[time-nuts] any HP 5370B Available or other TIC

Tue Aug 23 20:36:23 UTC 2011

Paul
take your time we may be in the psec. arena but that does not require  
instant response. Putting a D/M in front of your present counter is an answer,  
but once the PC software is done on my unit it is a better solution because 
it  is a totally stand alone system and if you build my  D/M it will cost  
you $ 180 in parts if 20 order a board set the counter components only add $ 
20!  Boards, mixers amps and transformers make up the cost. I will be glad 
to sell  you a D/M board at cost. All D/M boards are basically the modern 
adaptation of a  circuit the NBS presented in 1975 and issued as a paper in 76. 
I was there! Like  every body else I only updated the selection of parts. 
The counters are unique. 
Bert

In a message dated 8/23/2011 1:49:58 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
paulc at snet.net writes:

Hello  Bert,

I apologize for this very late response to your email.  To  be totally 
honest
I didn't really understand what you were talking  about.
I am new at this and didn't realize I had on hand some of the  equipment I
needed to do some basic testing.
My counter timer will  resolve down to 2 nanoseconds,  in a 1 sec interval.
Which is not near  good enough for what I want to see.
Using a piece of undisturbed coaxial  cable as a time delay I was able to 

Using TimeLab, with lots of help  from John Miles, and reading  " A Small
DMTD System," by Bill  Riley   I now have a basic.... basic understanding of
what you  were talking about.
Using a piece of undisturbed coaxial cable as a time  delay from A to B  I
was able to run a test with the Z3801 as the  ref.  and find in 1 sec the
best I can do is 1.74 Nsec  in a 1  second ave.
Also I ran the same test at  100 Khz , 1 MHz and 10 Mhz  with the traces
overlaying and they was almost no difference at  all

It appears like I have a number of options:
1) Buy a  5370A/B
2  Build/Buy a DMTD  system
3 Put a DMTD in front of  my current counter.

Since I have a counter that interfaces correctly  with TimeLab, I would
prefer to go with #3

So yes can I see the  larger picture and more about the DMTD system you
mention.

Thank you  Bert.

Paul A.  Cianciolo
W1VLF
http://www.rescueelectronics.com/
Our business  computer network is  powered exclusively by solar and  wind
power.
Converting Photons to Electrons for over 20  years

-----Original Message-----
From:  time-nuts-bounces at febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces at febo.com] On
Behalf Of  EWKehren at aol.com
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2011 8:58 AM
To:  time-nuts at febo.com
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] any HP 5370B Available or other  TIC

Paul,
following all the responses to this posting I think a old  fashioned D/M is
still the answer for you. For years there have been  discussions on using
latest  technology but limited to discussion no  hardware. Maybe now is the
time it will  change. 
That is why two  years ago I set out do develop a D/M system based on  the
original NBS  design but with its own counter and a cost goal of $ 200 and
readily  available parts.. Thanks to Richard, Corby and Hubert there are now
eight  systems out there with very good results. Cost goal was reached if  
20
PC  board sets are purchased. The actual D/M right from NBS, more  densely
packaged  for better temp. tracking and later components.  Corby's tests 
show
a noise floor  of 1 E-13. Resolution is 1 E -15. I  did post in the past a
picture but it is  115K, so off list I can send  more info.
What is holding up the release is software that takes the  counter  outputs
and does the Allan deviation calculations and  plots.
What is not included in the $200 is the offset Osc,, power supply  and
outside enclosure. Depending on the OCXO used it will drive the total  cost
to
$300 even $ 400 if 10 Hz is used. But no counter needs to be  used.
If you use a 1 Hz offset many choices for OCXO are available I have  used an
Austron 1150 and more recently thanks to a lead from Hubert a  Morion that 
is
available on ebay for $40. He characterized it with the D/M  system.
If you want to use 10 Hz offset the only choice I know is the HP  10811. All
the ones I have can be mechanically moved at least + - 20  Hz.
I know nothing about the Keithly 776 so I do not know if it will work.  You
may want to contact me off list.
The attached drawing of the counter  (thank you Brian Kirby) gives you an
idea of my counter approach. It is $  30 of the $ 200. Tipically the phase
between channel A and B are measured,  but that creates times depending of
phase  when the counter can not  keep up because it needs time for 
processing
and  transfer of data. My  concept does also have such a counter but it is
only used  to position  phase or once a run is completed to pick a section
where channel A   and B are in phase to eliminate any contribution by the
offset oscillator.  Two  counters each per channel count the 1 or 10 Hz
frequency  at
100 MHz, resulting  at 1 Hz with 1 E-15 and at 10 Hz 1 E-14 way  better than
the D/M noise floor. The  counters work in a ping pong  mode so there is
continuous counting, I call it  pseudo time stamping.  It also allows you to
"tune" 
the unknown close to the  reference  at a 1 or 10 Hz rate. These  four
counters are used for the  Allan  calculations.
This unit never needs a counter, once you connect  Reference and PC you can
tune the offset exactly to 1 or 10 Hz, connect the  unknown, "tune" it and
you  are ready to go. PC interface is RS 232 or  USB.
What is needed is some one tackling the PC software issue.
I will  not get into the kit business. At one time I was considering   to
coordinate a one time PCB run and even make some HP 10811's available  since
thanks to Corby's testing, I have ten 10811  and 5071 HP OCXO's  with better
than 1 E-12 over 1 to 100 sec..range, but after Jose Camara's  comment that
is no  longer an option for me. I will once a final board  set has run with
software make all info available, and hopefully some one  will pick it up.  
The reason I am right now reluctant to release the  PCB board code is if
changes  need to be done it will be impossible to  get rid of the previous
code.
If any one wants go get involved software  or hardware wise please contact 
me
off list.

Bert  Kehren

In a message dated 8/17/2011 11:11:30 P.M. Eastern  Daylight Time,
paulc at snet.net writes:

Hello  Folks,
I am  looking for an instrument that is better than Fluke 103a   comparator.
The purpose of this piece of equipment is help me learn  more  about
oscillators and characterizing them

The HP5370B is  the TIC  I keep hearing about but I am not glued to that 
make
or  model.
I wou;d like  to hear suggestion from the group.

Another  way to go might be to  build one of those units where there is  a
common oscillator is split  and feeds the LO of 2 mixers.
The RF  side comes from the DUT and the  REF Sorry I cannot remember  the
acronym... MDMM????

I do have that Keithly model 776  Counter  time with GPIB  I am really fuzzy
on this  aspect...

Comments  welcome 

Thank   you

PaulC
W1VLF

From: To: Sent:   

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

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