[time-nuts] 5MHz x 10MHz

Tom Knox actast at hotmail.com
Fri Aug 2 14:02:17 EDT 2013


It is my understanding that Quartz has a sweet spot at 5MHz that makes it ideal if the lowest possible phase noise and highest stability are needed.

Thomas Knox


> Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2013 19:57:16 +0200
> From: magnus at rubidium.dyndns.org
> To: time-nuts at febo.com
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] 5MHz x 10MHz
> 
> Hi Euclides,
> 
> On 02/08/13 18:31, Euclides Chuma wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Why any equipments use 5 MHz and others use 10 MHz reference standard?
> 
> There are some benefits (traditionally) in using 5 MHz over 10 MHz, but 
> 10 MHz have become a common standard. The actual frequency isn't really 
> magic, but 5 MHz and multiples became somewhat standard in the old MIL 
> STD 188 for time-keeping, and it fit fairly well with what was already 
> in use. There are folks here that can correct me on massive details.
> 
> Today 10 MHz is more common because, well, engineers then to be 
> following habits, and 10 MHz "sounds nice". I use 10 MHz mainly because 
> the application requires it, otherwise I use whatever frequency fits my 
> other needs, or what becomes easy to source.
> 
> PS. Have not seen you post before, so welcome to time-nuts!
> 
> Cheers,
> Magnus
> _______________________________________________
> 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