Discussion:
For your museum only Loran-C monitor
(too old to reply)
Pete Lancashire
2010-05-24 22:09:21 UTC
Permalink
For the 'real' collectors

on the E, Item 360264034791

NO assoc with the seller

so who has their own local Loran-C that covers the neighborehood ?

-pete



_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Poul-Henning Kamp
2010-05-24 22:13:00 UTC
Permalink
In message <b87177f06f2beeefbac24ce8b804dd6b.squirrel-6NP59FE1ho9MFQD/***@public.gmane.org>, "Pet
e Lancashire" writes:

>so who has their own local Loran-C that covers the neighborehood ?

The funny thing is that it would pretty legal to do so, at least here
100kHz is one of the bands where you can make noise at low energy
without getting into trouble.

--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk-***@public.gmane.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Bob Camp
2010-05-24 22:20:26 UTC
Permalink
Hi

Same thing here as long as you are in the business of making switching power supplies ....

Bob


On May 24, 2010, at 6:13 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

> In message <b87177f06f2beeefbac24ce8b804dd6b.squirrel-6NP59FE1ho9MFQD/***@public.gmane.org>, "Pet
> e Lancashire" writes:
>
>> so who has their own local Loran-C that covers the neighborehood ?
>
> The funny thing is that it would pretty legal to do so, at least here
> 100kHz is one of the bands where you can make noise at low energy
> without getting into trouble.
>
> --
> Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
> phk-***@public.gmane.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956
> FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>


_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
paul swed
2010-05-26 01:20:55 UTC
Permalink
Thats why I designed the loran c simulator. It works well.
All I need to do is hook it to an antenna and away you go. Maybe a small
power amp would be handy. Say 100KW? Antennas the real killer. I think its a
zoning problem.

On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Pete Lancashire <pete-6NP59FE1ho9MFQD/***@public.gmane.org>wrote:

> For the 'real' collectors
>
> on the E, Item 360264034791
>
> NO assoc with the seller
>
> so who has their own local Loran-C that covers the neighborehood ?
>
> -pete
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Hal Murray
2010-05-26 05:27:29 UTC
Permalink
paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
> Thats why I designed the loran c simulator. It works well. All I need to do
> is hook it to an antenna and away you go. Maybe a small power amp would be
> handy. Say 100KW? Antennas the real killer. I think its a zoning problem.

What's going to happen to that chunk of spectrum?

How much power/antenna would it take to make a signal that was useful out to
1 mile? 100 miles?

What are the chances the FCC would let amateurs run timing and/or location
services on that band? 1/2 :), but there might be something interesting in
there.



--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.




_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
paul swed
2010-05-26 12:44:16 UTC
Permalink
Great ?
Have to respond later

On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 1:27 AM, Hal Murray <hmurray-8cQiHa/C+6Go9G/***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

>
> paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
> > Thats why I designed the loran c simulator. It works well. All I need to
> do
> > is hook it to an antenna and away you go. Maybe a small power amp would
> be
> > handy. Say 100KW? Antennas the real killer. I think its a zoning problem.
>
> What's going to happen to that chunk of spectrum?
>
> How much power/antenna would it take to make a signal that was useful out
> to
> 1 mile? 100 miles?
>
> What are the chances the FCC would let amateurs run timing and/or location
> services on that band? 1/2 :), but there might be something interesting in
> there.
>
>
>
> --
> These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
paul swed
2010-05-27 12:57:19 UTC
Permalink
Hal
I have a minute.
The loran c simulator is designed to support the older loran timing
receivers and allows them to be used to measure references. Systems like the
austron 2000c and 2100f etc.
So you only need 1.
For location you need at least 3 transmitters and at some distance and they
must be controlled as to when they transmit. They can't all be masters.
So as a timing reference 1 is fine. Just need a amp and antenna.

On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 8:44 AM, paul swed <paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> Great ?
> Have to respond later
>
>
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 1:27 AM, Hal Murray <hmurray-8cQiHa/C+6Go9G/***@public.gmane.org>wrote:
>
>>
>> paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
>> > Thats why I designed the loran c simulator. It works well. All I need to
>> do
>> > is hook it to an antenna and away you go. Maybe a small power amp would
>> be
>> > handy. Say 100KW? Antennas the real killer. I think its a zoning
>> problem.
>>
>> What's going to happen to that chunk of spectrum?
>>
>> How much power/antenna would it take to make a signal that was useful out
>> to
>> 1 mile? 100 miles?
>>
>> What are the chances the FCC would let amateurs run timing and/or location
>> services on that band? 1/2 :), but there might be something interesting
>> in
>> there.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Hal Murray
2010-12-25 19:47:10 UTC
Permalink
> Seem to recall they may be rs422.

Trimble has/had at least 2 units like that: Palisade and Acutime. There have
been several variations of the Acutime.

Trimble had a development kit for the Palisade. It was a little box with
RS-422 to RS-232 converters, a DB-25 on the back, 2 DE-9s and a BNC on the
front. (and cables and such)
ftp://ftp.trimble.com/pub/sct/embedded/bin/Manuals/Old%20Manuals/PALISADE.PD
F

There are 5 signals:
PPS
Tx-A, Rx-A
Tx-B, Rx-B

The B channel is reasonably normal. You can send and receive messages.

The A channel is different. The Tx (to Palisade) signal is for timing, not
data. The development kit wires it up to one of the modem control signals.
When you flap that signal, it sends you back a message with the time that the
signal flapped. If your RS-422/232 converter wired Tx-Tx, you can send a
null byte.



--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
Julien Goodwin
2010-12-27 06:46:05 UTC
Permalink
On 26/12/10 06:47, Hal Murray wrote:
>> Seem to recall they may be rs422.
>
> Trimble has/had at least 2 units like that: Palisade and Acutime. There have
> been several variations of the Acutime.

So I can't just plug a Palisade into an Acutime rack?
Hal Murray
2010-12-27 07:19:56 UTC
Permalink
>> Trimble has/had at least 2 units like that: Palisade and Acutime.
>> There have been several variations of the Acutime.

> So I can't just plug a Palisade into an Acutime rack?

I'm not sure. I expect that Trimble would minimize the hassles like that but
it's probably best to check out the data sheets.

Note that there are two possible mismatches: hardware/pinout and software.



--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
Hal Murray
2011-01-05 18:54:56 UTC
Permalink
> The ad660 is a fm recvr chip.

Google tells me that it's a DAC:

AD660 | Monolithic 16-Bit Serial/Byte DACPORT | All D/A Converters ...
The AD660 DACPORT® is a complete 16-bit monolithic digital-to-analog ...


--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
Hal Murray
2011-01-29 04:03:16 UTC
Permalink
paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
> I have been working with another time-nut to recover austron 2201a GPS
> receivers and unfortunately I seem to have come to the conclusion that we
> can not get the almanacs to update and will guess this would be the same
> issue with these potentially.

Is the problem that they don't get an almanac, or that they get the wrong
answer?

There was a week rollover in one of the main GPS fields several/many years
ago. That ws the first one since GPS started. It made some units give crazy
answers. (I think they were time only, position was OK.)

I think you could get around that with some post-processing. I don't
remember anybody doing that. Some units got new firmware.



--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
paul swed
2011-01-29 14:43:53 UTC
Permalink
Hal
Thanks for your comments. Not sure I want to depart from Peters thread to
far. I was aware of several items y2K, the GPS rollover and I seem to recall
a 3rd thing.
It seems to interpret the almanacs wrong because amazingly enough its
actually does know the correct GPS week which was a shock to me. Unless
thats a simple calculation from the date I might guess.
But additionally it tends to track for a while and at times a long while at
least 1 sat. But never seems to go to 2-3. Running a garmin so that I can
see the real satellites shows that what the austron wants to track may or
may not be real kind of pot luck.
Email me, or start a separate thread and we can give this back to Peter.
Regards
Paul
WB8TSL


On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 11:03 PM, Hal Murray <hmurray-8cQiHa/C+6Go9G/***@public.gmane.org>wrote:

>
> paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
> > I have been working with another time-nut to recover austron 2201a GPS
> > receivers and unfortunately I seem to have come to the conclusion that we
> > can not get the almanacs to update and will guess this would be the same
> > issue with these potentially.
>
> Is the problem that they don't get an almanac, or that they get the wrong
> answer?
>
> There was a week rollover in one of the main GPS fields several/many years
> ago. That ws the first one since GPS started. It made some units give
> crazy
> answers. (I think they were time only, position was OK.)
>
> I think you could get around that with some post-processing. I don't
> remember anybody doing that. Some units got new firmware.
>
>
>
> --
> These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
Mark J. Blair
2011-01-29 18:14:21 UTC
Permalink
On Jan 29, 2011, at 6:43 AM, paul swed wrote:
> It seems to interpret the almanacs wrong because amazingly enough its
> actually does know the correct GPS week which was a shock to me. Unless
> thats a simple calculation from the date I might guess.

It's the other way around: The GPS week is directly decoded from the GPS signal. If I'm not mistaken, the GPS week roll-over causes a problem of being able to correctly calculate the calendar date from the GPS week. I could be mistaken, but I think that a receiver that doesn't handle the rollover properly but is otherwise in good shape should be able to track satellites and provide a correct position, but the calendar/clock time calculation would be wrong.

In a receiver that doesn't have a recent almanac, and particularly in an older receiver that takes a very simple approach to downloading ephemeris and almanac information, initial acquisition could take a long time. It'll need to do a slow full-sky search for its first satellite, and older receivers couldn't do that nearly as quickly as newer ones can. Once it gets that first bird, it may sit there downloading ephemeris and almanac data for at least 12.5 minutes before it does anything else. With an old receiver from that era, give it at least a half hour of good open-sky conditions before you begin to suspect that it's dead.


Back to the original topic now: That OCXO may seem mundane by time-nutty standards, but I'd certainly consider it to be worth salvaging. It could have all sorts of applications for radio stuff, portable test equipment, and even time-nutty stuff in an application that wants to be smaller and more portable than a Rb standard or full GPSDO.

I also agree that there's likely to be a lot more salvageable stuff on those boards. I see lots of socketed parts. UV-erasable EPROMs are worth saving. Are those Altera parts reprogrammable? If so, then they're worth keeping. Keep any microcontrollers or CPUs that are reprogrammable, or rely on external program memory, or can still be used in spite of fixed internal programming (e.g., an old mask-programmed 8051 can be used as an 8031 by strapping a pin to tell it to ignore its mask ROM and use external program memory).

I'd say that any units which track satellites at all after a half hour should be considered for repair, and the rest of the units are goldmines of parts.



--
Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x-/***@public.gmane.org>
Web page: http://www.nf6x.net/
GnuPG public key available from my web page.
paul swed
2011-01-29 21:03:36 UTC
Permalink
On the 2201 I do give it quite a while to get its act together hours. To an
extent it seems to.
But the fact that the sat tables which you can view never seem to come into
alignment with whats going on for real is why I think it may be a lost
cause.

Back to odetics,
So it seems at least one works. Peter wouldn't you just keep it around or is
it sloppy compared to todays Tbolts and such?
Seems a shame to part'em out if they work unless they really aren't that
useful.

On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Mark J. Blair <nf6x-/***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

>
> On Jan 29, 2011, at 6:43 AM, paul swed wrote:
> > It seems to interpret the almanacs wrong because amazingly enough its
> > actually does know the correct GPS week which was a shock to me. Unless
> > thats a simple calculation from the date I might guess.
>
> It's the other way around: The GPS week is directly decoded from the GPS
> signal. If I'm not mistaken, the GPS week roll-over causes a problem of
> being able to correctly calculate the calendar date from the GPS week. I
> could be mistaken, but I think that a receiver that doesn't handle the
> rollover properly but is otherwise in good shape should be able to track
> satellites and provide a correct position, but the calendar/clock time
> calculation would be wrong.
>
> In a receiver that doesn't have a recent almanac, and particularly in an
> older receiver that takes a very simple approach to downloading ephemeris
> and almanac information, initial acquisition could take a long time. It'll
> need to do a slow full-sky search for its first satellite, and older
> receivers couldn't do that nearly as quickly as newer ones can. Once it gets
> that first bird, it may sit there downloading ephemeris and almanac data for
> at least 12.5 minutes before it does anything else. With an old receiver
> from that era, give it at least a half hour of good open-sky conditions
> before you begin to suspect that it's dead.
>
>
> Back to the original topic now: That OCXO may seem mundane by time-nutty
> standards, but I'd certainly consider it to be worth salvaging. It could
> have all sorts of applications for radio stuff, portable test equipment, and
> even time-nutty stuff in an application that wants to be smaller and more
> portable than a Rb standard or full GPSDO.
>
> I also agree that there's likely to be a lot more salvageable stuff on
> those boards. I see lots of socketed parts. UV-erasable EPROMs are worth
> saving. Are those Altera parts reprogrammable? If so, then they're worth
> keeping. Keep any microcontrollers or CPUs that are reprogrammable, or rely
> on external program memory, or can still be used in spite of fixed internal
> programming (e.g., an old mask-programmed 8051 can be used as an 8031 by
> strapping a pin to tell it to ignore its mask ROM and use external program
> memory).
>
> I'd say that any units which track satellites at all after a half hour
> should be considered for repair, and the rest of the units are goldmines of
> parts.
>
>
>
> --
> Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x-/***@public.gmane.org>
> Web page: http://www.nf6x.net/
> GnuPG public key available from my web page.
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
Pete Lancashire
2011-01-29 21:41:04 UTC
Permalink
I'll keep one or two

here's some pictures of the inside of the down converter

http://petelancashire.com/gallery/main.php?g2_itemId=19822&g2_page=2

for detail, click on the thumbnail, the for full resolution click on the picture
or select the resolution near the upper right



On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 1:03 PM, paul swed <paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On the 2201 I do give it quite a while to get its act together hours. To an
> extent it seems to.
> But the fact that the sat tables which you can view never seem to come into
> alignment with whats going on for real is why I think it may be a lost
> cause.
>
> Back to odetics,
> So it seems at least one works. Peter wouldn't you just keep it around or is
> it sloppy compared to todays Tbolts and such?
> Seems a shame to part'em out if they work unless they really aren't that
> useful.
>
> On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 1:14 PM, Mark J. Blair <nf6x-/***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jan 29, 2011, at 6:43 AM, paul swed wrote:
>> > It seems to interpret the almanacs wrong because amazingly enough its
>> > actually does know the correct GPS week which was a shock to me. Unless
>> > thats a simple calculation from the date I might guess.
>>
>> It's the other way around: The GPS week is directly decoded from the GPS
>> signal. If I'm not mistaken, the GPS week roll-over causes a problem of
>> being able to correctly calculate the calendar date from the GPS week. I
>> could be mistaken, but I think that a receiver that doesn't handle the
>> rollover properly but is otherwise in good shape should be able to track
>> satellites and provide a correct position, but the calendar/clock time
>> calculation would be wrong.
>>
>> In a receiver that doesn't have a recent almanac, and particularly in an
>> older receiver that takes a very simple approach to downloading ephemeris
>> and almanac information, initial acquisition could take a long time. It'll
>> need to do a slow full-sky search for its first satellite, and older
>> receivers couldn't do that nearly as quickly as newer ones can. Once it gets
>> that first bird, it may sit there downloading ephemeris and almanac data for
>> at least 12.5 minutes before it does anything else. With an old receiver
>> from that era, give it at least a half hour of good open-sky conditions
>> before you begin to suspect that it's dead.
>>
>>
>> Back to the original topic now: That OCXO may seem mundane by time-nutty
>> standards, but I'd certainly consider it to be worth salvaging. It could
>> have all sorts of applications for radio stuff, portable test equipment, and
>> even time-nutty stuff in an application that wants to be smaller and more
>> portable than a Rb standard or full GPSDO.
>>
>> I also agree that there's likely to be a lot more salvageable stuff on
>> those boards. I see lots of socketed parts. UV-erasable EPROMs are worth
>> saving. Are those Altera parts reprogrammable? If so, then they're worth
>> keeping. Keep any microcontrollers or CPUs that are reprogrammable, or rely
>> on external program memory, or can still be used in spite of fixed internal
>> programming (e.g., an old mask-programmed 8051 can be used as an 8031 by
>> strapping a pin to tell it to ignore its mask ROM and use external program
>> memory).
>>
>> I'd say that any units which track satellites at all after a half hour
>> should be considered for repair, and the rest of the units are goldmines of
>> parts.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x-/***@public.gmane.org>
>> Web page: http://www.nf6x.net/
>> GnuPG public key available from my web page.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
David Martindale
2011-01-30 00:03:21 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Mark J. Blair <nf6x-/***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> In a receiver that doesn't have a recent almanac, and particularly in an older receiver that takes a very simple approach to downloading ephemeris and almanac information, initial acquisition could take a long time. It'll need to do a slow full-sky search for its first satellite, and older receivers couldn't do that nearly as quickly as newer ones can. Once it gets that first bird, it may sit there downloading ephemeris and almanac data for at least 12.5 minutes before it does anything else. With an old receiver from that era, give it at least a half hour of good open-sky conditions before you begin to suspect that it's dead.

It all depends on the receiver firmware. I remember when the GPS week
rolled over; I was in the process of driving from a conference in
California back to home in British Columbia, with a GPS receiver or
two in the car tracking our progress. We stopped for a meal, powering
the GPS receivers off. When we returned to the car, one of the
receivers (a Garmin) would not re-acquire satellites no matter how
long I gave it. I later figured out that the week rollover had
happened that afternoon, while we were driving, and the first restart
after the rollover failed.

But it apparently wasn't just a case of having to do a cold start to
get a new almanac, because I couldn't get that receiver to work again
myself. In a little while, Garmin released a small utility that you
ran on a PC connected to the GPS via its serial port, and it reset
something that allowed the GPS to do a successful cold start. I
remember an rumour that it simply reset the saved date and time far
enough away that the receiver dumped all its old almanac entries,
forcing it to do a cold start that worked. This suggests that it had
been keeping its pre-rollover almanac data and tried to use it, but
there was a bug in the calculation that resulted in mispredicting what
satellites should be visible where. But that's just a guess - Garmin
never said exactly what was wrong, or what they did to fix it.

> Back to the original topic now: That OCXO may seem mundane by time-nutty standards, but I'd certainly consider it to be worth salvaging. It could have all sorts of applications for radio stuff, portable test equipment, and even time-nutty stuff in an application that wants to be smaller and more portable than a Rb standard or full GPSDO.

Yes. If you offered them for postage cost, you'd probably find a
bunch of takers. You wouldn't even have to unsolder them - let the
recipient do that. It seems a waste to discard a perfectly good OCXO
- it would make a fine upgrade to an inexpensive frequency counter
(many of which just have a bare crystal, not even a TCXO).
paul swed
2011-01-30 00:50:36 UTC
Permalink
Peter was looking at the down converter pixs.
Several comments they are in quite good shape at least these pixs.
The resolution on 2740 and 42 are just at the edge so when you expand
everything you loose the part numbers so if they could be read the frequency
scheme might be reversed out.
I am indeed wondering if the pll arrangement is the same as the austron. 10
Mhz ref up coax First mixer is 1500 Mhz and downconverts to 75.42 MHz first
IF down coax.

You want to scrap these because???
Thanks
Paul.

On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 7:03 PM, David Martindale <dave.martindale-***@public.gmane.org
> wrote:

> On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Mark J. Blair <nf6x-/***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> > In a receiver that doesn't have a recent almanac, and particularly in an
> older receiver that takes a very simple approach to downloading ephemeris
> and almanac information, initial acquisition could take a long time. It'll
> need to do a slow full-sky search for its first satellite, and older
> receivers couldn't do that nearly as quickly as newer ones can. Once it gets
> that first bird, it may sit there downloading ephemeris and almanac data for
> at least 12.5 minutes before it does anything else. With an old receiver
> from that era, give it at least a half hour of good open-sky conditions
> before you begin to suspect that it's dead.
>
> It all depends on the receiver firmware. I remember when the GPS week
> rolled over; I was in the process of driving from a conference in
> California back to home in British Columbia, with a GPS receiver or
> two in the car tracking our progress. We stopped for a meal, powering
> the GPS receivers off. When we returned to the car, one of the
> receivers (a Garmin) would not re-acquire satellites no matter how
> long I gave it. I later figured out that the week rollover had
> happened that afternoon, while we were driving, and the first restart
> after the rollover failed.
>
> But it apparently wasn't just a case of having to do a cold start to
> get a new almanac, because I couldn't get that receiver to work again
> myself. In a little while, Garmin released a small utility that you
> ran on a PC connected to the GPS via its serial port, and it reset
> something that allowed the GPS to do a successful cold start. I
> remember an rumour that it simply reset the saved date and time far
> enough away that the receiver dumped all its old almanac entries,
> forcing it to do a cold start that worked. This suggests that it had
> been keeping its pre-rollover almanac data and tried to use it, but
> there was a bug in the calculation that resulted in mispredicting what
> satellites should be visible where. But that's just a guess - Garmin
> never said exactly what was wrong, or what they did to fix it.
>
> > Back to the original topic now: That OCXO may seem mundane by time-nutty
> standards, but I'd certainly consider it to be worth salvaging. It could
> have all sorts of applications for radio stuff, portable test equipment, and
> even time-nutty stuff in an application that wants to be smaller and more
> portable than a Rb standard or full GPSDO.
>
> Yes. If you offered them for postage cost, you'd probably find a
> bunch of takers. You wouldn't even have to unsolder them - let the
> recipient do that. It seems a waste to discard a perfectly good OCXO
> - it would make a fine upgrade to an inexpensive frequency counter
> (many of which just have a bare crystal, not even a TCXO).
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
Pete Lancashire
2011-01-30 01:57:02 UTC
Permalink
> You want to scrap these because???

time to thin the 'stuff' herd, i.e. I need the room. There at one time
were over 100 of these things, and maybe 40 recovered
antenna/downconverters. Add each has a 50' or 100' coax cable, a power
supply and they are taking a lot of space.

Just about every antenna/downconverter that lived outside is dead.
Plus I've been offered more for the HP displays then I've
been for the units.

For those curious they came from a company I worked at that is long
dead. They where only interested in a decent 1 PPS
and to replace Spectracom WWVB clocks. Odetics won the bid for 1,000
units and within a few months of being installed
the started to die. 90% where located in FM radio transmitter
buildings, so of which would cost $1,000 via helicopter to get
to in the winter. When they where replaced many of the
Antenna/downcoverters were just left behind. Odetics picked up the
bill to have them all replaced. They were suppose to be destroyed but
being a pack rat, I pulled them all out of the dropbox.

anyway .. I'll part out a few, take the HP LED's and offer them to the
t'nuts list members for the cost of shipping. I'll find out
how much can be shoved in a USPS flat rate box next week.

