Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27845 invoked from network); 9 Mar 2004 12:14:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ptb-mxscan01.plus.net) (212.159.14.235) by ptb-mailstore01.plus.net with SMTP; 9 Mar 2004 12:14:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 92347 invoked from network); 9 Mar 2004 12:20:04 -0000 X-Filtered-by: Plusnet (hmail v1.01) X-Spam-detection-level: 11 Received: from ptb-mxcore01.plus.net (212.159.14.215) by ptb-mxscan01.plus.net with SMTP; 9 Mar 2004 12:20:03 -0000 Received: from post.thorcom.com ([193.82.116.20]) by ptb-mxcore01.plus.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30; FreeBSD) id 1B0gDL-000NnB-EU for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Tue, 09 Mar 2004 12:20:03 +0000 X-Fake-Domain: majordom Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1B0gCf-000855-2A for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2004 12:19:21 +0000 Received: from [192.5.29.49] (helo=relay.dstl.gov.uk) by post.thorcom.com with smtp (Exim 4.14) id 1B0gCe-00084w-Az for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2004 12:19:20 +0000 Received: (qmail 12955 invoked from network); 9 Mar 2004 12:19:20 +0000 X-Fake-Domain: unknown Received: from unknown (HELO warlock.dstl.gov.uk) (192.5.29.10) by relay.dera.gov.uk with SMTP; 9 Mar 2004 12:19:20 +0000 Message-ID: <7D653C9C42F5D411A27C00508BF8803D01A9F48C@mail.dstl.gov.uk> From: Talbot Andrew To: "'rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org'" Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 12:19:18 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Subject: LF: RE: Ionospheric doppler ? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-PN-SPAMFiltered: yes X-Spam-Rating: 1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Usually these radio controlled clocks only check the time every few hours or when they are turned on. Normally the 1 pulse per second is just derived from the internal oscillator and I would expectyou to see the few parts-per-million drift of that, with a sudden correction from 'time to time' The fact that you were seeing a slowly changing varions plus / minus is surprising. I can observe doppler shift on MSF and DCF, but this is very pronounced at dawn and dusk - a few parts in 10^-9 over tens of minutes, which is less than the 80 - 120ns on 1 second you saw Andy G4JNT -----Original Message----- From: Alberto di Bene [mailto:dibene@usa.net] Sent: 2004 March 09 11:58 To: LF Mailing List Subject: LF: Ionospheric doppler ? Hello Group, I made yesterday an interesting experiment and would like to know your opinions about it. Waiting for the weather to become such to allow me to go on my roof to install there a GPS antenna, in the meantime I started to play with an inexpensive radio-controlled clock, made by Conrad, bought a few years ago at the Friedrichshafen Messe in Germany, which receives the DCF-77 signal. This clock has an output meant to drive an external electro-mechanical hand clock, and on this output there is, of course, an 1pps pulse. I have an HP-5328B Counter, with a 10811 OCXO which is always (24/7) on. My shack is in the basement, with a constant temperature of 21 Celsius, no drafts, so any variations in the measured frequency or time is real, and not an artifact of the counter. The 5328 has a sort of reciprocal counting feature, where you can use an external signal as a gate for an internal 100 MHz oscillator, phase locked to the OCXO. In addition you can prescale the external signal. So what I did was to prescale by ten the 1pps signal from the clock, then used this 10 second interval to count the internal 100 MHz oscillator, giving a resolution of 1 ns. If everything were perfect, I should have obtained a count of exactly 10^9. What I measured was a value that differed from the ideal by an amount slowly changing with time, ranging from -80 ns to + 120 ns. The count was very consistent from period to period, showing no short term random jitter. In one case I measured a variation of about 100 ns in a time lapse of roughly one hour. I am by no means an expert in propagations and ionospheric effects, so my question is : are the values I measured compatible with what is known about ionospheric doppler ? If not, what else could be an explanation of that slow change ? I would tend to exclude, for the reasons reported above, an artifact of the HP counter. Thanks for any explanations 73 Alberto I2PHD "This e-mail is intended for the recipient only. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, distribute, copy, print, or rely upon this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, please notify the author by replying to this e-mail." "Recipients should note that all e-mail traffic on MOD systems is subject to monitoring and auditing."