[USRP-users] Re: The operating system cannot be started when B200 is plugged into the computer

[Marcus Müller]

Hm, I can see that.

I've only observed the behaviour Damon describes with a single embedded system, 
and there
was no solution: It was the SBC's vendor firmware that simply waited for that 
USB bulk
device to do something. That's not standard, it was not fixable, and it's 
honestly nothing
the B200 can do about: it's not pretending to be e.g. a storage device.

Best regards,
Marcus

DISCLAIMER: Any attached Code is provided As Is. It has not been tested or 
validated as a product, for use in a deployed application or system, or for use 
in hazardous environments. You assume all risks for use of the Code. Use of the 
Code is subject to terms of the licenses to the UHD or RFNoC code with which 
the Code is used. Standard licenses to UHD and RFNoC can be found at 
https://www.ettus.com/sdr-software/licenses/.

NI will only perform services based on its understanding and condition that the 
goods or services (i) are not for the use in the production or development of 
any item produced, purchased, or ordered by any entity with a footnote 1 
designation in the license requirement column of Supplement No. 4 to Part 744, 
U.S. Export Administration Regulations and (ii) such a company is not a party 
to the transaction.  If our understanding is incorrect, please notify us 
immediately because a specific authorization may be required from the U.S. 
Commerce Department before the transaction may proceed further.

On 29.04.21 07:03, Nando Pellegrini wrote:
> To reset the B200 all most at every start, a very annoying inconvenient.
> Nando
>
> On 4/29/2021 06:11, Damon qiu wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> In one of our applications, we need to integrate USRP B200 and computer into 
>> a
>> mechanical mechanism. So B200 is always connected to the USB port of the 
>> computer.
>> In this case, the computer may not start, or it may take a long time to 
>> enter the
>> operating system.
>>
>> Is there a solution? thank you.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Damon
>>
>> ___
>> USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
>> To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com
>
>
> ___
> USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
> To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com
___
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com

[USRP-users] Re: Unable to receive two signals in parallel with one TwinRX

[arjan . feta]

Hi Marcus and thank you,

here is the gnuradio flow-graph and a diagram with the physical setup.

cheers,

Arjan
___
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com

[USRP-users] Re: Unable to receive two signals in parallel with one TwinRX

[Rob Kossler]

Hi Arjan,
I noticed two mistakes in the graph. First, you have 2 radios each with 1
channel. In your case with only 1 daughterboard populated, I think it
should be 1 radio block with 2 channels.  (A radio block is roughly
comparable to a daughterboard).  Second, you have the RX antenna set to
"Rx1". This is not valid.  It should be "Rx2".
Rob

On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 5:49 AM  wrote:

> Hi Marcus and thank you,
>
> here is the gnuradio flow-graph and a diagram with the physical setup.
>
> cheers,
>
> Arjan
> ___
> USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
> To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com
>
___
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com

[USRP-users] Re: Unable to receive two signals in parallel with one TwinRX

[Marcus D. Leech]

On 04/29/2021 08:41 AM, Rob Kossler wrote:

Hi Arjan,
I noticed two mistakes in the graph. First, you have 2 radios each 
with 1 channel. In your case with only 1 daughterboard populated, I 
think it should be 1 radio block with 2 channels.  (A radio block is 
roughly comparable to a daughterboard).  Second, you have the RX 
antenna set to "Rx1". This is not valid.  It should be "Rx2".

Rob

Actually, the default configuration for TwinRX has RX1 on the first 
channel and RX2 on the 2nd channel.  If you just leave it at the

  default, everything should be fine.

But the point about having a single, two-channel, radio block is the 
main issue here.



On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 5:49 AM > wrote:


Hi Marcus and thank you,

here is the gnuradio flow-graph and a diagram with the physical setup.

cheers,

Arjan

___
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com

To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com




___
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com


___
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com

[USRP-users] Re: Unable to receive two signals in parallel with one TwinRX

[arjan . feta]

Yes, even the names at the physical SMA ports at the front end of the x300 are 
named TX/RX and RX2 (for each of the doughterboards viz. RFA and RFB):

https://www.ettus.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/X300_Front-Large_2-min.jpg

and the test/default programs that come with UHD, like *uhd_fft* for example,  
instruct to pass one antenna at a time:

https://kb.ettus.com/TwinRX_Getting_Started_Guides#Test_and_Verify_the_Operation_of_the_USRP

The point is I can’t turn on both channels for RFA contemporarily.

Tomorrow (CEST timezone) I’ll do some more tests and try different configs.