-pete
Mark J. Blair
2011-01-30 03:01:49 UTC
Permalink
On Jan 29, 2011, at 4:03 PM, David Martindale wrote:
> It all depends on the receiver firmware. [...]
> In a little while, Garmin released a small utility that you
> ran on a PC connected to the GPS via its serial port, and it reset
> something that allowed the GPS to do a successful cold start. I
> remember an rumour that it simply reset the saved date and time far
> enough away that the receiver dumped all its old almanac entries,
> forcing it to do a cold start that worked.


Ah, yes. If the receiver is too stubborn to give up and do a very cold start, then it may single-mindedly continue searching exactly where the satellites aren't!


--
Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x-/***@public.gmane.org>
Web page: http://www.nf6x.net/
GnuPG public key available from my web page.
Hal Murray
2011-02-13 23:16:09 UTC
Permalink
> I do not have any lm158s can or dip. Pretty sure they would be hard to come
> by these days also.

Digikey has stock on everything but the ceramic DIP. They do have it in
TO-99/TO-5.


--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
Hal Murray
2011-03-05 02:23:05 UTC
Permalink
> But really like your clock site Wow.
>> www.precisionclocks.com

Neat. Thanks for the heads up.

------

I know about Bryan Mumford's web site:
http://www.bmumford.com/clocks/emindex.html

How many others am I missing?



--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
Hal Murray
2011-03-28 04:10:47 UTC
Permalink
> Pretty much before all these switching power supplies and cpfls etc.

Does anybody know what frequency CPFLs are using today?

I remember that we had some (non-compact) ceiling fluorescents at work with
"electronic" ballasts that were in the 50-60 KHz range. That was 5 years ago.

I wonder if all that junk will eventually migrate to well above 60 KHz to
take advantage of the smaller magnetics and open up WWVB again.


--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
E***@public.gmane.org
2011-03-28 10:51:36 UTC
Permalink
Living in Miami probably as far away as possible in the continental US I
have no problem receiving WWVB. When I moved here in 1993, 60 KHz was my main
reference source. I used a Tracor 599 and a HP 117 along with a 4 foot
commercial loop. The 599 showed clearly superior performance. Later Austron
Loran C was added. The 117 was put on the shelf because without paper it was
not conducive for long term tracking.When $5 Million homes where build
directly next to me the loop had to go, plus the homes where in the direct pass
with the transmitting site. Homes here are built because of code with
concrete cinder blocks and vertical 1" rebar every one or two feet. I did
replace the loop with a commercial 60 KHz ferrite rod unit that also does an
excellent job. With the new location of the antenna I try to peak between the
two houses but there is also a power transformer on a pole within a 10
degree window. During the time I relied on 60 KHz the 599 worked flawless and
as soon as I have room in my lab again I will run it against a tbolt.
I am presently cleaning house in preparation for a next year move and it is
depressing to throw out stuff that at one time I paid good money for. No
room to move in the lab right now.
In the nineties Junghans came to Miami to do some field strength
measurements in preparation with their product roll out. Knowing their senior
management I had an opportunity to host them. I ended up with four Junghans MEGA
clocks and two MEGA watches. The watches have the antenna in the leather
watch bands (their patent). All work well in a house with steel rebar and two
houses next to me in the signal pass. The same is true of the receiver in
my La Crosse weather station I bought three years ago. The only way I can
really tell when we change daylight time and I make it a point to check the
following morning. With out exception they all change.
Bert Kehren


In a message dated 3/28/2011 12:11:15 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
hmurray-8cQiHa/C+6Go9G/***@public.gmane.org writes:


> Pretty much before all these switching power supplies and cpfls etc.

Does anybody know what frequency CPFLs are using today?

I remember that we had some (non-compact) ceiling fluorescents at work
with
"electronic" ballasts that were in the 50-60 KHz range. That was 5 years
ago.

I wonder if all that junk will eventually migrate to well above 60 KHz to
take advantage of the smaller magnetics and open up WWVB again.


--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.




_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Greg Broburg
2011-03-28 16:33:29 UTC
Permalink
There is a method to recover a very weak signal
out of the mud that is fairly easy to build. It uses
a multiplying DAC run by a local reference look
up table that is phase locked into the noise. BW
can be effectively 1 Hz. Output of the DAC would
be integrated to a DC value to control the LO.

Once lock is achieved then the LO can be used
to look at the modulated signal in a wider BW.
Maybe some useful modulation maybe not.

An 8 bit MDAC with 256 or 512 samples per wave
would work ok, no problem to go to 12 14 16 bits
to polish the idea if desired.

Reference LO would be 30M72 for 512 or 15M36
for 256. Other ratios could be made using some
extra logic to make whole ratios better suited for
10M0 final detected values.

Greg


On 3/28/2011 4:51 AM, EWKehren-***@public.gmane.org wrote:
> Living in Miami probably as far away as possible in the continental US I
> have no problem receiving WWVB. When I moved here in 1993, 60 KHz was my main
> reference source. I used a Tracor 599 and a HP 117 along with a 4 foot
> commercial loop. The 599 showed clearly superior performance. Later Austron
> Loran C was added. The 117 was put on the shelf because without paper it was
> not conducive for long term tracking.When $5 Million homes where build
> directly next to me the loop had to go, plus the homes where in the direct pass
> with the transmitting site. Homes here are built because of code with
> concrete cinder blocks and vertical 1" rebar every one or two feet. I did
> replace the loop with a commercial 60 KHz ferrite rod unit that also does an
> excellent job. With the new location of the antenna I try to peak between the
> two houses but there is also a power transformer on a pole within a 10
> degree window. During the time I relied on 60 KHz the 599 worked flawless and
> as soon as I have room in my lab again I will run it against a tbolt.
> I am presently cleaning house in preparation for a next year move and it is
> depressing to throw out stuff that at one time I paid good money for. No
> room to move in the lab right now.
> In the nineties Junghans came to Miami to do some field strength
> measurements in preparation with their product roll out. Knowing their senior
> management I had an opportunity to host them. I ended up with four Junghans MEGA
> clocks and two MEGA watches. The watches have the antenna in the leather
> watch bands (their patent). All work well in a house with steel rebar and two
> houses next to me in the signal pass. The same is true of the receiver in
> my La Crosse weather station I bought three years ago. The only way I can
> really tell when we change daylight time and I make it a point to check the
> following morning. With out exception they all change.
> Bert Kehren
>
>
> In a message dated 3/28/2011 12:11:15 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> hmurray-8cQiHa/C+6Go9G/***@public.gmane.org writes:
>
>
>> Pretty much before all these switching power supplies and cpfls etc.
> Does anybody know what frequency CPFLs are using today?
>
> I remember that we had some (non-compact) ceiling fluorescents at work
> with
> "electronic" ballasts that were in the 50-60 KHz range. That was 5 years
> ago.
>
> I wonder if all that junk will eventually migrate to well above 60 KHz to
> take advantage of the smaller magnetics and open up WWVB again.
>
>
Poul-Henning Kamp
2011-03-28 15:56:58 UTC
Permalink
In message <4D90B859.2080907-***@public.gmane.org>, Greg Broburg writes:

>There is a method to recover a very weak signal
>out of the mud that is fairly easy to build.

I did this slightly differently:

Take a 1MSPS ADC and average it into 1000 buckets in round
robin form, one after the other.

This can be done very quickly in an interrupt routine or even in hardware.
The Aduc72xx family of ARM can do this running a sweat, any DSP
would have absolutely no trouble doing it.

In Europe use 2000 buckets so you can capture DCF77 also.

By multiplying the buckets with a suitable IQ signal, you can pull
out any signal of integral kHz frequency you care for, and measure
its relative phase and change of phase over time.

Here are some experiements I did many years ago with one million
buckets, so I could demodulate the second pulses:

http://phk.freebsd.dk/loran-c/CW/

I would love to find somebody who can design some proper hardware
for this, so that we can have an "VLF-All-band Time/Phase Receiver",
basically a receiver you can ask, at any time, "What is the phase
of the signal at N kHz, for any value of N you care for.

Poul-Henning

--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk-***@public.gmane.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Greg Broburg
2011-03-29 00:37:44 UTC
Permalink
Yes, your idea is very nice.

So, many basement engineers have not moved
into the world of programmable DSP concepts, missing
some basic breadboard circuit and some example
demonstration software to try out. Perhaps your idea
would be the perfect tool to inspire and learn from. The
general nature of this is very good.

Can you show a circuit of what you have done?

Would you recommend the 7200 again or something
else that is better suited?

Many thanks;

Greg


On 3/28/2011 9:56 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> In message<4D90B859.2080907-***@public.gmane.org>, Greg Broburg writes:
>
>> There is a method to recover a very weak signal
>> out of the mud that is fairly easy to build.
> I did this slightly differently:
>
> Take a 1MSPS ADC and average it into 1000 buckets in round
> robin form, one after the other.
>
> This can be done very quickly in an interrupt routine or even in hardware.
> The Aduc72xx family of ARM can do this running a sweat, any DSP
> would have absolutely no trouble doing it.
>
> In Europe use 2000 buckets so you can capture DCF77 also.
>
> By multiplying the buckets with a suitable IQ signal, you can pull
> out any signal of integral kHz frequency you care for, and measure
> its relative phase and change of phase over time.
>
> Here are some experiements I did many years ago with one million
> buckets, so I could demodulate the second pulses:
>
> http://phk.freebsd.dk/loran-c/CW/
>
> I would love to find somebody who can design some proper hardware
> for this, so that we can have an "VLF-All-band Time/Phase Receiver",
> basically a receiver you can ask, at any time, "What is the phase
> of the signal at N kHz, for any value of N you care for.
>
> Poul-Henning
>
Poul-Henning Kamp
2011-03-29 06:54:47 UTC
Permalink
In message <4D9129D8.4060609-***@public.gmane.org>, Greg Broburg writes:

>Can you show a circuit of what you have done?

Basically I have a 20MSPS PCI card in a PC and do it all in
software.

I did use similar principles to implement a LORAN-C receiver
in a aduc7216 (http://phk.freebsd.dk/AducLoran/) but that is
passe for US people now.

>Would you recommend the 7200 again or something
>else that is better suited?

The most user friendly way to do it, would be to have a small FPGA
which takes data from the ADC and averages it into a small piece
of multiplext or dual port RAM, and a microcontroller (ARM ?) on
the other port, doing all the high level stuff.

That way there is no real-time component to deal with in the
programming, and anybody should be able to play with the code.

The alternative is to use a DSP to read the ADC, do the
averaging and perform the high level functions. That would
be a lot harder to program for most people.

The ADC could be 16 bits, and run directly from a house standard
of 5 or 10 MHz (looks like that would cost $4 from analog.com, isn't
this future amazing ?)

Add a high resolution DAC for steering OCXO's and a serial port
or USB interface and we're done...

--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk-***@public.gmane.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
paul swed
2011-03-29 13:57:45 UTC
Permalink
Now you see I like these up to date solutions with cheap components. I
recently home brewed "YAGPSDO" yet another GPSDO, just to see how its done.
When I look at things like a frontend and maybe a mixer thats easy stuff.
Even adding a nice A/D converter etc is easy if you can solder the darn
things.
What gets tricky is indeed the programming of the processor. I would have to
say on the GPSDO its really not much more then a single loop pid with just a
drop of smarts.
So back to this.
I have read the high level comments. But can we get deeper detail. Can it be
done lets say in basic language etc. The comment I read that struck a cord
was that all you did was sample and put the information in roughly 1000
bins. Then I assume look for the bin with the most counts and called that
center frequency. Perhaps plotting that number out.
Is that really it??? Sure various filtering could also be done.
But if the above scenario were correct for me at least it gets interesting
and do-able.
By the way for definition my interest is indeed an alternate comparison
method to GPS. Kind of a second reference since we lost loran.

Having just wrapped up my project with VE2ZAZ for the HP3586 DSS its time to
move on to the tracor 599 and wwvb.
Regards
Paul

On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 2:54 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk-HF+***@public.gmane.org>wrote:

> In message <4D9129D8.4060609-***@public.gmane.org>, Greg Broburg writes:
>
> >Can you show a circuit of what you have done?
>
> Basically I have a 20MSPS PCI card in a PC and do it all in
> software.
>
> I did use similar principles to implement a LORAN-C receiver
> in a aduc7216 (http://phk.freebsd.dk/AducLoran/) but that is
> passe for US people now.
>
> >Would you recommend the 7200 again or something
> >else that is better suited?
>
> The most user friendly way to do it, would be to have a small FPGA
> which takes data from the ADC and averages it into a small piece
> of multiplext or dual port RAM, and a microcontroller (ARM ?) on
> the other port, doing all the high level stuff.
>
> That way there is no real-time component to deal with in the
> programming, and anybody should be able to play with the code.
>
> The alternative is to use a DSP to read the ADC, do the
> averaging and perform the high level functions. That would
> be a lot harder to program for most people.
>
> The ADC could be 16 bits, and run directly from a house standard
> of 5 or 10 MHz (looks like that would cost $4 from analog.com, isn't
> this future amazing ?)
>
> Add a high resolution DAC for steering OCXO's and a serial port
> or USB interface and we're done...
>
> --
> Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
> phk-***@public.gmane.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956
> FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
J. Forster
2011-03-29 14:13:05 UTC
Permalink
Even if you can build a perfect receiver I don't see how you can get
around the variable path length issue short of averaging WWVB for days or
weeks.

-John

================


> Now you see I like these up to date solutions with cheap components. I
> recently home brewed "YAGPSDO" yet another GPSDO, just to see how its
> done.
> When I look at things like a frontend and maybe a mixer thats easy stuff.
> Even adding a nice A/D converter etc is easy if you can solder the darn
> things.
> What gets tricky is indeed the programming of the processor. I would have
> to
> say on the GPSDO its really not much more then a single loop pid with just
> a
> drop of smarts.
> So back to this.
> I have read the high level comments. But can we get deeper detail. Can it
> be
> done lets say in basic language etc. The comment I read that struck a cord
> was that all you did was sample and put the information in roughly 1000
> bins. Then I assume look for the bin with the most counts and called that
> center frequency. Perhaps plotting that number out.
> Is that really it??? Sure various filtering could also be done.
> But if the above scenario were correct for me at least it gets interesting
> and do-able.
> By the way for definition my interest is indeed an alternate comparison
> method to GPS. Kind of a second reference since we lost loran.
>
> Having just wrapped up my project with VE2ZAZ for the HP3586 DSS its time
> to
> move on to the tracor 599 and wwvb.
> Regards
> Paul
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 2:54 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp
> <phk-HF+***@public.gmane.org>wrote:
>
>> In message <4D9129D8.4060609-***@public.gmane.org>, Greg Broburg writes:
>>
>> >Can you show a circuit of what you have done?
>>
>> Basically I have a 20MSPS PCI card in a PC and do it all in
>> software.
>>
>> I did use similar principles to implement a LORAN-C receiver
>> in a aduc7216 (http://phk.freebsd.dk/AducLoran/) but that is
>> passe for US people now.
>>
>> >Would you recommend the 7200 again or something
>> >else that is better suited?
>>
>> The most user friendly way to do it, would be to have a small FPGA
>> which takes data from the ADC and averages it into a small piece
>> of multiplext or dual port RAM, and a microcontroller (ARM ?) on
>> the other port, doing all the high level stuff.
>>
>> That way there is no real-time component to deal with in the
>> programming, and anybody should be able to play with the code.
>>
>> The alternative is to use a DSP to read the ADC, do the
>> averaging and perform the high level functions. That would
>> be a lot harder to program for most people.
>>
>> The ADC could be 16 bits, and run directly from a house standard
>> of 5 or 10 MHz (looks like that would cost $4 from analog.com, isn't
>> this future amazing ?)
>>
>> Add a high resolution DAC for steering OCXO's and a serial port
>> or USB interface and we're done...
>>
>> --
>> Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
>> phk-***@public.gmane.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956
>> FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
>> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by
>> incompetence.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
>
Greg Broburg
2011-03-29 15:22:04 UTC
Permalink
That is pretty much the way that it has always been done.

I just assumed that that was a given.

Greg


On 3/29/2011 8:13 AM, J. Forster wrote:
> Even if you can build a perfect receiver I don't see how you can get
> around the variable path length issue short of averaging WWVB for days or
> weeks.
>
> -John
>
> ================
>
>
Chris Albertson
2011-03-29 16:53:08 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 7:13 AM, J. Forster <jfor-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Even if you can build a perfect receiver I don't see how you can get
> around the variable path length issue short of averaging WWVB for days or
> weeks.

Yes but you only have to wait once as long as you don't turn it off.
This is OK if the use is only for a second independent reference.

Remember the Hubble mirror problem? I think the best use of WWVB is
to prevent an embarrassing problem like that. That's where they
trusted their supper arcuate machine so much they did not bother with
even a simple and cheep backup test. (Even I could have seen those
errors in 10 minutes using 19th century techniques like the Foucault
knife-edge test)


--
=====
Chris Albertson
Redondo Beach, California
Bruce Griffiths
2011-03-29 18:12:38 UTC
Permalink
Chris Albertson wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 7:13 AM, J. Forster<jfor-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>> Even if you can build a perfect receiver I don't see how you can get
>> around the variable path length issue short of averaging WWVB for days or
>> weeks.
>>
> Yes but you only have to wait once as long as you don't turn it off.
> This is OK if the use is only for a second independent reference.
>
> Remember the Hubble mirror problem? I think the best use of WWVB is
> to prevent an embarrassing problem like that. That's where they
> trusted their supper arcuate machine so much they did not bother with
> even a simple and cheep backup test. (Even I could have seen those
> errors in 10 minutes using 19th century techniques like the Foucault
> knife-edge test)
>
>
>
Actually the interferometric Hartmann test would have been far better
and quicker as it only requires a simple aperture array and a camera an
error of 1mm or so in location of the plate would have made little
difference to the results. This method was used to guide the figuring of
the NOT.

Bruce
Poul-Henning Kamp
2011-03-29 18:13:39 UTC
Permalink
In message <AANLkTi=Si24pPksDyae4Mvy_FB8W0qdSgF2vvDuT2+xP-JsoAwUIsXosN+***@public.gmane.org>, paul
swed writes:

>I have read the high level comments. But can we get deeper detail. Can it be
>done lets say in basic language etc. The comment I read that struck a cord
>was that all you did was sample and put the information in roughly 1000
>bins. Then I assume look for the bin with the most counts and called that
>center frequency. Perhaps plotting that number out.

If the averaging is done in a small FPGA, the rest can be done in
any programming language or even a spreadsheet.

Basically the buckets correspond to a timeinterval or time windown.

For instance 1MSPS and 1000 buckets, the buckets total a 1 millisecond
window.

A signal of 60 kHz will consequently have 60 periods over the 1000
buckets, so to derive the phase we multiply it with a 60 kHz
I+Q signal and take the average. (I+Q = sin+cos = two signals
same frequency, 90 degrees apart)

This comes out to:

freq = 60 # ...times higher = 60 kHz
sin_acc = 0.0
cos_acc = 0.0
for i in range(0,nbucket):
sin_acc += bucket[i] * sin(freq * 2 * PI / nbucket)
cos_acc += bucket[i] * cos(freq * 2 * PI / nbucket)
phase_angle = arc_tan2(sin_acc, cos_acc)

The beauty of this receiver, is that you can then change 60 to 75
and redo the calculation on the same bucket values.

The reason this works is the Fourier theorem:

integral (sin(n*x) * sin(m*x)) = zero
x 0...2*PI

If we can transfer the bucket values to the computer,
you could put them in column A in a spread-sheet and calculate the
phase_angle for any number of frequencies you care for in columns
B....

With a 32Kx16 ram, we could have 20000 buckets, with a 10MSPS ADC
that would give 2 msec for the window, allowing any frequency
divisible by 500 Hz to be measured.

Now arguably, there are a lot less usable signals than one would
dream of, but that does not distract from the fact that this is
an incredibly cheap and usable frequency/phase VLF receiver.

--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk-***@public.gmane.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Don Latham
2011-03-30 06:59:35 UTC
Permalink
I've had some success with control programs done in Robot Basic
www.robotbasic.org .
the price is right, and it's designed for i/o with simple tools built-in.
Check it out.
Don

----- Original Message -----
From: "paul swed" <paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org>
To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement"
<time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 7:57 AM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] WWVB Measurements using DSP recovery


> Now you see I like these up to date solutions with cheap components. I
> recently home brewed "YAGPSDO" yet another GPSDO, just to see how its
> done.
> When I look at things like a frontend and maybe a mixer thats easy stuff.
> Even adding a nice A/D converter etc is easy if you can solder the darn
> things.
> What gets tricky is indeed the programming of the processor. I would have
> to
> say on the GPSDO its really not much more then a single loop pid with just
> a
> drop of smarts.
> So back to this.
> I have read the high level comments. But can we get deeper detail. Can it
> be
> done lets say in basic language etc. The comment I read that struck a cord
> was that all you did was sample and put the information in roughly 1000
> bins. Then I assume look for the bin with the most counts and called that
> center frequency. Perhaps plotting that number out.
> Is that really it??? Sure various filtering could also be done.
> But if the above scenario were correct for me at least it gets interesting
> and do-able.
> By the way for definition my interest is indeed an alternate comparison
> method to GPS. Kind of a second reference since we lost loran.
>
> Having just wrapped up my project with VE2ZAZ for the HP3586 DSS its time
> to
> move on to the tracor 599 and wwvb.
> Regards
> Paul
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 2:54 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp
> <phk-HF+***@public.gmane.org>wrote:
>
>> In message <4D9129D8.4060609-***@public.gmane.org>, Greg Broburg writes:
>>
>> >Can you show a circuit of what you have done?
>>
>> Basically I have a 20MSPS PCI card in a PC and do it all in
>> software.
>>
>> I did use similar principles to implement a LORAN-C receiver
>> in a aduc7216 (http://phk.freebsd.dk/AducLoran/) but that is
>> passe for US people now.
>>
>> >Would you recommend the 7200 again or something
>> >else that is better suited?
>>
>> The most user friendly way to do it, would be to have a small FPGA
>> which takes data from the ADC and averages it into a small piece
>> of multiplext or dual port RAM, and a microcontroller (ARM ?) on
>> the other port, doing all the high level stuff.
>>
>> That way there is no real-time component to deal with in the
>> programming, and anybody should be able to play with the code.
>>
>> The alternative is to use a DSP to read the ADC, do the
>> averaging and perform the high level functions. That would
>> be a lot harder to program for most people.
>>
>> The ADC could be 16 bits, and run directly from a house standard
>> of 5 or 10 MHz (looks like that would cost $4 from analog.com, isn't
>> this future amazing ?)
>>
>> Add a high resolution DAC for steering OCXO's and a serial port
>> or USB interface and we're done...
>>
>> --
>> Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
>> phk-***@public.gmane.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956
>> FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
>> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by
>> incompetence.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
paul swed
2011-03-30 14:17:15 UTC
Permalink
Curious as to what you did in some detail. I use SXB basic which can run in
sub microsecond loops or a max clock of 75 Mhz.
But anything I would tend to do would not have the precision of what Poul
suggests.
He is using larger numbers and it makes sense to use a DSP chip set for the
math suggested. Unfortunately I have just about 0 ability to do that.
However Pouls final sentence does lead back for me at least to the real
interest. Load everything into a spreadsheet and produce a number on the
local reference as compared to GPS. But potentially at a lower resolution.
I have been spoiled by the austrons loran timing receivers and GPS also.
Reference in 1 X 10^ -12 out....
Regards
Paul.

