HM
Hal Murray
Sat, May 5, 2018 8:08 AM
Review/background: I have an UltraLink 333 WWVB receiver. It didn't work.
Several weeks ago. a discussion here mentioned that the phone cable between
the main box and antenna needs to be straight through rather than the typical
reversed. That was my problem. With the correct cable, the meter shows
signal and bounces around such that with practice, I could probably read the
bit pattern. But it didn't lock up.
That was several weeks ago. I left it running. When I looked last night, it
had figured out that it is 2018. I wasn't watching or monitoring, so I don't
know how long it took.
I assume the problem is noise. Is there any simple way to measure the noise
around 60 KHz? How about not so simple?
Extra credit for a way that others nuts can reproduce so we can compare the
noise at my location with other locations.
Can any audio cards be pushed that high? I see sample rates of 192K, but I
don't know if that is useful.
I'd also like to measure the propagation delays on WWV so a setup for HF that
also works down to 60 KHz would be interesting.
The UltraLink documentation says the display has a slot for a C or H. The C is for Colorado and the H is for Hawaii. Did WWVH have a low frequency transmitter many years ago? The NIST history of WWVH doesn't mention it.
My guess is a cut+paste from a version that listened to WWV/WWVH.
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
Review/background: I have an UltraLink 333 WWVB receiver. It didn't work.
Several weeks ago. a discussion here mentioned that the phone cable between
the main box and antenna needs to be straight through rather than the typical
reversed. That was my problem. With the correct cable, the meter shows
signal and bounces around such that with practice, I could probably read the
bit pattern. But it didn't lock up.
That was several weeks ago. I left it running. When I looked last night, it
had figured out that it is 2018. I wasn't watching or monitoring, so I don't
know how long it took.
I assume the problem is noise. Is there any simple way to measure the noise
around 60 KHz? How about not so simple?
Extra credit for a way that others nuts can reproduce so we can compare the
noise at my location with other locations.
Can any audio cards be pushed that high? I see sample rates of 192K, but I
don't know if that is useful.
I'd also like to measure the propagation delays on WWV so a setup for HF that
also works down to 60 KHz would be interesting.
----------
The UltraLink documentation says the display has a slot for a C or H. The C is for Colorado and the H is for Hawaii. Did WWVH have a low frequency transmitter many years ago? The NIST history of WWVH doesn't mention it.
My guess is a cut+paste from a version that listened to WWV/WWVH.
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
DW
Dana Whitlow
Sat, May 5, 2018 9:50 AM
Hal,
Some SDRs can tune that low and should provide a means to determine
if noise is really the problem as well as give some clues as to the
character
of said noise. But they are much less likely to help with delay
determination,
unless you can figure out a practical way to ascertain the latency in both
the
SDR's HW and its SW. The latter component will also vary considerable
depending on what computer you are using with the SDR, as well as with
random variations due to the vagrancy of typical operating systems.
I recently did a crude delay estimation for WWV (not WWVB) using my
Sony ICF-2010 receiver, a 2-channel DSO, and an Adafruit "Ultimate GPS"
module's PPS output. The combined (receiver + propagation) delay was
very close to 5 msec in Kerrville, TX. The precision was mostly limited by
my inability to decide precisely where each WWV tick started on the 'scope's
display due to distortion arising from multipath and the receiver's
filters.
The actual received waveform varied considerably from second to second.
Dana
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 3:08 AM, Hal Murray hmurray@megapathdsl.net wrote:
Review/background: I have an UltraLink 333 WWVB receiver. It didn't
work.
Several weeks ago. a discussion here mentioned that the phone cable
between
the main box and antenna needs to be straight through rather than the
typical
reversed. That was my problem. With the correct cable, the meter shows
signal and bounces around such that with practice, I could probably read
the
bit pattern. But it didn't lock up.
That was several weeks ago. I left it running. When I looked last night,
it
had figured out that it is 2018. I wasn't watching or monitoring, so I
don't
know how long it took.
I assume the problem is noise. Is there any simple way to measure the
noise
around 60 KHz? How about not so simple?
Extra credit for a way that others nuts can reproduce so we can compare
the
noise at my location with other locations.
Can any audio cards be pushed that high? I see sample rates of 192K, but
I
don't know if that is useful.
I'd also like to measure the propagation delays on WWV so a setup for HF
that
also works down to 60 KHz would be interesting.
The UltraLink documentation says the display has a slot for a C or H. The
C is for Colorado and the H is for Hawaii. Did WWVH have a low frequency
transmitter many years ago? The NIST history of WWVH doesn't mention it.
