[time-nuts] Making a HP 10811 better
EWKehren at aol.com
EWKehren at aol.com
Mon Mar 29 23:39:36 UTC 2010
I did retrieve it many times that is why I had all those sand bags with #
strings and that time the cost of an oscillator was much higher and I tried
putting the bags in and out several times before the oscillators went down
there including leak test for moisture penetration.
Bert
In a message dated 3/29/2010 6:00:19 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
warrensjmail-one at yahoo.com writes:
Bert wrote: >"would not feel comfortable tearing into the unit."
I tend to agree, First rule is "do no harm",
which is why I start with reversible things that can be done using just
external stuff.
The second rule does NOT apply though, "Don't fix it, if it aint broken"
Of course if it is already broken, or you have lots of them, or they are
not
yours, or you're getting paid for it, then go for it.
BUT
I find it amazing that you are more concerned about opening the unit than
you are about sticking it down a deep hole from which it may never return
if
something goes wrong.
I think I'd rather have mine on the bench even if it was in parts, than to
lose it to the center of the earth.
BUT I must Add, good idea if you want a nice constant passive "green"
environment with a very long time constants (maybe 1/2 year TC?)
ws
**********************
From: <EWKehren at aol.com>
>I would not feel comfortable tearing into the unit.
> Controlling its environment and power to it yes.
> I did that with a 10811 and a 10544 years ago by drilling a 20 foot
hole
> in my Dallas backyard lowering the units in it with support electronics
in
> place and sealing the shaft with individual sand bags each with a
numbered
> string, so I could pull them out one at time when I had to get to them.
> Did
> not have the equipment I have today but I did manage to borrow a 5061A
> for
> set up. Here in Miami being right on the water it is not an option.
When
> I
> relocate from Miami to dryer grounds I may repeat it with a Rubidium.
> Bert
>
****************************
> In a message dated 3/28/2010 11:52:14 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> warrensjmail-one at yahoo.com writes:
>
> Bert asked
>
>> "why would I want to mess with them at all if they are already under
>> 1E-12?"
>
> Don't know about you, The reason I'd mess with them is cause I'm nuts
> and can make them even better.
> And Allan variance is not everything.
> Have you plotted their Freq change over time with better than 1E-12
> resolution?
> If you are a True NUT, I'm betting you would see things that would make
> you sick.
> Things such as line freq spurs, Freq jumps, the effects of: changing
> temperature, changing PS, changing time, changing Load, partial
injection
> locking to other osc friends around them, and maybe even to the changing
> moon.
>
> Don't forget the Basic Nut Cake pledge.
> If it can be made better then it is not good enough
>
> Or for the more practical answer;
> Cause I can make mine good enough with some help from two of its
friends,
> named GPS and Rb, that I do not need a Cs primary standard.
>
> ws
>
> *********************
>
>> Good morning
>> I have a more fundamental question. Having three 10811-5071 all with
>> Allan
>> Variance from 1 to 100 Hz well below 1 E-12 one as low as 6 E-13 why
>> would
>> I want to mess with them at all?
>> Bert Kehren
>>
_______________________________________________
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.
More information about the time-nuts
mailing list