[time-nuts] Method for comparing oscillators

[Steve Rooke]

2009/8/7 Magnus Danielson <magnus at rubidium.dyndns.org>:
>> For the quality of xtals and sources that some
>> time-nuts are testing, this is unlikely to be a huge problem but for
>> lesser sources this is a real factor hence my suggestion for the use
>> of Hadamard Deviation.
>
> Having done the exercise on a fellow time-nuts measurements I beg to differ.
> It became clear that estimating the drift as a linear static component and
> then calculate ADEV with raw samples and ADEV with drift compensated samples
> it became clear that raw samples ADEV was infact drift compensated as it
> leveled out on the drift value, which is expected.

Interesting.

> You can't make the above assumption unless you know what the drift is and
> know that the ADEV is above your drift level for the intended tau range. The
> reason I keep pointing this thing out is that after having it pointed out in
> several sources relating to how one does real measurements I have done the
> exercise and been able to remove the limiting drift component.

That's why we are all here to learn.

> It's not advanced processing, so just do it rather than argue against it.

I'm not arguing against it, I was given the impression that it was a
better tool for oscillators with drift but I now see that this may not
be the case, thanks.

>> For practical purposes though, the xtals we use
>> are generally embedded as part of a GPSDO which will compensate for
>> the drift in the oscillator but cannot practically compensate for a
>> noisy xtal and HDEV would make comparing one source with another easy.
>
> The part of the noise being at taus longer than the loop will be replaced
> with the GPS-receivers output noise. Measuring loop-locked oscillators isn't
> the same as stand alone oscillators, so if that is a way to remove drift, it
> will give you false readings if you beleive you are measuring the oscillator
> itself.

I hadn't intended that the oscillator be coupled to the GPS receiver
for the purposes of this form of measurement for exactly the reasons
you cite hence the need to account for drift in the oscillator. The
intent was to characterise oscillators which would be a good candidate
for a GPSDO design. After all the output from any GPSDO is largely
dependant on the oscillator itself for it's noise component and all
the GPS receiver can, and should do, is to keep it loosely steered on
the correct frequency via a long TC.

Cheers,
Steve

> Cheers,
> Magnus
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>



-- 
Steve Rooke - ZL3TUV & G8KVD
A man with one clock knows what time it is;
A man with two clocks is never quite sure.