Oh yes you are not alone :-)) I have posted two or three times to EDN on this topic. Alan G3NYK
----- Original Message ----- From: "David Forbes" <dfor...@dakotacom.net> To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" <time-nuts@febo.com> Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2009 5:03 PM Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Spread Spectrum Spam! > > > >Hmph!... Spread Spectrum clocks do *NOT* make the shielding any > >easier, it's just a fudge for the accountants who won't fund a proper > >job in the first place. It only "fools" the QP detector in a measuring > >receiver into showing a lower value, it does not "Fix" the problem. > > And I thought I was the only person in the world who noticed that bit > of subterfuge. It actually makes EMI *worse*, artificially raising > the test limit by smearing the signal to get past the FCC's spectrum > analyzer-defined peak limit. > > The Part 15 limits for such things as the FM broadcast band, on the > other hand, are defined by field strength. That's the only > cheat-proof way to specify emitter power testing. > > -- > > --David Forbes, Tucson, AZ > http://www.cathodecorner.com/ > > > _______________________________________________ > 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. _______________________________________________ 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.
