On Fri, 23 May 2008 09:26:43 +1200, you wrote: >The errors of the various GPSDOs cannot be determined without access to >a primary standard.
Has anyone here tried to squeeze extra medium term performance out of a rubidium by controlling (or compensating for) environmental factors like temperature and pressure? Not having a decent reference for testing GPSDOs was one thing that made me want to see what could be done, although I'd been wanting to try it for a long time anyway. I recently got around to testing an LPRO against GPS, and the stability was still a fairly useful 1E-13 at 1 day. It was in a temperature controlled housing, and had an analogue pressure sensor connected up to it to adjust the c-field to compensate for air pressure changes - not a perfect setup, but as an experiment it was definitely promising. I'm not suggesting that it would be as good as a primary standard, but it could be useful in some circumstances, either stand-alone or steered to GPS. The only paper I came accross which deals specifically with this is a rather short one where FE5650A's were tested: "The Effects of Ambient Temperature Fluctuations on the Long-Term Frequency Stability of a Miniature Rubidium Atomic Frequency Standard" Angus. _______________________________________________ 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.
