[time-nuts] Fw: Rb Oscillator - rather fundamental question

[John Miles]

There is no qualitative difference between the physics of a 5062C and
5061A/B.  They both use the (3,0) to (4,0) transition.  For whatever reason,
the C-field is set for a Zeeman separation of 40-50 kHz in the 5061 and 70
kHz in the 5062.

The effect of the different magnetic bias levels is slight at the (0,0)
transition but still apparent, accounting for most of the +4.3 Hz offset in
the 5062C and the +1.6 to +2.5 Hz offset in the 5061 models.  It's
deterministic in both cases, so I don't know of any reason why the 5062C
couldn't be considered a primary standard.  It's not a high-grade primary
standard as those things go, but it passes the desert-island test.

On the other hand, the front panel of the 5061A says it's a "standard,"
while the 5062C says it's a "reference."  So the distinction obviously had
some meaning inside HP, if nothing else.

It's not clear what we can read into that, though, since the 5065A rubidium
clock (which unquestionably is *not* a primary standard) is also labelled as
a "standard."

-- john, KE5FX


> -----Original Message-----
> From: time-nuts-bounces at febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces at febo.com]On
> Behalf Of EWKehren at aol.com
> Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 1:37 PM
> To: time-nuts at febo.com
> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Fw: Rb Oscillator - rather fundamental question
>
>
> The HP 5062C is not a "Primary Standard", and that is why it is called a
> "Reference" because it uses a different transition of Cesium 133
> with the
> frequency of 9192.631,774,3 MHz which does not meet the
> definition of a second
>  and resulted in a relative short product life even though
> modified to run
> with a  FTS tube and "Standard Frequency" makes it a grate Frequency
> Standard.
> Bert Kehren
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>