ethernet clock could be made, I would be willing to try my hand at mounting them to mobile robots, again, for synchronised timing of events. I'm missing the big picture. Are the robots the end target? What are you going to do before that? Do the robots have a network connection? (maybe only WiFi to a local PC controlling them) How accurately do the robots have to be synchronized? -- These are my opinions. I hate spam. ___ time-nuts mailing list --
Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM
Said, good measure! Put it into dollars! This helps! Let me have a think about my budget... On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Shane Morris edgecombe...@gmail.com wrote: Graham, Yeah, I suppose I'm not aspiring to the most precise of the measurements, I want something that'll give me a reasonable accuracy on a budget. Inside the RaspberryPi is a free running 1MHz oscillator - if I could train it with a 1PPS to a good degree of accuracy (say 10ns to 100ns or so) I'd be a happy man. My synchronisation signal across the network is 10kHz, so accuracies would need to reflect say twice that for sampling purposes. The 10kHz is a best case - most equipment will respond slower over network links, and thus not generate as much traffic. Additionally, a no change in sensor reading generates no message over the network, it'll intelligently trim that to reduce overhead. Jason, I like DIY. I'm sold on this idea of hacking my RPi to get it to provide my cluster with NTP signals, and have the 1PPS and 10MHz pop out of a PCI slot bracket with BNC connectors in it. I'm even going to buy an 8RU desktop rack to put on top of my 18RU baby rack to put the RPis in 1RU rackmount cases and the 2RU 12VDC power supply shelf in. I'm going to be running Plan 9 CPU server on the other RPis, and thats where the NTP data will terminate. I hope I learn something good from this! On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Graham Haddock gh78...@gmail.com wrote: Shane: The question I think that is being asked is ... What does precise mean to you? To the nearest order of magnitude, what kind of accuracy are you looking for on your three signals. This defines the kind of system you will need. This group normally aspires to the more accurate end of the scale. If you are doing simple time logging of some process, then you are probably at the other end of the possible accuracy scale, and can do things much more simply and cheaply. So ... 1 PPS:+/- 1 ns? 10 ns? 100 ns? 1 us? 10 us ? NTP: +/-10 ms? 100 ms? 1 second? 10 MHz: +/- 10E-6? 10E-9? 10E-12? 10E-14? --- Graham == On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 3:57 AM, Shane Morris edgecombe...@gmail.com wrote: Hal, As much as I'd like to explain the big picture in list, it would make God awful noise - if you wish to know any details, I encourage you to respond to me off list. Given the fact that the robotics is so totally off topic, I'm not willing to discuss them here. Thats only out of respect to the topic of the list. The only real stipulations at this design part of the project is 10MHz out, 1PPS out, and NTP out. Please don't think I'm being narqy, I'm really not going to pollute the list with off topic chatter. I am more than happy to discuss off list, as and when. David, I was planning to use RaspberryPis in some part of the network, and of course, I must be silly, they have ethernet, and can run Real Time Linux (the LinuxCNC distros that have been made for control of CNC machines). By the way, the whole network uses heterogeneous CPU types, I'm pretty agnostic to CPU type, as long as it does the job I need it to. The actual ethernet interface won't be as deterministic as we'd like, being chained to the USB bus, but if one was not to put any other USB devices on, nor attach anything that draws power, the USB performance would be good enough for second accuracy NTP frames. This is without any real analysis of any spec sheets, although I have this link: http://www.synclab.org/?tag=raspberry%20pi Thats an interesting read in and of itself. An additional link is: http://www.geekroo.com/products/795 Which is a Mini ITX motherboard for RaspberryPi, which can then go nicely into a 1RU case. Add LCDs and other bits and bobs as needed (I saw a nice little LCD with an ATMega driver taking TTY strings in the ODROID Magazine earlier today - it was meant for an ODROID, but it will work with anything that'll output VT100 codes). Once in an 1RU case, it looks neat, and would work just as well as a $500 NTP ethernet time source second hand off eBay, if not much more configurable and hackable. Many thanks for the thoughts! Shane. On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote: edgecombe...@gmail.com said: I am needing a GPS source of precise time, in three flavours - 10MHz (or so), 1PPS, and ethernet NTP. In the beginning, the NTP will be most important, and as time goes on, I'll need the 1PPS signal. ... If a static CW12-TIM ethernet clock could be made, I would be willing to try my hand at mounting them to mobile robots, again, for synchronised timing of events. I'm missing the big picture. Are the robots the end target? What are you going to do before that? Do the robots have a network connection? (maybe only WiFi to a local PC controlling them)
Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von Erno Peres Gesendet: Samstag, 31. Marz 2012 15:10 An: time-nuts@febo.com Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Hi Ulbrich, Sorry but not everybody a digital and/or a professional guru... can you please be a more specific namely to show us the pre filter and other circuitif you do not mind. Understand that the key point is the PLL or the phase comparator circuit.if you want to build you own GPS-DO. Many thanks and best regards, Ernie. -Original Message- From: Ulrich Bangert df...@ulrich-bangert.de To: 'Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement' time-nuts@febo.com Sent: Sat, Mar 31, 2012 2:53 pm Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Bert, sometimes a manual can be a true treasure chest! Just download the PRS-10 anual at http://www.thinksrs.com/downloads/PDFs/Manuals/PRS10m.pdf and find starting on page 13 the complete instructions on how to build your wn GPSDO. A basic knowledge of math, programming and control theory is eeded to understand the manual but then: It works. I have constructed my own DIY GPSDO on the base of the information that I have found there, ncluding the pre-filter. Best regards lrich -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von ewkeh...@aol.com Gesendet: Samstag, 31. Marz 2012 13:46 An: time-nuts@febo.com Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Ulrich can you tell us more about your pre filter? Thank you Bert Kehren In a message dated 3/31/2012 6:23:49 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, df...@ulrich-bangert.de writes: Thomas, Has anyone compared the M12M to the M12+? I have done some measurements on the M12+ with typical results as shown in http://www.ulrich-bangert.de/M12Performance.jpg The red line is the raw phase data of the M12's PPS against a PPS derived from a local FRK-L rubidium. Note that you do not observe an overall difference frequency (and a resulting drift in phase) because the FRK-L is disciplined by the GPS. The blue line is the sawtooth corrected phase data and it becomes immediatly clear HOW IMPORTANT applying the correction is. The yellow line show you what happens if the sawtooth corrected phase data is sent through a pre-filter (lowpass with 1/3 the time constant of the main pll loop) before entering the loop itself. That is something that I learned from the PRS-10 manual. You may decide on your own which data you would like to work on in a GPSDO. Best regards Ulrich Bangert -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von Tom Knox Gesendet: Freitag, 30. Marz 2012 22:19An: Time-Nuts Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Has anyone compared the M12M to the M12+? Thanks for all the input, it is really appreciated. best wishes; Thomas Knox CC: time-nuts@febo.com From: saidj...@aol.com Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 09:53:17 -0700 To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Hello Ed, Azelio, We should also compare the same parameters. Sawtooth error of the m12+of +/-25ns is not its standard deviation, it's max/min. Compare that number to your 30ns max/min measurement on the 5372a. Standard deviation of the m12+ is around 2ns with correction. That needs to be compared to the 5ns you measure on the 5372a as that is the best performance you will get from the CW12. Yes the uncorrected 1pps of the m12 is worse, but it is designed to be used withcorrection. So in the end the m12m still performs better than the CW12. Bye, Said Sent From iPhone On Mar 29, 2012, at 1:56, Azelio Boriani azelio.bori...@screen.it wrote: We (that is my company) use the CW12-TIM (NMEA version) and its PPS wonders as usual, nothing different from a uBlox LEA-5T or the M12M. On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote: The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. The first claim The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns is correct but are you absolutely sure that the second claim is correct too? It would mean a factor 10 improvement of the CW12-TIM against the M12 which is hardly believeable. The 25 ns
Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
and a science of it's own called robust statistics tells us how to do. For that reason be prepared to learn more than you really want. Best regards Ulrich -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von Erno Peres Gesendet: Samstag, 31. Marz 2012 15:10 An: time-nuts@febo.com Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Hi Ulbrich, Sorry but not everybody a digital and/or a professional guru... can you please be a more specific namely to show us the pre filter and other circuitif you do not mind. Understand that the key point is the PLL or the phase comparator circuit.if you want to build you own GPS-DO. Many thanks and best regards, Ernie. -Original Message- From: Ulrich Bangert df...@ulrich-bangert.de To: 'Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement' time-nuts@febo.com Sent: Sat, Mar 31, 2012 2:53 pm Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Bert, sometimes a manual can be a true treasure chest! Just download the PRS-10 anual at http://www.thinksrs.com/downloads/PDFs/Manuals/PRS10m.pdf and find starting on page 13 the complete instructions on how to build your wn GPSDO. A basic knowledge of math, programming and control theory is eeded to understand the manual but then: It works. I have constructed my own DIY GPSDO on the base of the information that I have found there, ncluding the pre-filter. Best regards lrich -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von ewkeh...@aol.com Gesendet: Samstag, 31. Marz 2012 13:46 An: time-nuts@febo.com Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Ulrich can you tell us more about your pre filter? Thank you Bert Kehren In a message dated 3/31/2012 6:23:49 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, df...@ulrich-bangert.de writes: Thomas, Has anyone compared the M12M to the M12+? I have done some measurements on the M12+ with typical results as shown in http://www.ulrich-bangert.de/M12Performance.jpg The red line is the raw phase data of the M12's PPS against a PPS derived from a local FRK-L rubidium. Note that you do not observe an overall difference frequency (and a resulting drift in phase) because the FRK-L is disciplined by the GPS. The blue line is the sawtooth corrected phase data and it becomes immediatly clear HOW IMPORTANT applying the correction is. The yellow line show you what happens if the sawtooth corrected phase data is sent through a pre-filter (lowpass with 1/3 the time constant of the main pll loop) before entering the loop itself. That is something that I learned from the PRS-10 manual. You may decide on your own which data you would like to work on in a GPSDO. Best regards Ulrich Bangert -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von Tom Knox Gesendet: Freitag, 30. Marz 2012 22:19An: Time-Nuts Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Has anyone compared the M12M to the M12+? Thanks for all the input, it is really appreciated. best wishes; Thomas Knox CC: time-nuts@febo.com From: saidj...@aol.com Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 09:53:17 -0700 To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Hello Ed, Azelio, We should also compare the same parameters. Sawtooth error of the m12+of +/-25ns is not its standard deviation, it's max/min. Compare that number to your 30ns max/min measurement on the 5372a. Standard deviation of the m12+ is around 2ns with correction. That needs to be compared to the 5ns you measure on the 5372a as that is the best performance you will get from the CW12. Yes the uncorrected 1pps of the m12 is worse, but it is designed to be used withcorrection. So in the end the m12m still performs better than the CW12. Bye, Said Sent From iPhone On Mar 29, 2012, at 1:56, Azelio Boriani azelio.bori...@screen.it wrote: We (that is my company) use the CW12-TIM (NMEA version) and its PPS wonders as usual, nothing different from a uBlox LEA-5T or the M12M. On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote: The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. The first claim The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns
Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
Thomas, Has anyone compared the M12M to the M12+? I have done some measurements on the M12+ with typical results as shown in http://www.ulrich-bangert.de/M12Performance.jpg The red line is the raw phase data of the M12's PPS against a PPS derived from a local FRK-L rubidium. Note that you do not observe an overall difference frequency (and a resulting drift in phase) because the FRK-L is disciplined by the GPS. The blue line is the sawtooth corrected phase data and it becomes immediatly clear HOW IMPORTANT applying the correction is. The yellow line show you what happens if the sawtooth corrected phase data is sent through a pre-filter (lowpass with 1/3 the time constant of the main pll loop) before entering the loop itself. That is something that I learned from the PRS-10 manual. You may decide on your own which data you would like to work on in a GPSDO. Best regards Ulrich Bangert -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von Tom Knox Gesendet: Freitag, 30. Marz 2012 22:19 An: Time-Nuts Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Has anyone compared the M12M to the M12+? Thanks for all the input, it is really appreciated. best wishes; Thomas Knox CC: time-nuts@febo.com From: saidj...@aol.com Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 09:53:17 -0700 To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Hello Ed, Azelio, We should also compare the same parameters. Sawtooth error of the m12+ of +/-25ns is not its standard deviation, it's max/min. Compare that number to your 30ns max/min measurement on the 5372a. Standard deviation of the m12+ is around 2ns with correction. That needs to be compared to the 5ns you measure on the 5372a as that is the best performance you will get from the CW12. Yes the uncorrected 1pps of the m12 is worse, but it is designed to be used with correction. So in the end the m12m still performs better than the CW12. Bye, Said Sent From iPhone On Mar 29, 2012, at 1:56, Azelio Boriani azelio.bori...@screen.it wrote: We (that is my company) use the CW12-TIM (NMEA version) and its PPS wonders as usual, nothing different from a uBlox LEA-5T or the M12M. On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote: The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. The first claim The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns is correct but are you absolutely sure that the second claim is correct too? It would mean a factor 10 improvement of the CW12-TIM against the M12 which is hardly believeable. The 25 ns probably comes from period of the the free running clock they are using. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me to get 10x better if they use a GPSDO for the local clock so they can get the PPS edge right where they want it. -- These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts 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] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
Ulrich can you tell us more about your pre filter? Thank you Bert Kehren In a message dated 3/31/2012 6:23:49 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, df...@ulrich-bangert.de writes: Thomas, Has anyone compared the M12M to the M12+? I have done some measurements on the M12+ with typical results as shown in http://www.ulrich-bangert.de/M12Performance.jpg The red line is the raw phase data of the M12's PPS against a PPS derived from a local FRK-L rubidium. Note that you do not observe an overall difference frequency (and a resulting drift in phase) because the FRK-L is disciplined by the GPS. The blue line is the sawtooth corrected phase data and it becomes immediatly clear HOW IMPORTANT applying the correction is. The yellow line show you what happens if the sawtooth corrected phase data is sent through a pre-filter (lowpass with 1/3 the time constant of the main pll loop) before entering the loop itself. That is something that I learned from the PRS-10 manual. You may decide on your own which data you would like to work on in a GPSDO. Best regards Ulrich Bangert -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von Tom Knox Gesendet: Freitag, 30. Marz 2012 22:19 An: Time-Nuts Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Has anyone compared the M12M to the M12+? Thanks for all the input, it is really appreciated. best wishes; Thomas Knox CC: time-nuts@febo.com From: saidj...