(In light of a recent conversation) My initial proposition is to use the mean function to close in on a coarse frequency adjustment. Initially starting at 100 and then moving to 1,000 samples. I'm using a Firefly I for the external time base. I doubt I'll have a plan for fine frequency adjustment beyond using it as a gpsdo. Is that reasonable or am I missing something critical in my counter naivete? -- Paul

Hi You probably are better off simply taking all the samples into your "smarts" and handling things there rather than having the 5335 do it for you. Since you are simply looking at data once a second (delta T between two 1 pps signals) it's not a compute intensive setup. If you are trying to measure frequency with the 5335 rather than pps signals, you have some other problems to deal with. The data rate is still very slow. Even with this setup I would not play with the 5335 internal math, other than to subtract the nominal frequency. The sole advantage there is having data that's easier on the eyes. Bob On Sep 1, 2013, at 11:34 PM, Paul <tic-toc@bodosom.net> wrote: > (In light of a recent conversation) > > My initial proposition is to use the mean function to close in on a > coarse frequency adjustment. Initially starting at 100 and then > moving to 1,000 samples. I'm using a Firefly I for the external time > base. > > I doubt I'll have a plan for fine frequency adjustment beyond using it > as a gpsdo. > > Is that reasonable or am I missing something critical in my counter naivete? > > -- > Paul > _______________________________________________ > 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.

On 09/02/2013 03:09 PM, Bob Camp wrote: > Hi > > You probably are better off simply taking all the samples into your "smarts" and handling things there rather than having the 5335 do it for you. Since you are simply looking at data once a second (delta T between two 1 pps signals) it's not a compute intensive setup. > > If you are trying to measure frequency with the 5335 rather than pps signals, you have some other problems to deal with. The data rate is still very slow. Even with this setup I would not play with the 5335 internal math, other than to subtract the nominal frequency. The sole advantage there is having data that's easier on the eyes. Also considering that the PRS-10 beats the 5335 with about 10 times better single-shot resolution. Cheers, Magnus