On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 2:59 AM, Don Latham <djl-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> I've had some success with control programs done in Robot Basic
> www.robotbasic.org .
> the price is right, and it's designed for i/o with simple tools built-in.
> Check it out.
> Don
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "paul swed" <paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org>
> To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" <
> time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 7:57 AM
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] WWVB Measurements using DSP recovery
>
>
>
> Now you see I like these up to date solutions with cheap components. I
>> recently home brewed "YAGPSDO" yet another GPSDO, just to see how its
>> done.
>> When I look at things like a frontend and maybe a mixer thats easy stuff.
>> Even adding a nice A/D converter etc is easy if you can solder the darn
>> things.
>> What gets tricky is indeed the programming of the processor. I would have
>> to
>> say on the GPSDO its really not much more then a single loop pid with just
>> a
>> drop of smarts.
>> So back to this.
>> I have read the high level comments. But can we get deeper detail. Can it
>> be
>> done lets say in basic language etc. The comment I read that struck a cord
>> was that all you did was sample and put the information in roughly 1000
>> bins. Then I assume look for the bin with the most counts and called that
>> center frequency. Perhaps plotting that number out.
>> Is that really it??? Sure various filtering could also be done.
>> But if the above scenario were correct for me at least it gets interesting
>> and do-able.
>> By the way for definition my interest is indeed an alternate comparison
>> method to GPS. Kind of a second reference since we lost loran.
>>
>> Having just wrapped up my project with VE2ZAZ for the HP3586 DSS its time
>> to
>> move on to the tracor 599 and wwvb.
>> Regards
>> Paul
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 2:54 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk-HF+***@public.gmane.org
>> >wrote:
>>
>> In message <4D9129D8.4060609-***@public.gmane.org>, Greg Broburg writes:
>>>
>>> >Can you show a circuit of what you have done?
>>>
>>> Basically I have a 20MSPS PCI card in a PC and do it all in
>>> software.
>>>
>>> I did use similar principles to implement a LORAN-C receiver
>>> in a aduc7216 (http://phk.freebsd.dk/AducLoran/) but that is
>>> passe for US people now.
>>>
>>> >Would you recommend the 7200 again or something
>>> >else that is better suited?
>>>
>>> The most user friendly way to do it, would be to have a small FPGA
>>> which takes data from the ADC and averages it into a small piece
>>> of multiplext or dual port RAM, and a microcontroller (ARM ?) on
>>> the other port, doing all the high level stuff.
>>>
>>> That way there is no real-time component to deal with in the
>>> programming, and anybody should be able to play with the code.
>>>
>>> The alternative is to use a DSP to read the ADC, do the
>>> averaging and perform the high level functions. That would
>>> be a lot harder to program for most people.
>>>
>>> The ADC could be 16 bits, and run directly from a house standard
>>> of 5 or 10 MHz (looks like that would cost $4 from analog.com, isn't
>>> this future amazing ?)
>>>
>>> Add a high resolution DAC for steering OCXO's and a serial port
>>> or USB interface and we're done...
>>>
>>> --
>>> Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
>>> phk-***@public.gmane.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956
>>> FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
>>> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by
>>> incompetence.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
Shawn Tayler
2011-04-02 17:43:40 UTC
Permalink
If I could suggest a shorter and perhaps simpler solution. Rather than reinventing the wheel, simply insert each value as read into a SQL database engine, there are numerous free ones available, i.e. MySQL or Postgresql. You could include a timestamp either with your code or the system can do it automatically for you. To get your result a simple query against the table:

Select count(*), value from [table] group by value order by count desc limit 1;

A simple shell script up to something graphical could be used, the KISS principle would yield the best results I'd suggest.

It could provide your result Every few milliseconds with a properly built system and indexing of the table.



Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 29, 2011, at 6:57, paul swed <paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> Now you see I like these up to date solutions with cheap components. I
> recently home brewed "YAGPSDO" yet another GPSDO, just to see how its done.
> When I look at things like a frontend and maybe a mixer thats easy stuff.
> Even adding a nice A/D converter etc is easy if you can solder the darn
> things.
> What gets tricky is indeed the programming of the processor. I would have to
> say on the GPSDO its really not much more then a single loop pid with just a
> drop of smarts.
> So back to this.
> I have read the high level comments. But can we get deeper detail. Can it be
> done lets say in basic language etc. The comment I read that struck a cord
> was that all you did was sample and put the information in roughly 1000
> bins. Then I assume look for the bin with the most counts and called that
> center frequency. Perhaps plotting that number out.
> Is that really it??? Sure various filtering could also be done.
> But if the above scenario were correct for me at least it gets interesting
> and do-able.
> By the way for definition my interest is indeed an alternate comparison
> method to GPS. Kind of a second reference since we lost loran.
>
> Having just wrapped up my project with VE2ZAZ for the HP3586 DSS its time to
> move on to the tracor 599 and wwvb.
> Regards
> Paul
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 2:54 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk-HF+***@public.gmane.org>wrote:
>
>> In message <4D9129D8.4060609-***@public.gmane.org>, Greg Broburg writes:
>>
>>> Can you show a circuit of what you have done?
>>
>> Basically I have a 20MSPS PCI card in a PC and do it all in
>> software.
>>
>> I did use similar principles to implement a LORAN-C receiver
>> in a aduc7216 (http://phk.freebsd.dk/AducLoran/) but that is
>> passe for US people now.
>>
>>> Would you recommend the 7200 again or something
>>> else that is better suited?
>>
>> The most user friendly way to do it, would be to have a small FPGA
>> which takes data from the ADC and averages it into a small piece
>> of multiplext or dual port RAM, and a microcontroller (ARM ?) on
>> the other port, doing all the high level stuff.
>>
>> That way there is no real-time component to deal with in the
>> programming, and anybody should be able to play with the code.
>>
>> The alternative is to use a DSP to read the ADC, do the
>> averaging and perform the high level functions. That would
>> be a lot harder to program for most people.
>>
>> The ADC could be 16 bits, and run directly from a house standard
>> of 5 or 10 MHz (looks like that would cost $4 from analog.com, isn't
>> this future amazing ?)
>>
>> Add a high resolution DAC for steering OCXO's and a serial port
>> or USB interface and we're done...
>>
>> --
>> Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
>> phk-***@public.gmane.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956
>> FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
>> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
Hal Murray
2011-04-06 20:06:11 UTC
Permalink
paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
> The chargers on the small UPS's 70-100 watt class are not really set up to
> do a good job on a much larger battery set.

What's the problem and/or what do the larger units do differently?

----------

Several/many years ago, I got a UPS when somebody on this list (I think)
pointed out that the APC units would tell you the line voltage. Mostly, I
wanted something to run a PC that monitors line voltage if/when it went out
so that worked out nicely.

I looked at the charts and did some quick calculations. The smaller units
don't have many watt-hours. I ended up getting a big unit in order to get
hours rather than minutes of holdover.


--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
Hal Murray
2011-04-06 21:13:41 UTC
Permalink
paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
> The charger does not deliver enough current to effectively charge the
> battery set if its larger then the original design. As such the battery life
> is effected up to 50% and certainly the operating capacity.

I'm missing something. I'd expect it to just charge slower. What's wrong
with that? (as long as you are willing to wait longer and the unit doesn't
overheat and ...)

Actually, I'd expect charging slower to be (slightly) better for battery life.

Consider systems that charge batteries from solar cells. They work fine on
less than full bright sun.


--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
paul swed
2011-04-06 23:46:16 UTC
Permalink
To effectively charge a battery it needs a given amount of current for the
plate area.
Thats why larger batteries actually start in constant current mode.
We are getting slowly but surely off topic.
Regards

On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Hal Murray <hmurray-8cQiHa/C+6Go9G/***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

>
> paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
> > The charger does not deliver enough current to effectively charge the
> > battery set if its larger then the original design. As such the battery
> life
> > is effected up to 50% and certainly the operating capacity.
>
> I'm missing something. I'd expect it to just charge slower. What's wrong
> with that? (as long as you are willing to wait longer and the unit doesn't
> overheat and ...)
>
> Actually, I'd expect charging slower to be (slightly) better for battery
> life.
>
> Consider systems that charge batteries from solar cells. They work fine on
> less than full bright sun.
>
>
> --
> These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
Hal Murray
2012-02-11 02:30:15 UTC
Permalink
paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
> Why 24 bits because it was pretty easy using 74hc596 8 bit counters with
> latch and tristate outputs. Unfortunately the schematics are on paper at the
> moment scribbles. But the cntrs are stacked on top each other as a unit and
> soldered together. Only a few pins are not such as clock output enable and
> such its quite simple. The 8 bits feed a port on the micro so I can get the
> bytes. As for smaller countes indeed at this point its clear it could have
> been even 1.

I can't quite figure out what you are planning...

Someplace, you have to consider metastability.

Since you can't read all 3 chips in the counter at the same time, you also
have to consider the carry from one chip to the next. I assume you are
familiar with the classic trick of reading high, low, high, and trying again
if the high samples are not the same. (That's for a 2 byte counter.)

You can probably use the same ideas to avoid metastability by reading the low
byte twice. If you get X, X or X, X+1, you probably have a valid reading.

You still have the problem of reading both counters in sync. I'd probably
try something like read: high-1, mid-1, low-1, low-1, mid-1, high-1, high-2,
mid-2, low-2, low-2, mid-2, high-2 and then try again if any of the pairs
didn't match. (Where "match" allows the low byte to advance by 1.)

The key idea is that the counters will be read with an offset but the offset
will be a constant which won't cause any problems.



--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
Hal Murray
2012-02-11 02:35:01 UTC
Permalink
paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
> Hang on here. If the signal was 10 MHz for ref and RB its easy as suggested
> here XOR gates and such.

Assume I have 2 signals that are (very) close to 10 MHz and I get to read
their XOR. How do I know which one is faster?


--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.
Robert LaJeunesse
2012-02-11 02:47:05 UTC
Permalink
You don't. That's why the HC4046 has 3 phase comparators. Different strokes for
different folks...




________________________________
From: Hal Murray <hmurray-8cQiHa/C+6Go9G/***@public.gmane.org>
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement <time-nuts-***@public.gmane.orgm>
Sent: Fri, February 10, 2012 9:35:01 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] GPS lock of the FE5680. Current experiment and question


paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
> Hang on here. If the signal was 10 MHz for ref and RB its easy as suggested
> here XOR gates and such.

Assume I have 2 signals that are (very) close to 10 MHz and I get to read
their XOR.  How do I know which one is faster?


--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's.  I hate spam.




_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Hal Murray
2013-01-16 21:09:20 UTC
Permalink
> Quite odd my 8170 absolutely will not lock

How far are you from the transmitter?

What is EMI like in your area?


Years ago, Dave Mills was ranting about WWVB becoming useless in his area
(MD) because of EMI. I think he traced part of the problem to welding
machines at a nearby factory.

I'll try to track down more info if people are curious. I'm sure it's
archived out there somewhere.


--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
paul swed
2013-01-16 23:45:32 UTC
Permalink
Well the noise level is rising all the cfls and such.
But what nails me is MSF out of england. I can see the confusion it causes
in the signal chain.
BPSK it actually creates offsets depending on the signal strength.
Then we all face the noise in the summer.
Regards
Paul

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 4:09 PM, Hal Murray <hmurray-8cQiHa/C+6Go9G/***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> > Quite odd my 8170 absolutely will not lock
>
> How far are you from the transmitter?
>
> What is EMI like in your area?
>
>
> Years ago, Dave Mills was ranting about WWVB becoming useless in his area
> (MD) because of EMI. I think he traced part of the problem to welding
> machines at a nearby factory.
>
> I'll try to track down more info if people are curious. I'm sure it's
> archived out there somewhere.
>
>
> --
> These are my opinions. I hate spam.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
Bob Camp
2013-01-17 11:59:47 UTC
Permalink
Hi

….. and MSF does not do the BPSK rock and roll. That *should* ultimately improve your ability to reject MSF. How much improvement will depend on how fast the fade rate is when you are trying for a signal.

Bob

On Jan 16, 2013, at 6:45 PM, paul swed <paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> Well the noise level is rising all the cfls and such.
> But what nails me is MSF out of england. I can see the confusion it causes
> in the signal chain.
> BPSK it actually creates offsets depending on the signal strength.
> Then we all face the noise in the summer.
> Regards
> Paul
>
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 4:09 PM, Hal Murray <hmurray-8cQiHa/C+6Go9G/***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>>> Quite odd my 8170 absolutely will not lock
>>
>> How far are you from the transmitter?
>>
>> What is EMI like in your area?
>>
>>
>> Years ago, Dave Mills was ranting about WWVB becoming useless in his area
>> (MD) because of EMI. I think he traced part of the problem to welding
>> machines at a nearby factory.
>>
>> I'll try to track down more info if people are curious. I'm sure it's
>> archived out there somewhere.
>>
>>
>> --
>> These are my opinions. I hate spam.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
Timeok
2013-01-17 13:24:30 UTC
Permalink
Interesting info about a new developed Maser working at room
temperature:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v488/n7411/full/nature11339.html




timeok
Burt I. Weiner
2013-01-17 00:01:13 UTC
Permalink
Paul,

I just went out to my shoppe and looked. Mine is locked and has been
for most of the day, with two green lights. Some time ago I added a
meter to the front panel that I connected to one of the test
points. It's currently fairly steady except for the normal dips in
carrier strength. About this time of day it usually starts to go
nuts because of the Diurnal shift. I'm in Glendale, CA, just north
of Downtown Los Angeles. My WWVB antenna is a ferrite rod type in a
PVC tube. It's been laying by the side of the house on the ground
for over 15 years. That's where I've always gotten the cleanest
signal - found that out when we re-roofed the house.

Burt, K6OQK


>From: paul swed <paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org>
>
>Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Used Spectracom
>
>Quite odd my 8170 absolutely will not lock
>
>On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Burt I. Weiner <biwa-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure what the status of the new modulation scheme is at the
> > moment, but my Spectracom 8170 is still keeping good time. That's about
> > all I use it for anymore - a clock in the rack. It says it's locked.
> >
> > Burt, K6OQK
> >

Burt I. Weiner Associates
Broadcast Technical Services
Glendale, California U.S.A.
biwa-***@public.gmane.org
www.biwa.cc
K6OQK
paul swed
2013-01-17 01:09:45 UTC
Permalink
Burt
I don't know what to say at all but the bpsk signal does a number to my
8170. So all I can do is scratch my head. Lucky you.
Regards
Paul.

On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 7:01 PM, Burt I. Weiner <biwa-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> Paul,
>
> I just went out to my shoppe and looked. Mine is locked and has been for
> most of the day, with two green lights. Some time ago I added a meter to
> the front panel that I connected to one of the test points. It's currently
> fairly steady except for the normal dips in carrier strength. About this
> time of day it usually starts to go nuts because of the Diurnal shift. I'm
> in Glendale, CA, just north of Downtown Los Angeles. My WWVB antenna is a
> ferrite rod type in a PVC tube. It's been laying by the side of the house
> on the ground for over 15 years. That's where I've always gotten the
> cleanest signal - found that out when we re-roofed the house.
>
> Burt, K6OQK
>
>
> From: paul swed <paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org>
>>
>> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Used Spectracom
>>
>> Quite odd my 8170 absolutely will not lock
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Burt I. Weiner <biwa-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>
>> > I'm not sure what the status of the new modulation scheme is at the
>> > moment, but my Spectracom 8170 is still keeping good time. That's about
>> > all I use it for anymore - a clock in the rack. It says it's locked.
>> >
>> > Burt, K6OQK
>> >
>>
>
> Burt I. Weiner Associates
> Broadcast Technical Services
> Glendale, California U.S.A.
> biwa-***@public.gmane.org
> www.biwa.cc
> K6OQK
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**
> mailman/listinfo/time-nuts<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts>
> and follow the instructions there.
>
Hal Murray
2013-06-27 19:09:29 UTC
Permalink
paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
> Ed good comment on the 74c04. May tinker with that. Though the HC14s working
> pretty nicely now.

They make 74xU04 for many values of x. The U is for Unbuffered. They have
lower gain in the linear region.

I thought they were intended to be used for things like this, but I don't
understand that area. Can anybody give me a quick lesson or point me at a
good URL?


--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
paul swed
2013-06-27 21:03:47 UTC
Permalink
Hal I seem to have only a bit of a clue here because I thought I would just
grab any circuit off the internet and away I would go. Did not quite turn
out that way.
Regards
Paul
WB8TSL


On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Hal Murray <hmurray-8cQiHa/C+6Go9G/***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

>
> paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
> > Ed good comment on the 74c04. May tinker with that. Though the HC14s
> working
> > pretty nicely now.
>
> They make 74xU04 for many values of x. The U is for Unbuffered. They have
> lower gain in the linear region.
>
> I thought they were intended to be used for things like this, but I don't
> understand that area. Can anybody give me a quick lesson or point me at a
> good URL?
>
>
> --
> These are my opinions. I hate spam.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
Bob Camp
2013-06-28 00:22:39 UTC
Permalink
Hi

The U / unbuffered inverter has less delay than it's buffered cousin.

In order to get an oscillator, you need to satisfy Barkhausen's criteria:

loop gain > 1 to start up
loop gain = 1 in operation
net phase around the loop = 0 (modulo 360 degrees)

As long as the gate has more gain than the crystal network (crystal plus caps) has loss, it will start.

As long as the delay through the gate isn't to crazy, it will oscillate with about a 180 degree phase shift on the crystal network, and 180 degrees through the inverter.

In order to start, you want to get the inverter in it's linear region. That's not at all easy with a schmitt trigger. Much easier with a normal inverter.

Bob

On Jun 27, 2013, at 3:09 PM, Hal Murray <hmurray-8cQiHa/C+6Go9G/***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

>
> paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
>> Ed good comment on the 74c04. May tinker with that. Though the HC14s working
>> pretty nicely now.
>
> They make 74xU04 for many values of x. The U is for Unbuffered. They have
> lower gain in the linear region.
>
> I thought they were intended to be used for things like this, but I don't
> understand that area. Can anybody give me a quick lesson or point me at a
> good URL?
>
>
> --
> These are my opinions. I hate spam.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
ed breya
2013-06-27 21:37:16 UTC
Permalink
Still having email problems - here we go again. This is second try,
please excuse if both show up.

Hal Murray said:
>They make 74xU04 for many values of x. The U is for Unbuffered. They have
lower gain in the linear region.
I thought they were intended to be used for things like this, but I don't
understand that area. Can anybody give me a quick lesson or point me at a
good URL?<



I always thought the unbuffered "U" versions were preferred for ring
oscillators mostly to save power - you don't want the high-drive
output stages to be cooking away in linear mode if not needed. The
propagation delay can also be less since the U ones have only one
stage instead of three (the building block is the totem-pole inverter
stage), but they can't drive very much load anyway. I think that most
MSI and LSI parts that have built-in ring/crystal oscillator sections
use the U topology, but I don't think there's anything special about
it - it's the simplest thing that works.

I've made quite a few CD4000 and 74HC oscillators, and never worried
too much about U versions or not, except for battery-run items where
power is critical (or you can run the oscillator at lower voltage).
Often they are made from inverting gates that are part of a shared
package, where you wouldn't want puny drive capability in the other
gates anyway. They are relative power hogs though, whenever linear
biasing is needed. Except in the 4000 series, I don't know if U
versions are available in anything but the '04 hex inverter, but I
suppose it's possible. I think the Schmitt-trigger types like HC14
are necessarily buffered, so have three stages, since you need a
non-inverted version of the signal for the positive feedback to the input.

I've never tried making one in 74AC - I don't know if it's even
possible to bias one up that way without it burning up. I'm working
on some related circuits now, so maybe I'll set up an experiment to
see how much current it would take for one inverter - I've often
wondered about this.

I read about this years ago in various CMOS application notes, so I
may be missing some key points - there should be plenty of info
online. The older generation (when CMOS was fairly new) info may
provide more detail about the guts than that related to the newer,
higher performance families.

Ed
paul swed
2013-06-27 22:30:29 UTC
Permalink
I will say the fact is the 74hc14 is a bit of a power pig we are talking 12
ma. The rcvr is something much less like 100 ua. At least for the moment it
all works but 12 ma is a pig.
Especially when you take the signal out and knock it down to 100-200 uv.
Regards
Paul.