My guess is a cut+paste from a version that listened to WWV/WWVH.
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
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.
Hal,
Some SDRs can tune that low and should provide a means to determine
if noise is really the problem as well as give some clues as to the
character
of said noise. But they are much less likely to help with delay
determination,
unless you can figure out a practical way to ascertain the latency in both
the
SDR's HW and its SW. The latter component will also vary considerable
depending on what computer you are using with the SDR, as well as with
random variations due to the vagrancy of typical operating systems.
I recently did a crude delay estimation for WWV (not WWVB) using my
Sony ICF-2010 receiver, a 2-channel DSO, and an Adafruit "Ultimate GPS"
module's PPS output. The combined (receiver + propagation) delay was
very close to 5 msec in Kerrville, TX. The precision was mostly limited by
my inability to decide precisely where each WWV tick started on the 'scope's
display due to distortion arising from multipath and the receiver's
filters.
The actual received waveform varied considerably from second to second.
Dana
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 3:08 AM, Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net> wrote:
> Review/background: I have an UltraLink 333 WWVB receiver. It didn't
> work.
> Several weeks ago. a discussion here mentioned that the phone cable
> between
> the main box and antenna needs to be straight through rather than the
> typical
> reversed. That was my problem. With the correct cable, the meter shows
> signal and bounces around such that with practice, I could probably read
> the
> bit pattern. But it didn't lock up.
>
> That was several weeks ago. I left it running. When I looked last night,
> it
> had figured out that it is 2018. I wasn't watching or monitoring, so I
> don't
> know how long it took.
>
> I assume the problem is noise. Is there any simple way to measure the
> noise
> around 60 KHz? How about not so simple?
>
> Extra credit for a way that others nuts can reproduce so we can compare
> the
> noise at my location with other locations.
>
> Can any audio cards be pushed that high? I see sample rates of 192K, but
> I
> don't know if that is useful.
>
> I'd also like to measure the propagation delays on WWV so a setup for HF
> that
> also works down to 60 KHz would be interesting.
>
> ----------
>
> The UltraLink documentation says the display has a slot for a C or H. The
> C is for Colorado and the H is for Hawaii. Did WWVH have a low frequency
> transmitter many years ago? The NIST history of WWVH doesn't mention it.
>
> My guess is a cut+paste from a version that listened to WWV/WWVH.
>
>
>
> --
> These are my opinions. I hate spam.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>
UR
Ulrich Rohde
Sat, May 5, 2018 1:17 PM
I am trying to use the 60 KHz for synchronization of a Rb receiver. The local NJ noise and the signal in dBuV are about the same with an active antenna, electric field. A better solution might be a ferrite selective antenna, H field , if I find one.
73 de N1UL
In a message dated 5/5/2018 4:09:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmurray@megapathdsl.net writes:
Review/background: I have an UltraLink 333 WWVB receiver. It didn't work.
Several weeks ago. a discussion here mentioned that the phone cable between
the main box and antenna needs to be straight through rather than the typical
reversed. That was my problem. With the correct cable, the meter shows
signal and bounces around such that with practice, I could probably read the
bit pattern. But it didn't lock up.
That was several weeks ago. I left it running. When I looked last night, it
had figured out that it is 2018. I wasn't watching or monitoring, so I don't
know how long it took.
I assume the problem is noise. Is there any simple way to measure the noise
around 60 KHz? How about not so simple?
Extra credit for a way that others nuts can reproduce so we can compare the
noise at my location with other locations.
Can any audio cards be pushed that high? I see sample rates of 192K, but I
don't know if that is useful.
I'd also like to measure the propagation delays on WWV so a setup for HF that
also works down to 60 KHz would be interesting.
The UltraLink documentation says the display has a slot for a C or H. The C is for Colorado and the H is for Hawaii. Did WWVH have a low frequency transmitter many years ago? The NIST history of WWVH doesn't mention it.
My guess is a cut+paste from a version that listened to WWV/WWVH.
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
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.
I am trying to use the 60 KHz for synchronization of a Rb receiver. The local NJ noise and the signal in dBuV are about the same with an active antenna, electric field. A better solution might be a ferrite selective antenna, H field , if I find one.
73 de N1UL
In a message dated 5/5/2018 4:09:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmurray@megapathdsl.net writes:
Review/background: I have an UltraLink 333 WWVB receiver. It didn't work.
