Hi Brooke
Maybe I'll drop a line to Hugo to get his comments.
Rob
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Brooke Clarke
Sent: 20 February 2007 00:45
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] WAAS for Time
I don't wish to offend, but that is totally wrong. Even if every
satellite were on the exact same frequency, with the exact same
doppler, and the exact same direction, you would still have no problem
separating the carriers of the multiple satellites. The reason is
that the satellites do not
This is for a price sensitive commercial application, not a science
project and he is trying to minimize the amount of hardware at the far
end for cost and maintenance reasons.
A cleanup PLL becomes very costly when dealing with a frequency agile
system.
Thanks
Didier
Hal Murray wrote:
A
On 2/20/07, Peter Vince [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't wish to offend, but that is totally wrong. Even if every
satellite were on the exact same frequency, with the exact same
doppler, and the exact same direction, you would still have no problem
separating the carriers of the multiple
Hi --
I'm doing some stability comparisons of the RTFG-m-RB and RTFG-m-XO units.
I fired up two RTFG pairs (thanks to Jim Miller for lending me his
units) with the 10 MHz and cross-over interface cables in place. The
units fired up normally.
I did a 24 hour frequency stability run of the RB
Dear Bruce, Time-Nuts,
Sorry for the silence it was a long weekend. I checked the oscillator,
the serial number was: 1528A10107
If I'm correct this means it was manufactured in week 28 of 1975.
A pity that the cold frequency-offset is nowhere metioned, except for
the HP-Journal article.
Best
Also know as Double Sideband un suppressed or in other words, good old AM
Lester B Veenstra
M0YCM K1YCM K1YCM/6Y5
Mail Address:
Lester Veenstra
PSC 45 Box 781
APO AE 09468
Telephones:
Office 940-6456
Office +44-(0)1423-846-385
Home: +44-(0)1943-880-963
Hi Dave,
Try browsing chapter three here-
http://www.gmat.unsw.edu.au/snap/gps/gps_survey/principles_gps.htm
I have trouble getting my head round some of this stuff as well and
found it a useful read.
DaveB
That looks really excellent, I'll go off and study - thank you for the link.
And
I got similar results in that the rb oscillators are not GPS disciplined
after a 72 hr run.
I started off by manually offsetting the frequency of a warmed up rb unit by
doing a manual adjustment to the rb oscillator via the manual adjustment pot
so that it would be approximately 0.0050Hz off
I believe that there is more to the interface cable than a simple
crossover -- I wonder if there are any pins that are jumped on one or
the other of the connectors.
By the way, in the experiment I reported on earlier, the XOs seem to be
running undisciplined as well, and are about 1 Hz off
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
tmail.com writes:
1. there is the unit is putting voltage to the electronic cfield connector
of the rb oscillator.
It is not unlikely that there is a DAC for that voltage so that
factory and field calibrations can be done from a remote location.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
The interfering signals to GPS are:
...
3) defective ground based equipment, like the active TV antenna on a
ship in Monterey bay.
I hadn't heard about the Monterey Bay GPS mess. Google found this writeup.
The Hunt for RFI - Unjamming a Coast Harbor
It is not unlikely that there is a DAC for that voltage so that
factory and field calibrations can be done from a remote location.
I'm not sure in this case. Lucent put an awful lot of stuff in the RB unit
for it to be just green light.
___
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
tmail.com writes:
It is not unlikely that there is a DAC for that voltage so that
factory and field calibrations can be done from a remote location.
I'm not sure in this case. Lucent put an awful lot of stuff in the RB unit
for it to be just
I traced out where most of the interface connections went to. I don't
remember exactly what I found out, but I remember it was rather straight
foward so I'm leaning towards it being a simple cross over. What I'm not
sure about is the logic that selects the XO or the RB to be ON. But I'm
Didier Juges wrote:
This is for a price sensitive commercial application, not a science
project and he is trying to minimize the amount of hardware at the far
end for cost and maintenance reasons.
A cleanup PLL becomes very costly when dealing with a frequency agile
system.
Thanks
Jeroen Bastemeijer wrote:
Dear Bruce, Time-Nuts,
Sorry for the silence it was a long weekend. I checked the oscillator,
the serial number was: 1528A10107
If I'm correct this means it was manufactured in week 28 of 1975.
A pity that the cold frequency-offset is nowhere metioned, except for
How agile does it have to be, and how clean does it have to be? Optical
microwave clock distribution and price sensitive aren't terms you
normally encounter in the same wing of the library.