On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 5:37 PM, ed breya <eb-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> Still having email problems - here we go again. This is second try, please
> excuse if both show up.
>
>
> Hal Murray said:
> >They make 74xU04 for many values of x. The U is for Unbuffered. They
> have
> lower gain in the linear region.
> I thought they were intended to be used for things like this, but I don't
> understand that area. Can anybody give me a quick lesson or point me at a
> good URL?<
>
>
>
> I always thought the unbuffered "U" versions were preferred for ring
> oscillators mostly to save power - you don't want the high-drive output
> stages to be cooking away in linear mode if not needed. The propagation
> delay can also be less since the U ones have only one stage instead of
> three (the building block is the totem-pole inverter stage), but they can't
> drive very much load anyway. I think that most MSI and LSI parts that have
> built-in ring/crystal oscillator sections use the U topology, but I don't
> think there's anything special about it - it's the simplest thing that
> works.
>
> I've made quite a few CD4000 and 74HC oscillators, and never worried too
> much about U versions or not, except for battery-run items where power is
> critical (or you can run the oscillator at lower voltage). Often they are
> made from inverting gates that are part of a shared package, where you
> wouldn't want puny drive capability in the other gates anyway. They are
> relative power hogs though, whenever linear biasing is needed. Except in
> the 4000 series, I don't know if U versions are available in anything but
> the '04 hex inverter, but I suppose it's possible. I think the
> Schmitt-trigger types like HC14 are necessarily buffered, so have three
> stages, since you need a non-inverted version of the signal for the
> positive feedback to the input.
>
> I've never tried making one in 74AC - I don't know if it's even possible
> to bias one up that way without it burning up. I'm working on some related
> circuits now, so maybe I'll set up an experiment to see how much current it
> would take for one inverter - I've often wondered about this.
>
> I read about this years ago in various CMOS application notes, so I may be
> missing some key points - there should be plenty of info online. The older
> generation (when CMOS was fairly new) info may provide more detail about
> the guts than that related to the newer, higher performance families.
>
> Ed
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**
> mailman/listinfo/time-nuts<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts>
> and follow the instructions there.
>
David McGaw
2013-06-27 22:41:59 UTC
Permalink
Lower gain is better as long as it oscillates. The 74HCU04 is unlikely
to drive spurious responses. The 74HC04 is OK as long as you keep the
feedback gain low - sometimes a series resistor from the output to the
resonant circuit is required. A 74HC14 is the WRONG part for the job as
it can and will oscillate without the crystal controlling it - just try
it with a resistor for feedback and a capacitor to ground at the input,
no crystal.

David N1HAC


On 6/27/13 6:30 PM, paul swed wrote:
> I will say the fact is the 74hc14 is a bit of a power pig we are talking 12
> ma. The rcvr is something much less like 100 ua. At least for the moment it
> all works but 12 ma is a pig.
> Especially when you take the signal out and knock it down to 100-200 uv.
> Regards
> Paul.
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 5:37 PM, ed breya <eb-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>> Still having email problems - here we go again. This is second try, please
>> excuse if both show up.
>>
>>
>> Hal Murray said:
>>> They make 74xU04 for many values of x. The U is for Unbuffered. They
>> have
>> lower gain in the linear region.
>> I thought they were intended to be used for things like this, but I don't
>> understand that area. Can anybody give me a quick lesson or point me at a
>> good URL?<
>>
>>
>>
>> I always thought the unbuffered "U" versions were preferred for ring
>> oscillators mostly to save power - you don't want the high-drive output
>> stages to be cooking away in linear mode if not needed. The propagation
>> delay can also be less since the U ones have only one stage instead of
>> three (the building block is the totem-pole inverter stage), but they can't
>> drive very much load anyway. I think that most MSI and LSI parts that have
>> built-in ring/crystal oscillator sections use the U topology, but I don't
>> think there's anything special about it - it's the simplest thing that
>> works.
>>
>> I've made quite a few CD4000 and 74HC oscillators, and never worried too
>> much about U versions or not, except for battery-run items where power is
>> critical (or you can run the oscillator at lower voltage). Often they are
>> made from inverting gates that are part of a shared package, where you
>> wouldn't want puny drive capability in the other gates anyway. They are
>> relative power hogs though, whenever linear biasing is needed. Except in
>> the 4000 series, I don't know if U versions are available in anything but
>> the '04 hex inverter, but I suppose it's possible. I think the
>> Schmitt-trigger types like HC14 are necessarily buffered, so have three
>> stages, since you need a non-inverted version of the signal for the
>> positive feedback to the input.
>>
>> I've never tried making one in 74AC - I don't know if it's even possible
>> to bias one up that way without it burning up. I'm working on some related
>> circuits now, so maybe I'll set up an experiment to see how much current it
>> would take for one inverter - I've often wondered about this.
>>
>> I read about this years ago in various CMOS application notes, so I may be
>> missing some key points - there should be plenty of info online. The older
>> generation (when CMOS was fairly new) info may provide more detail about
>> the guts than that related to the newer, higher performance families.
>>
>> Ed
>>
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
>> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**
>> mailman/listinfo/time-nuts<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts>
>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
paul swed
2013-06-28 00:13:28 UTC
Permalink
Yes it makes a very fine 35 Mhz oscillator and reasonably stable.
Been there and done that.
Hey the systems done. May remod it one day but bigger fish to fry with the
d-psk-r
Regards
Paul
WB8TSL


On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 6:41 PM, David McGaw <n1hac-***@public.gmane.org>wrote:

> Lower gain is better as long as it oscillates. The 74HCU04 is unlikely to
> drive spurious responses. The 74HC04 is OK as long as you keep the
> feedback gain low - sometimes a series resistor from the output to the
> resonant circuit is required. A 74HC14 is the WRONG part for the job as it
> can and will oscillate without the crystal controlling it - just try it
> with a resistor for feedback and a capacitor to ground at the input, no
> crystal.
>
> David N1HAC
>
>
>
> On 6/27/13 6:30 PM, paul swed wrote:
>
>> I will say the fact is the 74hc14 is a bit of a power pig we are talking
>> 12
>> ma. The rcvr is something much less like 100 ua. At least for the moment
>> it
>> all works but 12 ma is a pig.
>> Especially when you take the signal out and knock it down to 100-200 uv.
>> Regards
>> Paul.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 5:37 PM, ed breya <eb-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>
>> Still having email problems - here we go again. This is second try,
>>> please
>>> excuse if both show up.
>>>
>>>
>>> Hal Murray said:
>>>
>>>> They make 74xU04 for many values of x. The U is for Unbuffered. They
>>>>
>>> have
>>> lower gain in the linear region.
>>> I thought they were intended to be used for things like this, but I don't
>>> understand that area. Can anybody give me a quick lesson or point me at
>>> a
>>> good URL?<
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I always thought the unbuffered "U" versions were preferred for ring
>>> oscillators mostly to save power - you don't want the high-drive output
>>> stages to be cooking away in linear mode if not needed. The propagation
>>> delay can also be less since the U ones have only one stage instead of
>>> three (the building block is the totem-pole inverter stage), but they
>>> can't
>>> drive very much load anyway. I think that most MSI and LSI parts that
>>> have
>>> built-in ring/crystal oscillator sections use the U topology, but I don't
>>> think there's anything special about it - it's the simplest thing that
>>> works.
>>>
>>> I've made quite a few CD4000 and 74HC oscillators, and never worried too
>>> much about U versions or not, except for battery-run items where power is
>>> critical (or you can run the oscillator at lower voltage). Often they are
>>> made from inverting gates that are part of a shared package, where you
>>> wouldn't want puny drive capability in the other gates anyway. They are
>>> relative power hogs though, whenever linear biasing is needed. Except in
>>> the 4000 series, I don't know if U versions are available in anything but
>>> the '04 hex inverter, but I suppose it's possible. I think the
>>> Schmitt-trigger types like HC14 are necessarily buffered, so have three
>>> stages, since you need a non-inverted version of the signal for the
>>> positive feedback to the input.
>>>
>>> I've never tried making one in 74AC - I don't know if it's even possible
>>> to bias one up that way without it burning up. I'm working on some
>>> related
>>> circuits now, so maybe I'll set up an experiment to see how much current
>>> it
>>> would take for one inverter - I've often wondered about this.
>>>
>>> I read about this years ago in various CMOS application notes, so I may
>>> be
>>> missing some key points - there should be plenty of info online. The
>>> older
>>> generation (when CMOS was fairly new) info may provide more detail about
>>> the guts than that related to the newer, higher performance families.
>>>
>>> Ed
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________****_________________
>>>
>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
>>> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/****<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**>
>>> mailman/listinfo/time-nuts<htt**ps://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**
>>> mailman/listinfo/time-nuts<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts>
>>> >
>>>
>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>>
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
>> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**
>> mailman/listinfo/time-nuts<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts>
>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**
> mailman/listinfo/time-nuts<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts>
> and follow the instructions there.
>
Don Latham
2013-06-28 04:20:05 UTC
Permalink
Maybe the old 4007 cmos would be better...
Don

paul swed
> Yes it makes a very fine 35 Mhz oscillator and reasonably stable.
> Been there and done that.
> Hey the systems done. May remod it one day but bigger fish to fry with
> the
> d-psk-r
> Regards
> Paul
> WB8TSL
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 6:41 PM, David McGaw
> <n1hac-***@public.gmane.org>wrote:
>
>> Lower gain is better as long as it oscillates. The 74HCU04 is
>> unlikely to
>> drive spurious responses. The 74HC04 is OK as long as you keep the
>> feedback gain low - sometimes a series resistor from the output to the
>> resonant circuit is required. A 74HC14 is the WRONG part for the job
>> as it
>> can and will oscillate without the crystal controlling it - just try
>> it
>> with a resistor for feedback and a capacitor to ground at the input,
>> no
>> crystal.
>>
>> David N1HAC
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/27/13 6:30 PM, paul swed wrote:
>>
>>> I will say the fact is the 74hc14 is a bit of a power pig we are
>>> talking
>>> 12
>>> ma. The rcvr is something much less like 100 ua. At least for the
>>> moment
>>> it
>>> all works but 12 ma is a pig.
>>> Especially when you take the signal out and knock it down to 100-200
>>> uv.
>>> Regards
>>> Paul.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 5:37 PM, ed breya <eb-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Still having email problems - here we go again. This is second try,
>>>> please
>>>> excuse if both show up.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hal Murray said:
>>>>
>>>>> They make 74xU04 for many values of x. The U is for Unbuffered.
>>>>> They
>>>>>
>>>> have
>>>> lower gain in the linear region.
>>>> I thought they were intended to be used for things like this, but I
>>>> don't
>>>> understand that area. Can anybody give me a quick lesson or point
>>>> me at
>>>> a
>>>> good URL?<
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I always thought the unbuffered "U" versions were preferred for ring
>>>> oscillators mostly to save power - you don't want the high-drive
>>>> output
>>>> stages to be cooking away in linear mode if not needed. The
>>>> propagation
>>>> delay can also be less since the U ones have only one stage instead
>>>> of
>>>> three (the building block is the totem-pole inverter stage), but
>>>> they
>>>> can't
>>>> drive very much load anyway. I think that most MSI and LSI parts
>>>> that
>>>> have
>>>> built-in ring/crystal oscillator sections use the U topology, but I
>>>> don't
>>>> think there's anything special about it - it's the simplest thing
>>>> that
>>>> works.
>>>>
>>>> I've made quite a few CD4000 and 74HC oscillators, and never worried
>>>> too
>>>> much about U versions or not, except for battery-run items where
>>>> power is
>>>> critical (or you can run the oscillator at lower voltage). Often
>>>> they are
>>>> made from inverting gates that are part of a shared package, where
>>>> you
>>>> wouldn't want puny drive capability in the other gates anyway. They
>>>> are
>>>> relative power hogs though, whenever linear biasing is needed.
>>>> Except in
>>>> the 4000 series, I don't know if U versions are available in
>>>> anything but
>>>> the '04 hex inverter, but I suppose it's possible. I think the
>>>> Schmitt-trigger types like HC14 are necessarily buffered, so have
>>>> three
>>>> stages, since you need a non-inverted version of the signal for the
>>>> positive feedback to the input.
>>>>
>>>> I've never tried making one in 74AC - I don't know if it's even
>>>> possible
>>>> to bias one up that way without it burning up. I'm working on some
>>>> related
>>>> circuits now, so maybe I'll set up an experiment to see how much
>>>> current
>>>> it
>>>> would take for one inverter - I've often wondered about this.
>>>>
>>>> I read about this years ago in various CMOS application notes, so I
>>>> may
>>>> be
>>>> missing some key points - there should be plenty of info online. The
>>>> older
>>>> generation (when CMOS was fairly new) info may provide more detail
>>>> about
>>>> the guts than that related to the newer, higher performance
>>>> families.
>>>>
>>>> Ed
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ______________________________****_________________
>>>>
>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/****<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**>
>>>> mailman/listinfo/time-nuts<htt**ps://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**
>>>> mailman/listinfo/time-nuts<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts>
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>>>
>>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
>>> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**
>>> mailman/listinfo/time-nuts<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts>
>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>>
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
>> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**
>> mailman/listinfo/time-nuts<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts>
>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>


--
"Neither the voice of authority nor the weight of reason and argument
are as significant as experiment, for thence comes quiet to the mind."
De Erroribus Medicorum, R. Bacon, 13th century.
"If you don't know what it is, don't poke it."
Ghost in the Shell


Dr. Don Latham AJ7LL
Six Mile Systems LLP
17850 Six Mile Road
POB 134
Huson, MT, 59846
VOX 406-626-4304
Skype: buffler2
www.lightningforensics.com
www.sixmilesystems.com
MailLists
2013-06-28 06:48:21 UTC
Permalink
Especially as the inverting gates have independent source and/or drain
connections - series resistors can be used to lower even more the
consumption when biased in the linear region...

On 6/28/2013 7:20 AM, Don Latham wrote:
> Maybe the old 4007 cmos would be better...
> Don
>
> paul swed
>> Yes it makes a very fine 35 Mhz oscillator and reasonably stable.
>> Been there and done that.
>> Hey the systems done. May remod it one day but bigger fish to fry with
>> the
>> d-psk-r
>> Regards
>> Paul
>> WB8TSL
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 6:41 PM, David McGaw
>> <n1hac-***@public.gmane.org>wrote:
>>
>>> Lower gain is better as long as it oscillates. The 74HCU04 is
>>> unlikely to
>>> drive spurious responses. The 74HC04 is OK as long as you keep the
>>> feedback gain low - sometimes a series resistor from the output to the
>>> resonant circuit is required. A 74HC14 is the WRONG part for the job
>>> as it
>>> can and will oscillate without the crystal controlling it - just try
>>> it
>>> with a resistor for feedback and a capacitor to ground at the input,
>>> no
>>> crystal.
>>>
>>> David N1HAC
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/27/13 6:30 PM, paul swed wrote:
>>>
>>>> I will say the fact is the 74hc14 is a bit of a power pig we are
>>>> talking
>>>> 12
>>>> ma. The rcvr is something much less like 100 ua. At least for the
>>>> moment
>>>> it
>>>> all works but 12 ma is a pig.
>>>> Especially when you take the signal out and knock it down to 100-200
>>>> uv.
>>>> Regards
>>>> Paul.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 5:37 PM, ed breya<eb-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Still having email problems - here we go again. This is second try,
>>>>> please
>>>>> excuse if both show up.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hal Murray said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> They make 74xU04 for many values of x. The U is for Unbuffered.
>>>>>> They
>>>>>>
>>>>> have
>>>>> lower gain in the linear region.
>>>>> I thought they were intended to be used for things like this, but I
>>>>> don't
>>>>> understand that area. Can anybody give me a quick lesson or point
>>>>> me at
>>>>> a
>>>>> good URL?<
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I always thought the unbuffered "U" versions were preferred for ring
>>>>> oscillators mostly to save power - you don't want the high-drive
>>>>> output
>>>>> stages to be cooking away in linear mode if not needed. The
>>>>> propagation
>>>>> delay can also be less since the U ones have only one stage instead
>>>>> of
>>>>> three (the building block is the totem-pole inverter stage), but
>>>>> they
>>>>> can't
>>>>> drive very much load anyway. I think that most MSI and LSI parts
>>>>> that
>>>>> have
>>>>> built-in ring/crystal oscillator sections use the U topology, but I
>>>>> don't
>>>>> think there's anything special about it - it's the simplest thing
>>>>> that
>>>>> works.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've made quite a few CD4000 and 74HC oscillators, and never worried
>>>>> too
>>>>> much about U versions or not, except for battery-run items where
>>>>> power is
>>>>> critical (or you can run the oscillator at lower voltage). Often
>>>>> they are
>>>>> made from inverting gates that are part of a shared package, where
>>>>> you
>>>>> wouldn't want puny drive capability in the other gates anyway. They
>>>>> are
>>>>> relative power hogs though, whenever linear biasing is needed.
>>>>> Except in
>>>>> the 4000 series, I don't know if U versions are available in
>>>>> anything but
>>>>> the '04 hex inverter, but I suppose it's possible. I think the
>>>>> Schmitt-trigger types like HC14 are necessarily buffered, so have
>>>>> three
>>>>> stages, since you need a non-inverted version of the signal for the
>>>>> positive feedback to the input.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've never tried making one in 74AC - I don't know if it's even
>>>>> possible
>>>>> to bias one up that way without it burning up. I'm working on some
>>>>> related
>>>>> circuits now, so maybe I'll set up an experiment to see how much
>>>>> current
>>>>> it
>>>>> would take for one inverter - I've often wondered about this.
>>>>>
>>>>> I read about this years ago in various CMOS application notes, so I
>>>>> may
>>>>> be
>>>>> missing some key points - there should be plenty of info online. The
>>>>> older
>>>>> generation (when CMOS was fairly new) info may provide more detail
>>>>> about
>>>>> the guts than that related to the newer, higher performance
>>>>> families.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ed
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________****_________________
>>>>>
>>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>>>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/****<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**>
>>>>> mailman/listinfo/time-nuts<htt**ps://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**
>>>>> mailman/listinfo/time-nuts<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**
>>>> mailman/listinfo/time-nuts<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts>
>>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
>>> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**
>>> mailman/listinfo/time-nuts<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts>
>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
>
>
ed breya
2013-06-27 04:13:15 UTC
Permalink
I presume you used the regular 74HC04 or 74HCU04 inverter, not the
74HC14 Schmitt trigger input type?? If the '14 is actually used, that
may explain the problems around setting the feedback biasing resistor
value - you may be overriding the built-in hysteresis to get it in
the linear region. Usually that R isn't very critical with regular
crystals, but maybe tuning fork types need more gain, or, if it's
actually a '14, the input impedance is probably lower than a regular
gate, so it's loading the resonator.

Ed
paul swed
2013-06-30 16:13:11 UTC
Permalink
Ed strange no body and you sent it 3 days ago.


On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 12:13 AM, ed breya <eb-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> I presume you used the regular 74HC04 or 74HCU04 inverter, not the 74HC14
> Schmitt trigger input type?? If the '14 is actually used, that may explain
> the problems around setting the feedback biasing resistor value - you may
> be overriding the built-in hysteresis to get it in the linear region.
> Usually that R isn't very critical with regular crystals, but maybe tuning
> fork types need more gain, or, if it's actually a '14, the input impedance
> is probably lower than a regular gate, so it's loading the resonator.
>
> Ed
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**
> mailman/listinfo/time-nuts<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts>
> and follow the instructions there.
>
ed breya
2013-06-30 19:05:45 UTC
Permalink
If you're talking about the email processing, I think something's
going on. It sometimes take two or even three tries to get one
through, while the most recent one I just sent (about regulators)
went OK the first time. Let's see if this one does. B

BTW how do you guys get the thread to continue on from the current
message? I have only been able to copy and paste parts into the new
email, and that loses some of the links and formatting in some way. I
don't think this is the cause of the email problem above, since it
seems uncorrelated with any editing or whether I send a brand new
topic. I'm using an old version of Eudora (7.1.0.9), if that matters.

Ed


Ed strange no body and you sent it 3 days ago.


On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 12:13 AM, ed breya
<<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts>eb at
telight.com> wrote:

> I presume you used the regular 74HC04 or 74HCU04 inverter, not the 74HC14
> Schmitt trigger input type?? If the '14 is actually used, that may explain
> the problems around setting the feedback biasing resistor value - you may
> be overriding the built-in hysteresis to get it in the linear region.
> Usually that R isn't very critical with regular crystals, but maybe tuning
> fork types need more gain, or, if it's actually a '14, the input impedance
> is probably lower than a regular gate, so it's loading the resonator.
>
> Ed
Tom Miller
2013-06-30 19:27:46 UTC
Permalink
It's probably a software bug in the NSA monitoring system that keeps
dropping some of the message content.

:)



----- Original Message -----
From: "ed breya" <eb-***@public.gmane.org>
To: <time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2013 3:05 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] wwvb 60 khz tuning fork crystals Some insights


If you're talking about the email processing, I think something's
going on. It sometimes take two or even three tries to get one
through, while the most recent one I just sent (about regulators)
went OK the first time. Let's see if this one does. B

BTW how do you guys get the thread to continue on from the current
message? I have only been able to copy and paste parts into the new
email, and that loses some of the links and formatting in some way. I
don't think this is the cause of the email problem above, since it
seems uncorrelated with any editing or whether I send a brand new
topic. I'm using an old version of Eudora (7.1.0.9), if that matters.

Ed


Ed strange no body and you sent it 3 days ago.


On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 12:13 AM, ed breya
<<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts>eb at
telight.com> wrote:

> I presume you used the regular 74HC04 or 74HCU04 inverter, not the 74HC14
> Schmitt trigger input type?? If the '14 is actually used, that may
explain
> the problems around setting the feedback biasing resistor value - you may
> be overriding the built-in hysteresis to get it in the linear region.
> Usually that R isn't very critical with regular crystals, but maybe
tuning
> fork types need more gain, or, if it's actually a '14, the input
impedance
> is probably lower than a regular gate, so it's loading the resonator.
>
> Ed






_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
ed breya
2013-06-27 21:35:30 UTC
Permalink
Hal Murray said:
>They make 74xU04 for many values of x. The U is for Unbuffered. They have
lower gain in the linear region.
I thought they were intended to be used for things like this, but I don't
understand that area. Can anybody give me a quick lesson or point me at a
good URL?<


I always thought the unbuffered "U" versions were preferred for ring
oscillators mostly to save power - you don't want the high-drive
output stages to be cooking away in linear mode if not needed. The
propagation delay can also be less since the U ones have only one
stage instead of three (the building block is the totem-pole inverter
stage), but they can't drive very much load anyway. I think that most
MSI and LSI parts that have built-in ring/crystal oscillator sections
use the U topology, but I don't think there's anything special about
it - it's the simplest thing that works.

I've made quite a few CD4000 and 74HC oscillators, and never worried
too much about U versions or not, except for battery-run items where
power is critical (or you can run the oscillator at lower voltage).
Often they are made from inverting gates that are part of a shared
package, where you wouldn't want puny drive capability in the other
gates anyway. They are relative power hogs though, whenever linear
biasing is needed. Except in the 4000 series, I don't know if U
versions are available in anything but the '04 hex inverter, but I
suppose it's possible. I think the Schmitt-trigger types like HC14
are necessarily buffered, so have three stages, since you need a
non-inverted version of the signal for the positive feedback to the input.

I've never tried making one in 74AC - I don't know if it's even
possible to bias one up that way without it burning up. I'm working
on some related circuits now, so maybe I'll set up an experiment to
see how much current it would take for one inverter - I've often
wondered about this.

