HI > On Dec 7, 2014, at 4:52 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 7, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Bob Camp <kb...@n1k.org> wrote: >> Of the $20K to $30K that a new tube costs, I doubt the material and basic >> assembly adds up to over $5K. The rest of the cost is the final assembly / >> test / yield / re-test / tooling / labor. That’s doing them in as high a >> volume as anybody does them. You will need either a couple of H-Masers or a >> set of Cs’s running and in good condition simply to make sure you got them >> put together right …. > > I'm sure that assembly/test/yield/re-test/tooling/labor are all > killers, but why the comment on h-masers?
You need a test reference that’s “better than” the thing you are testing. > > CS beam standards are largely self-calibrating, thats why they can be > primary references. It’s the “largely” part that gets you. They don’t get to this or that ADEV level due to primary characteristics. > For checking against systemic error you might > want a CS ensemble, but everyone has access to one of those for long > term measurement via GPS. Checking things like mag field against a 24 hour time frame probably isn’t very efficient. It’s also going to be to be tough to keep calibrated. Bob > _______________________________________________ > 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.