Several weeks ago. a discussion here mentioned that the phone cable between
the main box and antenna needs to be straight through rather than the typical
reversed. That was my problem. With the correct cable, the meter shows
signal and bounces around such that with practice, I could probably read the
bit pattern. But it didn't lock up.
That was several weeks ago. I left it running. When I looked last night, it
had figured out that it is 2018. I wasn't watching or monitoring, so I don't
know how long it took.
I assume the problem is noise. Is there any simple way to measure the noise
around 60 KHz? How about not so simple?
Extra credit for a way that others nuts can reproduce so we can compare the
noise at my location with other locations.
Can any audio cards be pushed that high? I see sample rates of 192K, but I
don't know if that is useful.
I'd also like to measure the propagation delays on WWV so a setup for HF that
also works down to 60 KHz would be interesting.
----------
The UltraLink documentation says the display has a slot for a C or H. The C is for Colorado and the H is for Hawaii. Did WWVH have a low frequency transmitter many years ago? The NIST history of WWVH doesn't mention it.
My guess is a cut+paste from a version that listened to WWV/WWVH.
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
_______________________________________________
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.
E
ew
Sat, May 5, 2018 1:26 PM
contact me off list I have a couple Bert Kehren
In a message dated 5/5/2018 9:17:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, time-nuts@febo.com writes:
I am trying to use the 60 KHz for synchronization of a Rb receiver. The local NJ noise and the signal in dBuV are about the same with an active antenna, electric field. A better solution might be a ferrite selective antenna, H field , if I find one.
73 de N1UL
In a message dated 5/5/2018 4:09:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmurray@megapathdsl.net writes:
Review/background: I have an UltraLink 333 WWVB receiver. It didn't work.
Several weeks ago. a discussion here mentioned that the phone cable between
the main box and antenna needs to be straight through rather than the typical
reversed. That was my problem. With the correct cable, the meter shows
signal and bounces around such that with practice, I could probably read the
bit pattern. But it didn't lock up.
That was several weeks ago. I left it running. When I looked last night, it
had figured out that it is 2018. I wasn't watching or monitoring, so I don't
know how long it took.
I assume the problem is noise. Is there any simple way to measure the noise
around 60 KHz? How about not so simple?
Extra credit for a way that others nuts can reproduce so we can compare the
noise at my location with other locations.
Can any audio cards be pushed that high? I see sample rates of 192K, but I
don't know if that is useful.
I'd also like to measure the propagation delays on WWV so a setup for HF that
also works down to 60 KHz would be interesting.
The UltraLink documentation says the display has a slot for a C or H. The C is for Colorado and the H is for Hawaii. Did WWVH have a low frequency transmitter many years ago? The NIST history of WWVH doesn't mention it.
My guess is a cut+paste from a version that listened to WWV/WWVH.
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
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.
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.
contact me off list I have a couple Bert Kehren
In a message dated 5/5/2018 9:17:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, time-nuts@febo.com writes:
I am trying to use the 60 KHz for synchronization of a Rb receiver. The local NJ noise and the signal in dBuV are about the same with an active antenna, electric field. A better solution might be a ferrite selective antenna, H field , if I find one.
73 de N1UL
In a message dated 5/5/2018 4:09:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmurray@megapathdsl.net writes:
Review/background: I have an UltraLink 333 WWVB receiver. It didn't work.
Several weeks ago. a discussion here mentioned that the phone cable between
the main box and antenna needs to be straight through rather than the typical
reversed. That was my problem. With the correct cable, the meter shows
signal and bounces around such that with practice, I could probably read the
bit pattern. But it didn't lock up.
That was several weeks ago. I left it running. When I looked last night, it
had figured out that it is 2018. I wasn't watching or monitoring, so I don't
know how long it took.
I assume the problem is noise. Is there any simple way to measure the noise
around 60 KHz? How about not so simple?
Extra credit for a way that others nuts can reproduce so we can compare the
noise at my location with other locations.
Can any audio cards be pushed that high? I see sample rates of 192K, but I
don't know if that is useful.
I'd also like to measure the propagation delays on WWV so a setup for HF that
also works down to 60 KHz would be interesting.
----------
The UltraLink documentation says the display has a slot for a C or H. The C is for Colorado and the H is for Hawaii. Did WWVH have a low frequency transmitter many years ago? The NIST history of WWVH doesn't mention it.
My guess is a cut+paste from a version that listened to WWV/WWVH.
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
_______________________________________________
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.
_______________________________________________
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.
