[time-nuts] Allan Deviation -> continuing saga...
jmiles at pop.net
Mon Oct 30 01:59:11 EST 2006
Definitely an interesting chart. I don't know how much stock I'd put in it,
though. The figures cited are, in some cases, much worse than those
published elsewhere and observed personally.
I didn't look at all of the test circuits, but there are more things wrong
with the LT1016 test circuit on page 19 than in the entire QEX article that
caught so much flak recently. :-)
-- john, KE5FX
> -----Original Message-----
> From: time-nuts-bounces at febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces at febo.com]On
> Behalf Of Richard H McCorkle
> Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2006 10:33 PM
> To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Allan Deviation -> continuing saga...
> I had been using the Shera HC4046 input circuit for my 10811
> GPSDO input until I read the test results in the LPRO manual
> (Table 3-1 on Pg 18) showing the results of testing various TTL
> converters for relative phase noise. The conversion techniques
> document at http://www.wenzel.com/documents/waveform.html
> has a circuit for using a tuned LC network to increase the sine
> output from an oscillator to drive a biased gate input. I did some
> testing of my own and found that using a biased AC04 gate using
> the Wenzel circuit with no input resistor, C = 100pf, L = 2.7uh,
> input directly from the 10 MHz 10811 gave the lowest phase noise
> combination for my GPSDO input.
> You may want to give this a try.
More information about the time-nuts