@aol.com Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 09:53:17 -0700 To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Hello Ed, Azelio, We should also compare the same parameters. Sawtooth error of the m12+ of +/-25ns is not its standard deviation, it's max/min. Compare that number to your 30ns max/min measurement on the 5372a. Standard deviation of the m12+ is around 2ns with correction. That needs to be compared to the 5ns you measure on the 5372a as that is the best performance you will get from the CW12. Yes the uncorrected 1pps of the m12 is worse, but it is designed to be used with correction. So in the end the m12m still performs better than the CW12. Bye, Said Sent From iPhone On Mar 29, 2012, at 1:56, Azelio Boriani azelio.bori...@screen.it wrote: We (that is my company) use the CW12-TIM (NMEA version) and its PPS wonders as usual, nothing different from a uBlox LEA-5T or the M12M. On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote: The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. The first claim The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns is correct but are you absolutely sure that the second claim is correct too? It would mean a factor 10 improvement of the CW12-TIM against the M12 which is hardly believeable. The 25 ns probably comes from period of the the free running clock they are using. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me to get 10x better if they use a GPSDO for the local clock so they can get the PPS edge right where they want it. -- These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts 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] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
Bert, sometimes a manual can be a true treasure chest! Just download the PRS-10 manual at http://www.thinksrs.com/downloads/PDFs/Manuals/PRS10m.pdf and find starting on page 13 the complete instructions on how to build your own GPSDO. A basic knowledge of math, programming and control theory is needed to understand the manual but then: It works. I have constructed my mown DIY GPSDO on the base of the information that I have found there, including the pre-filter. Best regards Ulrich -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von ewkeh...@aol.com Gesendet: Samstag, 31. Marz 2012 13:46 An: time-nuts@febo.com Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Ulrich can you tell us more about your pre filter? Thank you Bert Kehren In a message dated 3/31/2012 6:23:49 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, df...@ulrich-bangert.de writes: Thomas, Has anyone compared the M12M to the M12+? I have done some measurements on the M12+ with typical results as shown in http://www.ulrich-bangert.de/M12Performance.jpg The red line is the raw phase data of the M12's PPS against a PPS derived from a local FRK-L rubidium. Note that you do not observe an overall difference frequency (and a resulting drift in phase) because the FRK-L is disciplined by the GPS. The blue line is the sawtooth corrected phase data and it becomes immediatly clear HOW IMPORTANT applying the correction is. The yellow line show you what happens if the sawtooth corrected phase data is sent through a pre-filter (lowpass with 1/3 the time constant of the main pll loop) before entering the loop itself. That is something that I learned from the PRS-10 manual. You may decide on your own which data you would like to work on in a GPSDO. Best regards Ulrich Bangert -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von Tom Knox Gesendet: Freitag, 30. Marz 2012 22:19 An: Time-Nuts Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Has anyone compared the M12M to the M12+? Thanks for all the input, it is really appreciated. best wishes; Thomas Knox CC: time-nuts@febo.com From: saidj...@aol.com Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 09:53:17 -0700 To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Hello Ed, Azelio, We should also compare the same parameters. Sawtooth error of the m12+ of +/-25ns is not its standard deviation, it's max/min. Compare that number to your 30ns max/min measurement on the 5372a. Standard deviation of the m12+ is around 2ns with correction. That needs to be compared to the 5ns you measure on the 5372a as that is the best performance you will get from the CW12. Yes the uncorrected 1pps of the m12 is worse, but it is designed to be used with correction. So in the end the m12m still performs better than the CW12. Bye, Said Sent From iPhone On Mar 29, 2012, at 1:56, Azelio Boriani azelio.bori...@screen.it wrote: We (that is my company) use the CW12-TIM (NMEA version) and its PPS wonders as usual, nothing different from a uBlox LEA-5T or the M12M. On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote: The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. The first claim The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns is correct but are you absolutely sure that the second claim is correct too? It would mean a factor 10 improvement of the CW12-TIM against the M12 which is hardly believeable. The 25 ns probably comes from period of the the free running clock they are using. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me to get 10x better if they use a GPSDO for the local clock so they can get the PPS edge right where they want it. -- These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts 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
Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
Gentlemen, i have to correct myself: The pre-filter's time constant is 1/6 of the pll time constant and not 1/3 as i stated before. Sorry for that! Best regards Ulrich Bangert -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von Ulrich Bangert Gesendet: Samstag, 31. Marz 2012 14:49 An: 'Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement' Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Bert, sometimes a manual can be a true treasure chest! Just download the PRS-10 manual at http://www.thinksrs.com/downloads/PDFs/Manuals/PRS10m.pdf and find starting on page 13 the complete instructions on how to build your own GPSDO. A basic knowledge of math, programming and control theory is needed to understand the manual but then: It works. I have constructed my mown DIY GPSDO on the base of the information that I have found there, including the pre-filter. Best regards Ulrich -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von ewkeh...@aol.com Gesendet: Samstag, 31. Marz 2012 13:46 An: time-nuts@febo.com Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Ulrich can you tell us more about your pre filter? Thank you Bert Kehren In a message dated 3/31/2012 6:23:49 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, df...@ulrich-bangert.de writes: Thomas, Has anyone compared the M12M to the M12+? I have done some measurements on the M12+ with typical results as shown in http://www.ulrich-bangert.de/M12Performance.jpg The red line is the raw phase data of the M12's PPS against a PPS derived from a local FRK-L rubidium. Note that you do not observe an overall difference frequency (and a resulting drift in phase) because the FRK-L is disciplined by the GPS. The blue line is the sawtooth corrected phase data and it becomes immediatly clear HOW IMPORTANT applying the correction is. The yellow line show you what happens if the sawtooth corrected phase data is sent through a pre-filter (lowpass with 1/3 the time constant of the main pll loop) before entering the loop itself. That is something that I learned from the PRS-10 manual. You may decide on your own which data you would like to work on in a GPSDO. Best regards Ulrich Bangert -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von Tom Knox Gesendet: Freitag, 30. Marz 2012 22:19 An: Time-Nuts Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Has anyone compared the M12M to the M12+? Thanks for all the input, it is really appreciated. best wishes; Thomas Knox CC: time-nuts@febo.com From: saidj...@aol.com Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 09:53:17 -0700 To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Hello Ed, Azelio, We should also compare the same parameters. Sawtooth error of the m12+ of +/-25ns is not its standard deviation, it's max/min. Compare that number to your 30ns max/min measurement on the 5372a. Standard deviation of the m12+ is around 2ns with correction. That needs to be compared to the 5ns you measure on the 5372a as that is the best performance you will get from the CW12. Yes the uncorrected 1pps of the m12 is worse, but it is designed to be used with correction. So in the end the m12m still performs better than the CW12. Bye, Said Sent From iPhone On Mar 29, 2012, at 1:56, Azelio Boriani azelio.bori...@screen.it wrote: We (that is my company) use the CW12-TIM (NMEA version) and its PPS wonders as usual, nothing different from a uBlox LEA-5T or the M12M. On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote: The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. The first claim The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns is correct but are you absolutely sure that the second claim is correct too? It would mean a factor 10 improvement of the CW12-TIM against the M12 which is hardly believeable. The 25 ns probably comes from period of the the free running clock they are using. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me to get 10x better if they use a GPSDO for the local clock so they can get the PPS edge right where they want it. -- These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam
Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
Hi Ulbrich, Sorry but not everybody a digital and/or a professional guru... can you please be a more specific namely to show us the pre filter and other circuitif you do not mind. Understand that the key point is the PLL or the phase comparator circuit.if you want to build you own GPS-DO. Many thanks and best regards, Ernie. -Original Message- From: Ulrich Bangert df...@ulrich-bangert.de To: 'Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement' time-nuts@febo.com Sent: Sat, Mar 31, 2012 2:53 pm Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Bert, sometimes a manual can be a true treasure chest! Just download the PRS-10 anual at http://www.thinksrs.com/downloads/PDFs/Manuals/PRS10m.pdf and find starting on page 13 the complete instructions on how to build your wn GPSDO. A basic knowledge of math, programming and control theory is eeded to understand the manual but then: It works. I have constructed my own DIY GPSDO on the base of the information that I have found there, ncluding the pre-filter. Best regards lrich -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von ewkeh...@aol.com Gesendet: Samstag, 31. Marz 2012 13:46 An: time-nuts@febo.com Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Ulrich can you tell us more about your pre filter? Thank you Bert Kehren In a message dated 3/31/2012 6:23:49 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, df...@ulrich-bangert.de writes: Thomas, Has anyone compared the M12M to the M12+? I have done some measurements on the M12+ with typical results as shown in http://www.ulrich-bangert.de/M12Performance.jpg The red line is the raw phase data of the M12's PPS against a PPS derived from a local FRK-L rubidium. Note that you do not observe an overall difference frequency (and a resulting drift in phase) because the FRK-L is disciplined by the GPS. The blue line is the sawtooth corrected phase data and it becomes immediatly clear HOW IMPORTANT applying the correction is. The yellow line show you what happens if the sawtooth corrected phase data is sent through a pre-filter (lowpass with 1/3 the time constant of the main pll loop) before entering the loop itself. That is something that I learned from the PRS-10 manual. You may decide on your own which data you would like to work on in a GPSDO. Best regards Ulrich Bangert -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von Tom Knox Gesendet: Freitag, 30. Marz 2012 22:19 An: Time-Nuts Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Has anyone compared the M12M to the M12+? Thanks for all the input, it is really appreciated. best wishes; Thomas Knox CC: time-nuts@febo.com From: saidj...@aol.com Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 09:53:17 -0700 To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Hello Ed, Azelio, We should also compare the same parameters. Sawtooth error of the m12+ of +/-25ns is not its standard deviation, it's max/min. Compare that number to your 30ns max/min measurement on the 5372a. Standard deviation of the m12+ is around 2ns with correction. That needs to be compared to the 5ns you measure on the 5372a as that is the best performance you will get from the CW12. Yes the uncorrected 1pps of the m12 is worse, but it is designed to be used with correction. So in the end the m12m still performs better than the CW12. Bye, Said Sent From iPhone On Mar 29, 2012, at 1:56, Azelio Boriani azelio.bori...@screen.it wrote: We (that is my company) use the CW12-TIM (NMEA version) and its PPS wonders as usual, nothing different from a uBlox LEA-5T or the M12M. On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote: The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. The first claim The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns is correct but are you absolutely sure that the second claim is correct too? It would mean a factor 10 improvement of the CW12-TIM against the M12 which is hardly believeable. The 25 ns probably comes from period of the the free running clock they are using. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me to get 10x better if they use a GPSDO for the local clock so they can get the PPS edge right where they want it. -- These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam
Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
OK, I'll study the PRS10 manual. On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Erno Peres erniepe...@aol.com wrote: Hi Ulbrich, Sorry but not everybody a digital and/or a professional guru... can you please be a more specific namely to show us the pre filter and other circuitif you do not mind. Understand that the key point is the PLL or the phase comparator circuit.if you want to build you own GPS-DO. Many thanks and best regards, Ernie. -Original Message- From: Ulrich Bangert df...@ulrich-bangert.de To: 'Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement' time-nuts@febo.com Sent: Sat, Mar 31, 2012 2:53 pm Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Bert, sometimes a manual can be a true treasure chest! Just download the PRS-10 anual at http://www.thinksrs.com/downloads/PDFs/Manuals/PRS10m.pdf and find starting on page 13 the complete instructions on how to build your wn GPSDO. A basic knowledge of math, programming and control theory is eeded to understand the manual but then: It works. I have constructed my own DIY GPSDO on the base of the information that I have found there, ncluding the pre-filter. Best regards lrich -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von ewkeh...@aol.com Gesendet: Samstag, 31. Marz 2012 13:46 An: time-nuts@febo.com Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Ulrich can you tell us more about your pre filter? Thank you Bert Kehren In a message dated 3/31/2012 6:23:49 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, df...@ulrich-bangert.de writes: Thomas, Has anyone compared the M12M to the M12+? I have done some measurements on the M12+ with typical results as shown in http://www.ulrich-bangert.de/M12Performance.jpg The red line is the raw phase data of the M12's PPS against a PPS derived from a local FRK-L rubidium. Note that you do not observe an overall difference frequency (and a resulting drift in phase) because the FRK-L is disciplined by the GPS. The blue line is the sawtooth corrected phase data and it becomes immediatly clear HOW IMPORTANT applying the correction is. The yellow line show you what happens if the sawtooth corrected phase data is sent through a pre-filter (lowpass with 1/3 the time constant of the main pll loop) before entering the loop itself. That is something that I learned from the PRS-10 manual. You may decide on your own which data you would like to work on in a GPSDO. Best regards Ulrich Bangert -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von Tom Knox Gesendet: Freitag, 30. Marz 2012 22:19 An: Time-Nuts Betreff: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Has anyone compared the M12M to the M12+? Thanks for all the input, it is really appreciated. best wishes; Thomas Knox CC: time-nuts@febo.com From: saidj...@aol.com Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 09:53:17 -0700 To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Hello Ed, Azelio, We should also compare the same parameters. Sawtooth error of the m12+ of +/-25ns is not its standard deviation, it's max/min. Compare that number to your 30ns max/min measurement on the 5372a. Standard deviation of the m12+ is around 2ns with correction. That needs to be compared to the 5ns you measure on the 5372a as that is the best performance you will get from the CW12. Yes the uncorrected 1pps of the m12 is worse, but it is designed to be used with correction. So in the end the m12m still performs better than the CW12. Bye, Said Sent From iPhone On Mar 29, 2012, at 1:56, Azelio Boriani azelio.bori...@screen.it wrote: We (that is my company) use the CW12-TIM (NMEA version) and its PPS wonders as usual, nothing different from a uBlox LEA-5T or the M12M. On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote: The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. The first claim The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns is correct but are you absolutely sure that the second claim is correct too? It would mean a factor 10 improvement of the CW12-TIM against the M12 which is hardly believeable. The 25 ns probably comes from period of the the free running clock they are using. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me to get 10x better if they use a GPSDO for the local clock so they can get the PPS
Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
