Wow! One post and I've got the two top heavyweights against me! Let me introduce myself.
I am a retired electronics engineer with over 50 years of experience in instrumentation and metrology. Here is my patent list: http://www.pst.netii.net/patents.htm Among the achievements listed, I claim credit for the first disclosure of the now universal dual-d phase-frequency detector, and for the technique called "Phase Margin Analysis" as applied to hard disk bdrive it error analysis. The technology has evolved tremendously since the 1970's, but this was the first to show that rapid bit error analysis was possible. The internet would not be possible without this basic technique, since it would not be possible to manufacture hard disks fast enough. Another significant invention is Binary Sampling. I will talk more about this later, but some information is on my web site at http://www.pst.netii.net/sampler/index.htm also starting on page 6 of http://www.pst.netii.net/pdfs/tdrpaper.pdf One of the significant advantages of the Binary Sampler is the elimination of Gaussian and Impulse noise. Unlike conventional diode bridge samplers, the performance improves as the frequency increases. After working with the Binary Sampler, I am always dismayed to view the noisy graphs presented in time-nuts and other forums. The noise is hiding the interesting stuff and making it virtually impossible to understand what is actually going on. I Think the Binary Sampler can do a lot to help unravel the issues. I now intersperse replies: > Hi( > While you see a lot of pretty plots in GPS spec sheets showing > clean looking sawtooth sort of offsets marching down the page, > that?s not what I see on a real receiver. The real data, even > compared to a 5071A is much more random. It will indeed ?hang?, > but it also will reverse far more often than the pretty data > sheets suggest. A simple model would be to add the sawtooth to > some sort of random process. The sawtooth comes from the TCXO, the > random looking stuff comes from the GPS solution. > The oscillator in most timing modules is one form or another of a > TCXO. Often they have digital compensation (one way or another). > Their frequency versus temperature curves are not the simple third > order curve you would expect from a bare crystal. They have a much > higher order frequency versus temperature curve (6th, 8th ?). That > makes even the simple ?frequency goes down when temp goes up? > decision pretty tough. If they are doing some sort of auto > correction TCXO based on the GPS it would get even more crazy. In > that case the curve would be changing real time. > Since the sawtooth changes multiple ?runs? per minute in a room > that holds 2C / 30 minutes, you could guess that a control of > 0.01C would be needed to have any luck steering the oscillator. > It?s nowhere near that simple, so that?s not even up to the ?wild > guess? level of confidence. If it?s close, that?s not going to be > very easy all by it?s self. A double loop control is likely to be > needed. > Combine the random jitter with the (possibly) tough temperature > control problem, and frequency reversals - this is a real can of > worms. > ??????????? > Way lots easier approach: > 1) You already need a CPU to set up the GPS, read the sawtooth data stream > and do a control loop. It?s free / same with either approach. > 2) Rip a VCTCXO out of something (or buy one cheap). > 3) PWM control the TCXO, use it as your CPU clock > 4) Generate a PPS with a timer output on the CPU. > 5) Do a cheap / simple / easy TDC on the GPS pps, it will cost less that what > ever was going to drive the heater. > Now you have a GPSDO with a much lower jitter PPS output. You need > to write from scratch code for the CPU either way. The code for > the GPSDO is probably simpler than the temperature control code. > It?s certainly no more difficult. This way you have an output at > what ever the TCXO frequency is for ?other stuff?. > Bob Thanks, Bob. I don't propose using temperature to control the GPS clock. I plan to use a AD9912 DDS (1GHz 48Bit 4uHz 0.19ps $59@Newark.) > On Mar 5, 2014, at 6:48 PM, Tom Van Baak <t...@leapsecond.com> > wrote: >> I agree with Bob. >> For casual use, "hanging bridges" are not really a problem, >> statistically speaking -- so don't worry. >> Yes, you can apply various techniques to reduce/eliminate the >> rare effect: forced temperature change, forced Vcc change, 2 or 3 >> or more shared-antenna receivers, modulating phase, frequency, >> voltage, temperature, etc. But as you spend too much time >> engineering this uncertain hack you maybe start to wonder if the >> real solution is just to apply known digital, numerical >> correction instead of wishful analog cover-up. Been there, done >> that. >> For more serious use, at the tens or unit nanosecond level, the >> robust solution is simply to apply 1PPS sawtooth correction from >> the receiver. The sawtooth error data is truncated at 1 ns. I would like to get far below that error. >> This issue comes up every now and then as people gradually >> transition from casual to serious use. I welcome any hard data or >> plots that demonstrate the difference among all approaches. There >> *is* a slight difference for sure. It's just that most people >> throw in the towel and use sawtooth corrections instead of trying >> to avoid them and cover up with less deterministic methods. Tom, Thanks for your reply. The sawtooth error correction is described in "Timing for VLBI", by Tom Clark and Rick Hambly, at http://www.cnssys.com/files/tow-time2011.pdf John Ackermann shows graphs that compare the results in "GPS Pulse-per-Second Comparative Noise", at https://www.febo.com/pages/gps_pps/ It appears the implementation of the sawtooth error correction severely degrades the performance of the system. There could be many reasons, which is why it is important to nail down as many of the error sources as possible. >> /tvb > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bob Camp" <li...@rtty.us> > To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" > <time-nuts@febo.com> > Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 3:03 PM > Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Another "atomic" clock question > Hi > If you are going to decode and use the sawtooth data out of the > receiver, there?s no need to eliminate the hanging bridges. The > sawtooth data does that for you already. Put another way, heating > the receiver is *harder* than just using the decoded data?. > Bob Thanks, Bob. I am not planning on heating the crystal. I want to replace it with a precision DDS. The sawtooth data is truncated at 1ns. I want to do much better. Again, this is not intended as a quick-and-dirty fix. I would like to separate out the error sources in a GPSDO and see what can be done to improve the results. Thanks, Mike _______________________________________________ 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.