I read about this years ago in various CMOS application notes, so I
may be missing some key points - there should be plenty of info
online. The older generation (when CMOS was fairly new) info may
provide more detail about the guts than that related to the newer,
higher performance families.

Ed
paul swed
2013-07-01 17:28:32 UTC
Permalink
I suspect the threads been hijacked into a why doesn't email work.
I would say lets kill this thread.
Regards
Paul
WB8TSL


On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 5:35 PM, ed breya <eb-***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> Hal Murray said:
> >They make 74xU04 for many values of x. The U is for Unbuffered. They
> have
> lower gain in the linear region.
> I thought they were intended to be used for things like this, but I don't
> understand that area. Can anybody give me a quick lesson or point me at a
> good URL?<
>
>
> I always thought the unbuffered "U" versions were preferred for ring
> oscillators mostly to save power - you don't want the high-drive output
> stages to be cooking away in linear mode if not needed. The propagation
> delay can also be less since the U ones have only one stage instead of
> three (the building block is the totem-pole inverter stage), but they can't
> drive very much load anyway. I think that most MSI and LSI parts that have
> built-in ring/crystal oscillator sections use the U topology, but I don't
> think there's anything special about it - it's the simplest thing that
> works.
>
> I've made quite a few CD4000 and 74HC oscillators, and never worried too
> much about U versions or not, except for battery-run items where power is
> critical (or you can run the oscillator at lower voltage). Often they are
> made from inverting gates that are part of a shared package, where you
> wouldn't want puny drive capability in the other gates anyway. They are
> relative power hogs though, whenever linear biasing is needed. Except in
> the 4000 series, I don't know if U versions are available in anything but
> the '04 hex inverter, but I suppose it's possible. I think the
> Schmitt-trigger types like HC14 are necessarily buffered, so have three
> stages, since you need a non-inverted version of the signal for the
> positive feedback to the input.
>
> I've never tried making one in 74AC - I don't know if it's even possible
> to bias one up that way without it burning up. I'm working on some related
> circuits now, so maybe I'll set up an experiment to see how much current it
> would take for one inverter - I've often wondered about this.
>
> I read about this years ago in various CMOS application notes, so I may be
> missing some key points - there should be plenty of info online. The older
> generation (when CMOS was fairly new) info may provide more detail about
> the guts than that related to the newer, higher performance families.
>
> Ed
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/**
> mailman/listinfo/time-nuts<https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts>
> and follow the instructions there.
>
Hal Murray
2013-07-27 02:22:10 UTC
Permalink
> Reversion or not the goo is gone..
...

I thought that problem was well known among Z3801A owners. I think I noticed
it many years ago when browsing the web back around the time I got my first
one.

So far, I'm 3 for 3 on having goo rather than feet when I've opened them up,
and I agree that it cleans up easily.


Do other HP Z38xxx boxes have the same problem? (Just curious.)



--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
Mark C. Stephens
2013-07-27 02:56:30 UTC
Permalink
Z3805A has the same goo problem, The Z3815A well, that does have some rubber feet but it seems to survive well.
The Z3816A relies on the bottom surface mount tantalums as buffer but is mainly supported by thick mounting posts.


--marki

-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces-***@public.gmane.org [mailto:time-nuts-bounces-***@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Hal Murray
Sent: Saturday, 27 July 2013 12:22 PM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] HP Z3801 melted rubber feet. Heads up


> Reversion or not the goo is gone..
...

I thought that problem was well known among Z3801A owners. I think I noticed it many years ago when browsing the web back around the time I got my first one.

So far, I'm 3 for 3 on having goo rather than feet when I've opened them up, and I agree that it cleans up easily.


Do other HP Z38xxx boxes have the same problem? (Just curious.)



--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.



_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Tom Knox
2013-07-27 12:40:27 UTC
Permalink
I have seen the same problem in the Fluke 5700A and 5720A calibrators on the bottom board quite often and they do not run that hot and are usually in a lab enviroment.

Thomas Knox



> To: time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> From: hmurray-8cQiHa/C+6Go9G/***@public.gmane.org
> Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 19:22:10 -0700
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] HP Z3801 melted rubber feet. Heads up
>
>
> > Reversion or not the goo is gone..
> ...
>
> I thought that problem was well known among Z3801A owners. I think I noticed
> it many years ago when browsing the web back around the time I got my first
> one.
>
> So far, I'm 3 for 3 on having goo rather than feet when I've opened them up,
> and I agree that it cleans up easily.
>
>
> Do other HP Z38xxx boxes have the same problem? (Just curious.)
>
>
>
> --
> These are my opinions. I hate spam.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
Hal Murray
2013-08-15 07:13:48 UTC
Permalink
paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
> Yes indeed tick tick tick. But its funny if something happens and the pen
> jumps you can tell its worth going over for a look. SIDs and such. The
> digital ones make no noise.

For those of you who didn't know and were too busy to look it up:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudden_Ionospheric_Disturbance
(Minor time sink warning.)

We should be able to write some software that would beep (or blink a LED)
when the signal strength or delay jumped far enough. You could send a bit of
info using morse code. Even a crude number-of-blinks works pretty well.




--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
Hal Murray
2014-03-08 19:43:03 UTC
Permalink
> Yes indeed those plastic display covers do seem to fall out and get lost. I
> have a 5730 with the same issue. Digikey sold (or used to) the red filtered
> plastic and I have used that to fix an hp8505 that lost a window.

If you live in an area with lots of high-tech, there is probably a local shop
that specializes in plastic. In my area, it's TAP Plastics.
http://www.tapplastics.com/
http://www.tapplastics.com/about/locations
I've only used them once, but they were great.

The plastic for a 5370 has a mask on the back side. On the right, it's a
stencil to turn diffuse LEDs to text. You could probably make the equivalent
by printing on the plastic sheets used with old overhead slide projectors.

There is a diagram on page 3-10 of the operating/programming manual. I'll
take a picture if that will help.





--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
Hal Murray
2014-07-04 22:27:41 UTC
Permalink
paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
> The key to these systems is that the transmitters have very good references.
> In the US at least we have no requirement for that level of stability on the
> MW broadcasts. Though evidently some stations are quite good. I think I have
> a list some place have to re-look.

How stable are they? Could they provide a good regional reference if
somebody with a good setup would measure several stations and publish the
results? How often would you have to measure?

How do you measure the frequency of an AM or FM station? Wait for silence
and process it like CW?

Any suggestions for a receiver (or whatever) that would be appropriate for
that sort of project? I assume the main requirements are an external freq in
and a serial/USB port to adjust the knobs.

----------

Ages ago, I remember seeing a small booklet (20 pages?) from NBS describing
their setup with HP that was using NBC's atomic clock for time distribution.
HP's part was to run the west coast calibration to get the delay over phone
lines from the east coast to the west coast. Has anybody seen a copy of that
booklet online?


--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
Alexander Pummer
2014-07-04 22:59:34 UTC
Permalink
for an AM station is strait forward at first use a narrow filter to make
sure that you have just one station and feed the filter out put into a
limiter the output of the limiter will be the carrier.
73
KJ6UHN Alex

On 7/4/2014 3:27 PM, Hal Murray wrote:
> paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
>> The key to these systems is that the transmitters have very good references.
>> In the US at least we have no requirement for that level of stability on the
>> MW broadcasts. Though evidently some stations are quite good. I think I have
>> a list some place have to re-look.
> How stable are they? Could they provide a good regional reference if
> somebody with a good setup would measure several stations and publish the
> results? How often would you have to measure?
>
> How do you measure the frequency of an AM or FM station? Wait for silence
> and process it like CW?
>
> Any suggestions for a receiver (or whatever) that would be appropriate for
> that sort of project? I assume the main requirements are an external freq in
> and a serial/USB port to adjust the knobs.
>
> ----------
>
> Ages ago, I remember seeing a small booklet (20 pages?) from NBS describing
> their setup with HP that was using NBC's atomic clock for time distribution.
> HP's part was to run the west coast calibration to get the delay over phone
> lines from the east coast to the west coast. Has anybody seen a copy of that
> booklet online?
>
>
Max Robinson
2014-07-05 03:45:22 UTC
Permalink
The best way to measure the frequency of an AM station is to first pass it
through a Crystal filter to strip off the modulation sidebands. After that
limiting is usually not necessary. You can do that in either TRF mode, or
in the IF of a superhet with a synthesized local oscillator.

Regards.

Max. K 4 O DS.

Email: max-1+***@public.gmane.org

Transistor site http://www.funwithtransistors.net
Vacuum tube site: http://www.funwithtubes.net
Woodworking site
http://www.angelfire.com/electronic/funwithtubes/Woodworking/wwindex.html
Music site: http://www.maxsmusicplace.com

To subscribe to the fun with transistors group send an email to.
funwithtransistors-subscribe-***@public.gmane.org

To subscribe to the fun with tubes group send an email to,
funwithtubes-subscribe-***@public.gmane.org

To subscribe to the fun with wood group send a blank email to
funwithwood-subscribe-***@public.gmane.org

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alexander Pummer" <alexpcs-***@public.gmane.org>
To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement"
<time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org>
Sent: Friday, July 04, 2014 5:59 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Interesting frequency standard project


> for an AM station is strait forward at first use a narrow filter to make
> sure that you have just one station and feed the filter out put into a
> limiter the output of the limiter will be the carrier.
> 73
> KJ6UHN Alex
>
> On 7/4/2014 3:27 PM, Hal Murray wrote:
>> paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
>>> The key to these systems is that the transmitters have very good
>>> references.
>>> In the US at least we have no requirement for that level of stability on
>>> the
>>> MW broadcasts. Though evidently some stations are quite good. I think I
>>> have
>>> a list some place have to re-look.
>> How stable are they? Could they provide a good regional reference if
>> somebody with a good setup would measure several stations and publish the
>> results? How often would you have to measure?
>>
>> How do you measure the frequency of an AM or FM station? Wait for
>> silence
>> and process it like CW?
>>
>> Any suggestions for a receiver (or whatever) that would be appropriate
>> for
>> that sort of project? I assume the main requirements are an external
>> freq in
>> and a serial/USB port to adjust the knobs.
>>
>> ----------
>>
>> Ages ago, I remember seeing a small booklet (20 pages?) from NBS
>> describing
>> their setup with HP that was using NBC's atomic clock for time
>> distribution.
>> HP's part was to run the west coast calibration to get the delay over
>> phone
>> lines from the east coast to the west coast. Has anybody seen a copy of
>> that
>> booklet online?
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
Brian Lloyd
2014-07-04 22:38:58 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Hal Murray <hmurray-8cQiHa/C+6Go9G/***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

>
> paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
> > The key to these systems is that the transmitters have very good
> references.
> > In the US at least we have no requirement for that level of stability on
> the
> > MW broadcasts. Though evidently some stations are quite good. I think I
> have
> > a list some place have to re-look.
>
> How stable are they? Could they provide a good regional reference if
> somebody with a good setup would measure several stations and publish the
> results? How often would you have to measure?
>
> How do you measure the frequency of an AM or FM station? Wait for silence
> and process it like CW?
>
> Any suggestions for a receiver (or whatever) that would be appropriate for
> that sort of project? I assume the main requirements are an external freq
> in
> and a serial/USB port to adjust the knobs.
>

You might want to go talk to the FMT guys as they do testing against some
of the MW stations and know which ones have high-accuracy references.

--
Brian Lloyd
Lloyd Aviation
706 Flightline Drive
Spring Branch, TX 78070
brian-***@public.gmane.org
+1.916.877.5067
Dale H. Cook
2014-07-05 10:20:36 UTC
Permalink
At 06:27 PM 7/4/2014, Hal Murray wrote:

>>... we have no requirement for that level of stability on the MW broadcasts.
>
>How stable are they?

That varies greatly from station to station depending upon what transmitter they are running. Note also that compliance with the 20 Hz accuracy requirement varies so you would only want to use stations owned by companies with a good record of compliance with Part 73.

Dale H. Cook, Contract Engineer, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA
http://plymouthcolony.net/starcityeng/index.html
Al Wolfe
2014-07-05 16:56:03 UTC
Permalink
As stated AM stations in US must maintain 20 Hz accuracy. Most are well
within that tolerance. I have measured many AM station's frequency as a
function of my employment before retirement.

Now comes HD radio. While the merits of HD AM radio are very much open
to debate, one benefit is that the equipment for HD is GPS locked. If you
can find an HD AM station you can probably bet they are very close to being
on frequency. The ones I have measured have been right on and push the
limits of my test equipment.

Al, retired, mostly
AKA k9si


> Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2014 06:20:36 -0400
> From: "Dale H. Cook" <starcity-mKUAeu0r+***@public.gmane.org>
> To: time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Interesting frequency standard project
>
> At 06:27 PM 7/4/2014, Hal Murray wrote:
>
>>>... we have no requirement for that level of stability on the MW
>>>broadcasts.
>>
>>How stable are they?
>
> That varies greatly from station to station depending upon what
> transmitter they are running. Note also that compliance with the 20 Hz
> accuracy requirement varies so you would only want to use stations owned
> by companies with a good record of compliance with Part 73.
>
> Dale H. Cook, Contract Engineer, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA
> http://plymouthcolony.net/starcityeng/index.html
E***@public.gmane.org
2014-07-05 17:05:23 UTC
Permalink
In the seventies I did for some friends that had FCC First class licenses a
counter that on the input had three J/K F/F's to subtract the IF from the
LO. They modified receivers including running the IF in to saturation and
they certified stations without going there.. I think measurements had to be
done on a monthly basis. Since they where also HAM's they also used them
on frequency contests.
Bert Kehren


In a message dated 7/5/2014 12:56:24 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
alw.k9si-***@public.gmane.org writes:

As stated AM stations in US must maintain 20 Hz accuracy. Most are well
within that tolerance. I have measured many AM station's frequency as a
function of my employment before retirement.

Now comes HD radio. While the merits of HD AM radio are very much open
to debate, one benefit is that the equipment for HD is GPS locked. If you
can find an HD AM station you can probably bet they are very close to
being
on frequency. The ones I have measured have been right on and push the
limits of my test equipment.

Al, retired, mostly
AKA k9si


> Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2014 06:20:36 -0400
> From: "Dale H. Cook" <starcity-mKUAeu0r+***@public.gmane.org>
> To: time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Interesting frequency standard project
>
> At 06:27 PM 7/4/2014, Hal Murray wrote:
>
>>>... we have no requirement for that level of stability on the MW
>>>broadcasts.
>>
>>How stable are they?
>
> That varies greatly from station to station depending upon what
> transmitter they are running. Note also that compliance with the 20 Hz
> accuracy requirement varies so you would only want to use stations owned
> by companies with a good record of compliance with Part 73.
>
> Dale H. Cook, Contract Engineer, Roanoke/Lynchburg, VA
> http://plymouthcolony.net/starcityeng/index.html

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe, go to
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Hal Murray
2014-07-11 17:43:59 UTC
Permalink
paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
> Trying to keep the message and attachements below the 128KB limit. I send a
> 119KB message and it gets held as a 165KB message. Can someone help me to
> understand the difference please?

My guess would be base64 encoding? For binary files, you only get 6 bits per
(text) byte rather than all 8.


--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
paul swed
2014-07-11 18:58:13 UTC
Permalink
Thanks Hal
Yes I sent the same email to my business account and could see it was 148KB.
Gmail does not give you email size "cause they sell storage". So they make
it hard to manage your folders and the sizes. I did use thunderbird for a
bit and may need to go back to that. It did however tend to clear stuff out
I did not want deleted.
Need to re-explore it.
Regards
Paul.


On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Hal Murray <hmurray-8cQiHa/C+6Go9G/***@public.gmane.org> wrote:

>
> paulswedb-***@public.gmane.org said:
> > Trying to keep the message and attachements below the 128KB limit. I
> send a
> > 119KB message and it gets held as a 165KB message. Can someone help me to
> > understand the difference please?
>
> My guess would be base64 encoding? For binary files, you only get 6 bits
> per
> (text) byte rather than all 8.
>
>
> --
> These are my opinions. I hate spam.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts-***@public.gmane.org
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
Hal Murray
2014-11-02 20:17:36 UTC
Permalink
> By the way the z3801 is off most of the year so the drains quite small.

I think that's backwards. The battery is only used when there is no power to
the GPS module.

AAs are roughly 2800 mA hours. There are 8760 hours in a year. That's 319
microamp years. (How's that for a SI unit?) So that's 3 years if your GPS
module takes 100 uA. I think that's way high. Anybody measured it? There
is probably a strong temperature component.


--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.



_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Bob Camp
2014-11-02 20:35:49 UTC
Permalink
Hi

The numbers quoted earlier (and they sound right) were 20 uA at 2.5V. That would be well under your 100uA. My *guess* is that self discharge / aging on a normal AA is going to limit things faster than a 20 uA drain.

Now, if you have the more normal tiny coin cell involved with 1/10 or 1/100 that capacity and much lower self discharge ….

Bob

> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:17 PM, Hal Murray <***@megapathdsl.net> wrote:
>
>> By the way the z3801 is off most of the year so the drains quite small.
>
> I think that's backwards. The battery is only used when there is no power to
> the GPS module.
>
> AAs are roughly 2800 mA hours. There are 8760 hours in a year. That's 319
> microamp years. (How's that for a SI unit?) So that's 3 years if your GPS
> module takes 100 uA. I think that's way high. Anybody measured it? There
> is probably a strong temperature component.
>
>
> --
> These are my opinions. I hate spam.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Bob Camp
2014-11-02 20:49:46 UTC
Permalink
Hi

The supplied cable is indeed very short. It’s also quite stiff and a bit flakey (intermittent). I would bet at least one cold order of fries that there is no bi-directional serial between the two units. If there was, I doubt our little pin shorting exercises would get things running.

If there is no serial at all (no GPS data), that makes using the slave for a variety of projects quite simple (and thus attractive). One back burner TimeNut project is an ensemble clock.

If they are not looking at GPS strings, they are not doing sawtooth correction. That is an interesting observation (if true). These boxes have roots in the paranoid GPS SA era, so that might not be a big surprise.

Bob

> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:32 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>
> Given the expected close proximity of these units, presumably it was only
> ever intended that they should work as a pair, and I remember Stu Cobb
> commenting on how short the supplied link cable is, I wouldn't be too surprised
> if there turns out to be no serial comms between the units but perhaps just
> handshaking via asserted levels.
>
> Regards
>
> Nigel
> GM8PZR
>
>
> In a message dated 02/11/2014 20:12:35 GMT Standard Time, ***@n1k.org
> writes:
>
> Hi
>
> Yes, getting the GPS version worked out is certainly the thing most people
> will be after. Doing the other box is a bit further down the road. The
> main thing (to me) is documenting the 15 pin connector as best we can. That
> way whatever somebody decides to do in the future, they have a good starting
> point. Identifying which pins look like RS-422 and which look like CMOS
> would go a long way to figuring both sides of this out. When I did the other
> connectors, I just ran through them with a DVM. 2.5V = 422 input, 1.5 or 3.5
> = 422 output. I didn’t have any CMOS. Everything else was either open
> circuit or ground.
>
> Bob
>
>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:01 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
> <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>>
>> Ah, I had wondered about that but was probably being a bit selfish as I
>
>> only have the GPS based units:-)
>>
>> Given the similarity, I would assume where we've got to on these
> wouldn't
>> be a bad starting point, and at least identifying the 1PPS input on the
>
>> interface connector should be straightforward enough.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Nigel GM8PZR
>>
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 02/11/2014 19:41:07 GMT Standard Time, ***@n1k.org
>> writes:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> No, once we get the GPS end worked out, we need to do the same thing
> for
>> the non-GPS end. If we can fake it into working with just a PPS, it’s
> the
>> perfect thing to use to attach an OCXO to a newer GPS (like the Jackson
> Labs
>> part …).
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 2:15 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
>> <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Gotz
>>>
>>> That's great stuff, thank you, I'll try that later.
>>>
>>> At this rate we'll soon be finding ways of doing this without any
>> wiring
>>> whatsoever, perhaps we could start with just standing it upside down
> in
>> a
>>> dark corner on the night of the full moon:-)
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Nigel
>>> GM8PZR
>>>
>>>
>>> In a message dated 02/11/2014 17:58:12 GMT Standard Time,
>> ***@g-romahn.de
>>> writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 02.11.2014 15:08, :
>>>> Ooh err, whoops, and oh dear !!
>>>>
>>>> Arthur, I've only just had a chance to look at your latest photos,
> and
>>>> unless I've really got my wires crossed, if you'll pardon the
>>> expression:-),
>>>> your links on J5 are not shown on pins 2, 10, 12, and 15, but on
>> pins
>>> 4, 6,
>>>> 11, and 13.
>>>>
>>>> As far as I'm aware the numbering from the front of that connector
> as
>>
>>> shown
>>>> starts in the top right hand corner and every row is numbered right
> to
>>>> left.
>>>> That's certainly how mine are numbered anyway, and I wired them
>>>> accordingly, and it worked, so where the heck does that leave us
>> now?:-)
>>>>
>>> --------------------------
>>> thanks Nigel for detecting this glitch. I removed all jumpers now and
>>> tested some reasonable new/old combinations resulting in very simple
>>> scheme:
>>> it seems to be sufficient to connect pin2 and pin3 to pin8 (ground).
>>> Numbering as provided by Nigel and markings on my 15 pin-plug.
>>>
>>> Götz
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Tom Miller
2014-11-02 22:36:54 UTC
Permalink
Another mystery - what is on the three short pins? Usually that is done for
hot-plugging things and connects the ground first before the power is
applied. In this case, maybe it is some critical data lines that do not want
dirty signals? I will play some more later tonight.

Regards,
Tom

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Camp" <***@n1k.org>
To: <***@aol.com>; "Discussion of precise time and frequency
measurement" <time-***@febo.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2014 3:49 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Lucent KS-24361, HP/Symmetricom Z3809A,
Z3810A,Z3811A, Z3812...


