Wolfgang Wegner wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Sep 29, 2007 at 01:01:31PM +0200, Felix Domke wrote:
[...]
I don't know if broadcasters are required to send non-inverted signals.
I just know (read: remember) that some do. I might be wrong, so second
opinions are welcome.
sorry for the delay...
On Sun, Sep 30, 2007 at 03:11:39AM +0400, Manu Abraham wrote:
Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
On Sat, Sep 29, 2007, Manu Abraham wrote:
...
Instead of losing myself in the details of your questions,
some background info:
1) LNB drift
That said, since we have different LNB LO
Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
On Sun, Sep 30, 2007 at 03:11:39AM +0400, Manu Abraham wrote:
Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
On Sat, Sep 29, 2007, Manu Abraham wrote:
...
Instead of losing myself in the details of your questions,
some background info:
1) LNB drift
That said, since we have
On Sun, Sep 30, 2007, Manu Abraham wrote:
Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
The actual drift is totally irrelevant for the zig-zag scan.
Zig-zag is a trial-and-error approach, and only needs to know
- the step size (derived from the demod's carrier capture range)
- max. the number of steps
Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
On Sun, Sep 30, 2007, Manu Abraham wrote:
Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
The actual drift is totally irrelevant for the zig-zag scan.
Zig-zag is a trial-and-error approach, and only needs to know
- the step size (derived from the demod's carrier capture range)
- max.
Hi all,
After quite a lot of eyeballing in dvb_frontend.c, Some thoughts and questions
that i came
up with having no answers.
They are such:
1) LNB drift:
http://linuxtv.org/hg/v4l-dvb/file/4e590391b11f/linux/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c
279 /* calculate
Hi Manu,
The point here is that the frontend (demodulator + tuner) doesn't know about
the LNB drift.
Also the most important point to be noted is that LNB drift cannot be
calculated, but is measured on test criteria.
I think the misunderstanding is that lnb_drift doesn't correlate to any
Felix Hi,
Felix Domke wrote:
Hi Manu,
The point here is that the frontend (demodulator + tuner) doesn't know about
the LNB drift.
Also the most important point to be noted is that LNB drift cannot be
calculated, but is measured on test criteria.
I think the misunderstanding is that
Hi,
Ideally when zigzag is employed, in the end result the offset should be zero
or neglible.
In the case of the STB0899, IIRC it is rounded off. So in most cases, you
don't have an
offset.
Satellite transponders also tend to drift. Good operators will measure
the exact drift and fix their
Felix Domke wrote:
Hi,
Ideally when zigzag is employed, in the end result the offset should be zero
or neglible.
In the case of the STB0899, IIRC it is rounded off. So in most cases, you
don't have an
offset.
Satellite transponders also tend to drift. Good operators will measure
the
Hi,
- Inversion might happen on up- and downconversion, depending on what
frequency situation you have.
- The SatelliteDeliverySystemDescriptor does not specify Inversion.
AFAICS, Inversion isn't a part of the transport.
Why not? It's part of it like the frequency, isn't it?
What i meant
Hi,
- Inversion might happen on up- and downconversion, depending on what
frequency situation you have.
- The SatelliteDeliverySystemDescriptor does not specify Inversion.
AFAICS, Inversion isn't a part of the transport.
Why not? It's part of it like the frequency, isn't it?
What i meant
On Sat, Sep 29, 2007, Manu Abraham wrote:
...
Instead of losing myself in the details of your questions,
some background info:
1) LNB drift
- LNBs have a constant error plus a temperature drift
(e.g. +/-1MHz error, +/-3Mhz drift for a temperature range
of -40 ... +60 °C -- cheap no name
Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
On Sat, Sep 29, 2007, Manu Abraham wrote:
...
Instead of losing myself in the details of your questions,
some background info:
1) LNB drift
- LNBs have a constant error plus a temperature drift
(e.g. +/-1MHz error, +/-3Mhz drift for a temperature range
Hi,
On Sat, Sep 29, 2007 at 04:18:31PM +0400, Manu Abraham wrote:
Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
1) LNB drift
- LNBs have a constant error plus a temperature drift
(e.g. +/-1MHz error, +/-3Mhz drift for a temperature range
of -40 ... +60 °C -- cheap no name equipment usually worse)
On Sat, Sep 29, 2007, Manu Abraham wrote:
Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
- LNBs have a constant error plus a temperature drift
(e.g. +/-1MHz error, +/-3Mhz drift for a temperature range
of -40 ... +60 °C -- cheap no name equipment usually worse)
This is the old LNB, the one's we use
On Sat, Sep 29, 2007 at 04:18:31PM +0400, Manu Abraham wrote:
- LNBs have a constant error plus a temperature drift
(e.g. +/-1MHz error, +/-3Mhz drift for a temperature range
of -40 ... +60 °C -- cheap no name equipment usually worse)
This is the old LNB, the one's we use are
Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
On Sat, Sep 29, 2007, Manu Abraham wrote:
Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
- LNBs have a constant error plus a temperature drift
(e.g. +/-1MHz error, +/-3Mhz drift for a temperature range
of -40 ... +60 °C -- cheap no name equipment usually worse)
This is the old
Hi,
Wolfgang Wegner wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Sep 29, 2007 at 04:18:31PM +0400, Manu Abraham wrote:
Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
1) LNB drift
- LNBs have a constant error plus a temperature drift
(e.g. +/-1MHz error, +/-3Mhz drift for a temperature range
of -40 ... +60 °C -- cheap no name
Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
On Sat, Sep 29, 2007, Manu Abraham wrote:
...
Instead of losing myself in the details of your questions,
some background info:
1) LNB drift
That said, since we have different LNB LO drifts and the frontend driver
doesn't know
what the actual drift the LO is
20 matches
Mail list logo
