[time-nuts] Progress of my HP Z3801A -- Ooops!

[xaos]

First,

>Ah, much better. After batteling the perl package hell (i.e. finding the
>exact right Debian package that will make it tick) I now have it
>running, but
>now I need to figure out how to make it tick on automatic. I also
>commented out
>the "cd /opt/ntp/timelord/shm || exit" line from the G1 script. How that
>one
>should be set was non-obvious.

This is the kind of omission that is hard to spot. Actually that
directory is my source code gen home. I have added a separate comment
there to clarify this.

Now, to the more problematic issue of time delay between
:SYST:STAT? invocation and receiver response.

I just wish that the information in the :SYSTEM:STATUS?
command was available separately.

That said, it usually takes 4-5 seconds for the receiver
to respond to this command. As a result, the interactive
interface is sluggish and the "auto" mode lags behind.

What to do?

1.	Send the :SYSTEM:STATUS? command and report it as-is.
	Problems:
		Time lag is very obvious but we at least get
		what the receiver's state is.

2.	Send the :SYST:TIME? and at least get the time.
	Problems:
		Ok, we got the info but now we need to send the
		:SYSTEM:STATUS? anyway. Then for display purposes
		we interpolate the receiver time forward.
		Not a bad solution but still...

3. Option of how the user might want this handled.

I am open to suggestions here.

-GH
> 
> From: John Ackermann N8UR <jra at febo.com>
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Progress of my HP Z3801A -- Ooops!
> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 16:30:54 -0400
> Message-ID: <44F5F57E.1030200 at febo.com>
> 
> > Magnus Danielson wrote:
> > 
> > > Yes, there is a time-difference between the reported and the time of the
> > > machine. The machine has NTP from 4 known good public Stratum 1 NTP servers.
> > > the 11-13 s time-difference is "interesting".
> > 
> > Might your Z3801A be set to GPS time rather than UTC?  That would 
> > account for (I think) 13 seconds (or is it 14 now that we've had a 
> > leapsecond?).
> 
> That's it! Infact, it is apparent if one looks on the webpage:
> 
> Receiver Time: 2006-08-30T20:26:30.0 GPS
> Local Time: 2006-08-30T22:26:19
> 
> Local Time is UTC + 2h, so there you have 2006-08-30T20:26:19 actually, and
> infact this shows that ISO2 isn't following the ISO format.
> 
> Now, with 14 seconds of GPS/UTC offset the receiver Time should be
> 2006-08-T20:26:16 and the remaining difference of 3 seconds is maybe due to
> the report-time???
> 
> I think it is much better to do the :SYST:TIME? to get the time, while all the
> other stuff very well may come out of the :SYST:STAT? report and parsing.
> 
> Ideally it should read out the UTC-GPS time-difference and compensate with that
> OR set it to UTC. Yes, I know I can add commands to the end of my conf-file.
> UTC is better, since then it would handle leap-seconds +/- too early leap-
> second announcements and the leap-second bug.
> 
> Cheers,
> Magnus
> 
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list
> time-nuts at febo.com
> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
>