> Hi
>
> The supplied cable is indeed very short. It’s also quite stiff and a bit
> flakey (intermittent). I would bet at least one cold order of fries that
> there is no bi-directional serial between the two units. If there was, I
> doubt our little pin shorting exercises would get things running.
>
> If there is no serial at all (no GPS data), that makes using the slave for
> a variety of projects quite simple (and thus attractive). One back burner
> TimeNut project is an ensemble clock.
>
> If they are not looking at GPS strings, they are not doing sawtooth
> correction. That is an interesting observation (if true). These boxes have
> roots in the paranoid GPS SA era, so that might not be a big surprise.
>
> Bob
>
>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:32 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
>> <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>>
>> Given the expected close proximity of these units, presumably it was
>> only
>> ever intended that they should work as a pair, and I remember Stu Cobb
>> commenting on how short the supplied link cable is, I wouldn't be too
>> surprised
>> if there turns out to be no serial comms between the units but perhaps
>> just
>> handshaking via asserted levels.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Nigel
>> GM8PZR
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 02/11/2014 20:12:35 GMT Standard Time, ***@n1k.org
>> writes:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Yes, getting the GPS version worked out is certainly the thing most
>> people
>> will be after. Doing the other box is a bit further down the road. The
>> main thing (to me) is documenting the 15 pin connector as best we can.
>> That
>> way whatever somebody decides to do in the future, they have a good
>> starting
>> point. Identifying which pins look like RS-422 and which look like CMOS
>> would go a long way to figuring both sides of this out. When I did the
>> other
>> connectors, I just ran through them with a DVM. 2.5V = 422 input, 1.5 or
>> 3.5
>> = 422 output. I didn’t have any CMOS. Everything else was either open
>> circuit or ground.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:01 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
>> <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ah, I had wondered about that but was probably being a bit selfish as I
>>
>>> only have the GPS based units:-)
>>>
>>> Given the similarity, I would assume where we've got to on these
>> wouldn't
>>> be a bad starting point, and at least identifying the 1PPS input on the
>>
>>> interface connector should be straightforward enough.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Nigel GM8PZR
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In a message dated 02/11/2014 19:41:07 GMT Standard Time, ***@n1k.org
>>> writes:
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> No, once we get the GPS end worked out, we need to do the same thing
>> for
>>> the non-GPS end. If we can fake it into working with just a PPS, it’s
>> the
>>> perfect thing to use to attach an OCXO to a newer GPS (like the
>>> Jackson
>> Labs
>>> part …).
>>>
>>> Bob
>>>
>>>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 2:15 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
>>> <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Gotz
>>>>
>>>> That's great stuff, thank you, I'll try that later.
>>>>
>>>> At this rate we'll soon be finding ways of doing this without any
>>> wiring
>>>> whatsoever, perhaps we could start with just standing it upside down
>> in
>>> a
>>>> dark corner on the night of the full moon:-)
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Nigel
>>>> GM8PZR
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In a message dated 02/11/2014 17:58:12 GMT Standard Time,
>>> ***@g-romahn.de
>>>> writes:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Am 02.11.2014 15:08, :
>>>>> Ooh err, whoops, and oh dear !!
>>>>>
>>>>> Arthur, I've only just had a chance to look at your latest photos,
>> and
>>>>> unless I've really got my wires crossed, if you'll pardon the
>>>> expression:-),
>>>>> your links on J5 are not shown on pins 2, 10, 12, and 15, but on
>>> pins
>>>> 4, 6,
>>>>> 11, and 13.
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as I'm aware the numbering from the front of that connector
>> as
>>>
>>>> shown
>>>>> starts in the top right hand corner and every row is numbered right
>> to
>>>>> left.
>>>>> That's certainly how mine are numbered anyway, and I wired them
>>>>> accordingly, and it worked, so where the heck does that leave us
>>> now?:-)
>>>>>
>>>> --------------------------
>>>> thanks Nigel for detecting this glitch. I removed all jumpers now
>>>> and
>>>> tested some reasonable new/old combinations resulting in very simple
>>>> scheme:
>>>> it seems to be sufficient to connect pin2 and pin3 to pin8 (ground).
>>>> Numbering as provided by Nigel and markings on my 15 pin-plug.
>>>>
>>>> Götz
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Bob Camp
2014-11-02 23:08:30 UTC
Permalink
Hi

It looks like (for what ever reason) both of the pins we have called grounds are short pins. The other short pin is a CMOS input that we use to fake the slave present mode.

Bob

> On Nov 2, 2014, at 5:36 PM, Tom Miller <***@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> Another mystery - what is on the three short pins? Usually that is done for hot-plugging things and connects the ground first before the power is applied. In this case, maybe it is some critical data lines that do not want dirty signals? I will play some more later tonight.
>
> Regards,
> Tom
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Camp" <***@n1k.org>
> To: <***@aol.com>; "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" <time-***@febo.com>
> Sent: Sunday, November 02, 2014 3:49 PM
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Lucent KS-24361, HP/Symmetricom Z3809A, Z3810A,Z3811A, Z3812...
>
>
>> Hi
>>
>> The supplied cable is indeed very short. It’s also quite stiff and a bit flakey (intermittent). I would bet at least one cold order of fries that there is no bi-directional serial between the two units. If there was, I doubt our little pin shorting exercises would get things running.
>>
>> If there is no serial at all (no GPS data), that makes using the slave for a variety of projects quite simple (and thus attractive). One back burner TimeNut project is an ensemble clock.
>>
>> If they are not looking at GPS strings, they are not doing sawtooth correction. That is an interesting observation (if true). These boxes have roots in the paranoid GPS SA era, so that might not be a big surprise.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:32 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Given the expected close proximity of these units, presumably it was only
>>> ever intended that they should work as a pair, and I remember Stu Cobb
>>> commenting on how short the supplied link cable is, I wouldn't be too surprised
>>> if there turns out to be no serial comms between the units but perhaps just
>>> handshaking via asserted levels.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Nigel
>>> GM8PZR
>>>
>>>
>>> In a message dated 02/11/2014 20:12:35 GMT Standard Time, ***@n1k.org
>>> writes:
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> Yes, getting the GPS version worked out is certainly the thing most people
>>> will be after. Doing the other box is a bit further down the road. The
>>> main thing (to me) is documenting the 15 pin connector as best we can. That
>>> way whatever somebody decides to do in the future, they have a good starting
>>> point. Identifying which pins look like RS-422 and which look like CMOS
>>> would go a long way to figuring both sides of this out. When I did the other
>>> connectors, I just ran through them with a DVM. 2.5V = 422 input, 1.5 or 3.5
>>> = 422 output. I didn’t have any CMOS. Everything else was either open
>>> circuit or ground.
>>>
>>> Bob
>>>
>>>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:01 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
>>> <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Ah, I had wondered about that but was probably being a bit selfish as I
>>>
>>>> only have the GPS based units:-)
>>>>
>>>> Given the similarity, I would assume where we've got to on these
>>> wouldn't
>>>> be a bad starting point, and at least identifying the 1PPS input on the
>>>
>>>> interface connector should be straightforward enough.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Nigel GM8PZR
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In a message dated 02/11/2014 19:41:07 GMT Standard Time, ***@n1k.org
>>>> writes:
>>>>
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> No, once we get the GPS end worked out, we need to do the same thing
>>> for
>>>> the non-GPS end. If we can fake it into working with just a PPS, it’s
>>> the
>>>> perfect thing to use to attach an OCXO to a newer GPS (like the Jackson
>>> Labs
>>>> part …).
>>>>
>>>> Bob
>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 2:15 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
>>>> <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Gotz
>>>>>
>>>>> That's great stuff, thank you, I'll try that later.
>>>>>
>>>>> At this rate we'll soon be finding ways of doing this without any
>>>> wiring
>>>>> whatsoever, perhaps we could start with just standing it upside down
>>> in
>>>> a
>>>>> dark corner on the night of the full moon:-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>>
>>>>> Nigel
>>>>> GM8PZR
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In a message dated 02/11/2014 17:58:12 GMT Standard Time,
>>>> ***@g-romahn.de
>>>>> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 02.11.2014 15:08, :
>>>>>> Ooh err, whoops, and oh dear !!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Arthur, I've only just had a chance to look at your latest photos,
>>> and
>>>>>> unless I've really got my wires crossed, if you'll pardon the
>>>>> expression:-),
>>>>>> your links on J5 are not shown on pins 2, 10, 12, and 15, but on
>>>> pins
>>>>> 4, 6,
>>>>>> 11, and 13.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As far as I'm aware the numbering from the front of that connector
>>> as
>>>>
>>>>> shown
>>>>>> starts in the top right hand corner and every row is numbered right
>>> to
>>>>>> left.
>>>>>> That's certainly how mine are numbered anyway, and I wired them
>>>>>> accordingly, and it worked, so where the heck does that leave us
>>>> now?:-)
>>>>>>
>>>>> --------------------------
>>>>> thanks Nigel for detecting this glitch. I removed all jumpers now and
>>>>> tested some reasonable new/old combinations resulting in very simple
>>>>> scheme:
>>>>> it seems to be sufficient to connect pin2 and pin3 to pin8 (ground).
>>>>> Numbering as provided by Nigel and markings on my 15 pin-plug.
>>>>>
>>>>> Götz
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>>>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>>>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>>> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Bob Camp
2014-11-02 21:01:52 UTC
Permalink
Hi

So then the question becomes - What is the real cutoff voltage?

Your pair of AA’s will start off at 3.1V, but they will get to 2.5 long before they are truly dead. Is the RAM gone at 2.5000 or 2.4 or “about 2 volts” ….

Bob

> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:54 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Bob
>
> The UT+ data sheet from 1998 quotes an external backup supply of 2.5 to
> 5.35V with a drain of 5uA typical at 2.5 Volts.
>
> Regards
>
> Nigel
> GM8PZR
>
>
> In a message dated 02/11/2014 20:41:44 GMT Standard Time, ***@n1k.org
> writes:
>
> Hi
>
> The numbers quoted earlier (and they sound right) were 20 uA at 2.5V. That
> would be well under your 100uA. My *guess* is that self discharge / aging
> on a normal AA is going to limit things faster than a 20 uA drain.
>
> Now, if you have the more normal tiny coin cell involved with 1/10 or
> 1/100 that capacity and much lower self discharge ….
>
> Bob
>
>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:17 PM, Hal Murray <***@megapathdsl.net> wrote:
>>
>>> By the way the z3801 is off most of the year so the drains quite small.
>>
>> I think that's backwards. The battery is only used when there is no
> power to
>> the GPS module.
>>
>> AAs are roughly 2800 mA hours. There are 8760 hours in a year. That's
> 319
>> microamp years. (How's that for a SI unit?) So that's 3 years if your
> GPS
>> module takes 100 uA. I think that's way high. Anybody measured it?
> There
>> is probably a strong temperature component.
>>
>>
>> --
>> These are my opinions. I hate spam.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Bob Camp
2014-11-02 21:04:11 UTC
Permalink
Hi

Good point. They could have GPS data simply to make the diag stuff happy, but not use it for the disciplining side of things. I had not considered that possibility.

Others have reported SatStat working on the slave, so there is at least *some* data coming out that port.

Bob


> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:58 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>
> Just another thought though, does the diagnostic port on the slave also
> communicate with SatStat etc?
>
> That would imply at least a transfer of serial data in one direction, even
> if not for the control functions.
>
> Regards
>
> Nigel
> GM8PZR
>
>
> In a message dated 02/11/2014 20:49:49 GMT Standard Time, ***@n1k.org
> writes:
>
> Hi
>
> The supplied cable is indeed very short. It’s also quite stiff and a bit
> flakey (intermittent). I would bet at least one cold order of fries that
> there is no bi-directional serial between the two units. If there was, I doubt
> our little pin shorting exercises would get things running.
>
> If there is no serial at all (no GPS data), that makes using the slave for
> a variety of projects quite simple (and thus attractive). One back burner
> TimeNut project is an ensemble clock.
>
> If they are not looking at GPS strings, they are not doing sawtooth
> correction. That is an interesting observation (if true). These boxes have roots
> in the paranoid GPS SA era, so that might not be a big surprise.
>
> Bob
>
>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:32 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
> <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>>
>> Given the expected close proximity of these units, presumably it was
> only
>> ever intended that they should work as a pair, and I remember Stu Cobb
>> commenting on how short the supplied link cable is, I wouldn't be too
> surprised
>> if there turns out to be no serial comms between the units but perhaps
> just
>> handshaking via asserted levels.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Nigel
>> GM8PZR
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 02/11/2014 20:12:35 GMT Standard Time, ***@n1k.org
>> writes:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Yes, getting the GPS version worked out is certainly the thing most
> people
>> will be after. Doing the other box is a bit further down the road. The
>> main thing (to me) is documenting the 15 pin connector as best we can.
> That
>> way whatever somebody decides to do in the future, they have a good
> starting
>> point. Identifying which pins look like RS-422 and which look like CMOS
>> would go a long way to figuring both sides of this out. When I did the
> other
>> connectors, I just ran through them with a DVM. 2.5V = 422 input, 1.5 or
> 3.5
>> = 422 output. I didn’t have any CMOS. Everything else was either open
>> circuit or ground.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:01 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
>> <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ah, I had wondered about that but was probably being a bit selfish as
> I
>>
>>> only have the GPS based units:-)
>>>
>>> Given the similarity, I would assume where we've got to on these
>> wouldn't
>>> be a bad starting point, and at least identifying the 1PPS input on the
>
>>
>>> interface connector should be straightforward enough.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Nigel GM8PZR
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In a message dated 02/11/2014 19:41:07 GMT Standard Time,
> ***@n1k.org
>>> writes:
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> No, once we get the GPS end worked out, we need to do the same thing
>> for
>>> the non-GPS end. If we can fake it into working with just a PPS, it’
> s
>> the
>>> perfect thing to use to attach an OCXO to a newer GPS (like the
> Jackson
>> Labs
>>> part …).
>>>
>>> Bob
>>>
>>>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 2:15 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
>>> <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Gotz
>>>>
>>>> That's great stuff, thank you, I'll try that later.
>>>>
>>>> At this rate we'll soon be finding ways of doing this without any
>>> wiring
>>>> whatsoever, perhaps we could start with just standing it upside down
>> in
>>> a
>>>> dark corner on the night of the full moon:-)
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Nigel
>>>> GM8PZR
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In a message dated 02/11/2014 17:58:12 GMT Standard Time,
>>> ***@g-romahn.de
>>>> writes:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Am 02.11.2014 15:08, :
>>>>> Ooh err, whoops, and oh dear !!
>>>>>
>>>>> Arthur, I've only just had a chance to look at your latest photos,
>
>> and
>>>>> unless I've really got my wires crossed, if you'll pardon the
>>>> expression:-),
>>>>> your links on J5 are not shown on pins 2, 10, 12, and 15, but on
>>> pins
>>>> 4, 6,
>>>>> 11, and 13.
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as I'm aware the numbering from the front of that connector
>> as
>>>
>>>> shown
>>>>> starts in the top right hand corner and every row is numbered
> right
>> to
>>>>> left.
>>>>> That's certainly how mine are numbered anyway, and I wired them
>>>>> accordingly, and it worked, so where the heck does that leave us
>>> now?:-)
>>>>>
>>>> --------------------------
>>>> thanks Nigel for detecting this glitch. I removed all jumpers now
> and
>>>> tested some reasonable new/old combinations resulting in very
> simple
>>>> scheme:
>>>> it seems to be sufficient to connect pin2 and pin3 to pin8
> (ground).
>>>> Numbering as provided by Nigel and markings on my 15 pin-plug.
>>>>
>>>> Götz
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Bob Camp
2014-11-02 21:20:30 UTC
Permalink
Hi

It’s those little onboard batteries that I have the experience with. After a while, you are doing well to get a month out of them. Play for a bit longer and they are down to a couple weeks. That’s not a surprising thing, the charging circuit on some of this stuff is often less than perfect. You get a lot of cycles / long life out of a properly handled battery. Abuse the poor thing and not so long a life.

Bob

> On Nov 2, 2014, at 4:12 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>
> Ah, just found an Engineering Note in my files that again quotes 5uA at
> 2.5V but also quotes 100uA at 5.0V, perhaps not too relevant at 3.1V but
> that's quite an increase.
>
> The same document quotes the following specs for the optional onboard
> lithium battery...
>
> Voltage -- 3V
> Capacity -- 15mAh
> approximately 3 months between charges
> Recharge -- approximately 8 hours for a full charge
> Lifetime -- 5 Years minimum.
>
> So I guess an onboard battery conversion might still be a viable option.
>
> Regards
>
> Nigel
> GM8PZR
>
>
> In a message dated 02/11/2014 21:01:55 GMT Standard Time, ***@n1k.org
> writes:
>
> Hi
>
> So then the question becomes - What is the real cutoff voltage?
>
> Your pair of AA’s will start off at 3.1V, but they will get to 2.5 long
> before they are truly dead. Is the RAM gone at 2.5000 or 2.4 or “about 2 volts
> ” ….
>
> Bob
>
>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:54 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
> <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Bob
>>
>> The UT+ data sheet from 1998 quotes an external backup supply of 2.5 to
>> 5.35V with a drain of 5uA typical at 2.5 Volts.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Nigel
>> GM8PZR
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 02/11/2014 20:41:44 GMT Standard Time, ***@n1k.org
>> writes:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> The numbers quoted earlier (and they sound right) were 20 uA at 2.5V.
> That
>> would be well under your 100uA. My *guess* is that self discharge /
> aging
>> on a normal AA is going to limit things faster than a 20 uA drain.
>>
>> Now, if you have the more normal tiny coin cell involved with 1/10 or
>> 1/100 that capacity and much lower self discharge ….
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:17 PM, Hal Murray <***@megapathdsl.net>
> wrote:
>>>
>>>> By the way the z3801 is off most of the year so the drains quite
> small.
>>>
>>> I think that's backwards. The battery is only used when there is no
>> power to
>>> the GPS module.
>>>
>>> AAs are roughly 2800 mA hours. There are 8760 hours in a year.
> That's
>> 319
>>> microamp years. (How's that for a SI unit?) So that's 3 years if
> your
>> GPS
>>> module takes 100 uA. I think that's way high. Anybody measured it?
>> There
>>> is probably a strong temperature component.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> These are my opinions. I hate spam.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
paul swed
2014-11-02 21:55:23 UTC
Permalink
Good conversation
I am accurate in what I am saying about the z3801. Its off most of the time
so it is drawing against the the AA batteries most of the time. One more
note my bad, they are AAAs.
Like Bob says most likely self discharge and such will get them first. No
matter they get changed next year anyhow since I really don't want to enjoy
some leakage and it takes just a few easy seconds to change while the
system is on.

I may have missed it but was curious on the 15 pin cable if it was 1 to 1.
Regards
Paul
WB8TSL



On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Bob Camp <***@n1k.org> wrote:

> Hi
>
> It’s those little onboard batteries that I have the experience with. After
> a while, you are doing well to get a month out of them. Play for a bit
> longer and they are down to a couple weeks. That’s not a surprising thing,
> the charging circuit on some of this stuff is often less than perfect. You
> get a lot of cycles / long life out of a properly handled battery. Abuse
> the poor thing and not so long a life.
>
> Bob
>
> > On Nov 2, 2014, at 4:12 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts <
> time-***@febo.com> wrote:
> >
> > Ah, just found an Engineering Note in my files that again quotes 5uA at
> > 2.5V but also quotes 100uA at 5.0V, perhaps not too relevant at 3.1V but
> > that's quite an increase.
> >
> > The same document quotes the following specs for the optional onboard
> > lithium battery...
> >
> > Voltage -- 3V
> > Capacity -- 15mAh
> > approximately 3 months between charges
> > Recharge -- approximately 8 hours for a full charge
> > Lifetime -- 5 Years minimum.
> >
> > So I guess an onboard battery conversion might still be a viable option.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Nigel
> > GM8PZR
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 02/11/2014 21:01:55 GMT Standard Time, ***@n1k.org
> > writes:
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > So then the question becomes - What is the real cutoff voltage?
> >
> > Your pair of AA’s will start off at 3.1V, but they will get to 2.5 long
> > before they are truly dead. Is the RAM gone at 2.5000 or 2.4 or “about
> 2 volts
> > ” ….
> >
> > Bob
> >
> >> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:54 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
> > <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Bob
> >>
> >> The UT+ data sheet from 1998 quotes an external backup supply of 2.5 to
> >> 5.35V with a drain of 5uA typical at 2.5 Volts.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Nigel
> >> GM8PZR
> >>
> >>
> >> In a message dated 02/11/2014 20:41:44 GMT Standard Time,
> ***@n1k.org
> >> writes:
> >>
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> The numbers quoted earlier (and they sound right) were 20 uA at 2.5V.
> > That
> >> would be well under your 100uA. My *guess* is that self discharge /
> > aging
> >> on a normal AA is going to limit things faster than a 20 uA drain.
> >>
> >> Now, if you have the more normal tiny coin cell involved with 1/10 or
> >> 1/100 that capacity and much lower self discharge ….
> >>
> >> Bob
> >>
> >>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:17 PM, Hal Murray <***@megapathdsl.net>
> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> By the way the z3801 is off most of the year so the drains quite
> > small.
> >>>
> >>> I think that's backwards. The battery is only used when there is no
> >> power to
> >>> the GPS module.
> >>>
> >>> AAs are roughly 2800 mA hours. There are 8760 hours in a year.
> > That's
> >> 319
> >>> microamp years. (How's that for a SI unit?) So that's 3 years if
> > your
> >> GPS
> >>> module takes 100 uA. I think that's way high. Anybody measured it?
> >> There
> >>> is probably a strong temperature component.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> These are my opinions. I hate spam.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> >>> To unsubscribe, go to
> >> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> >>> and follow the instructions there.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> >> To unsubscribe, go to
> >> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> >> and follow the instructions there.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> >> To unsubscribe, go to
> > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> >> and follow the instructions there.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> > To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> > and follow the instructions there.
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Bob Camp
2014-11-02 22:18:21 UTC
Permalink
Hi

The 15 pin cable is:


Pair End A End B

A 1 9
B 2 10
C 3 11
D 4 12
E 5 13
F 6 14
G 7 15

ground 8 8

C above appears to be a CMOS signal.
My guess is that D is 1/2 of an RS-422 pair.

The rest are a “to be discovered” at this point.

