El 30/08/2012 20:53, saidj...@aol.com escribió:
There are some drawbacks to this type of SC-cut MCXO I would think, and it
could possibly be replaced by a much higher performance Symmetricom CSAC,
probably at a lower cost and higher availability:
* Q-tech MCXO is ITAR controlled, CSAC is not
* MCXO has 20ppb over temp stability, CSAC has 1ppb spec, typical units can
be much lower than that. Our GPSTCXO has 75ppb over temp, not much more
than the MCXO, but probably at 1/10th the cost.
* The G-sensitivity of CSAC is at least 50x better than the MCXO (its so
low, its very hard to measure)
* Aging of MCXO is much higher (order of magnitude)
* Symmetricom is a big player, Q-tech is relatively small and unknown
* I remember that there are patents on the MCXO held by FEI?
* Power consumption is very similar, future CSAC units will have much lower
power than the MCXO.
The MCXO does have lower phase noise, it's an SC-cut cyrstal after all. But
with CSAC's now becoming available from multiple sources, why use an MCXO?
bye,
Said
As you say about G-sensitivity, let time pass until the CSAC is also
ITAR controlled ;) It will no take too much.
Regards,
Javier
_______________________________________________
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.
