[time-nuts] GPSDO Question

[Mike Feher]

The 8640B has an FLL, if turned on by the front panel switch. The frequency
display number is stored and compared to. - Mike

 
 
Mike B. Feher, N4FS
89 Arnold Blvd.
Howell, NJ, 07731
732-886-5960
 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces at febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces at febo.com] On
Behalf Of WB6BNQ
Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2007 4:48 PM
To: Tom Van Baak; Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] GPSDO Question

); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Errors-To: time-nuts-bounces+mfeher=zinc.com at febo.com RETRY

Tom Van Baak wrote:

> > Jerry
> >
> > It is amusing/distressing to see that the myth that using an FLL to lock
> > an oscillator to the PPS output of a GPS receiver is a good approach
> > still persists.
> > The optimum solution is a phase lock loop.
> > Whilst building an FLL is instructive/educational, if you want the best
> > GPSDO performance you should really use a PLL.
> >
> > Bruce
>
> It would seem for timekeeping applications, a PLL-based
> GPSDO will inherit the long-term accuracy of GPS with
> great fidelity.
>
> But for many frequency (e.g., transmitters) or time interval
> applications (e.g., frequency counters with finite gate times),
> I'd like to understand, in detail, what the difference between
> a PLL- and FLL-based GPSDO really is.
>
> Can someone point me to real data or even simulations
> with plots that show rms or adev differences between the
> two camps?
>
> Thanks,
> /tvb
>

Hi Tom,

I have seen and am familiar with only one FLL loop.  It compared a counter's
registers to a static register loaded with the wanted value.  This loop was
read
to just -1x10^6.  With this scheme the granularity is obviously the +/- LSB
count, not counting the time base error.

Bill....WB6BNQ



_______________________________________________
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.