Re: [time-nuts] Spec An for phase noise measurements

It is quite surprising that the 859xE series is spec'd about 10-15 db worse on phase noise than the comparable 856xE instruments. I wonder if this difference exists in the performance Yes, and I just documented it. See my earlier post with the .GIF attachment. or just marketing

[time-nuts] SiRF GPS receivers: GlobalSat MR-350P

The context for this query is that I'm looking for inexpensive GPS units with a PPS output to connect up to ntpd. Is anybody familiar with these units? I just wired one up. The PPS signal is only 1 microsecond wide. The PPS from my Z3801A is 10 microseconds wide. I can deal with that. The

[time-nuts] Ovenaire OSC 49-61C

Hi, I know this has been asked before - but I haven't found an answer in the archives. Has anybody a spec on an Ovenaire OSC 49-61C, ex HP 8568A. Although I haven't yet, I should be able to determine the pin-out from the service manual also the rudiments of the performance spec. However, I

Re: [time-nuts] Ovenaire OSC 49-61C

Geoff Blake wrote: Hi, I know this has been asked before - but I haven't found an answer in the archives. Has anybody a spec on an Ovenaire OSC 49-61C, ex HP 8568A. Although I haven't yet, I should be able to determine the pin-out from the service manual also the rudiments of the

Re: [time-nuts] 10811 clones

Just speaking of 10811 clones, I have one made by Piezo Systems, model # 2810007-1. It fits electrically and mechanically HP boards, and looks like a 10811. But I miss the specs. Does anybody have any info? Thanks, Antonio Geoff Blake wrote: Hi, I know this has been asked before - but I

[time-nuts] Wenzel, Inc article on low-noise oscillators

Hello All-- I suppose that most on this list already know all about this, but as a newbie to considerations about low noise oscillators, I found the Wenzel, Inc article on design notes for ultra-low noise oscillators interesting-- Just in case anyone on the list has not seen it:

Re: [time-nuts] Ovenaire OSC 49-61C

Geoff, I have one of each lying in front of me. They are quite different. The 10811 is 3 3/4 by 2 by 2 3/8. It has a PC edge connector with 15 contacts protruding from the case. The 49-61C is 3 1/2 by 1 15/16 by 1 15/16. It has 6 individual thru-case pins to a short pigtail lead with a 5 pin

Re: [time-nuts] 10811 clones

Just speaking of 10811 clones, I have one made by Piezo Systems, model # 2810007-1. It fits electrically and mechanically HP boards, and looks like a 10811. But I miss the specs. Does anybody have any info? Thanks, Antonio Yep, I have one of those also. From what I gather they were used

Re: [time-nuts] SiRF GPS receivers: GlobalSat MR-350P

On Jan 23, 2008 1:44 AM, Hal Murray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The context for this query is that I'm looking for inexpensive GPS units with a PPS output to connect up to ntpd. Is anybody familiar with these units? I've used other globalsat receivers based on both the SiRFstarII and

Re: [time-nuts] indoor GPS test.

I have had no success getting anyone to loan me their GPS units. Does anyone have suggestions as to what inexpensive unit to purchase, which will give a good indication of whether a GPSDO unit will receive and process the signals? Which end of the nut scale are you on? If you have to do

Re: [time-nuts] Ovenaire OSC 49-61C

John Ackermann N8UR wrote: Geoff, my understanding is that for a time HP swapped out the 10811A oscillator in the 8566/8568 with another unit, probably the one you're talking about. If that's the case, I strongly suspect that the pinout would be compatible with the 10811A. So that might be

Re: [time-nuts] Ovenaire OSC 49-61C

Here is the spec for the Ovenair 49-62 Hopefully it will be close enough to be helpful. http://www.ko4bb.com/cgi-bin/manuals.pl?dir=5)_GPS_Timing/Ovenair_OSC_49-62_0950-0411 Didier KO4BB Geoff Blake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I know this has been asked before - but I haven't found

[time-nuts] 20logN was Re: phase noise questions (long)

Hi John, Steve, et al, While I am not a phase noise buff at all, in talking to many on this subject I feel that this is not well understood. When I ask where the 6db/Hz for doubling or 20logN in general comes from, I very often get an unsatisfying answer and I have seen strange notes on this

Re: [time-nuts] Ovenaire OSC 49-61C

There are two versions of the 10811. One is as you describe, the other has feedthrough pins and a small 5 pin connector. Specs are on my web site: http://www.ko4bb.com/cgi-bin/manuals.pl?dir=HP_Agilent/HP_-_10811_Crystal_Oven_Oscillator Didier KO4BB Jeff Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

[time-nuts] indoor GPS test.

