Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4982 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2001 21:33:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO murphys-inbound.servers.plus.net) (212.159.14.225) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 20 Jan 2001 21:33:45 -0000 Received: (qmail 9849 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2001 21:28:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by murphys with SMTP; 20 Jan 2001 21:28:04 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14K5I2-0008QR-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Sat, 20 Jan 2001 21:11:14 +0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from phobos.unica.co.uk ([208.239.240.147] ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14K5I1-0008QM-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 20 Jan 2001 21:11:13 +0000 Received: from [199.45.40.146] (helo=gtei2.bellatlantic.net) by phobos.unica.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.13 #2) id 14K5Ho-0000IA-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 20 Jan 2001 16:11:00 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from bellatlantic.net (client-151-200-117-66.bellatlantic.net [151.200.117.66]) by gtei2.bellatlantic.net (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA21048; Sat, 20 Jan 2001 16:07:55 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3A69FEB9.BAABE575@bellatlantic.net> Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 16:10:17 -0500 From: "Andre' Kesteloot" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD47 (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: PLL inaccuracy References: <000f01c0783a$c6049800$11e27ad5@default> 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: Alan Melia wrote: > Hi Andre' that is not my appreciation of how off air standards work. You do > not try to get a lock up in 64 microseconds (one frame). In this case the > PLL is not trying to compensate for poor short term stability. The > short-term stability of the VCO must be excellent. My Droitwich standard can > take up to 20 minutes to reach lock after switch-on. The VCO is a very > stable VXO which still have reasonable performance when the locking signal > disappears. I think you must consider trading time for accuracy. A good PLL > should always have the best VCO you can get to reduce the incidental FM. So > over 10 minutes of nudging it in the right direction (not compensating for > its short term stability) it is easy to see you can get 1000 times (at > least) better performance. As you say there will always be a slight error, > but it can be made vanishingly small. > > Cheers de Alan G3NYK > Alan.Melia@btinternet.com I am not sure I can agree with this understanding. The _time_ required to reach lock is indeed a function of the time constant in the feedback loop, but the total amount of possible drift is not. The way a PLL works _is_ because it drifts ever so slightly in either direction, thereby creating a DC component that is then used to bring the VCO back in the other direction. If we insert a divide-by-64 between the VCO and the PLL comparator, then the error in the comparator (phase difference) must be multiplied by 64. For simplicity's sake, let's assume that we have a phase comparator that needs a 1 Hz difference between its two inputs before it creates a DC correction signal large enough to control the VCO (not a very good phase comparator, assuredly, but just for demonstration purposes). The second phase comparator's input is the TV line frequency. The VCO operates at 1,000,000 Hz and has a divide-by-64 inserted between its output and the phase comparator. If the VCO is exactly at 1MHz, then the output of the divider is 15,625Hz, but the VCO can drift all the way to 1,000,064 Hz before the phase comparator will see a 1 Hz difference, and start reacting. 73 Andre' N4ICK