I've evaluated various of their products including the 125 NCOs boards, and they are worse than 2ns in real world environments.. The m12+ timing replacement unit also only supports a small subset of the Motorola command set. It was useless as a replacement receiver for our Fury GPSDO when we looked into it. The ilotus M12M is still king of the hill in my opinion. Caveat emptor. Bye, Said Sent From iPhone On Mar 29, 2012, at 0:32, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote: The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. The first claim The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns is correct but are you absolutely sure that the second claim is correct too? It would mean a factor 10 improvement of the CW12-TIM against the M12 which is hardly believeable. The 25 ns probably comes from period of the the free running clock they are using. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me to get 10x better if they use a GPSDO for the local clock so they can get the PPS edge right where they want it. -- These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts 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] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
Hello Ed, Azelio, We should also compare the same parameters. Sawtooth error of the m12+ of +/-25ns is not its standard deviation, it's max/min. Compare that number to your 30ns max/min measurement on the 5372a. Standard deviation of the m12+ is around 2ns with correction. That needs to be compared to the 5ns you measure on the 5372a as that is the best performance you will get from the CW12. Yes the uncorrected 1pps of the m12 is worse, but it is designed to be used with correction. So in the end the m12m still performs better than the CW12. Bye, Said Sent From iPhone On Mar 29, 2012, at 1:56, Azelio Boriani azelio.bori...@screen.it wrote: We (that is my company) use the CW12-TIM (NMEA version) and its PPS wonders as usual, nothing different from a uBlox LEA-5T or the M12M. On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote: The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. The first claim The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns is correct but are you absolutely sure that the second claim is correct too? It would mean a factor 10 improvement of the CW12-TIM against the M12 which is hardly believeable. The 25 ns probably comes from period of the the free running clock they are using. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me to get 10x better if they use a GPSDO for the local clock so they can get the PPS edge right where they want it. -- These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts 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] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
Hi Said, On 3/30/2012 10:53 AM, Said Jackson wrote: Hello Ed, Azelio, We should also compare the same parameters. Sawtooth error of the m12+ of +/-25ns is not its standard deviation, it's max/min. Compare that number to your 30ns max/min measurement on the 5372a. Yes, you're right. Thanks for the clarification. Standard deviation of the m12+ is around 2ns with correction. That needs to be compared to the 5ns you measure on the 5372a as that is the best performance you will get from the CW12. Yes the uncorrected 1pps of the m12 is worse, but it is designed to be used with correction. So in the end the m12m still performs better than the CW12. That's why I suggested to the OP that if the Commsync II uses sawtooth correction the CW12 might not improve his performance. The limited command set you mentioned in your other message is another potential problem. Ed Bye, Said Sent From iPhone On Mar 29, 2012, at 1:56, Azelio Borianiazelio.bori...@screen.it wrote: We (that is my company) use the CW12-TIM (NMEA version) and its PPS wonders as usual, nothing different from a uBlox LEA-5T or the M12M. On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Hal Murrayhmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote: The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. The first claim The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns is correct but are you absolutely sure that the second claim is correct too? It would mean a factor10 improvement of the CW12-TIM against the M12 which is hardly believeable. The 25 ns probably comes from period of the the free running clock they are using. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me to get 10x better if they use a GPSDO for the local clock so they can get the PPS edge right where they want it. ___ 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] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
Hi Ed, no problem. It's an issue when some companies claim 2ns, when it's really 5ns. Or show phase noise plots that seem to be measurements of just the oscillator removed from the board and measured in a clean-room environment, not measurements of the module with all the digital control noise and spurs etc added.. bye, Said In a message dated 3/30/2012 10:29:32 Pacific Daylight Time, ed_pal...@sasktel.net writes: Hi Said, On 3/30/2012 10:53 AM, Said Jackson wrote: Hello Ed, Azelio, We should also compare the same parameters. Sawtooth error of the m12+ of +/-25ns is not its standard deviation, it's max/min. Compare that number to your 30ns max/min measurement on the 5372a. Yes, you're right. Thanks for the clarification. Standard deviation of the m12+ is around 2ns with correction. That needs to be compared to the 5ns you measure on the 5372a as that is the best performance you will get from the CW12. Yes the uncorrected 1pps of the m12 is worse, but it is designed to be used with correction. So in the end the m12m still performs better than the CW12. That's why I suggested to the OP that if the Commsync II uses sawtooth correction the CW12 might not improve his performance. The limited command set you mentioned in your other message is another potential problem. Ed ___ 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] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
Actually I don't have a good reference (Z3815A): I'm still preparing my first disciplined Rb and have 2 Fluke PM6681s. I'm waiting for my SR620, it should be on its way to Italy right now. I have 2 TBolts but not yet turned on. What kind of reference have you used? On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 8:10 PM, saidj...@aol.com wrote: Hi Ed, no problem. It's an issue when some companies claim 2ns, when it's really 5ns. Or show phase noise plots that seem to be measurements of just the oscillator removed from the board and measured in a clean-room environment, not measurements of the module with all the digital control noise and spurs etc added.. bye, Said In a message dated 3/30/2012 10:29:32 Pacific Daylight Time, ed_pal...@sasktel.net writes: Hi Said, On 3/30/2012 10:53 AM, Said Jackson wrote: Hello Ed, Azelio, We should also compare the same parameters. Sawtooth error of the m12+ of +/-25ns is not its standard deviation, it's max/min. Compare that number to your 30ns max/min measurement on the 5372a. Yes, you're right. Thanks for the clarification. Standard deviation of the m12+ is around 2ns with correction. That needs to be compared to the 5ns you measure on the 5372a as that is the best performance you will get from the CW12. Yes the uncorrected 1pps of the m12 is worse, but it is designed to be used with correction. So in the end the m12m still performs better than the CW12. That's why I suggested to the OP that if the Commsync II uses sawtooth correction the CW12 might not improve his performance. The limited command set you mentioned in your other message is another potential problem. Ed ___ 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] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
Has anyone compared the M12M to the M12+? Thanks for all the input, it is really appreciated. best wishes; Thomas Knox CC: time-nuts@febo.com From: saidj...@aol.com Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 09:53:17 -0700 To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world Hello Ed, Azelio, We should also compare the same parameters. Sawtooth error of the m12+ of +/-25ns is not its standard deviation, it's max/min. Compare that number to your 30ns max/min measurement on the 5372a. Standard deviation of the m12+ is around 2ns with correction. That needs to be compared to the 5ns you measure on the 5372a as that is the best performance you will get from the CW12. Yes the uncorrected 1pps of the m12 is worse, but it is designed to be used with correction. So in the end the m12m still performs better than the CW12. Bye, Said Sent From iPhone On Mar 29, 2012, at 1:56, Azelio Boriani azelio.bori...@screen.it wrote: We (that is my company) use the CW12-TIM (NMEA version) and its PPS wonders as usual, nothing different from a uBlox LEA-5T or the M12M. On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote: The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. The first claim The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns is correct but are you absolutely sure that the second claim is correct too? It would mean a factor 10 improvement of the CW12-TIM against the M12 which is hardly believeable. The 25 ns probably comes from period of the the free running clock they are using. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me to get 10x better if they use a GPSDO for the local clock so they can get the PPS edge right where they want it. -- These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts 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] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
