time-nuts@lists.febo.com

Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement

View all threads

GPS discipline oscillator vs phase lock

LS
life speed
Fri, Jun 16, 2017 6:40 PM

I may already know the answer to this, but I figured I would ask the time nuts anyway.  I have an application where I would like to phase-lock two oscillators together, probably 10MHz OCXOs as they have particularly good Allen Deviation compared to what I would ultimately like to use, a 100MHz crystal oscillator locally PLL'd to the 10MHz oscillators.  These oscillators will be separated by a distance of a few yards up to a few miles.  The requirement is not that their phases align perfectly, as in the conventional locally-connected phase-locked loop sense, but rather that any phase difference between the two oscillators resulting from arrival times of GPS signals are held constant.  Perhaps this shows my lack of understanding of GPS time, I don't know if travel time is accounted for in commercial GPS 1Hz outputs, it may well be corrected.

I suspect the result of a GPSDO is not the same as phase-locking two oscillators together.  Perhaps it is frequency locking?  Which, if the phase difference were held constant to within 0.1 degree, would be acceptable.  Not sure this is the result either.
Thanks for the info, - Lifespeed

I may already know the answer to this, but I figured I would ask the time nuts anyway.  I have an application where I would like to phase-lock two oscillators together, probably 10MHz OCXOs as they have particularly good Allen Deviation compared to what I would ultimately like to use, a 100MHz crystal oscillator locally PLL'd to the 10MHz oscillators.  These oscillators will be separated by a distance of a few yards up to a few miles.  The requirement is not that their phases align perfectly, as in the conventional locally-connected phase-locked loop sense, but rather that any phase difference between the two oscillators resulting from arrival times of GPS signals are held constant.  Perhaps this shows my lack of understanding of GPS time, I don't know if travel time is accounted for in commercial GPS 1Hz outputs, it may well be corrected. I suspect the result of a GPSDO is not the same as phase-locking two oscillators together.  Perhaps it is frequency locking?  Which, if the phase difference were held constant to within 0.1 degree, would be acceptable.  Not sure this is the result either. Thanks for the info, - Lifespeed
AK
Attila Kinali
Fri, Jun 16, 2017 7:26 PM

Moin,

On Fri, 16 Jun 2017 18:40:26 +0000 (UTC)
life speed via time-nuts time-nuts@febo.com wrote:

I suspect the result of a GPSDO is not the same as phase-locking two
oscillators together.  Perhaps it is frequency locking?  Which, if the phase
difference were held constant to within 0.1 degree, would be acceptable.  Not
sure this is the result either.

Nope, GPSDOs do phase lock on the "true" GPS time. The offset between
GPS time and the GPSDO output is mainly dependent on the antenna,
the antenna cable and the receiver. The antenna delay is mostly
the temperature dependence of the antenna itself and its filter.
The cable is temperature dependence of length and dielectric constant.
The receiver is mostly temperature dependence of filters.

With a bit care, you can keep the stability of these to better than 1ns.
The offset stability between two GPSDO setups of the same kind should
be an order of magnitude smaller (given similar temperatures), maybe
even two.

The analysis above is under the assumption that you have good sky view,
with little multi-path and a well surveyed GPSDO. If you have bad sky
view or lots of multi-path or are off with the survey coordinates,
you can easily get a jitter in the order of 100's of ns.

What you have not talked about is, how well you want to keep the
phase between the two GPSDO stable.

If you look at ADEV numbers of GPSDOs, then you will see that the stability
easily goes down to 1e-10, some even reach a few parts of 1e-12 at taus < 1000s.
This should give you an indication what's possible.

HTH

		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

Moin, On Fri, 16 Jun 2017 18:40:26 +0000 (UTC) life speed via time-nuts <time-nuts@febo.com> wrote: > I suspect the result of a GPSDO is not the same as phase-locking two > oscillators together.  Perhaps it is frequency locking?  Which, if the phase > difference were held constant to within 0.1 degree, would be acceptable.  Not > sure this is the result either. Nope, GPSDOs do phase lock on the "true" GPS time. The offset between GPS time and the GPSDO output is mainly dependent on the antenna, the antenna cable and the receiver. The antenna delay is mostly the temperature dependence of the antenna itself and its filter. The cable is temperature dependence of length and dielectric constant. The receiver is mostly temperature dependence of filters. With a bit care, you can keep the stability of these to better than 1ns. The offset stability between two GPSDO setups of the same kind should be an order of magnitude smaller (given similar temperatures), maybe even two. The analysis above is under the assumption that you have good sky view, with little multi-path and a well surveyed GPSDO. If you have bad sky view or lots of multi-path or are off with the survey coordinates, you can easily get a jitter in the order of 100's of ns. What you have not talked about is, how well you want to keep the phase between the two GPSDO stable. If you look at ADEV numbers of GPSDOs, then you will see that the stability easily goes down to 1e-10, some even reach a few parts of 1e-12 at taus < 1000s. This should give you an indication what's possible. HTH 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
BK
Bob kb8tq
Fri, Jun 16, 2017 8:32 PM

Hi

A lot depends on your definition of “phase locked”.  If indeed you are after 0.1 degree at 100 MHz, that gets into the “no can do” range. To put some numbers on it, 0.1 degree at 100 MHz is 2.7 ps. GPS time as received simply is not stable to that level … If you drop back to about 20 degrees, you start to get into the “maybe can do” range.