BK
Bob kb8tq
Sat, May 5, 2018 1:57 PM
Hi
Even if you get the 60 KHz process working, a $20 GPS module ( or maybe $50) will
do a much better job. That’s not saying don’t do the WWVB stuff. Just realize it’s
limitations. A second limitation is that the new phase modulation process makes
comparison a bit more complex.
60 KHz noise can be measured with any of a number of SDR’s that tune down there.
An RTL-SDR probably isn’t ideal, but there are a lot of sub $200 devices that will do
very well.
Once you have a tuner you need a “standard” antenna (if this is for noise). Some sort
of single turn loop is probably the best bet. Assuming the input to the SDR comes
pre-calibrated you are ready to go. If it’s not calibrated you will need to squirt a test
tone of known level in at 60 KHz to calibrate it ( likely a one time thing).
60 KHz reception is a bit iffy these days. The low cost world loves 60KHz as a
switcher frequency. It only takes one of them near your reception site to mess things
up. The E-field probe vs loop debate has been going on for at least a century by now.
I’d go with some sort of loop. With a proper location, either can work well.
Lots of fun ….
Bob
On May 5, 2018, at 9:17 AM, Ulrich Rohde via time-nuts time-nuts@febo.com wrote:
I am trying to use the 60 KHz for synchronization of a Rb receiver. The local NJ noise and the signal in dBuV are about the same with an active antenna, electric field. A better solution might be a ferrite selective antenna, H field , if I find one.
73 de N1UL
In a message dated 5/5/2018 4:09:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmurray@megapathdsl.net writes:
Review/background: I have an UltraLink 333 WWVB receiver. It didn't work.
Several weeks ago. a discussion here mentioned that the phone cable between
the main box and antenna needs to be straight through rather than the typical
reversed. That was my problem. With the correct cable, the meter shows
signal and bounces around such that with practice, I could probably read the
bit pattern. But it didn't lock up.
That was several weeks ago. I left it running. When I looked last night, it
had figured out that it is 2018. I wasn't watching or monitoring, so I don't
know how long it took.
I assume the problem is noise. Is there any simple way to measure the noise
around 60 KHz? How about not so simple?
Extra credit for a way that others nuts can reproduce so we can compare the
noise at my location with other locations.
Can any audio cards be pushed that high? I see sample rates of 192K, but I
don't know if that is useful.
I'd also like to measure the propagation delays on WWV so a setup for HF that
also works down to 60 KHz would be interesting.
The UltraLink documentation says the display has a slot for a C or H. The C is for Colorado and the H is for Hawaii. Did WWVH have a low frequency transmitter many years ago? The NIST history of WWVH doesn't mention it.
My guess is a cut+paste from a version that listened to WWV/WWVH.
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
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.
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.
Hi
Even if you get the 60 KHz process working, a $20 GPS module ( or maybe $50) will
do a much better job. That’s not saying *don’t* do the WWVB stuff. Just realize it’s
limitations. A second limitation is that the new phase modulation process makes
comparison a bit more complex.
60 KHz noise can be measured with any of a number of SDR’s that tune down there.
An RTL-SDR probably isn’t ideal, but there are a lot of sub $200 devices that will do
very well.
Once you have a tuner you need a “standard” antenna (if this is for noise). Some sort
of single turn loop is probably the best bet. Assuming the input to the SDR comes
pre-calibrated you are ready to go. If it’s not calibrated you will need to squirt a test
tone of known level in at 60 KHz to calibrate it ( likely a one time thing).
60 KHz reception is a bit iffy these days. The low cost world *loves* 60KHz as a
switcher frequency. It only takes one of them near your reception site to mess things
up. The E-field probe vs loop debate has been going on for at least a century by now.
I’d go with some sort of loop. With a proper location, either can work well.
Lots of fun ….
Bob
> On May 5, 2018, at 9:17 AM, Ulrich Rohde via time-nuts <time-nuts@febo.com> wrote:
>
>
> I am trying to use the 60 KHz for synchronization of a Rb receiver. The local NJ noise and the signal in dBuV are about the same with an active antenna, electric field. A better solution might be a ferrite selective antenna, H field , if I find one.
>
> 73 de N1UL
>
>
> In a message dated 5/5/2018 4:09:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmurray@megapathdsl.net writes:
>
>
> Review/background: I have an UltraLink 333 WWVB receiver. It didn't work.
> Several weeks ago. a discussion here mentioned that the phone cable between
> the main box and antenna needs to be straight through rather than the typical
> reversed. That was my problem. With the correct cable, the meter shows
> signal and bounces around such that with practice, I could probably read the
> bit pattern. But it didn't lock up.
