time-nuts@lists.febo.com

Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement

View all threads

Re: [time-nuts] PLL performance?

HM
Hal Murray
Wed, Mar 22, 2017 6:24 PM

There have been a couple of discussions about doing GPSDOs using only analog
components in the past. People fare more knowledgable than me have commented
there on what the challenges would be and how to solve them. So I recommend
to go through the archives and look for those discussions. They might be a
little bit hidden, though.

I think the main problem is how to build a filter with a time constant of
many seconds.  The better your OCXO the longer the time span you can
integrate over.  100s of seconds isn't an unreasonable target.

There may be other problems.

--
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.

attila@kinali.ch said: > There have been a couple of discussions about doing GPSDOs using only analog > components in the past. People fare more knowledgable than me have commented > there on what the challenges would be and how to solve them. So I recommend > to go through the archives and look for those discussions. They might be a > little bit hidden, though. I think the main problem is how to build a filter with a time constant of many seconds. The better your OCXO the longer the time span you can integrate over. 100s of seconds isn't an unreasonable target. There may be other problems. -- These are my opinions. I hate spam.
BK
Bob kb8tq
Wed, Mar 22, 2017 9:57 PM

Hi

As others have pointed out, a control loop at 100 seconds is more a gain spec than
an R/C time constant spec. The real issue is that you should have an integrator on
the loop and that is an R/C sort of thing. It’s also likely to have a much longer time
constant than the magic number for the loop.

Bob

On Mar 22, 2017, at 2:24 PM, Hal Murray hmurray@megapathdsl.net wrote:

attila@kinali.ch said:

There have been a couple of discussions about doing GPSDOs using only analog
components in the past. People fare more knowledgable than me have commented
there on what the challenges would be and how to solve them. So I recommend
to go through the archives and look for those discussions. They might be a
little bit hidden, though.

I think the main problem is how to build a filter with a time constant of
many seconds.  The better your OCXO the longer the time span you can
integrate over.  100s of seconds isn't an unreasonable target.

There may be other problems.

--
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.


time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.

Hi As others have pointed out, a control loop at 100 seconds is more a gain spec than an R/C time constant spec. The real issue is that you should have an integrator on the loop and that *is* an R/C sort of thing. It’s also likely to have a much longer time constant than the magic number for the loop. Bob > On Mar 22, 2017, at 2:24 PM, Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net> wrote: > > > attila@kinali.ch said: >> There have been a couple of discussions about doing GPSDOs using only analog >> components in the past. People fare more knowledgable than me have commented >> there on what the challenges would be and how to solve them. So I recommend >> to go through the archives and look for those discussions. They might be a >> little bit hidden, though. > > I think the main problem is how to build a filter with a time constant of > many seconds. The better your OCXO the longer the time span you can > integrate over. 100s of seconds isn't an unreasonable target. > > There may be other problems. > > > -- > These are my opinions. I hate spam. > > > > _______________________________________________ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there.