Hi Marcus,
timing offset estimate) that your symbols have duration of 2.236472 samples
> and start with a sample offset of 114.060072; I don't see how knowing that
> would map the end of a preamble to any "exact" sample.
>
If I understand this, it is not straightforward to find the end of the
preamble, to start the clock for the data transmission part. I can
approximately chop the preamble off then.
> I can extract them and apply the S+N/N = E[noise +signal]/ E[noise]
> equation.
>
> I am transmitting preamble at double the amplitude than the actual
> bits due to my experiment requirements (more fidelity at the
> receiver), so I can't calculate the SNR over the preamble, hence I
> will do it over samples corresponding to bit 1 pulses in the trace
> corresponding to data transmission.
>
> So what's your modulation scheme?
>
> I am simply doing OOK.
> Generally, [image: $\frac{S+N}{N}$] is only really a useful measure if
> you either have
>
> 1. a constant power modulation (e.g. PSK), or
> 2. whiten your over-the-air bits sufficiently (using *coding*), so
> that for (stochastically speaking almost any) data sequence, the signal
> power is the same.
>
> Usually, even when you have 1., you do 2..
>
so the above formula is what I am using currently over the whole message
run, and for similar amount of time when no message was transmitted to get
S+N/N .
I have looked through Gnuradio docs and doesn't seem to appeal that there
is any of the four would work. Their output varies significantly amongst
one another and hard to say which one is correct (as mentioned in the docs,
some implementations are to be used cautiously).
> If you measure SNR based on a subset of bits that actually have energy,
> you're biasing your measurement, and it won't have any meaning for your
> real transmission, unless you've done the math and know that these bits
> represent a certain percentage of the power of an actual transmission. But
> as soon as you do the math, and figure out that some bits have higher
> Energy per bit [image: $E_b$], you'd try to minimize the average [image:
> $E_b$], so that you can just increase the signal amplitude without
> breaking your specifications, and get a higher average SNR; this implies
> spreading the energy over different bits more evenly, and that just leads
> to the whitening mentioned above.
>
Okay, then it makes sense to average the energy over the whole trace
instead of searching for the isolated pulses and calculating SNR only due
those samples.
Thanks,
Abhinav
> Best regards,
> Marcus
>
>
>
> Thank you for your replies,
> Abhinav
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 3:12 AM, Marcus Müller <marcus.muel...@ettus.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Abhinav,
>>
>> point of timing recovery like you do it is that there's no IQ samples
>> that *exactly and reliably* correspond to the symbol timing; that's why you
>> need timing recovery. The question here is: what do you actually need? The
>> IQ samples before timing recovery aren't useful to the decoder.
>>
>> Just to assure you: AGC2 doesn't modify the number of samples, it just
>> multiplies with a factor that changes so that average power stays the same.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>> On 01/25/2016 06:26 PM, abhinav narain wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> My problem is that above calculation sort of works, and isn't it exact.
>> I have the following preable of 32
>> bits [1,0,1,0,1,1,0,0,1,1,0,1,1,1,0,1,1,0,1,0,0,1,1,0,0,1,1,1,0,1,0,1].
>> This can be seen in badpreamble.png, where for some reason I have
>> trailing 0s or noise and the
>> start of preamble is missing.
>>
>> If I shift the position to 8 bits lag in the bit file and then
>> plot(8shiftedpreamble.png), the corresponding
>> IQ samples using above logic, it is almost right (alhough sitll not right.
>>
>> Any suggestions how to get the exact IQ samples ?
>> Thanks,
>> Abhinav
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 11:03 AM, abhinav narain <
>> <abhinavnarai...@gmail.com>abhinavnarai...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>> This might be too simple, but I wanted to confirm as I am not sure how
>>> the
>>> blocks manipulate the IQ samples and how AGC works, does it add more
>>> samples for compensating the noise average or not.
>>>
>>> I have a flowgraph(image attached) which dumps the IQ samples and the
>>> bits after using Polyphase Clock Sync. I want to find exact IQ samples
>>> corresponding to
>>> a specific preamble in the bitsequence I have obtained in the output
>>> file.
>>> Let say the starting position of sample is= P, the sample rate=S ksps,
>>> samples \
>>> per symbol=Y.
>>>
>>> Is it correct to assume that the index of iq samples corresponding to
>>> preamble in the IQ file will be at index P*Y ?
>>> If preamble size is 32 bits then there will be 32*Y of them ?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Abhinav
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss-gnuradio mailing
>> listDiscuss-gnuradio@gnu.orghttps://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
>> Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
>>
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
