saidj...@aol.com wrote:
Hi Magnus,
Agree with all your points.
:)
On the added noise due to an accelerometer, my thoughts are that this needs
to be carefully designed so as not to add more error than we are actually
removing (due to phase shifts between crystal sensitivity and the
accelerometer response for example, and due to random noise).
For example, if we do the compensation in the digital domain, and use a 10
bit ADC on the accelerometer, and a full-scale compensation is say 2E-09,
then the quantization noise itself (1/2 of 1 LSB on average, or about 4E-013
just due to the quantization noise) may already be considerable. So we
need to use a good ADC, and very low noise accelerometer :)
This is indeed a very good point. Blindfoldingly adding some
compensation scheme could end up worse than it was originally. Still,
some quantization noise may be tolerable than the much higher and not
tolerable acceleration deviation. Thought, it is always good to get the
extra margin. Far too many design become a hurdle due to a too small
initial assumption on dynamics.
While building and carefully calibrating a unit for Time-Nuts enjoyment is
possible, I would think bringing such technology into large-scale mass
production is quite a challenge.
Depends on what large-scale means. For some it could be 100-1000 units a
year.
It's not mobiles or something we are discussing. Yet.
Cheers,
Magnus
_______________________________________________
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.