As with all of my hobbies, they are limited by money and time to pursue them. IF I were certain I would get a good enough signal, to be more accurate and stable than my current setup(OCXO disciplined by a CDMA signal), then I would go for a GPSDO recommendation. The GPS 18 from Garmin is ~130

Re: [time-nuts] Ovenaire OSC 49-61C

On Wed, 23 Jan 2008, Didier Juges wrote: Here is the spec for the Ovenair 49-62 Hopefully it will be close enough to be helpful. http://www.ko4bb.com/cgi-bin/manuals.pl?dir=5)_GPS_Timing/Ovenair_OSC_49-62_0950-0411 Hi Didier, Thanks but it does not look that similar, it has less

Re: [time-nuts] 20logN was Re: phase noise questions (long)

Christophe Huygens wrote: Hi John, Steve, et al, While I am not a phase noise buff at all, in talking to many on this subject I feel that this is not well understood. When I ask where the 6db/Hz for doubling or 20logN in general comes from, I very often get an unsatisfying answer and I

Re: [time-nuts] Ovenaire OSC 49-61C

In a message dated 23/01/2008 21:07:11 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: BTW, a colleague is scanning the 10811-60111 for me. Hi Geoff If you could make the scan generally available, either via email or by uploading it to Didier's site perhaps?, that would be much

Re: [time-nuts] 20logN was Re: phase noise questions (long)

Hi, I did the same thing using the Euler relation for sin(w1+sin(w2t)) and straight multiplication and collecting terms gave 1-0.5*cos(2*w1+2*sin(w2t)). I wanted to actually contribute but was too slow :( -steve Quoting Bruce Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Christophe Huygens wrote: Hi John,

Re: [time-nuts] 20logN was Re: phase noise questions (long)

Perhaps the results can be summarised by: (1+x)2 = 1+2x + x2 For |x| 1 the term in x2 is negligible. For FM the term in x determines the amplitude of the (2fc-fm), (2fc+fm) components whereas the x2 term determines the amplitude of the (2fc-2fm) and (2fc+2fm) components. The 1 term determines

Re: [time-nuts] 20logN was Re: phase noise questions (long)

steve the knife wrote: Hi, I did the same thing using the Euler relation for sin(w1+sin(w2t)) and straight multiplication and collecting terms gave 1-0.5*cos(2*w1+2*sin(w2t)). I wanted to actually contribute but was too slow :( -steve Steve Please post your derivation it may be

Re: [time-nuts] Spec An for phase noise measurements

On Jan 21, 2008 11:44 AM, John Miles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am considering getting a new spectrum analyzer so I can make better phase noise measurements than with my 8596E. I've looked at the 8566B and the 8562 and 8563 since I need coverage to at least 6 GHz. The 8566 is huge and

Re: [time-nuts] 20logN was Re: phase noise questions (long)

Christophe - While all of the mathematics to prove the 20logN behavior can be found in most elementary texts, the concept of what is really happening may not be so obvious from the math, even though the math of course supports the 20logN behavior. You, yourself said it in your assumption in 2a.

