[time-nuts] Next upgrade
jerry at hanler.com
Wed Nov 22 18:23:40 EST 2017
The 15pin cable has to be cross-connected. Maybe that is your problem?
The pin connections were posted not that long ago. It is like 1-15; 2-14; 3-13; 4-12; 5-11; 6-10; 7-9; 8-8; 9-7; 10-6;11-5; etc.
> On Nov 22, 2017, at 3:08 PM, Adrian Godwin <artgodwin at gmail.com> wrote:
> I've got several of the Ref 0 boxes but none of the Ref 1. I've added an
> Oncore GPS receiver to one of them as per Peter Garde's notes and it works
> But I'd like it to run with an unmodified Ref 0 too in the ref0/ref1
> configuration. Not that I need an HA reference but just for interest. I've
> only had a quick look so far and found that connecting the two together
> with a 15-pin cable didn't work.
> Has anyone looked into this ?
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 11:01 PM, Bob kb8tq <kb8tq at n1k.org> wrote:
>>> On Nov 22, 2017, at 5:16 PM, Jerry Hancock <jerry at hanler.com> wrote:
>>> Three questions:
>>> 1) Now that I’ve split my Lucent RFTG-U into a REF0 and REF1 unit with
>> both supplying 10Mhz and 1PPS, is there a way to combine the outputs or
>> some other technique to improve the short and/or long term performance?
>> You can monitor one against the other. Ideally you would want three
>> GPSDO’s and a
>> monitoring setup. That way you can figure out which of the three has gone
>>> 2) I’ve become interested in Rubidium Disciplined Oscillators recently
>> and was now thinking of purchasing one of the PRS-10 that I see on Ebay. If
>> I did that and replaced one of the DOCXOs from one of the Lucent boxes,
>> what impact would this have on the overall performance both with and
>> without (when in hold-over)?
>> If you go into holdover, you are the exception. Most setups rarely go into
>> holdover. When they
>> do, it’s because a hurricane just went over the house. Generally that’s
>> not when the focus is going
>> to be on timing experiments.
>>> Basically, is it worth the money to upgrade one of the boxes to a
>> Rubidium disciplined oscillator assuming the GPS signal is rarely lost?
>> Not worth the money if you are only looking at holdover and have a typical
>>> 3) Figuring the PRS-10 will cost around $250 when all is said and done,
>> is there a better option to improve my GPSDO system?
>> Disciplining implies continuously correcting. Rb standards age much less
>> than a typical
>> OCXO. Oddly enough their temperature stability may not be as good as a
>> high end
>> DOCXO. It is fairly common to try to stabilize the environment your
>> standards operate in.
>> To the extent you are successful this reduces the need to deal with
>> The net effect is that disciplining an Rb at a rate (filter / control loop
>> / manual tweak) of less than
>> a few days actually makes the Rb worse. Coming up with software to “back
>> off” on the tuning is
>> not as simple as it might seem.
>> This comes back to the fact that the GPS signal (or any of the sat
>> signals) are quite noisy. You
>> need to average them over a *long* time to get good performance. Rb’s are
>> enough better than
>> a GPSDO OCXO that the time ranges really stretch out ….
>>> I basically use the GPSDO as a reference for any equipment that takes an
>> input. I have no monetary need for a reference, just an interest.
>> For most normal test equipment, a GPSDO output is “plenty good enough”. As
>> a source for fancy
>> timing experiments … maybe not so much. As a phase noise reference or a
>> spur free source for
>> microwave games … also not the best way to go.
>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
>>> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/
>>> and follow the instructions there.
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/
>> and follow the instructions there.
> 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