Thomas, The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. The first claim The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns is correct but are you absolutely sure that the second claim is correct too? It would mean a factor 10 improvement of the CW12-TIM against the M12 which is hardly believeable. Best regards Ulrich Bangert -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von Tom Knox Gesendet: Mittwoch, 28. Marz 2012 20:42 An: Time-Nuts Betreff: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world I spoke with Navsync about some of the issues we are discussing and this was their response. I just received mine and will try to test it over the weekend. 1. Is CW12-TIM compatible with Motorola M12 ? The CW12 is designed to be compatible with the M12 although there are some differences. The main hardware differences are listed on page 7 of the CW12 User Manual (http://www.navsync.com/docs/cw12-tim_um.pdf). 2. According to the customer, M12 has a Sawtooth Correction Error Hanging Bridge Error? Does CW12 have a solution for these type of errors? How these errors are taken care of in CW12? The Hanging Bridge Error is a pattern seen in the sawtooth error that occurs as the local clock frequency changes. The standard Motorola Binary software for the CW12-TIM does not have the sawtooth correction field in the @@Hn command implemented, but NavSync is currently developing this and it will be available in future standard releases. The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. Thomas Knox ___ 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] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. The first claim The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns is correct but are you absolutely sure that the second claim is correct too? It would mean a factor 10 improvement of the CW12-TIM against the M12 which is hardly believeable. The 25 ns probably comes from period of the the free running clock they are using. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me to get 10x better if they use a GPSDO for the local clock so they can get the PPS edge right where they want it. -- These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
We (that is my company) use the CW12-TIM (NMEA version) and its PPS wonders as usual, nothing different from a uBlox LEA-5T or the M12M. On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Hal Murray hmur...@megapathdsl.net wrote: The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. The first claim The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns is correct but are you absolutely sure that the second claim is correct too? It would mean a factor 10 improvement of the CW12-TIM against the M12 which is hardly believeable. The 25 ns probably comes from period of the the free running clock they are using. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me to get 10x better if they use a GPSDO for the local clock so they can get the PPS edge right where they want it. -- These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts 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] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
I just posted what I was sent for the manufacturer, warts and all. I did notice they were comparing to the M12+ or M12. I hope the specs are correct. I purchased one and will pass on measurement when I get a chance to test it. Thomas Knox To: time-nuts@febo.com From: hmur...@megapathdsl.net Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 00:32:13 -0700 Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. The first claim The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns is correct but are you absolutely sure that the second claim is correct too? It would mean a factor 10 improvement of the CW12-TIM against the M12 which is hardly believeable. The 25 ns probably comes from period of the the free running clock they are using. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me to get 10x better if they use a GPSDO for the local clock so they can get the PPS edge right where they want it. -- These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts 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] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
OK been only slightly paying attention. But I see in the US several sellers for a operational board at $84-89. Maybe I have the wrong unit but it does say 5ns or less timing error Regards Paul WB8TSL On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Ed Palmer ed_pal...@sasktel.net wrote: On 3/29/2012 12:54 AM, Ulrich Bangert wrote: Thomas, The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. The first claim The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns is correct but are you absolutely sure that the second claim is correct too? It would mean a factor10 improvement of the CW12-TIM against the M12 which is hardly believeable. Believe it. I've made multiple test runs where I use an HP 5372A to measure 1000 pulses of the CW12. The Standard Deviation is always 5 ns with a max-min range of 30 ns. That's without any type of error correction - straight from the GPS receiver to the 5372A. A clue to the performance is a line in the datasheet that says the clock speed is up to 120 MHz. Maybe not fast enough to justify +/- 2 ns., but in the ball park. I am rather surprised that they're adding sawtooth correction. This unit has been around for some years. The Motorola firmware isn't even a standard offering anymore. You have to ask for it. It'll be interesting to see what they come up with considering that the datasheet says that the resolution on the 1 PPS signal is 5 ns. There doesn't seem to be much room for correction there. Ed Best regards Ulrich Bangert -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@**febo.com time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von Tom Knox Gesendet: Mittwoch, 28. Marz 2012 20:42 An: Time-Nuts Betreff: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world I spoke with Navsync about some of the issues we are discussing and this was their response. I just received mine and will try to test it over the weekend. 1. Is CW12-TIM compatible with Motorola M12 ? The CW12 is designed to be compatible with the M12 although there are some differences. The main hardware differences are listed on page 7 of the CW12 User Manual (http://www.navsync.com/docs/**cw12-tim_um.pdfhttp://www.navsync.com/docs/cw12-tim_um.pdf). 2. According to the customer, M12 has a Sawtooth Correction Error Hanging Bridge Error? Does CW12 have a solution for these type of errors? How these errors are taken care of in CW12? The Hanging Bridge Error is a pattern seen in the sawtooth error that occurs as the local clock frequency changes. The standard Motorola Binary software for the CW12-TIM does not have the sawtooth correction field in the @@Hn command implemented, but NavSync is currently developing this and it will be available in future standard releases. The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. Thomas Knox __**_ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/** mailman/listinfo/time-nutshttps://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] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
Yes, it is: the CW12 has the PPS derived from the 100MHz clock and that's why you have that PPS granularity with no need for a sawtooth correction. On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 7:18 PM, paul swed paulsw...@gmail.com wrote: OK been only slightly paying attention. But I see in the US several sellers for a operational board at $84-89. Maybe I have the wrong unit but it does say 5ns or less timing error Regards Paul WB8TSL On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Ed Palmer ed_pal...@sasktel.net wrote: On 3/29/2012 12:54 AM, Ulrich Bangert wrote: Thomas, The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. The first claim The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns is correct but are you absolutely sure that the second claim is correct too? It would mean a factor10 improvement of the CW12-TIM against the M12 which is hardly believeable. Believe it. I've made multiple test runs where I use an HP 5372A to measure 1000 pulses of the CW12. The Standard Deviation is always 5 ns with a max-min range of 30 ns. That's without any type of error correction - straight from the GPS receiver to the 5372A. A clue to the performance is a line in the datasheet that says the clock speed is up to 120 MHz. Maybe not fast enough to justify +/- 2 ns., but in the ball park. I am rather surprised that they're adding sawtooth correction. This unit has been around for some years. The Motorola firmware isn't even a standard offering anymore. You have to ask for it. It'll be interesting to see what they come up with considering that the datasheet says that the resolution on the 1 PPS signal is 5 ns. There doesn't seem to be much room for correction there. Ed Best regards Ulrich Bangert -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@**febo.com time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] Im Auftrag von Tom Knox Gesendet: Mittwoch, 28. Marz 2012 20:42 An: Time-Nuts Betreff: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world I spoke with Navsync about some of the issues we are discussing and this was their response. I just received mine and will try to test it over the weekend. 