Hi
It’s “happy” either way (as in, it will accept the pulse). The stability will
be degraded due
to hanging bridges if you don’t have sawtooth correction.
Bob
> On Oct 12, 2015, at 6:13 PM, Hal Murray wrote:
>
>
> kb...@n1k.org said:
>> A $25 Ref-0 with the same GPS and a (now) documented M
Hi,
The REF-0 will accept a PPS signal from a non-timing GPS. I use the u-blox
NEO-6M for a lot of my testing. That module can be had in the $12 range online.
I have also gotten the REF-0 to lock to a Venus GPS and an FE-5680B rubidium
standard.
Of course, using a less stable PPS signal will g
kb...@n1k.org said:
> A $25 Ref-0 with the same GPS and a (now) documented MCU will do the same
> thing as any other GPSDO.
Does anybody know if the Ref-0 expects a clean PPS from the Ref-1 OCXO, or is
it happy with what comes out of a typical GPS unit?
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam
I'd second that, sounds interesting and plenty of accuracy for the project
I'm thinking of.
On 10 Oct 2015 15:00, "Alex Pummer" wrote:
> Hi Bert,
> where could I get more inf on on that project?
> 73
> KJ6UHN
> Alex
>
> On 10/10/2015 4:23 AM, Bert Kehren via time-nuts wrote:
>
>> We did a GPS PL
Hi Bert,
where could I get more inf on on that project?
73
KJ6UHN
Alex
On 10/10/2015 4:23 AM, Bert Kehren via time-nuts wrote:
We did a GPS PLL using ublox M7 not for time nuts but for Hams no u
processors, simple to build with readily available parts with performance of 1
E-10.. Hams still ha
We did a GPS PLL using ublox M7 not for time nuts but for Hams no u
processors, simple to build with readily available parts with performance of
1
E-10.. Hams still have get to gether and it would make sense to order the
parts. Boards would be less than $ 2 in quantity 10. 5X5 cm board can
(Long-term members of the list can skip this; you've seen it many times
before. But it sounds like Clint is new, and could use some basic
explanation. I was in his position once too).
It sounds like you are assuming that the GPS receiver's internal oscillator is
locked to GPS time. In most
Hi
The PPS out of the GPS has a number of issues short term. Without sawtooth
correction it likely is hopping and bopping 5 or 10 ns each second. Looked at as
frequency, the 1 Hz is +/- many ppb.
The “frequency” output inherits this problem and adds the issues associated
with pulse
drop freque
> Le 9 oct. 2015 à 16:16, Clint Jay a écrit :
>
> I am still learning and want to understand, if the PPS is good then why is
> the programmable output bad, as I understand it thus far, the PPS is
> derived from the same clock source or have I got that badly wrong?
Yes, the same clock, BUT the o
There is a lot of jitter on a GPS 1 PPS output.
You need a big "flywheel" to smooth out the jitter errors.
GPS modules only have room for small flywheels.
--- Graham
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 9:16 AM, Clint Jay wrote:
> I am still learning and want to understand, if the PPS is good then why is
> t
The 1 pps and the output frequencies are all derived from the same XO in
the module. Up to 7 the difference in a T is that the saw tooth correction
factor is brought out for correction purposes . 7 has a much higher XO
frequency than the 5 so the saw tooth is smaller. So use a ublox 7 if you
I am still learning and want to understand, if the PPS is good then why is
the programmable output bad, as I understand it thus far, the PPS is
derived from the same clock source or have I got that badly wrong?
On 9 October 2015 at 12:16, Bob Camp wrote:
> Hi
>
> Doing a GPSDO by locking to the
Hi
Doing a GPSDO by locking to the awful 10 MHz output from any of these GPS
modules
is not going to work very well. Given the very long time constants involved in
a GPSDO
control loop, doing it without code is going to be pretty difficult.
A much easier approach:
Grab the GPS PPS and a scop
13 matches
Mail list logo