Treasure map (all voltages approximate):

2.5 V = RS-422 input
1.5 V = RS-422 output
3.5 V = RS-422 output (other half of the pair)
O or 5 V = CMOS output

Bob

> On Nov 2, 2014, at 4:55 PM, paul swed <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Good conversation
> I am accurate in what I am saying about the z3801. Its off most of the time
> so it is drawing against the the AA batteries most of the time. One more
> note my bad, they are AAAs.
> Like Bob says most likely self discharge and such will get them first. No
> matter they get changed next year anyhow since I really don't want to enjoy
> some leakage and it takes just a few easy seconds to change while the
> system is on.
>
> I may have missed it but was curious on the 15 pin cable if it was 1 to 1.
> Regards
> Paul
> WB8TSL
>
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Bob Camp <***@n1k.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> It’s those little onboard batteries that I have the experience with. After
>> a while, you are doing well to get a month out of them. Play for a bit
>> longer and they are down to a couple weeks. That’s not a surprising thing,
>> the charging circuit on some of this stuff is often less than perfect. You
>> get a lot of cycles / long life out of a properly handled battery. Abuse
>> the poor thing and not so long a life.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 4:12 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts <
>> time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ah, just found an Engineering Note in my files that again quotes 5uA at
>>> 2.5V but also quotes 100uA at 5.0V, perhaps not too relevant at 3.1V but
>>> that's quite an increase.
>>>
>>> The same document quotes the following specs for the optional onboard
>>> lithium battery...
>>>
>>> Voltage -- 3V
>>> Capacity -- 15mAh
>>> approximately 3 months between charges
>>> Recharge -- approximately 8 hours for a full charge
>>> Lifetime -- 5 Years minimum.
>>>
>>> So I guess an onboard battery conversion might still be a viable option.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Nigel
>>> GM8PZR
>>>
>>>
>>> In a message dated 02/11/2014 21:01:55 GMT Standard Time, ***@n1k.org
>>> writes:
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> So then the question becomes - What is the real cutoff voltage?
>>>
>>> Your pair of AA’s will start off at 3.1V, but they will get to 2.5 long
>>> before they are truly dead. Is the RAM gone at 2.5000 or 2.4 or “about
>> 2 volts
>>> ” ….
>>>
>>> Bob
>>>
>>>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:54 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
>>> <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Bob
>>>>
>>>> The UT+ data sheet from 1998 quotes an external backup supply of 2.5 to
>>>> 5.35V with a drain of 5uA typical at 2.5 Volts.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Nigel
>>>> GM8PZR
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In a message dated 02/11/2014 20:41:44 GMT Standard Time,
>> ***@n1k.org
>>>> writes:
>>>>
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> The numbers quoted earlier (and they sound right) were 20 uA at 2.5V.
>>> That
>>>> would be well under your 100uA. My *guess* is that self discharge /
>>> aging
>>>> on a normal AA is going to limit things faster than a 20 uA drain.
>>>>
>>>> Now, if you have the more normal tiny coin cell involved with 1/10 or
>>>> 1/100 that capacity and much lower self discharge ….
>>>>
>>>> Bob
>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:17 PM, Hal Murray <***@megapathdsl.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> By the way the z3801 is off most of the year so the drains quite
>>> small.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that's backwards. The battery is only used when there is no
>>>> power to
>>>>> the GPS module.
>>>>>
>>>>> AAs are roughly 2800 mA hours. There are 8760 hours in a year.
>>> That's
>>>> 319
>>>>> microamp years. (How's that for a SI unit?) So that's 3 years if
>>> your
>>>> GPS
>>>>> module takes 100 uA. I think that's way high. Anybody measured it?
>>>> There
>>>>> is probably a strong temperature component.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> These are my opinions. I hate spam.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>>>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>>>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Bob Camp
2014-11-02 22:13:07 UTC
Permalink
Hi

After spending some quality time with Mr. Google, I dug out some of the old UT+ information. The little beast does indeed forget everything it ever knew once you loose battery / super cap / whatever backup power. You can force a position, but it’s not persistent once you loose RAM.

If these GPSDO's normally ran with nothing connected to the Diag (HP commands) port, there may not be a way to force a survey solution into the GPS. If there is a Lucent command that does that over the PPS port, I’ve not seen mention of it.

The approach may well have been to save what ever you had to RAM and if you lost it, back to square one. That’s not as crazy as it sounds. Having a cell site power down for 24 hours is a “big deal”. Having one out for several days, should be a very rare thing. If the super cap does the job for a few days, that may have been all the designers cared about.

In TimeNut use, the situation isn’t really all that different. These boxes take a long time to get everything all worked out and stabilized. Turning them on and off is not a real good idea. Having them coast through a 24 hour power outage (position wise) is probably good enough for most of us. If you often have outages longer than a day, cancel my request to come play at your house ….

Having a nice modern GPS receiver outside the box might have it’s benefits in some cases. Getting the slave boxes figured out could be moving up on my list of things to do.

Bob

> On Nov 2, 2014, at 4:12 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>
> Ah, just found an Engineering Note in my files that again quotes 5uA at
> 2.5V but also quotes 100uA at 5.0V, perhaps not too relevant at 3.1V but
> that's quite an increase.
>
> The same document quotes the following specs for the optional onboard
> lithium battery...
>
> Voltage -- 3V
> Capacity -- 15mAh
> approximately 3 months between charges
> Recharge -- approximately 8 hours for a full charge
> Lifetime -- 5 Years minimum.
>
> So I guess an onboard battery conversion might still be a viable option.
>
> Regards
>
> Nigel
> GM8PZR
>
>
> In a message dated 02/11/2014 21:01:55 GMT Standard Time, ***@n1k.org
> writes:
>
> Hi
>
> So then the question becomes - What is the real cutoff voltage?
>
> Your pair of AA’s will start off at 3.1V, but they will get to 2.5 long
> before they are truly dead. Is the RAM gone at 2.5000 or 2.4 or “about 2 volts
> ” ….
>
> Bob
>
>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:54 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
> <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Bob
>>
>> The UT+ data sheet from 1998 quotes an external backup supply of 2.5 to
>> 5.35V with a drain of 5uA typical at 2.5 Volts.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Nigel
>> GM8PZR
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 02/11/2014 20:41:44 GMT Standard Time, ***@n1k.org
>> writes:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> The numbers quoted earlier (and they sound right) were 20 uA at 2.5V.
> That
>> would be well under your 100uA. My *guess* is that self discharge /
> aging
>> on a normal AA is going to limit things faster than a 20 uA drain.
>>
>> Now, if you have the more normal tiny coin cell involved with 1/10 or
>> 1/100 that capacity and much lower self discharge ….
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:17 PM, Hal Murray <***@megapathdsl.net>
> wrote:
>>>
>>>> By the way the z3801 is off most of the year so the drains quite
> small.
>>>
>>> I think that's backwards. The battery is only used when there is no
>> power to
>>> the GPS module.
>>>
>>> AAs are roughly 2800 mA hours. There are 8760 hours in a year.
> That's
>> 319
>>> microamp years. (How's that for a SI unit?) So that's 3 years if
> your
>> GPS
>>> module takes 100 uA. I think that's way high. Anybody measured it?
>> There
>>> is probably a strong temperature component.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> These are my opinions. I hate spam.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Bob Camp
2014-11-02 23:03:30 UTC
Permalink
Hi

I bet (again the order of fries) that the ground on pin 13 that crosses to is some sort of “other box plugged in” indicator.

So:

The 15 pin cable is:


Pair End A End B

A 1 9
B 2 10
C 3 11 (short pin on 3)
D 4 12
E 5 13 (short pin on 13)
F 6 14
G 7 15

ground 8 8 (short pin on 8)


Pair B - CMOS signaling
Pair C - CMOS signaling
Pari D - one half of RS-422
Pair E - CMOS signal ? ground on pin 13

We have A, F, and G in the “to be discovered” category. One of those should be the other half of D. Something in here should be a PPS.

Bob


> On Nov 2, 2014, at 5:48 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Gotz
>
> 2 and 3 grounded works fine for me too, although I still have one unit that
> insists on flashing the ON light rather than bringing it on solid. In all
> other respects both units seem to match. Two more should be arriving
> sometime in the next couple of weeks so will see how they match up.
>
> Just for reference, pin 13 is also a ground connection so if just pushing
> wires into the connector it might be convenient to use both grounds.
>
> Regards
>
> Nigel
> GM8PZR
>
>
>
>
> In a message dated 02/11/2014 17:58:12 GMT Standard Time, ***@g-romahn.de
> writes:
>
>
>
> Am 02.11.2014 15:08, :
>> Ooh err, whoops, and oh dear !!
>>
>> Arthur, I've only just had a chance to look at your latest photos, and
>> unless I've really got my wires crossed, if you'll pardon the
> expression:-),
>> your links on J5 are not shown on pins 2, 10, 12, and 15, but on pins
> 4, 6,
>> 11, and 13.
>>
>> As far as I'm aware the numbering from the front of that connector as
> shown
>> starts in the top right hand corner and every row is numbered right to
>> left.
>> That's certainly how mine are numbered anyway, and I wired them
>> accordingly, and it worked, so where the heck does that leave us now?:-)
>>
> --------------------------
> thanks Nigel for detecting this glitch. I removed all jumpers now and
> tested some reasonable new/old combinations resulting in very simple
> scheme:
> it seems to be sufficient to connect pin2 and pin3 to pin8 (ground).
> Numbering as provided by Nigel and markings on my 15 pin-plug.
>
> Götz
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Bob Camp
2014-11-03 02:11:32 UTC
Permalink
Hi

Well here’s some data to think about:

Pin GPS box Slave box

1 o.c. 1.1 K
2 10 K 10 K
3 1.1 K 1.1 K
4 1.1 K 1.1 K
5 o.c. o.c.
6 1.1 K 1.1 K
7 o.c. o.c.
8 ground ground
9 10 K 10K
10 o.c. o.c.
11 1.1 K 1.1 K
12 o.c. o.c.
13 gnd gnd
14 o.c. o.c.
15 o.c. 1.1 K

All of the above are resistance to ground on a unit with no power. Just for reference, the 422 transmitters on the PPS connector read 550 ohms, the receivers read around 3K ohms.

Simply put, except for the resistors on pins 1 and 15, the two boxes look a lot alike. No idea if the open circuit (o.c.) is actually connected to something or not.

Bob

> On Nov 2, 2014, at 6:25 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>
> It would seem that the hunt for 1PPS will need to be attempted by someone
> with two units coupled together.
> I don't know if there's some sort of handshake enablement but with just the
> Ref-1 unit I've not been able so far to find 1PPS on the Interface
> connector, either during the boot up sequence or when up and running.
>
> The 1PPS on pin 6 of the RS422/1PPS connector is very easy to spot so I
> don't think it's just a case of me missing it on the interface.
>
> Regards
>
> Nigel
> GM8PZR
>
>
> In a message dated 02/11/2014 23:03:34 GMT Standard Time, ***@n1k.org
> writes:
>
> Hi
>
> I bet (again the order of fries) that the ground on pin 13 that crosses
> to is some sort of “other box plugged in” indicator.
>
> So:
>
> The 15 pin cable is:
>
>
> Pair End A End B
>
> A 1 9
> B 2 10
> C 3 11 (short pin on 3)
> D 4 12
> E 5 13 (short pin on 13)
> F 6 14
> G 7 15
>
> ground 8 8 (short pin on 8)
>
>
> Pair B - CMOS signaling
> Pair C - CMOS signaling
> Pari D - one half of RS-422
> Pair E - CMOS signal ? ground on pin 13
>
> We have A, F, and G in the “to be discovered” category. One of those
> should be the other half of D. Something in here should be a PPS.
>
> Bob
>
>
>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 5:48 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
> <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Gotz
>>
>> 2 and 3 grounded works fine for me too, although I still have one unit
> that
>> insists on flashing the ON light rather than bringing it on solid. In
> all
>> other respects both units seem to match. Two more should be arriving
>> sometime in the next couple of weeks so will see how they match up.
>>
>> Just for reference, pin 13 is also a ground connection so if just
> pushing
>> wires into the connector it might be convenient to use both grounds.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Nigel
>> GM8PZR
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 02/11/2014 17:58:12 GMT Standard Time,
> ***@g-romahn.de
>> writes:
>>
>>
>>
>> Am 02.11.2014 15:08, :
>>> Ooh err, whoops, and oh dear !!
>>>
>>> Arthur, I've only just had a chance to look at your latest photos, and
>>> unless I've really got my wires crossed, if you'll pardon the
>> expression:-),
>>> your links on J5 are not shown on pins 2, 10, 12, and 15, but on pins
>> 4, 6,
>>> 11, and 13.
>>>
>>> As far as I'm aware the numbering from the front of that connector as
>> shown
>>> starts in the top right hand corner and every row is numbered right to
>>> left.
>>> That's certainly how mine are numbered anyway, and I wired them
>>> accordingly, and it worked, so where the heck does that leave us
> now?:-)
>>>
>> --------------------------
>> thanks Nigel for detecting this glitch. I removed all jumpers now and
>> tested some reasonable new/old combinations resulting in very simple
>> scheme:
>> it seems to be sufficient to connect pin2 and pin3 to pin8 (ground).
>> Numbering as provided by Nigel and markings on my 15 pin-plug.
>>
>> Götz
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Bob Camp
2014-11-03 02:54:42 UTC
Permalink
Hi

Here’s another way to look at the data:

pin pin res res
Pair from to from to

A 1 9 oc/1k 10k
B 2 10 10K o.c.
C 3 11 1K 1K (short pin on 3)
D 4 12 1K o.c.
E 5 13 o.c. gnd (short pin on 13)
F 6 14 1K o.c.
G 7 15 o.c. o.c./ 1K

I don’t know if that’s more clear or more confusing. It certainly suggests there are a variety of things going on.

OC on one, 1K on the other D,F and 1/2 G
Different GPS, Slave A,G
OC on one end 10K on the other B and 1/2 A
OC one end Ground on the other E
1K both ends C
OC both ends 1/2 G
1K and 10K 1/2 A

I suspect some of the open circuits are just that - no connect.

I wonder what happens if you plug two GPS’s together or two slaves together? Some of the odd pins may be to sort that kind of thing out.

Bob

> On Nov 2, 2014, at 9:11 PM, Bob Camp <***@n1k.org> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Well here’s some data to think about:
>
> Pin GPS box Slave box
>
> 1 o.c. 1.1 K
> 2 10 K 10 K
> 3 1.1 K 1.1 K
> 4 1.1 K 1.1 K
> 5 o.c. o.c.
> 6 1.1 K 1.1 K
> 7 o.c. o.c.
> 8 ground ground
> 9 10 K 10K
> 10 o.c. o.c.
> 11 1.1 K 1.1 K
> 12 o.c. o.c.
> 13 gnd gnd
> 14 o.c. o.c.
> 15 o.c. 1.1 K
>
> All of the above are resistance to ground on a unit with no power. Just for reference, the 422 transmitters on the PPS connector read 550 ohms, the receivers read around 3K ohms.
>
> Simply put, except for the resistors on pins 1 and 15, the two boxes look a lot alike. No idea if the open circuit (o.c.) is actually connected to something or not.
>
> Bob
>
>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 6:25 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>>
>> It would seem that the hunt for 1PPS will need to be attempted by someone
>> with two units coupled together.
>> I don't know if there's some sort of handshake enablement but with just the
>> Ref-1 unit I've not been able so far to find 1PPS on the Interface
>> connector, either during the boot up sequence or when up and running.
>>
>> The 1PPS on pin 6 of the RS422/1PPS connector is very easy to spot so I
>> don't think it's just a case of me missing it on the interface.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Nigel
>> GM8PZR
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 02/11/2014 23:03:34 GMT Standard Time, ***@n1k.org
>> writes:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> I bet (again the order of fries) that the ground on pin 13 that crosses
>> to is some sort of “other box plugged in” indicator.
>>
>> So:
>>
>> The 15 pin cable is:
>>
>>
>> Pair End A End B
>>
>> A 1 9
>> B 2 10
>> C 3 11 (short pin on 3)
>> D 4 12
>> E 5 13 (short pin on 13)
>> F 6 14
>> G 7 15
>>
>> ground 8 8 (short pin on 8)
>>
>>
>> Pair B - CMOS signaling
>> Pair C - CMOS signaling
>> Pari D - one half of RS-422
>> Pair E - CMOS signal ? ground on pin 13
>>
>> We have A, F, and G in the “to be discovered” category. One of those
>> should be the other half of D. Something in here should be a PPS.
>>
>> Bob
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 2, 2014, at 5:48 PM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
>> <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks Gotz
>>>
>>> 2 and 3 grounded works fine for me too, although I still have one unit
>> that
>>> insists on flashing the ON light rather than bringing it on solid. In
>> all
>>> other respects both units seem to match. Two more should be arriving
>>> sometime in the next couple of weeks so will see how they match up.
>>>
>>> Just for reference, pin 13 is also a ground connection so if just
>> pushing
>>> wires into the connector it might be convenient to use both grounds.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Nigel
>>> GM8PZR
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In a message dated 02/11/2014 17:58:12 GMT Standard Time,
>> ***@g-romahn.de
>>> writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 02.11.2014 15:08, :
>>>> Ooh err, whoops, and oh dear !!
>>>>
>>>> Arthur, I've only just had a chance to look at your latest photos, and
>>>> unless I've really got my wires crossed, if you'll pardon the
>>> expression:-),
>>>> your links on J5 are not shown on pins 2, 10, 12, and 15, but on pins
>>> 4, 6,
>>>> 11, and 13.
>>>>
>>>> As far as I'm aware the numbering from the front of that connector as
>>> shown
>>>> starts in the top right hand corner and every row is numbered right to
>>>> left.
>>>> That's certainly how mine are numbered anyway, and I wired them
>>>> accordingly, and it worked, so where the heck does that leave us
>> now?:-)
>>>>
>>> --------------------------
>>> thanks Nigel for detecting this glitch. I removed all jumpers now and
>>> tested some reasonable new/old combinations resulting in very simple
>>> scheme:
>>> it seems to be sufficient to connect pin2 and pin3 to pin8 (ground).
>>> Numbering as provided by Nigel and markings on my 15 pin-plug.
>>>
>>> Götz
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Arthur Dent
2014-11-03 17:00:03 UTC
Permalink
GandalfG8 at aol.com GandalfG8 at aol.com Sun Nov 2 09:08:30 EST 2014 wrote:

"Ooh err, whoops, and oh dear !!

Arthur, I've only just had a chance to look at your latest photos, and
unless I've really got my wires crossed, if you'll pardon the
expression:-),
your links on J5 are not shown on pins 2, 10, 12, and 15, but on pins 4,
6,
11, and 13."
+++++++++++++++++++++

Darn-I'm glad someone was paying more attention than I was when I wrote
that years ago. Apparently when I was documenting what modifications I
had made I just picked up a 15 pin D plug shell to get the numbers
instead of looking at the obvious numbers on the RFTG socket connector
and those connectors being mirror images have the numbers reversed. I
was out geocaching yesterday and didn't catch up on the new posts until
this morning so I'm a little late in responding. I also checked to see
if I had any other scribbles on the changes I made and found this: "If
pin 2 is held low the 'ON' LED will flash. A pulse low will turn it on.
The RC timer holds pin 2 low to flash for about 6 seconds so you can
see it actually happens then pin 2 returns high and the 'ON' LED stays
on solid."

So apparently some of the parts I added were to just make the light look
like they were working correctly (can you spell OCD?) and may not be
necessary. As I originally said, this was a hack and I wanted others to
duplicate what I had done to see if any of it made sense to them. At
least it appears that by adding the circuit I came up with and/or adding
jumpers you can get the RFTG-u REF 1 unit to work without the slave unit.
I just ordered another RFTG-u REF 1 and will see if I can modify that and
get it to output 10Mhz instead of 5Mhz like my original unit.

Sorry about the screw up on the numbers.

-Arthur
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Bob Camp
2014-11-04 01:41:01 UTC
Permalink
Hi


> On Nov 3, 2014, at 12:00 PM, Arthur Dent <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> GandalfG8 at aol.com GandalfG8 at aol.com Sun Nov 2 09:08:30 EST 2014 wrote:
>
> "Ooh err, whoops, and oh dear !!
>
> Arthur, I've only just had a chance to look at your latest photos, and
> unless I've really got my wires crossed, if you'll pardon the
> expression:-),
> your links on J5 are not shown on pins 2, 10, 12, and 15, but on pins 4,
> 6,
> 11, and 13."
> +++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Darn-I'm glad someone was paying more attention than I was when I wrote
> that years ago. Apparently when I was documenting what modifications I
> had made I just picked up a 15 pin D plug shell to get the numbers
> instead of looking at the obvious numbers on the RFTG socket connector
> and those connectors being mirror images have the numbers reversed. I
> was out geocaching yesterday and didn't catch up on the new posts until
> this morning so I'm a little late in responding. I also checked to see
> if I had any other scribbles on the changes I made and found this: "If
> pin 2 is held low the 'ON' LED will flash. A pulse low will turn it on.
> The RC timer holds pin 2 low to flash for about 6 seconds so you can
> see it actually happens then pin 2 returns high and the 'ON' LED stays
> on solid."
>
> So apparently some of the parts I added were to just make the light look
> like they were working correctly (can you spell OCD?) and may not be
> necessary. As I originally said, this was a hack and I wanted others to
> duplicate what I had done to see if any of it made sense to them. At
> least it appears that by adding the circuit I came up with and/or adding
> jumpers you can get the RFTG-u REF 1 unit to work without the slave unit.
> I just ordered another RFTG-u REF 1 and will see if I can modify that and
> get it to output 10Mhz instead of 5Mhz like my original unit.
>

The 15 MHz “chain” in the units is *much* cleaner than what ever they did to get 10 MHz. It looks like the 15 MHz has some sort of push pull amp driving a fairly involved filter. Best guess is they have a 3X stage and a fairly involved filter to take out the 5, 10 and 20 MHz signals. Turning the 3X into a 2X (assuming you can find it) should be fairly easy. The doubler should be cleaner than the 3X, so less filtering would be needed. Working out their filter circuit might be easier than it looks. Right now it looks pretty complex to me.


> Sorry about the screw up on the numbers.

Sorry I could not find any of these when you first posted about them….

Bob
>
> -Arthur
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Anthony Roby
2014-11-03 19:23:23 UTC
Permalink
The photos I posted at http://goo.gl/87e8GG show the differences between the two boards - there is more to it than just adding a GPS board. The underside has a bunch of additional components beneath the antenna connector.

Anthony

-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts [mailto:time-nuts-***@febo.com] On Behalf Of GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 12:00 PM
To: time-***@febo.com
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Lucent KS-24361, HP/Symmetricom Z3809A, Z3810A, Z3811A, Z3812...

Hi Arthur

Thanks for your further comments, and certainly no need for the "sorry".

It was your pioneering work that inspired recent efforts to start with, and the confusion over the pin numbers that led Gotz to the, just grounding pins 2 and 3, 2 link solution we have now.

Overall, I'd say, not a bad result:-)

Good luck with the 10 MHz conversion, I'll probably do that soon as well, after bringing out the 5 Mhz, but for now I'm just letting them cook whilst monitoring the 15MHz.

