On Fri, December 2, 2005 7:39 am, Dawei Shen said:
> However, I could only understand the general framework so far. Could you
> please provide more details? Especially which book or paper did you refer
Dawei,
Heinrich Meyer, et al "Digital Communication Receivers" has a lot of these
details. Warn
Hi, EricThanks for your detailed and prompt reply. I will try that. At the same time, could you please provide more pointers to understand the GMSK2 code?If I understand correctly, the code uses the Mueller and Muller timing error detector, right? The output of the Mueller and Muller should be a qu
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 10:47:22PM -0500, Dawei Shen wrote:
> Hi, Eric and other dudes
>
> Hope you have enjoyed a nice Thanksgiving.
Thank you, I did.
> We have bought two Flex boards and we are doing the experiments with the
> GMSK2. We do TX and RX using two machines, but at the receiver, we
Hi, Eric and other dudes
Hope you have enjoyed a nice Thanksgiving.
We have bought two Flex boards and we are doing the experiments with
the GMSK2. We do TX and RX using two machines, but at the receiver, we
can't see anything. So could you please help me clarify a few things?
1. There are two S
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 08:52:24PM +, Robert McGwier wrote:
>
> Your latter suggestion (do it in blocks) with a once per block
> integrator makes perfect sense and would save many ticks.
> Mathematically, it is nearly identical. Since we are taking a perfect
> average for the block, we wou
Your latter suggestion (do it in blocks) with a once per block
integrator makes perfect sense and would save many ticks.
Mathematically, it is nearly identical. Since we are taking a perfect
average for the block, we would have to change the integration time
constant on the IIR to accomodate
Robert McGwier wrote:
>
> Dawei:
>
> You have understood it. Can you suggest a less expensive way than a
> single pole iir filter (integrator) to compute the running average of
> the data so we can subtract that mean?
You could use a decimating fir with no window (use all samples)
and taps (1.0/
Dawei:
You have understood it. Can you suggest a less expensive way than a
single pole iir filter (integrator) to compute the running average of
the data so we can subtract that mean? That was the only thought. We
needed a very low frequency cut off and this is computationally cheap.
Bob
Hi Eric and other dudesI am studying the GMSK2 code now. The code is very clean and obviously designed sophisticatedly. I feel excited to read the code. Could you please help explain the following code to me?
alpha = 0.0002 # FIXME, maybe 0.0008/spb self.freq_offset = gr.single_pole_iir_fi
Quoting Matt Ettus ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Joshua Lackey wrote:
> > We should keep the code there. FSK is used enough that someone will
> > eventually fix it to use the new clock recovery method. Perhaps just
> > put a comment in the source saying something like "don't use this unless
> > you fix
The GMSK code is an FSK detector and modulator, etc. The only caveat is
that it must be a "narrow shift" FSK because of the use of arctangent in
the detector but this should not be a problem for any reasonable shift.
It is called GMSK because of the settings inside.
I think it is more genera
On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 05:04:23PM -0800, Joshua Lackey wrote:
> Quoting Eric Blossom ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> >
> > Use the new GMSK stuff and/or convert the FSK use the new clock
> > recovery code. Unless someone steps up to fix it in the next day or
> > so, I'm removing it.
> >
>
> We should k
Joshua Lackey wrote:
> Quoting Eric Blossom ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
>>Use the new GMSK stuff and/or convert the FSK use the new clock
>>recovery code. Unless someone steps up to fix it in the next day or
>>so, I'm removing it.
>>
>
>
> We should keep the code there. FSK is used enough that some
Quoting Eric Blossom ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> Use the new GMSK stuff and/or convert the FSK use the new clock
> recovery code. Unless someone steps up to fix it in the next day or
> so, I'm removing it.
>
We should keep the code there. FSK is used enough that someone will
eventually fix it to
On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 01:55:44AM -0500, Dawei Shen wrote:
> Hi, Eric
>
> Thanks for your effort and I'd like to share the happiness with you. I can't
> wait to read your code. A couple of questions:
>
> 1. Are all the codes available on CVS now?
It's all in CVS now. Expect some changes over t
Hi, EricThanks for your effort and I'd like to share the happiness with you. I can't wait to read your code. A couple of questions:1. Are all the codes available on CVS now?2. When will be the Flex 400 available to purchase?
3. Why to remove the FSK code? Is there any better alternative?ThanksDawei
Right. We did the "standard squelch" where we compare a "pitch
frequency" bandpass filter's output to a high frequency band pass
filter's output (same Q), and then compare the differences in the mean
square output. If the power levels are nearly the same, it is
squelched. If the low freq f
Robert McGwier wrote:
> What else did we forget?
We did a proper squelch on the nbfm demod.
Matt
___
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
Eric Blossom wrote:
Matt, Bob McGwier (N4HY) and I spent last week working on GNU Radio
face to face. We got an incredible amount of stuff done, and not much
sleep!
Below are some of the highlights:
-- snip --
You left out why it was possible to work this hard
Matt, Bob McGwier (N4HY) and I spent last week working on GNU Radio
face to face. We got an incredible amount of stuff done, and not much
sleep!
Below are some of the highlights:
(1) Brand new GMSK implementation that is running on the air at 768kb/sec
with no errors! This was tested unidirecti
20 matches
Mail list logo
