[time-nuts] Minimising effective divider propagation delay
Dr Bruce Griffiths
bruce.griffiths at xtra.co.nz
Tue Sep 26 08:48:44 EDT 2006
Dr Bruce Griffiths wrote:
> Brian O'Connor <vk4gtw at bigpond.com> wrote:
>> I note that Shera's QST article refers to using the 1 MHz
>> output from a HP5328A. Is there any degradation of
>> performance or increased thermal sensitivity due to the use
>> of a HP marked 7490 (ripple counter) to divide down to 1 MHz?
>> Would use of a synchronous divider or the TVB PIC approach
>> yield a worthwhile improvement?
> Don't forget the various ring-counter implementations, too.
> Everybody unfortunately always focuses on the binary counters
> (35 years ago it was true too! Look at all the hobbyist articles
> in the 70's based around 7490's...)
> TVB's PIC approach has a lot of leverage for high and funky division
> ratios but for divide-by-10 there's the good old CD4017 (actually
> a ring counter with decoded states) and faster modern versions like
> the 74HC4017 et al. For the propogation delay minimization purist
> I suppose the decoded states take away points, but for them there's
> the 6-stage shift register DIP's.
> You can always follow your slow divider with a fast D flipflop to
> resynchronise the divided output to the input clock. A 74AC74 will
> reduce the clock to output transition delay to a few nanoseconds, a
> modern PECL or similar D flipflop will reduce this delay to a few
> hundred femtosec.
> 1. https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> time-nuts mailing list
> time-nuts at febo.com
Oops I meant a few hundred picoseconds with the PECl flipflop.
Jitter can be as low as be a few hundred femtoseconds.
More information about the time-nuts