Bob

On Jun 16, 2017, at 2:40 PM, life speed via time-nuts time-nuts@febo.com wrote:

I may already know the answer to this, but I figured I would ask the time nuts anyway.  I have an application where I would like to phase-lock two oscillators together, probably 10MHz OCXOs as they have particularly good Allen Deviation compared to what I would ultimately like to use, a 100MHz crystal oscillator locally PLL'd to the 10MHz oscillators.  These oscillators will be separated by a distance of a few yards up to a few miles.  The requirement is not that their phases align perfectly, as in the conventional locally-connected phase-locked loop sense, but rather that any phase difference between the two oscillators resulting from arrival times of GPS signals are held constant.  Perhaps this shows my lack of understanding of GPS time, I don't know if travel time is accounted for in commercial GPS 1Hz outputs, it may well be corrected.

I suspect the result of a GPSDO is not the same as phase-locking two oscillators together.  Perhaps it is frequency locking?  Which, if the phase difference were held constant to within 0.1 degree, would be acceptable.  Not sure this is the result either.
Thanks for the info, - Lifespeed


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 A *lot* depends on your definition of “phase locked”. If indeed you are after 0.1 degree at 100 MHz, that gets into the “no can do” range. To put some numbers on it, 0.1 degree at 100 MHz is 2.7 ps. GPS time as received simply is not stable to that level … If you drop back to about 20 degrees, you start to get into the “maybe can do” range. Bob > On Jun 16, 2017, at 2:40 PM, life speed via time-nuts <time-nuts@febo.com> wrote: > > I may already know the answer to this, but I figured I would ask the time nuts anyway. I have an application where I would like to phase-lock two oscillators together, probably 10MHz OCXOs as they have particularly good Allen Deviation compared to what I would ultimately like to use, a 100MHz crystal oscillator locally PLL'd to the 10MHz oscillators. These oscillators will be separated by a distance of a few yards up to a few miles. The requirement is not that their phases align perfectly, as in the conventional locally-connected phase-locked loop sense, but rather that any phase difference between the two oscillators resulting from arrival times of GPS signals are held constant. Perhaps this shows my lack of understanding of GPS time, I don't know if travel time is accounted for in commercial GPS 1Hz outputs, it may well be corrected. > > I suspect the result of a GPSDO is not the same as phase-locking two oscillators together. Perhaps it is frequency locking? Which, if the phase difference were held constant to within 0.1 degree, would be acceptable. Not sure this is the result either. > Thanks for the info, - Lifespeed > _______________________________________________ > 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.
LS
life speed
Fri, Jun 16, 2017 9:01 PM

I was afraid of that, I guess it doesn't hurt to ask.  Perhaps I could implement an ISM band radio link for the purpose of locking the two oscillators.  Of course that wouldn't reach a couple miles either. - Lifespeed

Hi

A lot depends on your definition of “phase locked”.  If indeed you are after 0.1 degree at 100 MHz, that gets into the “no can do” range. To put some numbers on it, 0.1 degree at 100 MHz is 2.7 ps. GPS time as received simply is not stable to that level … If you drop back to about 20 degrees, you start to get into the “maybe can do” range.

Bob

I was afraid of that, I guess it doesn't hurt to ask.  Perhaps I could implement an ISM band radio link for the purpose of locking the two oscillators.  Of course that wouldn't reach a couple miles either. - Lifespeed Hi A *lot* depends on your definition of “phase locked”.  If indeed you are after 0.1 degree at 100 MHz, that gets into the “no can do” range. To put some numbers on it, 0.1 degree at 100 MHz is 2.7 ps. GPS time as received simply is not stable to that level … If you drop back to about 20 degrees, you start to get into the “maybe can do” range. Bob
CS
Charles Steinmetz
Sat, Jun 17, 2017 3:57 AM

Perhaps I could implement an ISM band radio link for the purpose of locking the two oscillators.  Of course that wouldn't reach a couple miles either.

There appears to be some amount of talking past each other going on here.

First, I think you may have a fundamental misconception of phase locking
as it applies in your proposed case.  If there are two GPSDOs, the
oscillators are already phase locked -- each one to the GPS network as
received at its actual location.  If you were to try to do some other
phase-locking, at least one of them wouldn't be a GPSDO any more.  (That
may not be a bad thing, if common-view GPSDOs can't achieve the required
accuracy.)

