[time-nuts] Re: Timestamping counter techniques : phase computation question

[Bob kb8tq]

Hi

The main point about “added hardware” is that this *is* how a counter
gets from the numbers I mentioned to performance that is better than 
that. It’s not done by running some magic math that somehow improves
a basic sampling counter by a couple orders of magnitude. 

Since that hardware is off topic, I suspect that’s as far as this needs to go.

The dead band issue can come from a variety of interactions. There pretty
much is *always* going to be some harmonic of the signal that hits some 
harmonic of the clock. The best you can do is hope that both are high enough
that the interaction is not a big deal. 

Bob

> On Feb 1, 2022, at 2:01 AM, Erik Kaashoek <erik at kaashoek.com> wrote:
> 
> @Bob
> Yes, the resolution provided with the HW is a given and is good enough so I am most interested in those well known techniques to improve on it. Can you provide some pointers?
> 
> I am aware of techniques like analog interpolation and time to data to improve the accuracy but these required additional HW which is not the topic of this question.
> 
> It is considered to adjust the 200MHz clock away from being harmonically related to the frequency of the events to avoid dead bands once this harmonic relations is detected.
> 
> On 31-1-2022 22:25, Bob kb8tq wrote:
>> So: Is this sort of resolution good enough for your application? If not, there
>> are well known techniques to improve on it. They are not crazy hard to do.
>> Yes, you are heading off into the world of analog this or that to implement
>> them.
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at lists.febo.com -- To unsubscribe send an email to time-nuts-leave at lists.febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to and follow the instructions there.