On 08/06/2011 05:21 PM, Ben Reynwar wrote:
I don't have any hardware and am looking for some raw input data to
play with. It doesn't really matter what. Where are good places to
find this?
I faintly remember people asking this question here before, but
haven't come up with the right search ter
anyone is interested in this contract position, please contact us
directly at h...@thinkrf.com (not through the list, obviously). We're
definitely interested in having someone who already knows their way
around GNUradio take this on.
Thanks for your attention
Patrick Yeon
Th
On 06/02/2011 07:10 AM, Mike Clark wrote:
Anyways, the question I have is, is there a general procedure one can
follow to design a decent receiver in gnuradio? For example, I have a
project that I'm using for experimentation where my receiver looks
like this: USRP Source -> GMSK Demod -> Packet
meone wanted to "Try before you buy."
[1] http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/discuss-gnuradio/2010-11/msg00530.html
--
Patrick Yeon
ThinkRF
___
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
racy of 50 parts per billion). Maybe see what that code is all about?
[1] http://thre.at/kalibrate
--
Patrick Yeon
ThinkRF
613-369-5104 x418
___
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
mber it happening to me.
--
Patrick Yeon
ThinkRF
613-369-5104 x418
___
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
esn't mean that you could demod a
signal at -111dBm (you still need some margin of SNR), and if you were
speccing for a customer, you might bump that up a bit to give yourself
some 'wiggle room.'
That's at least how I see it. Anybody else care to
ot quite. Noise figure is a measure of the degradation of SNR, so if
you know your input SNR, you would know that the measurements from the
USRP will have a 35 dB worse (lower) SNR. Alternativley, you know your
input SNR is 35 dB better (higher) than what you measure "coming out of"
th
t low
frequencies), as would shielding problem traces (ADC clock and data
lines, and sensitive RF lines). A fair amount of tweaking and
optimizing our RF and downconverter circuitry gave us some results as
well, but not enough to really ignore those spurs.
Hope this helps,
---
