Tom,
as I did say in my first sentence I would have been glad to make
measurements against a H2 Maser or a Cesium. Unfortunately I don't own
one of them.
But then let us consider what is second best: A xtal oscillator alone or
a Rb alone won't do the job because up from a certain Tau we would
Jack,
the good thing about it is: 99.9 % of the people that i invite to drink
an Laphroaig with me believe that i am going to poisen them and state
that they will never in their life take a second sip of it. That helps
keeping my inventory of Laphroaig entirely for me alone!
Best regards and a
From: Dr Bruce Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [time-nuts] Picket fence technique
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 18:07:43 +1300
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bruce,
The Question is has anyone considered using this technique?
I have not seen it in use for any commercial products. In fact, few of
My HP 5334B has been doing the following since I got it off eBay this
summer. It's not a major problem, but it is irritating and I would like
to fix it, but I don't know where to start...
At power up, when being fed two signals for TIC measurements, the
instrument passes self test without
Thus a simple inexpensive single chip divider such as 74HC4017 Johnson
counter may be used for oscillator frequencies of up to 20MHz or so.
As a slight aside, Google gave me a page with an excellent
description of Johnson counters:
http://www.vias.org/feee/shiftreg_07.html
which also
Your manual 2934 covers the 2804 series and the 2804 definitely contains fixes
made in the 2704. Otherwise it would state that the 2804 requires this change.
If you use a manual that cover everything up to an including 2804, then you
wouldn't know if any later fixes might have solve an issue
Thank you Jack, it makes sense, but I am not aware of the logic used by
HP for serial numbers. I know it's been covered extensively on the
hp_agilent newsgroup, I just don't recall.
Thanks anyway and Merry Christmas to you and all time-nuts.
Didier KO4BB
Jack Hudler wrote:
Your manual 2934
Hi --
I'm running an experiment with my 3 atomic standards (2 HP 5061A and 1
HP 5065A) versus GPS via an M12+ (no sawtooth correction). I now have
148 days of data, and hope to keep the experiment running out to 180 days.
For the fun of it this morning I ran all-tau analyses of all three
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], John Ackermann N8UR writes:
I'm running an experiment with my 3 atomic standards (2 HP 5061A and 1
HP 5065A) versus GPS via an M12+ (no sawtooth correction). I now have
148 days of data, and hope to keep the experiment running out to 180 days.
180 days is a bad
Poul-Henning Kamp said the following on 12/23/2006 05:11 PM:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], John Ackermann N8UR writes:
I'm running an experiment with my 3 atomic standards (2 HP 5061A and 1
HP 5065A) versus GPS via an M12+ (no sawtooth correction). I now have
148 days of data, and hope to
From: Poul-Henning Kamp [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Some long-term data
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 22:11:20 +
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], John Ackermann N8UR writes:
I'm running an experiment with my 3 atomic standards (2 HP 5061A and 1
HP
Magnus Danielson said the following on 12/23/2006 05:22 PM:
Such as temperature and humidity. One of the Cesiums seemed to have a rather
large frequency offset. Did you drift-compensate your ADEV measures or not?
No, I ran the ADEV in Stable32 without removing drift. My understanding
is that
Please forgive what is probably a naive question from this newbie,
but a loop filter has considerable delay (half the number of samples
for a typical(?) symmetrical FIR or block-averaging filter). This
must surely limit the usefulness of very long averaging times? And
perhaps it could
Brooks Shera wrote:
- Original Message - From: Dr Bruce Griffiths
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Brooks Shera [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 22, 2006 20:52
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] GPS orthodontics: time averaging theory
Brooks Shera wrote:
- Original Message - From:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Peter Vince writes:
Please forgive what is probably a naive question from this newbie,
but a loop filter has considerable delay (half the number of samples
for a typical(?) symmetrical FIR or block-averaging filter).
One interesting approach here is to use a
From: John Ackermann N8UR [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Some long-term data
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 17:53:50 -0500
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi John!
Magnus Danielson said the following on 12/23/2006 05:22 PM:
Such as temperature and humidity. One of the Cesiums seemed to
Didier Juges wrote:
Dr Bruce Griffiths wrote:
Using a GPS timing receiver to quantify the long term stability of an
oscillator whose frequency is not a harmonic of 1Hz, then the technique
of dividing the oscillator frequency down to 1Hz and logging the time
delay between the GPS
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 12/23/2006 15:17:33 Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The FIR filter used in some GPSDOCXOs is not the optimum prefilter for
the control loop.
An exponential averaging (IIR) filter is better.
However an FIR filter has the
Brooks
The pitfalls Dave mentions are:
PARTIAL PULSE BIAS: very narrow gated clock pulses are not counted,
thereby introducing a bias as computed in his eq(1). Note that all
the
parameters on the right side of eq(1) are constant, thus the bias is
constant. A constant bias is important
19 matches
Mail list logo