1. Is CW12-TIM compatible with Motorola M12 ? The CW12 is designed to be compatible with the M12 although there are some differences. The main hardware differences are listed on page 7 of the CW12 User Manual (http://www.navsync.com/docs/**cw12-tim_um.pdf http://www.navsync.com/docs/cw12-tim_um.pdf). 2. According to the customer, M12 has a Sawtooth Correction Error Hanging Bridge Error? Does CW12 have a solution for these type of errors? How these errors are taken care of in CW12? The Hanging Bridge Error is a pattern seen in the sawtooth error that occurs as the local clock frequency changes. The standard Motorola Binary software for the CW12-TIM does not have the sawtooth correction field in the @@Hn command implemented, but NavSync is currently developing this and it will be available in future standard releases. The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. Thomas Knox __**_ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/** mailman/listinfo/time-nuts 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] CW12-TIM vs M12M and the world
I spoke with Navsync about some of the issues we are discussing and this was their response. I just received mine and will try to test it over the weekend. 1. Is CW12-TIM compatible with Motorola M12 ? The CW12 is designed to be compatible with the M12 although there are some differences. The main hardware differences are listed on page 7 of the CW12 User Manual (http://www.navsync.com/docs/cw12-tim_um.pdf). 2. According to the customer, M12 has a Sawtooth Correction Error Hanging Bridge Error? Does CW12 have a solution for these type of errors? How these errors are taken care of in CW12? The Hanging Bridge Error is a pattern seen in the sawtooth error that occurs as the local clock frequency changes. The standard Motorola Binary software for the CW12-TIM does not have the sawtooth correction field in the @@Hn command implemented, but NavSync is currently developing this and it will be available in future standard releases. The sawtooth error on the Motorola M12+ is about +/- 25ns, while the CW12-TIM has a sawtooth error of +/- 2 ns, so correcting for the sawtooth error is not as critical with the CW12-TIM. Thomas Knox ___ 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] CW12-TIM
Tom Knox: Has anyone played with the CW12-TIM? I am hoping it is a plug and play replacement for the M12+ in my Commsync II with better performance. + I have no idea if it will work but from my experience with trying to upgrade my Odetics 365 to a 565, there is a chance you might run into a problem. My 365 was built around 1998 and the 565 about 2005 but the main boards looked identical with the exception of the revision on a 27c010 EPROM. I put just the receiver board from the 565 into the 365 and it would not work. By putting both the 565 receiver board and the 565 EPROM into the 365 it worked and acted just like the original 565. It appeared that the EPROM contained some information or code that only let it talk to certain receiver boards. Robert Atkinson posted he had worked for Odetics when the change was made and that both receiver and firmware changes were made. My 565 used a M12+ on a Synergy Systems adapter board to make it look like a UT+ board so I then substituted a Motorola UT+ GPS receiver into the receiver in place of the M12+ and its adapter board and it did work and the display reported it correctly. Looking at the spec sheet I'd say the CW12-TIM would be worth a try as it isn't that expensive and the specs look really good. Both receivers seem to speak the same language where the original receiver in my 365 was an old Magellan which apparently was way different than the M12+/UT+ that worked with the new firmware. The fact that the CW12-TIM can look like the M12+ makes me think it will work as a replacement but there is a chance that it won't depending what the firmware checks. I'm glad you're getting a CW12-TIM to check it out to save me from the gamble. I might be willing to try one of the CW12-TIM boards on the Synergy Systems adapter board as a replacement for my M12+ if you have good luck. I would still have to use the Synergy Systems adapter board that is needed to interface the M12+ to the main board in the 565 to make it fit into the UT+ footprint but the big gain in the 1PPS stability should be unaffected. Please keep us posted on your progress. -Arthur ___ 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] CW12-TIM
Thomas, where did you buy your CW-12? AFAIK, the Motorola version of the CW-12 is a 'special order' item. You can only buy the NMEA version. If you did buy the NMEA version, ask their tech support for the Motorola firmware. They sent it to me and I flashed it with no problem. If you decide not to use the CW-12 in your Commsync and think you might like to play with the 10 MHz output, there was an issue with the frequency of that output. Search the archives for details. I can provide the updated firmware that resolves the issue. Ed On 3/23/2012 7:36 PM, Tom Knox wrote: I have already bite the bullet, After reading the manual I thought it was worth a try. It should arrive Tuesday. So next week I will post what I find. Thanks; Thomas Knox Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 19:17:06 -0600 From: ed_pal...@sasktel.net To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM Sorry Thomas. I don't know a thing about the Commsync II. See what you can dig out of the manuals. Ultimately, you might have to bite the bullet and buy a CW12 to try it. Sometimes that's the only way to find out. Ed On 3/23/2012 6:10 PM, Tom Knox wrote: Thanks Ed, My Commsync has the LPN clean up oscillator option do you think that will clean up the sawtooth? Thomas Knox Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 16:56:50 -0600 From: ed_pal...@sasktel.net To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM Yes, the CW12-TIM was designed as a drop-in replacement for the M12+. Search the archives and you'll find out more about it. One thing to note is that the CW12-TIM doesn't support sawtooth correction so the 1 PPS may or may not be an improvement over the M12+. Ed On 3/23/2012 3:16 PM, Tom Knox wrote: Hi Group; Has anyone played with the CW12-TIM? I am hoping it is a plug and play replacement for the M12+ in my Commsync II with better performance. Is there any other product I should look at? Thanks; Thomas Knox ___ 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] CW12-TIM
Thanks Ed, You may have saved me a headache. The only place I found the CW12-TIM was semiconductorstore.com and they did not know anything about them. I did not realize there were different firmware versions, After reading the manual, I thought it would just recognize NMEA 0183 and Motorola Binary. All thru their literature they keep claiming M12 compatible never clearly mentioning different versions. Typical. the Commsymc II manual, like most other commercial GPS manuals offers nothing useful. They do not even explain what a number of different jumpers do. I am sure one is for 5VDC or 3.3VDC I could only guess at the rest. I am interested in the firmware to fix the 10MHz issue in case I ever utilize the variable freq output. Thanks Again; Thomas Knox Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2012 10:55:01 -0600 From: ed_pal...@sasktel.net To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM Thomas, where did you buy your CW-12? AFAIK, the Motorola version of the CW-12 is a 'special order' item. You can only buy the NMEA version. If you did buy the NMEA version, ask their tech support for the Motorola firmware. They sent it to me and I flashed it with no problem. If you decide not to use the CW-12 in your Commsync and think you might like to play with the 10 MHz output, there was an issue with the frequency of that output. Search the archives for details. I can provide the updated firmware that resolves the issue. Ed On 3/23/2012 7:36 PM, Tom Knox wrote: I have already bite the bullet, After reading the manual I thought it was worth a try. It should arrive Tuesday. So next week I will post what I find. Thanks; Thomas Knox Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 19:17:06 -0600 From: ed_pal...@sasktel.net To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM Sorry Thomas. I don't know a thing about the Commsync II. See what you can dig out of the manuals. Ultimately, you might have to bite the bullet and buy a CW12 to try it. Sometimes that's the only way to find out. Ed On 3/23/2012 6:10 PM, Tom Knox wrote: Thanks Ed, My Commsync has the LPN clean up oscillator option do you think that will clean up the sawtooth? Thomas Knox Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 16:56:50 -0600 From: ed_pal...@sasktel.net To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM Yes, the CW12-TIM was designed as a drop-in replacement for the M12+. Search the archives and you'll find out more about it. One thing to note is that the CW12-TIM doesn't support sawtooth correction so the 1 PPS may or may not be an improvement over the M12+. Ed On 3/23/2012 3:16 PM, Tom Knox wrote: Hi Group; Has anyone played with the CW12-TIM? I am hoping it is a plug and play replacement for the M12+ in my Commsync II with better performance. Is there any other product I should look at? Thanks; Thomas Knox ___ 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] CW12-TIM
