[time-nuts] Odd-order multiplication of CMOS-output OCXO

[Bob kb8tq]

Hi


> On Jan 20, 2020, at 5:16 PM, jimlux <jimlux at earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
> On 1/20/20 1:57 PM, Attila Kinali wrote:
> 
>> And then there ia third way, which is IMHO even better:
>> Your application is an SDR system, i.e. you already need some
>> signal processing for the system to work. Why not extend this
>> to use it for the reference as well? Add another ADC and feed
>> the reference signal to that, then track the phase/frequency
>> relation between the sampling clock and the reference and
>> compensate any drift in the signal path. This way you get to
>> disable the reference if it is not needed and save a lot of power
>> and at the same time are able to use references with any frequency
>> and can change the "loop frequency" freely without the need to
>> worry about PLL stability or tempco of filters in the multiplier
>> version.
> 
> This ...
> 
> This is the way of the future.  The problem is that there are enough legacy systems out there where you need "control" vs "knowledge"
> 
> And, in the SDR world: while theoretically, you can do this in software, a lot of times the software is either a black box, or incomprehensible in finite time, or architected in a way that makes it hard, that it's actually faster and easier to discipline the reference oscillator than to fix the software.

If your “reference” is a 10 MHz OCXO, that may well come down on top / very near something you might want to
receive. Having seen what WWV uses as an exciter … indeed their noise “as transmitted” is pretty darn good. 

If the reference is 16.384 …. hmmm …. maybe not so much. I can’t think of much around there worth tuning in to. 
Simply feeding the OCXO (at a very low level) into a single ADC might well do the trick. ( yes, you have a number 
of things to dig into, it’s not quite the slam dunk I’m making it out to be).

Bob


> 
> I say this as someone who makes his living designing, building, and using SDRs - a Curse on Matt Ettus and USRPs, gnuradio, pothos, etc. and their ease of use, allowing positive legions of people to produce software which is horrible, without realizing the implications and defects within.  They should all be consulting *me* before engaging in these ill advised implementations based on textbook descriptions from Oppenheim and Schaefer, etc.
> 
> 
> But yes, the *best* way to do it is to *measure* the oscillator and use that to correct the digitized data, rather than driving the oscillator.
> It is challenging, though, to do this in a system where there is a need for full duplex operation (i.e. the transmitted signal needs to be adjusted to match the received signal).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at lists.febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com
> and follow the instructions there.