In message <ce93652a-1da6-48e3-9883-d7616ac24...@rtty.us>, Bob Camp writes:
Bob, There's one thing makes me scratch my head here: Why do you keep arguing like the timeconstant cannot be changed dynamically ? I use a very aggresive timeconstants initially, to quickly get the phase offset under control, and then I ramp up the timeconstant in order to reduce phase noise of the GPS, until I hit something which looks like the "Allan-intercept" (as Dave Mills calls it). It' won't take long time for us to agree that the timeconstant is a tradeoff between phase and frequency error, but just because it is called a "timeconstant" doesn't mean we cannot change it. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. _______________________________________________ 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.
