https://www.febo.com/pipermail/time-nuts/2017-May/105566.html
Tell us more about the RF leakage problems in the 5061. I thought that the 5071 used the same beam tube. How does the electricity leak out and at what frequencies? My method costs a tenth as much and has higher spectral purity performance to the beam tube. I admit that I hadn't thought about the electricity leaking out. Can the leak be plugged? BTW these are not strictly Diophantine equations. No exact solution is possible if C field is to be used. Can you tell us the magic numbers? πθ°μΩω±√·Γλ WB0KV ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Richard (Rick) Karlquist <rich...@karlquist.com> Date: Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 12:10 PM Subject: Re: [time-nuts] HP5061B Versus HP5071 Cesium Line Frequencies To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement <time-nuts@febo.com>, "Donald E. Pauly" <trojancow...@gmail.com>, "rwa...@aol.com" <rwa...@aol.com> I said no *manufacturer* does it this way. NBS is not a manufacturer. In a one-off money-is-no-object non-portable standard, you can make direct multiplication work. It will not work well in a 5061, because of RF leakage issues specific to the 5061 that are well documented. Bolting on a different synthesizer does nothing to change that. The decision not to use direct multiplication has nothing to do with not being able to figure out how to synthesize the correct frequency. Certainly by the time we did the 5071A, we were already using DDS, and it wouldn't have been any problem to synthesize for direct multiplication if we had wanted to do that. You seem to be doing it the hard way (pre DDS) involving Diophantine equations. So it's easier to do direct multiply than it used to be, but that doesn't necessarily mean you should do it that way. Rick _______________________________________________ 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.