Discussion:
TimePod 5330A announcement/info (was TimePod, cross-correlation fun and measurements)
John Miles
2012-06-18 05:26:52 UTC
Permalink
> I was recently reading the manual for the TimePod. It looks quite
> nice. I'm curious as to the price.

I haven't really done a formal "product announcement" on the list or
anywhere else beyond the PTTI show last November, for two reasons. One is
that the PTTI introduction led to a larger-than-expected amount of
business... and the second, related reason is that those early adopters
almost unanimously asked for some additional software features that weren't
on my to-do list. I wanted to support some of those requests, such as
automated test scripts and pass/fail masks, before advertising to more
commercial users who would likely need the same things.

Some good progress has been made in that direction, so I'm planning to raise
the market visibility over the next few months.

So, the short answer is that yes, the TimePod 5330A is shipping, and it's
available at lead times from one to six weeks, depending on quantities
ordered and parts/production scheduling at this end. The current price is
US $4995.00 each for 1-5 units.

> Or is this a case of "if you have
> to ask, you can't afford one"?
>
> Joe Gray
> W5JG

The pricing was intended to be competitive with some of the newer
time-interval counters that have been introduced with significantly fewer
features and less capable specs. If someone is in the market for an Agilent
53230A or similar high-performance TIC for use at 5/10 MHz (i.e., not 1
pps), they are almost certainly better off with a TimePod instead.

Other users have been manufacturers who would like to use TSC 5120A-class
analyzers for production testing, but who have been deterred by the cost of
putting high-end lab equipment on the factory floor. Some of the newer
features being added to TimeLab are the result of requests from these users,
who I didn't realize were out there at first.

At the same time, quite a few R&D users are having trouble keeping their
older HP 3048A gear alive, and they are looking for alternative solutions
that are actively supported. For reasons too long to get into here, I tend
to get a lot of email asking about HP 3048A software support, and that's
really what made me decide to jump into the market in the first place.

The overall idea is that while the TimePod isn't what you would call "dirt
cheap," it outperforms all existing instrumentation that's available at a
similar price, and it can often compete with equipment that costs 5x to 20x
more.

Sell sheet (from PTTI): http://www.miles.io/timepod/ss_1pg.pdf

Manual: http://www.miles.io/TimePod_5330A_user_manual.pdf

Software: http://www.miles.io/timelab/readme.htm (which supports a lot of
other time/freq hardware besides my own)

Latest beta, for more adventurous users:
http://www.miles.io/timelab/beta.htm

Obviously, technical discussion is more than welcome on the list, but any
specific sales inquiries should go to me directly, as it's not my intent to
spam the list with sales/marketing stuff beyond this post.

-- john, KE5FX

Miles Design LLC
www.miles.io
Poul-Henning Kamp
2012-06-18 11:03:03 UTC
Permalink
In message <00bf01cd4d12$f83a41d0$e8aec570$@pop.net>, "John Miles" writes:

Hi John,

Congratulations on a good design.

Why the 78 MHz sample frequency ?

--
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.
John Miles
2012-06-18 12:31:45 UTC
Permalink
> Hi John,
>
> Congratulations on a good design.

Thanks!

> Why the 78 MHz sample frequency ?

Long story: it's mostly arbitrary, but at least with some ADCs, it's
beneficial to spur performance if the first few dozen harmonics of the ADC
clock rate and the most commonly-used test frequencies don't approach each
other too closely. In this case I wanted to ensure good SFDR when measuring
5 and 10 MHz signals, so I went with a clock frequency that has no harmonics
within 100 kHz of any harmonics of 5 MHz until 3.2 GHz. At that point, the
640th harmonic of 5 MHz is 50 kHz away from the 41st harmonic of 78.050 MHz.


The resulting 50 kHz spur is somewhat dependent on input levels, but it's
rarely worse than -130 dBc, well below the 5330A's spec limit of -100 dBc.
Being in a predictable location far from the carrier, it could be removed in
software, although I don't currently do that.

There is a patent by Symmetricom (US 7,227,346) that discusses the problem
in more detail. Their approach in the TSC 5120A was to use a pair of ADCs
with inputs in quadrature at each phase detector, for a total of eight.
This technique doesn't seem to be needed with the LTC2216s I used. They're
well-behaved even near input frequencies deliberately chosen to cause
trouble, like 7.805 MHz.

-- john
Loading...