> I'm just curious if the phase difference slope value can be plugged
in to this equation.
> I'm seeing 4.22E-12 as the slope value in the upper right of the
> TimeLab phase difference plot. Is that telling me that my DUT is
> within +4.22ps / sec from my reference 1PPS for the 24 hour
> measurement duration?
>
> I have attached a screen capture that will hopefully make its way
> through for viewing.
Chris,
The answer is yes. But let's consider why instead of plugging numbers
into equations.
Your measurements are not that different from comparing two wrist
watches. Since two watches never actually run at the same rate you know
that on average one is fast and one is slow, relative to each other. We
often measure clock or oscillator rate using a unit-less number like
percent. Your left watch may be 0.01% faster than your right watch. Or
maybe it's 15 ppm slower, or 50 ppb faster. These are all dimensionless
numbers; ratios. So when we talk about an oscillator being 4.22E-12 fast
it's just 4.22 ppt, or 0.000000000004 or 0.000000000422%. You get the idea.
So where does the 4.22 ps/s thing come from? Well, it turns out that the
way that we measure two clocks is not to directly compare their
frequency. You can't tell with a glance at two wristwatches which is
fast and which is slow. Sure, one may be ahead and one may be behind.
But that is the time (phase) of the clocks; not their rate.
The best way to find out which clock is fast or slow is to compare their
times *over a long time*. Eventually a *trend* will be evident. You
might have to wait an hour before one watch gets a second ahead of the
other. This is where the "second/second" thing comes in. If a watch is
fast by 1 second an hour then it must be running 1s/3600s = 0.028% = 278
ppm faster. Note how both the units of the amount of time gain (1 s) and
the amount of time spent doing the measurement (3600 s) cancel and
you're left with a dimensionless number.
In general a frequency difference measurement is just a phase (aka time)
difference measurement made over some elapsed time (aka measurement
duration).
So you are using a TAPR/TICC to measure the phase difference between
your two clocks. It appears you ran it for an entire day (1 d = 86400 s)
and the net change in phase between the two clocks was 382 ns. That
means the frequency difference between the two clocks is 382 ns / 86400
s = 382e-9 / 86400 = 4.22e-012.
The reason this wasn't obvious is that you had the TimeLab 'r'
(residual) command in effect. In a sense, this removes the very slope
you're trying to see. If you undo the 'r' you should see one clock
gradually gaining time relative to the other. The advantage of the 'r'
command is that it shows you "what's left" if the two clocks were
running at the same rate; it shows the wander, the short- and mid-term
noise between the two. And TimeLab also reports the now-removed slope in
the upper corner.
Now back to 4.22 ps/s. It is true that 4.22e-12 is equal to 4.22 ps/s.
Mathematically, it is also equal to 382 ns/d, or 133 us/year for that
matter. Yet, it may be misleading to claim 133 us/year because the word
"year" may be interpreted as how long the measurement was. But it wasn't
a year-long experiment, not even close. Similarly, claiming the clock is
4.22 ps/s may imply to the reader that both the DUT and the REF and the
TICC are all clean signals at the sub-ps level. But they aren't, not
even close. To complete the picture you need both the frequency
difference value and the duration over which the measurement was made.
So that's why you often see frequency differences reported using
scientific notation, as in 4.22e-12, rather than ps/s or ns/d or us/y.
/tvb
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to
http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
and follow the instructions there.
