On 2017-01-04 10:16, wb6bnq wrote: Hello Bill
Thanks for re-iterating over this.
Yes, I do think the outer can covering is a MU-metal shield. The bottom plate where the connector is located is not.
That is reassuring thank you!
I know the calculator that comes with Windows XP will produce the correct mathematical results. I think the Windows version 7 does the same. I do not have Windows 10 and therefore cannot address that one, if there is one. Even EXCEL spreadsheet does not do the job properly. So use caution with your calculations.
OK noted. The original calculations were done with a calculator that was designed for high precision (in the floating point sense). I did re-run the calculations in windows calculator for kicks, and the result is different, although the difference is too small to have an effect on the integer phase accumulator increment (fingers crossed!)
However, with all that said, it means nothing if you cannot properly measure the final value against an external standard of greater accuracy. Acquiring the equipment to do the external measurements is where the real cost comes in.
Yes, I think that I am aware of that and I have the opportunity to do that with somebody else's gear. I also understand that I'm supposed to do that on a regular basis.
Hopefully the above helps to clear up your query ?
Yes most of it is clear, thank you. Unfortunately though my original question, i.e. how to incorporate the reported R value into the calculation, is still kind of open. I'm still convinced that what I did, i.e. not taking the R number into account, is no worse than using it. But this might be incorrect, and if it is I'd like to know why. Regards and thanks again Matt _______________________________________________ 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.
