Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23729 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 13:27:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO warrior-inbound.servers.plus.net) (212.159.14.227) by extortion.plus.net with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 13:27:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 24662 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2001 13:27:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by warrior with SMTP; 14 Feb 2001 13:27:38 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14T1rs-0001nv-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 13:21:12 +0000 X-Priority: 3 Received: from d12lmsgate-3.de.ibm.com ([195.212.91.201]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14T1rq-0001nd-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 13:21:10 +0000 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from d12relay02.de.ibm.com (d12relay02.de.ibm.com [9.165.215.23]) by d12lmsgate-3.de.ibm.com (1.0.0) with ESMTP id OAA66206 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 14:20:11 +0100 Received: from usa.net (ss4.bld.socks.ibm.com [9.14.4.69]) by d12relay02.de.ibm.com (8.8.8m3/NCO v4.95) with ESMTP id OAA31964 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 14:19:29 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3A8A85DB.FF4B58AB@usa.net> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 14:19:23 +0100 From: "Alberto di Bene" Organization: Undisclosed X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: Re: GPS-Disciplined BPSK References: <008601c09682$e7f3bfc0$f06e97d4@oemcomputer> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Johan Bodin wrote: > Oh! That's bad news. I checked the Laipac data sheet and the 1PPS accuracy > is +/-1 microsecond - about 20 times worse than the UT+... It's good enough to > be used as a bit clock but probably not good enough for disciplining a frequency > standard. > Johan, I asked about this OEM unit on the TAPR bulletin board TACGPS. Here are a couple of answers I received . ---------------------------------- According to the data on the web site, the receivers are based on SiRF technology, which is a pretty fair pedigree. While the 1us jitter appears excessive, perhaps it's not as bad as all that. I seem to recall hearing about a timing app using these (SiRF) receivers that was rivalling the OnCores, but I'm not sure where... ---------------------------------- A few experimental SiRFstar-I receivers were equipped with experimental timing firmware. The test results showed the 1PPS far better than any other receiver we had seen before, 5-10 times better than an Oncore VP or UT+. For a copy of the paper or viewgraphs given at ION-2000 back in September check out http://www.gpstime.com/. This is an ongoing project. New SiRF firmware was released for testing this morning. Unfortunately, this is not for sale at this time. The 1PPS performance of a GPS receiver is determined primarily by two things - the hardware capability of the receiver and the firmware. The best hardware will still only provide roughly +-500nsec (half a microsecond) performance with plenty of jitter if the firmware is optimized only for navigation. The best firmware will be limited by the clock speed of the CPU in setting the edges of the 1PPS, although this can be removed through post processing of the "sawtooth correction" data. Rick W2GPS ------------------------------------- Another (longish) answer on the topic, by Dr Thomas A Clark, is the following : http://www.tapr.org/tapr/list-archive/tacgps/0101/msg00024.html 73 Alberto I2PHD