[time-nuts] Divider circuit for Rubidium Standard

[Bob Camp]

Hi

I guess the simple answer is “when you measure them that’s the result”. 

The slightly more complex answer is “fast silicon CMOS is indeed good, other
types may require further analysis”.  In general the faster stuff is better than 
the slower CMOS. 

Deeper into it you get to the fact that the gate is optimized for one input swing range, 
speed and consistent (short) delay. The amount of time that anything in a CMOS gate spends
in-between “on” and “off” if very short. If you look at the time it’s hooked to a rail as noiseless (= 
quiet supplies), then the time noise can get into the output is quite short. Short time = little noise.

You could go further with fancy tools.

Bob


> On May 7, 2015, at 11:09 AM, Attila Kinali <attila at kinali.ch> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 06 May 2015 18:09:03 -0700
> "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" <richard at karlquist.com> wrote:
> 
>>> A standard input on a frequency counter is not a very demanding thing in the hierarchy of
>>> TimeNut signals. You can drive any of them with some pretty simple logic gate based
>>> circuits. No need to spend a lot of money.
>> 
>> Logic gate, yes.  Comparator, no.
> 
> This reminds me a lot of a similar discussion a couple of weeks ago.
> (where the issue boiled down to noise bandwidth)
> 
> What is the problem with a comparator vs a logic gate?
> What makes the logic gate supperior?
> 
> 			Attila Kinali
> 
> -- 
> It is upon moral qualities that a society is ultimately founded. All 
> the prosperity and technological sophistication in the world is of no 
> use without that foundation.
>                 -- Miss Matheson, The Diamond Age, Neil Stephenson
> _______________________________________________
> 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.