>
> That was several weeks ago. I left it running. When I looked last night, it
> had figured out that it is 2018. I wasn't watching or monitoring, so I don't
> know how long it took.
>
> I assume the problem is noise. Is there any simple way to measure the noise
> around 60 KHz? How about not so simple?
>
> Extra credit for a way that others nuts can reproduce so we can compare the
> noise at my location with other locations.
>
> Can any audio cards be pushed that high? I see sample rates of 192K, but I
> don't know if that is useful.
>
> I'd also like to measure the propagation delays on WWV so a setup for HF that
> also works down to 60 KHz would be interesting.
>
> ----------
>
> The UltraLink documentation says the display has a slot for a C or H. The C is for Colorado and the H is for Hawaii. Did WWVH have a low frequency transmitter many years ago? The NIST history of WWVH doesn't mention it.
>
> My guess is a cut+paste from a version that listened to WWV/WWVH.
>
>
>
> --
> These are my opinions. I hate spam.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
BK
Bob kb8tq
Sat, May 5, 2018 3:49 PM
Hi
If you want delay ( hardware delay and not propagation), calibrating a SDR should not
be to nutty. Some boards ( the Lime SDR comes to mind) will generate a signal as well
as receive one. That could be piped into a scope to make the measurement fairly
easy. Once you know what is going into the receiver and what is coming out, it’s just
twiddling the knobs ….
Bob
On May 5, 2018, at 5:50 AM, Dana Whitlow k8yumdoober@gmail.com wrote:
Hal,
Some SDRs can tune that low and should provide a means to determine
if noise is really the problem as well as give some clues as to the
character
of said noise. But they are much less likely to help with delay
determination,
unless you can figure out a practical way to ascertain the latency in both
the
SDR's HW and its SW. The latter component will also vary considerable
depending on what computer you are using with the SDR, as well as with
random variations due to the vagrancy of typical operating systems.
I recently did a crude delay estimation for WWV (not WWVB) using my
Sony ICF-2010 receiver, a 2-channel DSO, and an Adafruit "Ultimate GPS"
module's PPS output. The combined (receiver + propagation) delay was
very close to 5 msec in Kerrville, TX. The precision was mostly limited by
my inability to decide precisely where each WWV tick started on the 'scope's
display due to distortion arising from multipath and the receiver's
filters.
The actual received waveform varied considerably from second to second.
Dana
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 3:08 AM, Hal Murray hmurray@megapathdsl.net wrote:
Review/background: I have an UltraLink 333 WWVB receiver. It didn't
work.
Several weeks ago. a discussion here mentioned that the phone cable
between
the main box and antenna needs to be straight through rather than the
typical
reversed. That was my problem. With the correct cable, the meter shows
signal and bounces around such that with practice, I could probably read
the
bit pattern. But it didn't lock up.
That was several weeks ago. I left it running. When I looked last night,
it
had figured out that it is 2018. I wasn't watching or monitoring, so I
don't
know how long it took.
I assume the problem is noise. Is there any simple way to measure the
noise
around 60 KHz? How about not so simple?
Extra credit for a way that others nuts can reproduce so we can compare
the
noise at my location with other locations.
Can any audio cards be pushed that high? I see sample rates of 192K, but
I
don't know if that is useful.
I'd also like to measure the propagation delays on WWV so a setup for HF
that
also works down to 60 KHz would be interesting.
The UltraLink documentation says the display has a slot for a C or H. The
C is for Colorado and the H is for Hawaii. Did WWVH have a low frequency
transmitter many years ago? The NIST history of WWVH doesn't mention it.
My guess is a cut+paste from a version that listened to WWV/WWVH.
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
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.
Hi
If you want delay ( hardware delay and not propagation), calibrating a SDR should not
be to nutty. Some boards ( the Lime SDR comes to mind) will generate a signal as well
as receive one. That could be piped into a scope to make the measurement fairly
easy. Once you know what is going into the receiver and what is coming out, it’s just
twiddling the knobs ….
Bob
> On May 5, 2018, at 5:50 AM, Dana Whitlow <k8yumdoober@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hal,
>
> Some SDRs can tune that low and should provide a means to determine
> if noise is really the problem as well as give some clues as to the
> character
> of said noise. But they are much less likely to help with delay
> determination,
> unless you can figure out a practical way to ascertain the latency in both
> the
> SDR's HW and its SW. The latter component will also vary considerable
> depending on what computer you are using with the SDR, as well as with
> random variations due to the vagrancy of typical operating systems.