That's the same place I got mine. They made the same mistake, but helped me get the Motorola firmware. The CW-12 is also available from Janus Remote Communications (Navsync and Janus are part of Connor-Winfield). They have two warnings on the CW-12 page about the Motorola firmware. As for the variable frequency output, it's only variable with the NMEA load. Whoever paid Navsync to create the Motorola firmware apparently wasn't interested in the variable frequency output so there's no command to change the frequency. It's fixed at 10 MHz. So you can have variable frequency, or you can have a Motorola-compatible timing receiver with TRAIM. Sigh. Connor-Winfield provided me with the firmware, but asked me not to post the link. I'll send it off-list. Ed On 3/24/2012 3:07 PM, Tom Knox wrote: Thanks Ed, You may have saved me a headache. The only place I found the CW12-TIM was semiconductorstore.com and they did not know anything about them. I did not realize there were different firmware versions, After reading the manual, I thought it would just recognize NMEA 0183 and Motorola Binary. All thru their literature they keep claiming M12 compatible never clearly mentioning different versions. Typical. the Commsymc II manual, like most other commercial GPS manuals offers nothing useful. They do not even explain what a number of different jumpers do. I am sure one is for 5VDC or 3.3VDC I could only guess at the rest. I am interested in the firmware to fix the 10MHz issue in case I ever utilize the variable freq output. Thanks Again; Thomas Knox Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2012 10:55:01 -0600 From: ed_pal...@sasktel.net To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM Thomas, where did you buy your CW-12? AFAIK, the Motorola version of the CW-12 is a 'special order' item. You can only buy the NMEA version. If you did buy the NMEA version, ask their tech support for the Motorola firmware. They sent it to me and I flashed it with no problem. If you decide not to use the CW-12 in your Commsync and think you might like to play with the 10 MHz output, there was an issue with the frequency of that output. Search the archives for details. I can provide the updated firmware that resolves the issue. Ed On 3/23/2012 7:36 PM, Tom Knox wrote: I have already bite the bullet, After reading the manual I thought it was worth a try. It should arrive Tuesday. So next week I will post what I find. Thanks; Thomas Knox Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 19:17:06 -0600 From: ed_pal...@sasktel.net To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM Sorry Thomas. I don't know a thing about the Commsync II. See what you can dig out of the manuals. Ultimately, you might have to bite the bullet and buy a CW12 to try it. Sometimes that's the only way to find out. Ed On 3/23/2012 6:10 PM, Tom Knox wrote: Thanks Ed, My Commsync has the LPN clean up oscillator option do you think that will clean up the sawtooth? Thomas Knox Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 16:56:50 -0600 From: ed_pal...@sasktel.net To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM Yes, the CW12-TIM was designed as a drop-in replacement for the M12+. Search the archives and you'll find out more about it. One thing to note is that the CW12-TIM doesn't support sawtooth correction so the 1 PPS may or may not be an improvement over the M12+. Ed On 3/23/2012 3:16 PM, Tom Knox wrote: Hi Group; Has anyone played with the CW12-TIM? I am hoping it is a plug and play replacement for the M12+ in my Commsync II with better performance. Is there any other product I should look at? Thanks; Thomas Knox ___ 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] CW12-TIM
Hi Group; Has anyone played with the CW12-TIM? I am hoping it is a plug and play replacement for the M12+ in my Commsync II with better performance. Is there any other product I should look at? Thanks; Thomas Knox ___ 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] CW12-TIM
Yes, the CW12-TIM was designed as a drop-in replacement for the M12+. Search the archives and you'll find out more about it. One thing to note is that the CW12-TIM doesn't support sawtooth correction so the 1 PPS may or may not be an improvement over the M12+. Ed On 3/23/2012 3:16 PM, Tom Knox wrote: Hi Group; Has anyone played with the CW12-TIM? I am hoping it is a plug and play replacement for the M12+ in my Commsync II with better performance. Is there any other product I should look at? Thanks; Thomas Knox ___ 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] CW12-TIM
Thanks Ed, My Commsync has the LPN clean up oscillator option do you think that will clean up the sawtooth? Thomas Knox Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 16:56:50 -0600 From: ed_pal...@sasktel.net To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM Yes, the CW12-TIM was designed as a drop-in replacement for the M12+. Search the archives and you'll find out more about it. One thing to note is that the CW12-TIM doesn't support sawtooth correction so the 1 PPS may or may not be an improvement over the M12+. Ed On 3/23/2012 3:16 PM, Tom Knox wrote: Hi Group; Has anyone played with the CW12-TIM? I am hoping it is a plug and play replacement for the M12+ in my Commsync II with better performance. Is there any other product I should look at? Thanks; Thomas Knox ___ 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] CW12-TIM
act...@hotmail.com said: Thanks Ed, My Commsync has the LPN clean up oscillator option do you think that will clean up the sawtooth? I doubt it. What's the time constant on the PLL? Do you know about hanging bridges? -- These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM
Sorry Thomas. I don't know a thing about the Commsync II. See what you can dig out of the manuals. Ultimately, you might have to bite the bullet and buy a CW12 to try it. Sometimes that's the only way to find out. Ed On 3/23/2012 6:10 PM, Tom Knox wrote: Thanks Ed, My Commsync has the LPN clean up oscillator option do you think that will clean up the sawtooth? Thomas Knox Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 16:56:50 -0600 From: ed_pal...@sasktel.net To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM Yes, the CW12-TIM was designed as a drop-in replacement for the M12+. Search the archives and you'll find out more about it. One thing to note is that the CW12-TIM doesn't support sawtooth correction so the 1 PPS may or may not be an improvement over the M12+. Ed On 3/23/2012 3:16 PM, Tom Knox wrote: Hi Group; Has anyone played with the CW12-TIM? I am hoping it is a plug and play replacement for the M12+ in my Commsync II with better performance. Is there any other product I should look at? Thanks; Thomas Knox ___ 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] CW12-TIM
I have already bite the bullet, After reading the manual I thought it was worth a try. It should arrive Tuesday. So next week I will post what I find. Thanks; Thomas Knox Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 19:17:06 -0600 From: ed_pal...@sasktel.net To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM Sorry Thomas. I don't know a thing about the Commsync II. See what you can dig out of the manuals. Ultimately, you might have to bite the bullet and buy a CW12 to try it. Sometimes that's the only way to find out. Ed On 3/23/2012 6:10 PM, Tom Knox wrote: Thanks Ed, My Commsync has the LPN clean up oscillator option do you think that will clean up the sawtooth? Thomas Knox Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 16:56:50 -0600 From: ed_pal...@sasktel.net To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] CW12-TIM Yes, the CW12-TIM was designed as a drop-in replacement for the M12+. Search the archives and you'll find out more about it. One thing to note is that the CW12-TIM doesn't support sawtooth correction so the 1 PPS may or may not be an improvement over the M12+. Ed On 3/23/2012 3:16 PM, Tom Knox wrote: Hi Group; Has anyone played with the CW12-TIM? I am hoping it is a plug and play replacement for the M12+ in my Commsync II with better performance. Is there any other product I should look at? Thanks; Thomas Knox ___ 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.
