[time-nuts] GPS noise reduction
Richard H McCorkle
mccorkle at ptialaska.net
Sat Apr 5 20:00:59 EDT 2008
>> The data I am trying to determine is the GPS short-term phase error
>> based on the results from comparing the same receiver to multiple
>> higher short-term stability sources. If that could be determined
>> then you would have an idea of the short-term noise being added
>> by the receiver and could possibly correct for it.
>> The two oscillators in the system are both quiet, but have opposite
>> age rates allowing me to see a difference, otherwise I wouldn't
>> be able to tell a difference in the data sets at all. That's why
>> additional testing was done to insure the two weren't injection
> Your assumption that if the 2 oscillators didnt drift in opposite
> directions you wouldnt be able to see any differences in the datasets is
> Unless off course, the time intervals being measured by the TICs are
> sufficiently long that the short term instabilities of the 2 100MHz TIC
> oscillators mask the TIC quantisation noise.
> If your oscillators are sufficiently unstable for a fixed isolation
> between the 2 then injection locking will not occur.
> The amount of isolation required to prevent injection locking increases
> dramatically as the frequencies of the the 2 tuned circuits approach one
> Independent timestamps of a PPS edge will differ according to the
> timestamp quantisation.
> This is entirely independent of the PPS edge to PPS edge jitter either
> random or determinisitic.
> With 10ns TIC quantisation there will be variations of up to 20ns or so
> in 2 independent TIC measurements of the same time interval provided
> each TIC uses synchronisers.
> If no synchronisers are used then all bets are off.
> After averaging this variation will be reduced, but will still be present.
> The observed differences will be a combination of the 2 oscillator
> relative instabilities and the TIC quantisation errors.
> Averaging the 2 (or more) sets of phase error measurements will improve
> the determination of the short term GPS PPS error by perhaps 40% for 2
> oscillators by 1/SQRT(N) for N oscillators (if and only if TIC
> quantisation noise dominates over the GPS timing noise) however this
> doesnt generate any useful information for more closely disciplining the
> 2 (or more) oscillators.
> You can achieve the same improvement by increasing the TIC resolution to
> the point where GPS PPS random noise dominates.
> However in this case you also generate data that can be used to
> discipline each oscillator more closely.
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
Once again, thanks for the explaination. I am using a common 100M OCXO
and not independent XOs for the two TICs in the dual design. That is why
the plots are so similar. What effect does this have on the disciplining
of the individual oscillators?
More information about the time-nuts