-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ruben is absolutely right! In loopback configuration with devices as
sensitive as the WBX, always use an attenuator. Also, in direct
loopback, you really shouldn't need the RX gain, and only risk
damaging the daughterboard and in the worst case your US
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Vahid,
a few things:
On one hand, to be really orthogonal, all your nodes would need to
exhibit no frequency offset. As long as you don't have a common clock,
be it through a clock distributor, GPSDOs or by doing estimations of
the own offset on t
On Fri, 2014-10-17 at 12:00 -0400, discuss-gnuradio-requ...@gnu.org
wrote:
> Message: 33
> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 07:37:25 -0700
> From: John Malsbury
> To: Luke Berndt
> Cc: "Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org List"
> Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Works with GR 3.6, breaks with 3.7
> Message-ID:
>
On 17.10.2014 18:58, John Malsbury wrote:
2. We tried several "clever" (ha) methods to select the desired
stream. Most of them revolved around the concept of
summering/xoring streams after multiplying or and'ing the streams
according to which stream we wanted (operand = 1 if we want
Figured I'd chime in since I wrote the code in question. The band edge FLL
is probably the wrong thing to use, but it did work surprisingly well for
my local setup (at very high SNR), so I left it in. The square-and-FFT
block works great for MSK, but Smartnet isn't MSK, it's FSK, and its lack
of ph
Thanks! I clearly have a lot of RF theory to read up on.
The Band Edge FLL works great for me too, on 3.6. Does anyone know if there
were changes to it or surrounding blocks in 3.7 that would make it stop working?
I have a pretty strong, clean signal.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Oct 18, 2014, a
Tom changed it to use the fir_filter_with_buffer vs. the standard
fir_filter internally, but as the taps remain the same I'd imagine it to be
more or less numerically identical.
First step I think is to verify that the FLL is actually the problem -- get
a scope on the output of the FLL and see tha
On Sat, 2014-10-18 at 08:00 -0700, Nick Foster wrote:
> Figured I'd chime in since I wrote the code in question. The band edge
> FLL is probably the wrong thing to use, but it did work surprisingly
> well for my local setup (at very high SNR), so I left it in. The
> square-and-FFT block works great
Different package managers call the same package by different names.
You can look at the recipe
(https://github.com/pybombs/pybombs/blob/master/recipes/pyqwt5.lwr#L22)
to see what Debian-based distros call it. If you've tried to build
this manually and the configure step gives you errors then those