Re: [time-nuts] Spec An for phase noise measurements

I am seeing the following performance when measuring the built in 30 MHz reference: 100 Hz -81dBc 1 kHz-108 to -110 10 kHz -117 100 kHz -125 1 MHz-131 All of those are 3-8dB better than the spec, except for at 1 MHz where the spec is -135. The measurements

Re: [time-nuts] 20logN was Re: phase noise questions (long)

Mike Feher wrote: Christophe - While all of the mathematics to prove the 20logN behavior can be found in most elementary texts, the concept of what is really happening may not be so obvious from the math, even though the math of course supports the 20logN behavior. You, yourself said it in

Re: [time-nuts] Wenzel, Inc article on low-noise oscillators

The Wenzel article mentions that care was taken to minimize power supply noise and HEATER NOISE. I had never considered the effect of the magnetic field from the heater winding coupling into the oscillator circuitry. Fortunately (aka luckily), I had always wound my heater coils with 2

Re: [time-nuts] Spec An for phase noise measurements

I decided to get a new spectrum analyzer rather than an 11729 at this time. I bought an Advantest R3267 to replace the HP 8596E. It seems to have phase noise performance in the same neighborhood as the 8560-series, for about half the price. In case I ever need anything better, I can get an

Re: [time-nuts] Spec An for phase noise measurements

Are you using a noise marker that yields dBc/Hz values? The FFT window function has its own required noise-response correction value, so if you're just looking at a marker and doing the log10(RBW) subtraction yourself, that could account for the difference. Also, if there is a noise marker,

Re: [time-nuts] Wenzel, Inc article on low-noise oscillators

By the way -- Despite the discussion in the article about the voltage regulator, TVB and I have discovered that the Wenzel ULN oscillators are very sensitive to external factors like power supply noise. When I was testing with an aged bench supply that apparently had some dried up electrolytics,

Re: [time-nuts] Spec An for phase noise measurements

Sure, send me the GPIB .PDF, either via Didier's site, ftp.ko4bb.com, user manuals, password manuals) or via my GMail account at [EMAIL PROTECTED] It looks like a great spectrum analyzer considering the prices they seem to fetch on eBay. Should be a nice upgrade from the 8596E, all right.

Re: [time-nuts] Spec An for phase noise measurements

On Jan 23, 2008 4:26 PM, John Miles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are you using a noise marker that yields dBc/Hz values? The FFT window function has its own required noise-response correction value, so if you're just looking at a marker and doing the log10(RBW) subtraction yourself, that could

Re: [time-nuts] Wenzel, Inc article on low-noise oscillators

John Ackermann N8UR wrote: By the way -- Despite the discussion in the article about the voltage regulator, TVB and I have discovered that the Wenzel ULN oscillators are very sensitive to external factors like power supply noise. When I was testing with an aged bench supply that apparently

Re: [time-nuts] Spec An for phase noise measurements

Usually the built-in noise marker will average some nearby trace points (behind the scenes), convert the result from dBm to dBm/Hz by subtracting 10*log(RBW), and add the filter/detector noise-equivalent-bandwidth correction. The latter factor makes the DUT look 2-4 dB worse than the 10*log(RBW)

Re: [time-nuts] 20logN was Re: phase noise questions (long)

Mike Feher wrote: Bruce - I am just trying to keep things practical for us. - Mike Mike B. Feher, N4FS 89 Arnold Blvd. Howell, NJ, 07731 732-886-5960 Mike I realise that, but some caveats are necessary, otherwise someone will try locking a low frequency VCO to the rubidium

Re: [time-nuts] 10811 clonesy

Jason wrote: Just speaking of 10811 clones, I have one made by Piezo Systems, model # 2810007-1. It fits electrically and mechanically HP boards, and looks like a 10811. But I miss the specs. Does anybody have any info? I've been unable to find any info but logic would dictate their specs

[time-nuts] New Question on HP3048A Phase Noise Test Set

Bruce Griffiths wrote: After low pass filtering Vo(t) = (A2/2)*sin((w1-w2)t) Thus the amplitude of the discrete spur related component in the low pass filtered phase detector output is 1/2 (6dB) the amplitude of the discrete spur itself. This result is independent of any additional

Re: [time-nuts] New Question on HP3048A Phase Noise Test Set

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bruce Griffiths wrote: After low pass filtering Vo(t) = (A2/2)*sin((w1-w2)t) Thus the amplitude of the discrete spur related component in the low pass filtered phase detector output is 1/2 (6dB) the amplitude of the discrete spur itself. This result is