[time-nuts] FMT 2006 results

Connie Marshall connie.marshall at suddenlink.net
Thu Jan 4 06:54:34 UTC 2007


Looks good John.... Our readdings are within .03Hz on 160, .1Hz on 80, and
.06Hz on 40 of each other.

Connie

-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces at febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces at febo.com]On
Behalf Of John Ackermann N8UR
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 9:33 AM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: [time-nuts] FMT 2006 results


I've put my FMT results at http://www.febo.com/time-freq/fmt/fmt2006/
based on the preliminary numbers from ARRL that Connie posted here.

As I noted earlier, I screwed up the math and ended up being off on all
three bands by 75 to 110 Hz -- double the delta between W1AW and my
marker, because I did USB math when the receivers were set to LSB.

After correcting that error, I was -0.295 Hz on 160, -0.343 Hz on 40,
and -1.066 Hz on 40.  That's a bit more like it, though the error on 40
is interesting, and I see that a few other folks saw that problem, too.
 We'll have to wait for the final results from W1AW to see if their 40M
frequency had a typo.

I think a couple of other folks noted, as did I, that on 40M there
appeared to be two signals close to each other (I measured about 0.5
Hz).  An FFT with enough resolution to separate them lost any ability to
look for CW in the waterfall, so I had to guess which was the correct
signal.  I chose the sharper one, which was the higher frequency of the
two; had I picked the one that was more smeared out, I would have been
more like -0.5 Hz off.

I've learned my lesson -- from now on, all measurements will be taken in
USB mode!

John

_______________________________________________
time-nuts mailing list
time-nuts at febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts





More information about the Time-nuts_lists.febo.com mailing list