As has been previously commented, aside from the GPS module, there seems to be very little difference between the Ref-0 and Ref-1 modules, and I'm quite tempted to make up my own patch lead, whip out the GPS module from one of my Ref-1 units, and then couple the two Ref-1s together to see how they cope with that:-)

Regards

Nigel
GM8PZR




In a message dated 03/11/2014 17:13:15 GMT Standard Time, ***@gmail.com writes:

GandalfG8 at aol.com GandalfG8 at aol.com Sun Nov 2 09:08:30 EST 2014
wrote:

"Ooh err, whoops, and oh dear !!

Arthur, I've only just had a chance to look at your latest photos, and unless I've really got my wires crossed, if you'll pardon the expression:-), your links on J5 are not shown on pins 2, 10, 12, and 15, but on pins 4, 6, 11, and 13."
+++++++++++++++++++++

Darn-I'm glad someone was paying more attention than I was when I wrote that years ago. Apparently when I was documenting what modifications I had made I just picked up a 15 pin D plug shell to get the numbers instead of looking at the obvious numbers on the RFTG socket connector and those connectors being mirror images have the numbers reversed. I was out geocaching yesterday and didn't catch up on the new posts until this morning so I'm a little late in responding. I also checked to see if I had any other scribbles on the changes I made and found this: "If pin 2 is held low the 'ON' LED will flash. A pulse low will turn it on.
The RC timer holds pin 2 low to flash for about 6 seconds so you can see it actually happens then pin 2 returns high and the 'ON' LED stays on solid."

So apparently some of the parts I added were to just make the light look like they were working correctly (can you spell OCD?) and may not be necessary. As I originally said, this was a hack and I wanted others to duplicate what I had done to see if any of it made sense to them. At least it appears that by adding the circuit I came up with and/or adding jumpers you can get the RFTG-u REF 1 unit to work without the slave unit.
I just ordered another RFTG-u REF 1 and will see if I can modify that and get it to output 10Mhz instead of 5Mhz like my original unit.

Sorry about the screw up on the numbers.

-Arthur
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Bob Camp
2014-11-04 02:36:47 UTC
Permalink
Hi

I’m hoping that you can “add” a GPS to the slave by putting it outboard. There have to be a limited number of strings that the slave needs to see. Once it sees those strings, it starts locking up to the PPS. The only thing it might use in the lock process is the sawtooth correction data. Past that it could either watch the “all is ok” traffic or it could let the GPS CPU do that and just watch a status line.

If you can put it on outboard with next to no traffic, mating a modern GPS up with one of the slaves should be easier than mating it up with the GPS box.

Bob

> On Nov 3, 2014, at 2:23 PM, Anthony Roby <***@antamy.com> wrote:
>
> The photos I posted at http://goo.gl/87e8GG show the differences between the two boards - there is more to it than just adding a GPS board. The underside has a bunch of additional components beneath the antenna connector.
>
> Anthony
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: time-nuts [mailto:time-nuts-***@febo.com] On Behalf Of GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 12:00 PM
> To: time-***@febo.com
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Lucent KS-24361, HP/Symmetricom Z3809A, Z3810A, Z3811A, Z3812...
>
> Hi Arthur
>
> Thanks for your further comments, and certainly no need for the "sorry".
>
> It was your pioneering work that inspired recent efforts to start with, and the confusion over the pin numbers that led Gotz to the, just grounding pins 2 and 3, 2 link solution we have now.
>
> Overall, I'd say, not a bad result:-)
>
> Good luck with the 10 MHz conversion, I'll probably do that soon as well, after bringing out the 5 Mhz, but for now I'm just letting them cook whilst monitoring the 15MHz.
>
> As has been previously commented, aside from the GPS module, there seems to be very little difference between the Ref-0 and Ref-1 modules, and I'm quite tempted to make up my own patch lead, whip out the GPS module from one of my Ref-1 units, and then couple the two Ref-1s together to see how they cope with that:-)
>
> Regards
>
> Nigel
> GM8PZR
>
>
>
>
> In a message dated 03/11/2014 17:13:15 GMT Standard Time, ***@gmail.com writes:
>
> GandalfG8 at aol.com GandalfG8 at aol.com Sun Nov 2 09:08:30 EST 2014
> wrote:
>
> "Ooh err, whoops, and oh dear !!
>
> Arthur, I've only just had a chance to look at your latest photos, and unless I've really got my wires crossed, if you'll pardon the expression:-), your links on J5 are not shown on pins 2, 10, 12, and 15, but on pins 4, 6, 11, and 13."
> +++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Darn-I'm glad someone was paying more attention than I was when I wrote that years ago. Apparently when I was documenting what modifications I had made I just picked up a 15 pin D plug shell to get the numbers instead of looking at the obvious numbers on the RFTG socket connector and those connectors being mirror images have the numbers reversed. I was out geocaching yesterday and didn't catch up on the new posts until this morning so I'm a little late in responding. I also checked to see if I had any other scribbles on the changes I made and found this: "If pin 2 is held low the 'ON' LED will flash. A pulse low will turn it on.
> The RC timer holds pin 2 low to flash for about 6 seconds so you can see it actually happens then pin 2 returns high and the 'ON' LED stays on solid."
>
> So apparently some of the parts I added were to just make the light look like they were working correctly (can you spell OCD?) and may not be necessary. As I originally said, this was a hack and I wanted others to duplicate what I had done to see if any of it made sense to them. At least it appears that by adding the circuit I came up with and/or adding jumpers you can get the RFTG-u REF 1 unit to work without the slave unit.
> I just ordered another RFTG-u REF 1 and will see if I can modify that and get it to output 10Mhz instead of 5Mhz like my original unit.
>
> Sorry about the screw up on the numbers.
>
> -Arthur
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Tom Miller
2014-11-04 02:49:01 UTC
Permalink
Some of the parts on the underside are to provide power to the antenna. It
does not use the GPS rx to do that. I guess they also detect any antenna
fault.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Anthony Roby" <***@antamy.com>
To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement"
<time-***@febo.com>
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 2:23 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Lucent KS-24361, HP/Symmetricom Z3809A,
Z3810A,Z3811A, Z3812...


> The photos I posted at http://goo.gl/87e8GG show the differences between
> the two boards - there is more to it than just adding a GPS board. The
> underside has a bunch of additional components beneath the antenna
> connector.
>
> Anthony
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: time-nuts [mailto:time-nuts-***@febo.com] On Behalf Of
> GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 12:00 PM
> To: time-***@febo.com
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Lucent KS-24361, HP/Symmetricom Z3809A, Z3810A,
> Z3811A, Z3812...
>
> Hi Arthur
>
> Thanks for your further comments, and certainly no need for the "sorry".
>
> It was your pioneering work that inspired recent efforts to start with,
> and the confusion over the pin numbers that led Gotz to the, just
> grounding pins 2 and 3, 2 link solution we have now.
>
> Overall, I'd say, not a bad result:-)
>
> Good luck with the 10 MHz conversion, I'll probably do that soon as well,
> after bringing out the 5 Mhz, but for now I'm just letting them cook
> whilst monitoring the 15MHz.
>
> As has been previously commented, aside from the GPS module, there seems
> to be very little difference between the Ref-0 and Ref-1 modules, and I'm
> quite tempted to make up my own patch lead, whip out the GPS module from
> one of my Ref-1 units, and then couple the two Ref-1s together to see how
> they cope with that:-)
>
> Regards
>
> Nigel
> GM8PZR
>
>
>
>
> In a message dated 03/11/2014 17:13:15 GMT Standard Time,
> ***@gmail.com writes:
>
> GandalfG8 at aol.com GandalfG8 at aol.com Sun Nov 2 09:08:30 EST 2014
> wrote:
>
> "Ooh err, whoops, and oh dear !!
>
> Arthur, I've only just had a chance to look at your latest photos, and
> unless I've really got my wires crossed, if you'll pardon the
> expression:-), your links on J5 are not shown on pins 2, 10, 12, and 15,
> but on pins 4, 6, 11, and 13."
> +++++++++++++++++++++
>
> Darn-I'm glad someone was paying more attention than I was when I wrote
> that years ago. Apparently when I was documenting what modifications I
> had made I just picked up a 15 pin D plug shell to get the numbers
> instead of looking at the obvious numbers on the RFTG socket connector
> and those connectors being mirror images have the numbers reversed. I was
> out geocaching yesterday and didn't catch up on the new posts until this
> morning so I'm a little late in responding. I also checked to see if I
> had any other scribbles on the changes I made and found this: "If pin 2
> is held low the 'ON' LED will flash. A pulse low will turn it on.
> The RC timer holds pin 2 low to flash for about 6 seconds so you can see
> it actually happens then pin 2 returns high and the 'ON' LED stays on
> solid."
>
> So apparently some of the parts I added were to just make the light look
> like they were working correctly (can you spell OCD?) and may not be
> necessary. As I originally said, this was a hack and I wanted others to
> duplicate what I had done to see if any of it made sense to them. At
> least it appears that by adding the circuit I came up with and/or adding
> jumpers you can get the RFTG-u REF 1 unit to work without the slave unit.
> I just ordered another RFTG-u REF 1 and will see if I can modify that and
> get it to output 10Mhz instead of 5Mhz like my original unit.
>
> Sorry about the screw up on the numbers.
>
> -Arthur
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Bob Camp
2014-11-04 05:15:48 UTC
Permalink
Hi

Feeding antenna bias through the “stuff” on the module does not let you handle shorts and strange stuff as well as an outboard solution. I guess they wanted it built tough.

The crazy deal with re-stuffing a slave is that there probably are 7 0402 sized resistors on the board that control some aspect of the changeover. I’m sure that finding six of them will be easy. Finding the 7th never seems to work out for me. I’ve seen a lot of troubleshooting and inspection done on boards far less complex. Without some sort of automated system … it’s a lot of time.

Bob


> On Nov 3, 2014, at 9:49 PM, Tom Miller <***@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> Some of the parts on the underside are to provide power to the antenna. It does not use the GPS rx to do that. I guess they also detect any antenna fault.
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Anthony Roby" <***@antamy.com>
> To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" <time-***@febo.com>
> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 2:23 PM
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Lucent KS-24361, HP/Symmetricom Z3809A, Z3810A,Z3811A, Z3812...
>
>
>> The photos I posted at http://goo.gl/87e8GG show the differences between the two boards - there is more to it than just adding a GPS board. The underside has a bunch of additional components beneath the antenna connector.
>>
>> Anthony
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: time-nuts [mailto:time-nuts-***@febo.com] On Behalf Of GandalfG8--- via time-nuts
>> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 12:00 PM
>> To: time-***@febo.com
>> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Lucent KS-24361, HP/Symmetricom Z3809A, Z3810A, Z3811A, Z3812...
>>
>> Hi Arthur
>>
>> Thanks for your further comments, and certainly no need for the "sorry".
>>
>> It was your pioneering work that inspired recent efforts to start with, and the confusion over the pin numbers that led Gotz to the, just grounding pins 2 and 3, 2 link solution we have now.
>>
>> Overall, I'd say, not a bad result:-)
>>
>> Good luck with the 10 MHz conversion, I'll probably do that soon as well, after bringing out the 5 Mhz, but for now I'm just letting them cook whilst monitoring the 15MHz.
>>
>> As has been previously commented, aside from the GPS module, there seems to be very little difference between the Ref-0 and Ref-1 modules, and I'm quite tempted to make up my own patch lead, whip out the GPS module from one of my Ref-1 units, and then couple the two Ref-1s together to see how they cope with that:-)
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Nigel
>> GM8PZR
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> In a message dated 03/11/2014 17:13:15 GMT Standard Time, ***@gmail.com writes:
>>
>> GandalfG8 at aol.com GandalfG8 at aol.com Sun Nov 2 09:08:30 EST 2014
>> wrote:
>>
>> "Ooh err, whoops, and oh dear !!
>>
>> Arthur, I've only just had a chance to look at your latest photos, and unless I've really got my wires crossed, if you'll pardon the expression:-), your links on J5 are not shown on pins 2, 10, 12, and 15, but on pins 4, 6, 11, and 13."
>> +++++++++++++++++++++
>>
>> Darn-I'm glad someone was paying more attention than I was when I wrote that years ago. Apparently when I was documenting what modifications I had made I just picked up a 15 pin D plug shell to get the numbers instead of looking at the obvious numbers on the RFTG socket connector and those connectors being mirror images have the numbers reversed. I was out geocaching yesterday and didn't catch up on the new posts until this morning so I'm a little late in responding. I also checked to see if I had any other scribbles on the changes I made and found this: "If pin 2 is held low the 'ON' LED will flash. A pulse low will turn it on.
>> The RC timer holds pin 2 low to flash for about 6 seconds so you can see it actually happens then pin 2 returns high and the 'ON' LED stays on solid."
>>
>> So apparently some of the parts I added were to just make the light look like they were working correctly (can you spell OCD?) and may not be necessary. As I originally said, this was a hack and I wanted others to duplicate what I had done to see if any of it made sense to them. At least it appears that by adding the circuit I came up with and/or adding jumpers you can get the RFTG-u REF 1 unit to work without the slave unit.
>> I just ordered another RFTG-u REF 1 and will see if I can modify that and get it to output 10Mhz instead of 5Mhz like my original unit.
>>
>> Sorry about the screw up on the numbers.
>>
>> -Arthur
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>> _______________________________________________
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>> and follow the instructions there.
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Bob Camp
2014-11-05 12:41:39 UTC
Permalink
Hi

On a “real” Ref-0 / Ref-1 combo, the Lucent status message (RS-422 / PPS port) shows which device the string is coming from. This is independent of their status bits. Previous digging into similar units shows the same thing on earlier Lucent GPSDO’s. All the details are buried (200 posts back according to some ..) in one of my previous posts.I do not have anything on the diag port, so I don’t know what it says.

Looking at the few unknown pins / pairs on the 15 pin connector, I’m guessing that one of them might be high or low depending on it being a Ref-0 or Ref-1. I’m also guessing that the pair on pin 15 is serial both ways. At this point my guessing average is not to good on these parts. I’m not really expecting that it will improve. Figuring out what the last few pairs do would be a nice thing.

Bob

> On Nov 5, 2014, at 7:20 AM, GandalfG8--- via time-nuts <time-***@febo.com> wrote:
>
> For what it's worth, here's what happened when I linked two Ref-1 units
> together....
>
> One was fitted with it's GPS module as normal, I'll call this Ref-1.
> The other was as normal other than having it's GPS module removed, I'll
> call this Ref-1-0.
> The link cable was around 15 inches long and wired 1-15, 2-14, etc, using
> standard 15 way high density plugs.
>
> BTW, whereas shortened pins have been used in the past to ensure safe power
> up sequences I'm pretty sure that on the Z3809A cable it's perhaps a
> precaution to reduce the risk of bringing down the base station when hot
> swapping.
> I've noticed that removing my "faker" plug once a stand alone Ref-1 is up
> and running starts to flash the Standby light but doesn't otherwise inhibit
> operation, the 15MHz and 1PPS outputs remain available. I don't know how
> long this might continue but the system obviously responds differently once
> fully booted to when it's first powered and I suspect the use of shortened
> pins could be related.
>
> Anyway, back to the two linked....
>
> At power up both go through the flashing light sequence, then...
> Ref-1-0 -- "No GPS" - Flashing, "Fault" - Solid
> Ref-1 ------"No GPS" - Solid, "Fault" - Solid
>
> After the boot period finishes.....
>
> Ref-1-0 -- "No GPS" - Flashing, "Fault" - Solid
> Ref-1 ------"Standby" - Solid, all other lights off.
>
> Both units will talk via the J8 diagnostics port as soon as powered up but
> Ref-1-0 behaves just as one would expect if the GPS module is removed, and
> it doesn't seem to be relaying any data from the Ref-1 unit, whilst Ref-1
> shows what looks to be a normal acquisition sequence, the onset of
> conditioning, and a self survey
> At no time is there a 15MHz or 1PPS output available from either unit.
>
> Although it's been conjectured that the firmware is identical in the Z3811A
> and Z3812A, and the Prom markings certainly seem to confirm this, it would
> also seem that there must be something that tells the unit what it is,
> either by a firmware difference somewhere after all or perhaps a link on the
> board somewhere.
> This isn't just based on my not very successful experiment, although the
> results are no great surprise:-), but my Ref-1 units always report
> themselves to monitoring software as a "Z3811A Secondary Receiver".
> Based on this am I correct in thinking that a standard Ref-0 would report
> as a "Z3812A Primary Receiver"?
> If so it has to get this information from somewhere.
>
> Regards
>
> Nigel
> GM8PZR
>
>
>
> In a message dated 04/11/2014 09:38:25 GMT Standard Time,
> ***@gmail.com writes:
>
> A wiring diagram of the Z3809A cable interconnect cable was published
> earlier on this list. That information appears to be incorrect. The
> cable is actually wired pin 1 to pin 15, pin 2 to pin 14, etc.
> Another way to describe it is that for each wire in the cable, the pin
> numbers on each end of the cable add up to 16.
>
> A mated pair of these units is running in my lab with a scratch-built
> interconnect cable following the above rules. This scratch-built
> cable allowed access to the interconnect signals while the system was
> operating happily. No lights were lit except the green ON light on
> the Ref-0 unit (Z3812A, no GPS) and the yellow STBY light on the Ref-1
> unit (Z3911A with GPS receiver). The following signals were observed
> on the interconnect (pin numbers given for the J5 interconnect socket
> on the Ref-1 unit):
>
> Pin 1: 9600 baud serial data (described below)
>
> Pin 2: logic low (0.11V)
>
> Pin 3: Ground (0.00V) Presence detect? (see below)
>
> Pin 4: logic high (4.79V)
>
> Pin 5: inverted Motorola PPS, high (5V) for 800ms, low for 200ms
>
> Pin 6: "17 / 23 dBm" signal from Ref-0 unit (see below)
>
> Pin 7: logic high (4.48V)
>
> Pin 8: Ground (0.00V)
>
> Pin 9: logic low (0.11V)
>
> Pin 10: "17 / 23 dBm" signal from Ref-1 unit (see below)
>
> Pin 11: inverted PPS, low 400us, high (5V) otherwise
>
> Pin 12: logic low (0.12V)
>
> Pin 13: Ground (0.00V)
>
> Pin 14: logic low (0.08V)
>
> Pin 15: logic high (4.78V)
>
> Pins 3, 8, and 13 appear to be firmly connected to Ground. (Note that
> these are the three pins which are clipped short on the HP
> interconnect cable.) On an unpowered, disconnected box (either Ref-0
> or Ref-1), pins 8 and 13 are connected to Ground (low resistance) and
> pin 3 is high impedance. Presumably pin 3 on each box (connected to
> the grounded pin 13 on the other box) is used to sense the presence of
> the other box and/or the interconnect cable.
>
> The timing of the PPS signal on pin 11 matches precisely the timing of
> the PPS signal available on pins 1 and 6 of J6 (RS422/PPS) on the
> active Ref-0 unit. Presumably this signal is coming across the cable
> from the Ref-0 unit.
>
> Note: when the system is coming up from a cold start, SatStat on the
> unit with the GPS receiver (Ref-1) will show "[Ext 1PPS valid]" in the
> space where it shows "[GPS 1PPS valid]" after the survey is complete.
> It appears that the Ref-1 unit timing system is locking its oscillator
> to the PPS coming from the Ref-0 unit during this time.
>
> The timing of the PPS signal on pin 5 matches the timing of the PPS
> output described in the Motorola OnCore manual. Presumably this
> signal is sourced by the Ref-1 unit to allow the Ref-0 unit to lock to
> GPS. The edges of this PPS signal look very dirty compared to the
> signal on pin 11. This may be an artifact of the homemade cable used
> for this experiment. The HP cable clearly has an overall shield
> (visible through the cable sheath) and may have internal coax or
> twisted pair for these PPS signals.
>
> When pin 5 and pin 11 are observed together, the usual GPS sawtooth
> pattern is evident.
>
> Someone discovered earlier that the both units will blink their green
> ON lights if the front-panel switch on either unit is set to 23 dBm
> vice the normal 17. Obviously each unit can communicate its switch
> status to the other unit. They use pins 6 and 10 to do that. Pin 10
> (on the Ref-1 unit) is high (~5V) if the switch on the Ref-1 unit is
> in the 17 dBm position, and low in the 23 dBm position. Pin 6 (on the
> Ref-1 unit) gives the same indications for the switch on the Ref-0
> unit.
>
> The serial data on pin 1 is transmitted at 9600 baud, with a burst of
> data every second. The signal idles at logic low (near 0V) and rises
> to logic high (near 5V) during the burst. This may be the standard
> for TTL (not RS-232) transmission of serial data, or it may be
> inverted. The first few characters of one burst were hand-decoded
> from a scope trace as 0x40, 0x40, 0x45, 0x61, 0x0B, or ASCII "@@Ea".
> This appears to be the Motorola Oncore binary data format, although
> "Ea" does not appear to be a valid Motorola command or response.
> Perhaps the hand-decoding was in error.
>
> One can use SatStat, talking to the Ref-0 (non-GPS) box, to issue
> queries and commands to the GPS receiver. The results are
> inconsistent, but it seems that at least some of the queries get
> through and trigger responses. If the Ref-0 box is actually talking
> to the GPS receiver, it must be doing so through the interconnect
> cable. The specific wire in the cable used for this (if any) has not
> yet been identified.
>
> An earlier post speculated that the computer in each unit only had two
> UARTs. This does not seem possible. Clearly each unit uses one UART
> to communicate with the J8 diagnostic port. The Ref-1 unit needs
> another UART to communicate with the GPS receiver. And both units need
> to be able to transmit the legacy Lucent timecode message out the J6
> (RS422/1PPS) port. Perhaps there is a transmit-only UART coded into
> the FPGA, or perhaps one of the UARTs is timeshared with the Lucent
> message, or perhaps there is another UART chip hidden somewhere on the
> board.
>
> It seems unlikely that the two units are sending serial data to each
> other. (No such data was observed on the interconnect.) Instead,
> they appear to communicate their state to each other by means of logic
> levels on various pins of the cable. The logic functions of pins 6
> and 10 have already been identified. Further research is needed.
>
> Cheers!
> --Stu
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Arthur Dent
2014-11-05 23:29:34 UTC
Permalink
Could someone who has both the REF 0 and REF 1 units check
to see if the REF 0 unit has U1 missing. U1 is an AD7849
serial input, 14-Bit/16-Bit DAC on my REF 1 units but is
missing on an old REF 0 I just dug out of the to-do pile.
Someone may have already mentioned this and I missed it.

-Arthur

http://www.analog.com/en/digital-to-analog-converters/da-converters/ad7849/products/product.html
_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list -- time-***@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Loading...