On 04/19/2011 01:10 PM, i...@agile-sdr-solutions.com wrote:
>
> Dear Matt,
>
> We honestly went through every material in search on Google but we
> couldn't locate a single article published successful testing for
> STBC/SFBC.
>
> For whatever reason, we would like to know, if you can confirm o
On 04/19/2011 05:26 PM, Colby Boyer wrote:
> Basically, if possible use the same LO, or lock the two LO's together.
>
> Going back to the original question: is locking the LOs for an RX card
> and a TX card on a USRP1 feasible?
>
Yes, it is possible to lock them together.
Matt
___
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Fengyuan Gong wrote:
> Hi, All,
>
> I want to run benchmark_tx.py and benchmark_rx.py simultaneously. So I
> write a shell script to do that.
> #---run.sh---
> sudo ./benchmark_tx.py -f 24e8 -w 0 &
> sudo ./benchmark
Hi, All,
I want to run benchmark_tx.py and benchmark_rx.py simultaneously. So I
write a shell script to do that.
#---run.sh---
sudo ./benchmark_tx.py -f 24e8 -w 0 &
sudo ./benchmark_rx.py -f 24e8 -w 1 &
>From the output result, sometimes, the first
On Wed, 2011-04-20 at 10:13 +1000, Vladimir Negnevitsky wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> We've recently received an N210. I updated the firmware successfully a
> few times, but then usrp_n2xx_net_burner.py crashed. I immediately
> tried rewriting the image, and all seemed to go fine, however both
> default
Basically, if possible use the same LO, or lock the two LO's together.
Going back to the original question: is locking the LOs for an RX card and a
TX card on a USRP1 feasible?
Thanks for your comments Vijay, you helped to add focus to my question.
--Colby
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Vijay
Hi folks,
We've recently received an N210. I updated the firmware successfully a
few times, but then usrp_n2xx_net_burner.py crashed. I immediately
tried rewriting the image, and all seemed to go fine, however both
default and backup booting (holding S2 during powerup) failed. I
directly programme
Hi Colby,
Even if the two boards have slightly different frequencies, this should not
impact decoding of the receive signal as the received signal jumps between the
I and Q channels (depending of course on the packet lengths and assuming that
you have a packet decoder on I and Q separately).
M
Hi Nick,
thank you very much for your answers.
>From a development perspective, you're probably best off in Linux, but
>Windows and Cygwin with C++ and Python will work as well. You will
>probably encounter significant difficulty trying to get Visual Basic to
>work in this application.
I wi
I recently saw that Lattice Semiconductor is having a promotion for a
development kit that has PCIe x1, dual gigabit ethernet and 1Gb DDR3
for $99:
http://www.latticesemi.com/products/developmenthardware/developmentkits/ecp3versadevelopmentkit.cfm
This might be interesting for people who are
On 04/19/2011 05:44 PM, Gunther Ferdinand wrote:
Hi,
I would like to ask you a question regarding the USRP1 and WBX.
Have anybody made some tests with these and other ISM band
transceivers to see the communication distance indoor and outdoor? For
example if I have a tranceiver on 433MHz and
Hi,
I would like to ask you a question regarding the USRP1 and WBX. Have anybody
made some tests with these and other ISM band transceivers to see the
communication distance indoor and outdoor? For example if I have a tranceiver
on
433MHz and it has a transmission power of 17dBm, which shou
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 14:00:01 -0700, Colby Boyer wrote:
The two
boards should have different clocks, so there should be some frequency
offset. Even in typical SISO systems, you use a PLL block to deal with
this since you can't access the other LO because its physically
somewhere else.
While
The two boards should have different clocks, so there should be some
frequency offset. Even in typical SISO systems, you use a PLL block to deal
with this since you can't access the other LO because its physically
somewhere else.
While receiving, the transmitter is still running at full power to r
On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 12:17:22 -0700, Matt Ettus wrote:
> On 04/18/2011 10:13 AM, i...@agile-sdr-solutions.com wrote:
>> We went through this published article you sent to us for review
>> http://newport.eecs.uci.edu/~hyousefi/publ/sdrMC08.pdf
>>
>> We didn't see anything particular to STBC/SFBC.
>
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 11:41:46 -0700, Matt Ettus wrote:
> On 04/19/2011 11:38 AM, Colby Boyer wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> In RFID applications, a reader receives (backscatter from RFID tag) and
>> transmits (constant tone) at the same frequency. With commercial
>> readers, a single LO will be shared by
On 04/19/2011 11:38 AM, Colby Boyer wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> In RFID applications, a reader receives (backscatter from RFID tag) and
> transmits (constant tone) at the same frequency. With commercial
> readers, a single LO will be shared by the RX and TX chain. However, in
> the USRP case, two separat
Hi All,
In RFID applications, a reader receives (backscatter from RFID tag) and
transmits (constant tone) at the same frequency. With commercial readers, a
single LO will be shared by the RX and TX chain. However, in the USRP case,
two separate daughter boards are used so different LOs are in use
Ok I had used the muliplier in a previous code using Frequency Modulation
which is why I used it again. But thanks for that. I will change it to a
smaller value.
I also had it set up with the interpolation to 512 and the decimation to 256
but it didn't work either. Though I will set these va
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:03 PM, ish13 wrote:
>
> I am using DBPSK, but I am not receiving anything when I transmit my
> signal.
> I attached the flow-graphs from the companion. Can someone look through it
> and tell me if it is correct?
>
> Thanks
> Ismael
>
> http://old.nabble.com/file/p314349
I am using DBPSK, but I am not receiving anything when I transmit my signal.
I attached the flow-graphs from the companion. Can someone look through it
and tell me if it is correct?
Thanks
Ismael
http://old.nabble.com/file/p31434999/Receiver.png Receiver.png
http://old.nabble.com/file/p314349
On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 12:33:31 -0500, Steve Peters wrote:
Although
we haven't come across any projects with USRP1 for successful
testing
for STBC and SFBC codes.
If any team or individual has published this
work, we would be happy to
check that part.
The Hydra project
(http://netlab.ece.ute
> Are you sure you're really using TX/RX for receive? As the link Josh
> supplied says "The user may set the receive antenna to be TX/RX or RX2.
> However, when using an RFX board in full-duplex mode, the receive antenna
> will always be set to RX2, regardless of the settings."
As far as I know,
> I might suggest:
> 1) shut off the demodulation in software when transmitting.
> 2) transmit and receive on different frequencies.
> 3) reject the received packet at the mac layer
>
Thanks for the info. I wasn't sure how to shut off demodulation in
software. I ended up finding the "valve" block
Hey all
currently i'm modifying usrp_std.v to be able to include FFT inside
the fpga so i could perform spectrum analysis and total size after adding
fft is 76% which is good, but recently i knew that the application which we
want to run ( Openbts ) require the usrp_inband_usb project not th
25 matches
Mail list logo
