[time-nuts] 10MHz to 25MHz

Bryan _ bpl521 at outlook.com
Thu Jan 19 14:42:20 EST 2017

Wouldn't designing circuitry and PCB's be easier with 10Mhz vs 100Mhz? Maybe not so much now but then.


From: time-nuts <time-nuts-bounces at febo.com> on behalf of Charles Steinmetz <csteinmetz at yandex.com>
Sent: January 19, 2017 4:13 AM
To: time-nuts at febo.com
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] 10MHz to 25MHz

Chris wrote:

> I have always wondered why we build our "standard" with such a low
> frequency.   Why not a 100MHz GPSDO?   Why 10MHz

Quartz crystals work better at lower frequencies, predominantly because
they have higher Q.  10MHz was chosen because it is low enough for
excellent performance but high enough to be directly useful (since an
accident of biology gave us ten fingers, we've created a base-10 world
and powers of 10 are favored in almost everything).

In prior times, 5MHz crystals held this position, and before that, 1MHz.
  There is a good argument even today that the best 2.5MHz or 5MHz
crystals are better than the best 10MHz crystals, but not by enough to
make 2.5MHz or 5MHz standards popular any longer.

One lonely data point, which proves nothing:  My best crystal oscillator
is a Symmetricom clone of the double-oven HP 10811s (it came out of an
HP GPSDO, so apparently HP at one time used them interchangeably with
the 10811).  That OCXO uses a 5MHz crystal and a frequency doubler to
produce its 10MHz output.

Best Regards,


time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts

time-nuts Info Page - American Febo Enterprises<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts>
time-nuts is a low volume, high SNR list for the discussion of precise time and frequency measurement and related topics. To see the collection of prior postings to ...

and follow the instructions there.

More information about the time-nuts mailing list