--- DuBose Walt Civ AETC CONS/LGCA
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Greeings All,
> 
> How hard is it to demodulate a 16QPSK as compaired
> to a 8QPSK signal.

Demodulation...I think it is about the same. Carrier
regeneration is a bit more complex. Decoding it is
something else, but also doable.

> And I have forgotten but does a 16QPSK signal will
> allow for 6 bites per cycle?

Four bits per symbol (constellation position).
 
> Looking back at some very old hand written notes I
> took at an HF conference at Scott AFB, IL where
> Collins-Rockwell, Magnavox and Harris Comm Gp were
> making presentations, they said that they all
> agreeded that 45 baud (maybe 45.5) should be the
> highest baud rate for the low end of the HF band and
> even though you could go higher closer to the MUF,
> if you needed a fixed buad rate, chose the one that
> was the lowest.

Certainly...

Close to the MUF allows fewer rays, hopefully only one
ray to propagate, which eliminates ISI.

But there is still ionospheric doppler and noise/QRM
to damage your received signal.
 
> Thus, if you have a single tone/carrier with 16QPSK,
> modulates at 45 baud, 1) what would its bandwidth be
> and 2) what is the total bit rate for the signal? (I
> would  give you my answer; but think I might be
> really wrong and you will question my math.  Hi Hi.)

Formulas are in "Communications Systems", by Carlson
et al (4th Edition). Maybe "Digital Communications",
by Bernard Sklar could help.

Maybe taking a peek at Wikipedia could help.

I do not remember the formulas in detail by heart...
 
Making more complex constellations carries more price
tags than you could think at first sight. 

First, a more complex constellation has more capacity,
but beyond QPSK the distance between the constellation
points gets smaller, and the BER for the same RECEIVED
power gets worse (on a clean channel, say wire or
microwave, leave alone a noise HF channel). Complex
constellations should be meant for clean, non
dispersive channels. You can get an idea by drawing
circles around the canonical points of a constellation
up to half the distance between them. As long as
signal plus noise falls within that circle, it MIGHT
be identified correctly. Beyond that, confusion
reigns...

BPSK and QPSK have the same distance  between
constellation points, beyond that, distance begins to
decrease, be it nPSK or mQAM.

Second, you can get a better SNR to maintain the same
BER using more power. And even when dB's are dB's, a 3
dB increase in power is not a thing to take too
lightly (ask NASA Deep Space...). On HF you can only
beat noise by increasing power...or using a better
antenna...a hard feat to accomplish at those
wavelengths. 

Have you ever seen a video presentation of a
conference given by Doug Smith, KF6DX at the Georgia
Tech about digital voice? There are two versions, the
highest quality video tales some 100 MB.

It is interesting, and deals with many aspects of
digital voice, DSP, etc. I liked it a lot. Very
practical, with solid theoretical foundations. 

And there you can see someting that separate the pros
from the rest. IMD on your transmitter becomes another
source of noise, as it creates distortion products
that interfere with your PSK or QAM signal. What works
on PSK31 (say, -20 dB on John Doe's japanese
transceiver) would not work wel enough for a more
complex constellation. 

73 de Jose, CO2JA



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to  Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org

Other areas of interest:

The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol  (band plan policy discussion)

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to