The two GPSDOs would, ideally, produce clock "ticks" identical to each
other within picoseconds, which would be plenty sufficient for the vast
majority of applications.  Of course, there are inevitably various
errors, so in reality we do not achieve the full theoretical precision
of the system.

The largest contributors to the differential errors (i.e., the phase
difference between the two oscillators) are (or should be)  (i) mismatch
in the cable delays due to differences between the lengths of the coax
connecting each receiver to its antenna and/or the propagation
velocities of the antenna cables (including the temperature coefficients
of the cables), and (ii) differences in the GPS "solutions" in use at
the two locations, which includes differences between the satellite
constellations being used moment-to-moment by the two GPS receivers and
the local reception conditions (quality of sky view, multipath, etc.).

Then there is (iii) the jitter of each GPSDO, which is not synchronous
one to the other.  This includes the ionospheric path distortion [maybe
this should be its own item], the GPS receiver electronics, and the
locked oscillators themselves (including noise on the EFC line and the
different instabilities of the two OCXOs).

Item (i) cable delay differences due to the cable lengths and/or
isothermal propagation velocities result in a static offset.  Most
timing-grade GPS receivers have a "cable length" setting that allows one
to compensate for the cable delay (although that will not correct for
the cable temperature coefficients).  This is all avoided if you use
integrated GPSDOs (GPSDO built into an antenna housing).

It may be possible to reduce item (iI) by operating the GPS receivers in
"single satellite" mode, both looking at the same satellite.  If long
observations are required (such that the satellite in use must be
changed during the measurements), this would become messy.  The tradeoff
in "single satellite" mode is that while you eliminate errors due to the
different satellite constellations being used moment-to-moment by the
two receivers, but the the RF path errors and noise may increase, giving
back at least some of the gain.

To reduce item (iii) errors, use identical GPSDOs with the very best
OCXOs available.  You may need to select samples of the GPSDOs to
minimize these errors.

All that will hopefully get you down to a differential phase of a few
nS, at least for substantial stretches of time (using single-frequency
receivers).  Times of day with low ionospheric distortion will produce
lower differential phase than times with higher ionospheric distortion.

If you need better differential phase than this, you may want to
consider solutions like White Rabbit (note that there may be issues with
portable-type [movable] applications).

Best regards,

Charles

life-speed@yahoo.com wrote: > Perhaps I could implement an ISM band radio link for the purpose of locking the two oscillators. Of course that wouldn't reach a couple miles either. There appears to be some amount of talking past each other going on here. First, I think you may have a fundamental misconception of phase locking as it applies in your proposed case. If there are two GPSDOs, the oscillators are *already* phase locked -- each one to the GPS network as received at its actual location. If you were to try to do some other phase-locking, at least one of them wouldn't be a GPSDO any more. (That may not be a bad thing, if common-view GPSDOs can't achieve the required accuracy.) The two GPSDOs would, ideally, produce clock "ticks" identical to each other within picoseconds, which would be plenty sufficient for the vast majority of applications. Of course, there are inevitably various errors, so in reality we do not achieve the full theoretical precision of the system. The largest contributors to the differential errors (i.e., the phase difference between the two oscillators) are (or should be) (i) mismatch in the cable delays due to differences between the lengths of the coax connecting each receiver to its antenna and/or the propagation velocities of the antenna cables (including the temperature coefficients of the cables), and (ii) differences in the GPS "solutions" in use at the two locations, which includes differences between the satellite constellations being used moment-to-moment by the two GPS receivers and the local reception conditions (quality of sky view, multipath, etc.). Then there is (iii) the jitter of each GPSDO, which is not synchronous one to the other. This includes the ionospheric path distortion [maybe this should be its own item], the GPS receiver electronics, and the locked oscillators themselves (including noise on the EFC line and the different instabilities of the two OCXOs). Item (i) cable delay differences due to the cable lengths and/or isothermal propagation velocities result in a static offset. Most timing-grade GPS receivers have a "cable length" setting that allows one to compensate for the cable delay (although that will not correct for the cable temperature coefficients). This is all avoided if you use integrated GPSDOs (GPSDO built into an antenna housing). It may be possible to reduce item (iI) by operating the GPS receivers in "single satellite" mode, both looking at the same satellite. If long observations are required (such that the satellite in use must be changed during the measurements), this would become messy. The tradeoff in "single satellite" mode is that while you eliminate errors due to the different satellite constellations being used moment-to-moment by the two receivers, but the the RF path errors and noise may increase, giving back at least some of the gain. To reduce item (iii) errors, use identical GPSDOs with the very best OCXOs available. You may need to select samples of the GPSDOs to minimize these errors. All that will hopefully get you down to a differential phase of a few nS, at least for substantial stretches of time (using single-frequency receivers). Times of day with low ionospheric distortion will produce lower differential phase than times with higher ionospheric distortion. If you need better differential phase than this, you may want to consider solutions like White Rabbit (note that there may be issues with portable-type [movable] applications). Best regards, Charles