>
> I recently did a crude delay estimation for WWV (not WWVB) using my
> Sony ICF-2010 receiver, a 2-channel DSO, and an Adafruit "Ultimate GPS"
> module's PPS output. The combined (receiver + propagation) delay was
> very close to 5 msec in Kerrville, TX. The precision was mostly limited by
> my inability to decide precisely where each WWV tick started on the 'scope's
> display due to distortion arising from multipath and the receiver's
> filters.
> The actual received waveform varied considerably from second to second.
>
> Dana
>
>
> On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 3:08 AM, Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net> wrote:
>
>> Review/background: I have an UltraLink 333 WWVB receiver. It didn't
>> work.
>> Several weeks ago. a discussion here mentioned that the phone cable
>> between
>> the main box and antenna needs to be straight through rather than the
>> typical
>> reversed. That was my problem. With the correct cable, the meter shows
>> signal and bounces around such that with practice, I could probably read
>> the
>> bit pattern. But it didn't lock up.
>>
>> That was several weeks ago. I left it running. When I looked last night,
>> it
>> had figured out that it is 2018. I wasn't watching or monitoring, so I
>> don't
>> know how long it took.
>>
>> I assume the problem is noise. Is there any simple way to measure the
>> noise
>> around 60 KHz? How about not so simple?
>>
>> Extra credit for a way that others nuts can reproduce so we can compare
>> the
>> noise at my location with other locations.
>>
>> Can any audio cards be pushed that high? I see sample rates of 192K, but
>> I
>> don't know if that is useful.
>>
>> I'd also like to measure the propagation delays on WWV so a setup for HF
>> that
>> also works down to 60 KHz would be interesting.
>>
>> ----------
>>
>> The UltraLink documentation says the display has a slot for a C or H. The
>> C is for Colorado and the H is for Hawaii. Did WWVH have a low frequency
>> transmitter many years ago? The NIST history of WWVH doesn't mention it.
>>
>> My guess is a cut+paste from a version that listened to WWV/WWVH.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> These are my opinions. I hate spam.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
AP
Alexander Pummer
Sat, May 5, 2018 7:35 PM
tuned,[ fine-tuning with vari-caps remotely] large size frame antenna 1
meter dia provides mV size 60kHz in the Livermore area in California
from the Colorado WWVB TX
73
KJ6UHN
Alex
On 5/5/2018 6:17 AM, Ulrich Rohde via time-nuts wrote:
I am trying to use the 60 KHz for synchronization of a Rb receiver. The local NJ noise and the signal in dBuV are about the same with an active antenna, electric field. A better solution might be a ferrite selective antenna, H field , if I find one.
73 de N1UL
In a message dated 5/5/2018 4:09:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmurray@megapathdsl.net writes:
Review/background: I have an UltraLink 333 WWVB receiver. It didn't work.
Several weeks ago. a discussion here mentioned that the phone cable between
the main box and antenna needs to be straight through rather than the typical
reversed. That was my problem. With the correct cable, the meter shows
signal and bounces around such that with practice, I could probably read the
bit pattern. But it didn't lock up.
That was several weeks ago. I left it running. When I looked last night, it
had figured out that it is 2018. I wasn't watching or monitoring, so I don't
know how long it took.
I assume the problem is noise. Is there any simple way to measure the noise
around 60 KHz? How about not so simple?
Extra credit for a way that others nuts can reproduce so we can compare the
noise at my location with other locations.
Can any audio cards be pushed that high? I see sample rates of 192K, but I
don't know if that is useful.
I'd also like to measure the propagation delays on WWV so a setup for HF that
also works down to 60 KHz would be interesting.
The UltraLink documentation says the display has a slot for a C or H. The C is for Colorado and the H is for Hawaii. Did WWVH have a low frequency transmitter many years ago? The NIST history of WWVH doesn't mention it.
My guess is a cut+paste from a version that listened to WWV/WWVH.
tuned,[ fine-tuning with vari-caps remotely] large size frame antenna 1
meter dia provides mV size 60kHz in the Livermore area in California
from the Colorado WWVB TX
73
KJ6UHN
Alex
On 5/5/2018 6:17 AM, Ulrich Rohde via time-nuts wrote:
>
> I am trying to use the 60 KHz for synchronization of a Rb receiver. The local NJ noise and the signal in dBuV are about the same with an active antenna, electric field. A better solution might be a ferrite selective antenna, H field , if I find one.