Cheers,

Arjan
___
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com

[USRP-users] Re: Unable to receive two signals in parallel with one TwinRX

[Marcus D Leech]

Ignore the printing on the front panel. It is designed for the more usual case 
of a transceiver card which has a Tx/RX and RX2 input. 

For TwinRx the two antenna choices are named “RX1” and “RX2”. They are routed 
to the SmA on the front panel labeled as TX/RX and RX2. 

Either channel on the TwinRx can select either antenna input—there’s a 
switching matrix. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 29, 2021, at 11:24 AM, arjan.f...@unifi.it wrote:
> 
> 
> Yes, even the names at the physical SMA ports at the front end of the x300 
> are named TX/RX and RX2 (for each of the doughterboards viz. RFA and RFB):
> 
> https://www.ettus.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/X300_Front-Large_2-min.jpg
> 
> and the test/default programs that come with UHD, like uhd_fft for example, 
> instruct to pass one antenna at a time:
> 
> https://kb.ettus.com/TwinRX_Getting_Started_Guides#Test_and_Verify_the_Operation_of_the_USRP
> 
> The point is I can’t turn on both channels for RFA contemporarily.
> 
> Tomorrow (CEST timezone) I’ll do some more tests and try different configs.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Arjan
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
> To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com
___
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com

[USRP-users] n3xx series questions

[Hodges, Jeff via USRP-users]

How many rfnoc Computation Engines (CEs) are available on the N3xx radios 
FPGAs? For example, i read online that the x3xx has 16 CEs.


How does the tuning speed compare between the N2xx and N3xx radios? I saw a 
whitepaper a few years back that listed the max sustained hop rate of the 
N210+WBX of approximately 250 hops per second. I'm wondering if the N3xx radios 
have comparable tune times or faster/slower?


Thanks,


Jeff
___
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com

[USRP-users] Re: n3xx series questions

[Marcus D Leech]

The N310 uses AD936x family of RF front end devices. They are not speedy to 
retune. 

The N320 uses a discrete LO and mixer approach and I would suspect that it’s 
comparable to the WBX. 



Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 29, 2021, at 2:33 PM, Hodges, Jeff via USRP-users 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> How many rfnoc Computation Engines (CEs) are available on the N3xx radios 
> FPGAs? For example, i read online that the x3xx has 16 CEs.
> 
> 
> 
> How does the tuning speed compare between the N2xx and N3xx radios? I saw a 
> whitepaper a few years back that listed the max sustained hop rate of the 
> N210+WBX of approximately 250 hops per second. I'm wondering if the N3xx 
> radios have comparable tune times or faster/slower?
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> 
> Jeff
> 
> ___
> USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
> To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com
___
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com

[USRP-users] Re: n3xx series questions

[Michael Dickens]

According to the Ettus KB < https://kb.ettus.com/N320/N321#RF_Specifications
>, the N320/N321 USRPs have a tuning time of 245 microseconds ... that
offers up to around 4000 hopes per second. I have never measured this to
verify. - MLD



On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 4:03 PM Marcus D Leech 
wrote:

> The N310 uses AD936x family of RF front end devices. They are not speedy
> to retune.
>
> The N320 uses a discrete LO and mixer approach and I would suspect that
> it’s comparable to the WBX.
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 29, 2021, at 2:33 PM, Hodges, Jeff via USRP-users <
> usrp-users@lists.ettus.com> wrote:
>
> 
>
> How many rfnoc Computation Engines (CEs) are available on the N3xx radios
> FPGAs? For example, i read online that the x3xx has 16 CEs.
>
>
> How does the tuning speed compare between the N2xx and N3xx radios? I saw
> a whitepaper a few years back that listed the max sustained hop rate of the
> N210+WBX of approximately 250 hops per second. I'm wondering if the N3xx
> radios have comparable tune times or faster/slower?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Jeff
> ___
> USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
> To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com
>
> ___
> USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
> To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com
>
___
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com

[USRP-users] Re: n3xx series questions

[Rob Kossler]

Regarding the computation engines, this may be a 3.15 limitation that is no
longer relevant in 4.0.  If you are using 3.15, I *think* that the CE
limitation for the N310 is the same as for the X310.

On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 2:34 PM Hodges, Jeff via USRP-users <
usrp-users@lists.ettus.com> wrote:

> How many rfnoc Computation Engines (CEs) are available on the N3xx radios
> FPGAs? For example, i read online that the x3xx has 16 CEs.
>
>
> How does the tuning speed compare between the N2xx and N3xx radios? I saw
> a whitepaper a few years back that listed the max sustained hop rate of the
> N210+WBX of approximately 250 hops per second. I'm wondering if the N3xx
> radios have comparable tune times or faster/slower?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Jeff
> ___
> USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
> To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com
>
___
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com