On 06/13/2013 06:00 AM, Chris Albertson wrote:
My dim memory says there is some analog way to multiply the phase noise.
What does that? Then it might be easier to measure.
Simple, you multiply frequency. The time errors will remain but for a
shorter cycle, so relative the carrier it has a higher value.
So, a step-up PLL might be what you want for that.
Cheers,
Magnus
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Marek Peca<ma...@duch.cz> wrote:
My point was, that DSO is basically an ADC. Therefore, there is some
amount of noise, nonlinearity and drift, limiting the jitter measurement.
Do you think any method can dig more information from given data than
sinc() interpolation and zero-crossing computation?
The cross-spectrum averaging does indeed do just that, relying on two
ADCs to produce uncorrelated noise, which can be averaged out.
Or am I misunderstanding your point?
Nothing against that. It depends on what noise level after averaging you
require. I only posted my experience with a very low-quality DSO, which has
100psRMS single-shot. Using sinc() interpolation, but my point was, that I
suppose there is no way to obtain better single-shot performance than this.
To average out 100psRMS to, say, 1psRMS, it would require 10^4 edges (under
the assumption, that the 100psRMS is well behaved noise).
What performance it could yield with a better scope? I hope I'll try
LC584AL some day, I guess it might give sth like 10psRMS single-shot...
Regards,
Marek
______________________________**_________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**
mailman/listinfo/time-nuts<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.