>
> 73 de N1UL
>
>
> In a message dated 5/5/2018 4:09:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, hmurray@megapathdsl.net writes:
>
>
> Review/background: I have an UltraLink 333 WWVB receiver. It didn't work.
> Several weeks ago. a discussion here mentioned that the phone cable between
> the main box and antenna needs to be straight through rather than the typical
> reversed. That was my problem. With the correct cable, the meter shows
> signal and bounces around such that with practice, I could probably read the
> bit pattern. But it didn't lock up.
>
> That was several weeks ago. I left it running. When I looked last night, it
> had figured out that it is 2018. I wasn't watching or monitoring, so I don't
> know how long it took.
>
> I assume the problem is noise. Is there any simple way to measure the noise
> around 60 KHz? How about not so simple?
>
> Extra credit for a way that others nuts can reproduce so we can compare the
> noise at my location with other locations.
>
> Can any audio cards be pushed that high? I see sample rates of 192K, but I
> don't know if that is useful.
>
> I'd also like to measure the propagation delays on WWV so a setup for HF that
> also works down to 60 KHz would be interesting.
>
> ----------
>
> The UltraLink documentation says the display has a slot for a C or H. The C is for Colorado and the H is for Hawaii. Did WWVH have a low frequency transmitter many years ago? The NIST history of WWVH doesn't mention it.
>
> My guess is a cut+paste from a version that listened to WWV/WWVH.
>
>
>
DW
Dana Whitlow
Sat, May 5, 2018 9:27 PM
Alex- how many turns on that loop?
Dana
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 2:35 PM, Alexander Pummer alex@pcscons.com wrote:
tuned,[ fine-tuning with vari-caps remotely] large size frame antenna 1
meter dia provides mV size 60kHz in the Livermore area in California from
the Colorado WWVB TX
73
KJ6UHN
Alex
On 5/5/2018 6:17 AM, Ulrich Rohde via time-nuts wrote:
I am trying to use the 60 KHz for synchronization of a Rb receiver. The
local NJ noise and the signal in dBuV are about the same with an active
antenna, electric field. A better solution might be a ferrite selective
antenna, H field , if I find one.
73 de N1UL
In a message dated 5/5/2018 4:09:25 AM Eastern Standard Time,
hmurray@megapathdsl.net writes:
Review/background: I have an UltraLink 333 WWVB receiver. It didn't
work.
Several weeks ago. a discussion here mentioned that the phone cable
between
the main box and antenna needs to be straight through rather than the
typical
reversed. That was my problem. With the correct cable, the meter shows
signal and bounces around such that with practice, I could probably read
the
bit pattern. But it didn't lock up.
That was several weeks ago. I left it running. When I looked last night,
it
had figured out that it is 2018. I wasn't watching or monitoring, so I
don't
know how long it took.
I assume the problem is noise. Is there any simple way to measure the
noise
around 60 KHz? How about not so simple?
Extra credit for a way that others nuts can reproduce so we can compare
the
noise at my location with other locations.
Can any audio cards be pushed that high? I see sample rates of 192K, but I
don't know if that is useful.
I'd also like to measure the propagation delays on WWV so a setup for HF
that
also works down to 60 KHz would be interesting.
The UltraLink documentation says the display has a slot for a C or H. The
C is for Colorado and the H is for Hawaii. Did WWVH have a low frequency
transmitter many years ago? The NIST history of WWVH doesn't mention it.
My guess is a cut+paste from a version that listened to WWV/WWVH.
Alex- how many turns on that loop?
Dana
On Sat, May 5, 2018 at 2:35 PM, Alexander Pummer <alex@pcscons.com> wrote:
> tuned,[ fine-tuning with vari-caps remotely] large size frame antenna 1
> meter dia provides mV size 60kHz in the Livermore area in California from
> the Colorado WWVB TX
> 73
> KJ6UHN
> Alex
>
> On 5/5/2018 6:17 AM, Ulrich Rohde via time-nuts wrote:
>
>> I am trying to use the 60 KHz for synchronization of a Rb receiver. The
>> local NJ noise and the signal in dBuV are about the same with an active
>> antenna, electric field. A better solution might be a ferrite selective
>> antenna, H field , if I find one.
>> 73 de N1UL
>> In a message dated 5/5/2018 4:09:25 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>> hmurray@megapathdsl.net writes:
>>
>> Review/background: I have an UltraLink 333 WWVB receiver. It didn't
>> work.
