Envelope-to: dave@picks.force9.co.uk
Delivery-date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 21:52:14 +0100
Message-ID: <42CAD6CF.1000901@freenet.de>
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 20:51:59 +0200
From: Wolf DL4YHF <dl4yhf@freenet.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (Windows/20041103)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <29596326.1120572088040.JavaMail.www@wwinf3001>
In-Reply-To: <29596326.1120572088040.JavaMail.www@wwinf3001>
Subject: Re: LF: Narrow B/W Techniques
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org

Hi Laurie,

It shouldn't be too difficult to implement such a synchronisation - 
though I am not really convinced how 3 dB can be gained from this. One 
must consider that the usual "waterfall" software scrolls a bit faster 
than a "dot" interval, accepting some smearing, but sometimes this 
improves visibility.
In Spectrum Lab there is the option "triggered spectrogram", which was 
used in an experimental chirped radar once. If you feed a 
1-pulse-per-second signal to one of the inputs of the soundcard, you can 
already synchonize the waterfall display to that signal. The problem 
with the windows system clock is (at least under Win XP) that it drifts 
like hell, for absolutely obscure reasons, if its not permanently 
corrected by Dimension4 or the like. Too bad ! The battery-buffered 
"CMOS clock" in my old 486 machine was off by a few seconds per month - 
and easy to read under DOS - but these days it is almost impossible to 
access the CMOS clock registers directly without some low-level kernel 
driver programming.
A similar kind of "external" sync could be achieved with QRSS-sending 
software too. The question is still, will it pay out if the spectrogram 
is decoded by eye/brain .

Best regards,
 Wolf  DL4YHF.

P.S: Thanks for the nice CW contact last weekend. Hope it's not one of 
the last, thinking about the new Loran TX.....


Lawrence Mayhead G3AQC schrieb:

> This is an appeal to the writers of QRSS/Argo?Spectran software, and 
> also to those much more expert than I am to comment.
>
> Is it time we looked at method of time synchronisation? in order to 
> improve sig/noise ratio in very slow morse transmissions. ie QRSS.
>
> As I understand it about 3db improvement is possible by making the FFT 
> sample time equal to the dot length.
>
> If we are using QRSS10 for example a time accuracy of  1 sec. is only 
> 10% and at QRSS30 this is only a 3% error. I should not have thought 
> it too difficult to get this fromGPS or even MSF-60 or DCF 77 time 
> clocks, nor should it be too expensive.
>
> My big question is however how do I :- 1) Synchronise my QRSS/DFCW 
> programs and 2) my Spectran/ARGO programs to the computer clock. Does 
> this facility exist and if not would it be very difficult to implement? 
>
> If these options were available perhaps more people would consider 
> locking their computer clocks, so perhaps we could win another 3db. 
>
> 73 Laurie      
>
>
>
> Whatever you Wanadoo <http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/time/>
>
> This email has been checked for most known viruses - find out more 
> here <http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/help/id/7098.htm>