-- john, KE5FX
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of
Didier
Additional references
http://www.nt.hs-bremen.de/peik/rof/literatur/ROF-franz-presentation.pdf
http://www.plextek.eu/brochure/rffiber.pdf
http://www.opticalzonu.com/products/oz400TR.pdf
As you may glean from the above you wont be able to achieve anything
useful unless the laser is
IF anyone has information on an OAC (Ovenaire) Model OSC 35-42B
(26-0040-01) 10.000 MHz Precision Crystal Oscillator Serial No.
36600-3661, I would really appreciate pin outs and power requirements.
Thanks
Bob Ogburn
N5LXK
___
time-nuts mailing list
Hi,
I'm just a starter in the field of time and frequency.
I have recently acquired a Austron 1201A Linear Phase Recorder and now i
was wondering
if someone on this list has an electronic manual for this and just some
general info.
Sincerely,
Stijn Nestra PE1RKS
Hi
John Ackermann N8UR wrote:
snipped
3. In about 30 seconds, XO FAULT and NO GPS go off, ON
comes on.
So, the XO is definitely testing for the presence of the 10 MHz
reference input signal, and becomes unhappy when it goes away.
but only if crossover cable used?
This is consistent
Phil Staton said the following on 02/20/2007 07:33 PM:
Hi
John Ackermann N8UR wrote:
snipped
3. In about 30 seconds, XO FAULT and NO GPS go off, ON
comes on.
So, the XO is definitely testing for the presence of the 10 MHz
reference input signal, and becomes unhappy when it goes
Didier Juges wrote:
Bruce,
The more I read the specs, the more obvious it becomes. I did not
realize how jittery these things are.
I am still trying to get more info on how clean the LO has to be, but I
am pretty sure it will be close to telecom specs.
Thanks,
Didier
Didier
One
My understanding is that the immediate application is for fixed
frequency, but my friend's products include some that are frequency
agile, and he would like to be able to leverage the technology
development across his product line.
In the agile application, I do not know how fast it must
Dr Bruce Griffiths wrote:
Didier Juges wrote:
Bruce,
The more I read the specs, the more obvious it becomes. I did not
realize how jittery these things are.
I am still trying to get more info on how clean the LO has to be, but I
am pretty sure it will be close to telecom specs.
Didier Juges wrote:
Bruce,
I have read about this, noise performance also is not good for analog
transmissions, causing very limited dynamic range.
That's probably why they use either FM or digital coding in just about
all applications.
I just did not think the jitter would be so bad,
Hi All;
To answer a question first. I believe PLDENB likely means programmable logic
device enable. Right next to that header is an Altera Max7000 series device.
What we dont know is, when enabled does that mean the device just wakes up, or
does it mean the device is opened to be reprogrammed.
Dr Bruce Griffiths wrote:
Didier Juges wrote:
Bruce,
I have read about this, noise performance also is not good for analog
transmissions, causing very limited dynamic range.
That's probably why they use either FM or digital coding in just about
all applications.
I just did not
Didier Juges wrote:
Dr Bruce Griffiths wrote:
Didier Juges wrote:
Bruce,
I have read about this, noise performance also is not good for analog
transmissions, causing very limited dynamic range.
That's probably why they use either FM or digital coding in just about
all
Dr Bruce Griffiths wrote:
Didier Juges wrote:
Dr Bruce Griffiths wrote:
Didier Juges wrote:
Bruce,
I have read about this, noise performance also is not good for analog
transmissions, causing very limited dynamic range.
That's probably why they use either
Do you hear the relays working when you change the
signal level?
If yes, and that's probably the case, i definitely
suspect burned-out attenuator resistors/modules
(HIGHLY probably due to excessive reverse power
(Signal generator directly plugged to a transceiver
which has been accidently
All 3 voltages are present as marked at XO-TP400. The jumper W11-W12
measures 2.394 volts. I'm running the pair, XO RB, but having
intermittent NO GPS LEDs on, on both units.
With the Ref input/output the J5 jumper cables disconnected the above 4
voltages do not change.
Regards,
Bob
So I have a bunch of these mini-circuits splitters that cover 500 - 2000
Mhz. It has continuity on all ports. Has anyone tried something like this to
use
a single GPS antenna on 2 receivers? They both put out 5 volts on the center
pin. Maybe a cap on one of the ports?
In a message dated 2/21/2007 06:13:52 W. Europe Standard Time, [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
writes:
So I have a bunch of these mini-circuits splitters that cover 500 - 2000
Mhz. It has continuity on all ports. Has anyone tried something like this to
use
a single GPS antenna on 2 receivers? They
35 matches
Mail list logo