>> Several weeks ago. a discussion here mentioned that the phone cable
>> between
>> the main box and antenna needs to be straight through rather than the
>> typical
>> reversed. That was my problem. With the correct cable, the meter shows
>> signal and bounces around such that with practice, I could probably read
>> the
>> bit pattern. But it didn't lock up.
>>
>> That was several weeks ago. I left it running. When I looked last night,
>> it
>> had figured out that it is 2018. I wasn't watching or monitoring, so I
>> don't
>> know how long it took.
>>
>> I assume the problem is noise. Is there any simple way to measure the
>> noise
>> around 60 KHz? How about not so simple?
>>
>> Extra credit for a way that others nuts can reproduce so we can compare
>> the
>> noise at my location with other locations.
>>
>> Can any audio cards be pushed that high? I see sample rates of 192K, but I
>> don't know if that is useful.
>>
>> I'd also like to measure the propagation delays on WWV so a setup for HF
>> that
>> also works down to 60 KHz would be interesting.
>>
>> ----------
>>
>> The UltraLink documentation says the display has a slot for a C or H. The
>> C is for Colorado and the H is for Hawaii. Did WWVH have a low frequency
>> transmitter many years ago? The NIST history of WWVH doesn't mention it.
>>
>> My guess is a cut+paste from a version that listened to WWV/WWVH.
>>
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/m
> ailman/listinfo/time-nuts
> and follow the instructions there.
>
AD
Alberto di Bene
Sat, May 5, 2018 9:42 PM
If you have a sound card capable of sampling at 192 kS/s, you don't need an SDR
to receive a signal at 60 kHz... just connect the output of an active antenna, like
e.g. the mini-whip, directly to the Line-In of the sound card, then use, for example,
HDSDR as software, setting the sampling frequency of the sound card to 192 kS/s,
the LO to zero, and the TUNE to 60 kHz.
I used this method in the past to successfully receive the SAQ transmission at 17.2 kHz
Look here :
http://www.sdradio.eu/SAQ_2009_12_24.html
73 Alberto I2PHD
If you have a sound card capable of sampling at 192 kS/s, you don't need an SDR
to receive a signal at 60 kHz... just connect the output of an active antenna, like
e.g. the mini-whip, directly to the Line-In of the sound card, then use, for example,
HDSDR as software, setting the sampling frequency of the sound card to 192 kS/s,
the LO to zero, and the TUNE to 60 kHz.
I used this method in the past to successfully receive the SAQ transmission at 17.2 kHz
Look here :
http://www.sdradio.eu/SAQ_2009_12_24.html
73 Alberto I2PHD
BK
Bob kb8tq
Sat, May 5, 2018 10:36 PM
Hi
The sample rate on a sound card is not always a good indication of it’s
performance. Some 192 KS/s cards have cutoff’s below 50 KHz. Others
have a noise spectrum that rises quite a bit past 30 or 40 KHz.
Lots to dig into ….
Bob
On May 5, 2018, at 5:42 PM, Alberto di Bene dibene@usa.net wrote:
If you have a sound card capable of sampling at 192 kS/s, you don't need an SDR
to receive a signal at 60 kHz... just connect the output of an active antenna, like
e.g. the mini-whip, directly to the Line-In of the sound card, then use, for example,
HDSDR as software, setting the sampling frequency of the sound card to 192 kS/s,
the LO to zero, and the TUNE to 60 kHz.
I used this method in the past to successfully receive the SAQ transmission at 17.2 kHz
Look here :
http://www.sdradio.eu/SAQ_2009_12_24.html
73 Alberto I2PHD
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.
Hi
The sample rate on a sound card is not always a good indication of it’s
performance. Some 192 KS/s cards have cutoff’s below 50 KHz. Others
have a noise spectrum that rises quite a bit past 30 or 40 KHz.
Lots to dig into ….
Bob
> On May 5, 2018, at 5:42 PM, Alberto di Bene <dibene@usa.net> wrote:
>
> If you have a sound card capable of sampling at 192 kS/s, you don't need an SDR
> to receive a signal at 60 kHz... just connect the output of an active antenna, like
> e.g. the mini-whip, directly to the Line-In of the sound card, then use, for example,
> HDSDR as software, setting the sampling frequency of the sound card to 192 kS/s,
> the LO to zero, and the TUNE to 60 kHz.
>
> I used this method in the past to successfully receive the SAQ transmission at 17.2 kHz
> Look here :
>
> http://www.sdradio.eu/SAQ_2009_12_24.html
>
> 73 Alberto I2PHD
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
