> Mike > Neither do I, know how to reply to a post that is. This may be the > blind leading the blind and end up in some unknown place.
> True it would be simpler to use the High freq Osc directly but it > would not be accurate. > The problem with just using the High freq as you suggested is that > it is not at any known, exact or even constant frequency. > The divider number can change for each low freq cycle. Example if > the master freq was say 0.2520 Hz high then every forth second the > divider would add 1 extra divide count and every 500th second it > would divide by an additional extra clock time, therefore skipping > 11 divides every 500 seconds. > Regards, > Warren Warren, thanks for the reply. When you say "The divider number can change", what oscillator are you referring to? Is this the cheap crystal oscillator in the GPS unit? If so, is it adjusting the timing of the 100Hz pulses the same way as it adjusts the 1PPS? It doesn't seem it could do it any other way. If that's true, how does it do the calculation for each 1Hz message from the GPS decode? Does it put out 100 pulses using the same timing info, and repeat the next cycle with a different timing? Then the sawtooth would be a group of 100 pulses, then another group shifted slightly in phase. Heh - that would be fun for a PLL to track:) Another alternative would be to repeat the calculation for each pulse and shift them according to where they are in the cycle. This would be a much nicer signal for a PLL to work with. It might take a lot of calculations, but I suppose a lookup table would reduce the workload on the processor and leave enough cpu cycles for other tasks. Can you tell if any of the above methods are used in your system? Thanks, Mike Monett _______________________________________________ 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.