discuss-gnuradio
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] OFDM Updates


From: CHIN-YA HUANG
Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] OFDM Updates
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 13:48:49 -0500

Hey Tom,

I find your new version about OFDM part : Changeset 8144.
Does it the part you mean last time you want to the merge?
Anyway, I will try this first. Thanks Bob for giving me the link.


Chin-Ya
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob McGwier <address@hidden>
Date: Monday, March 31, 2008 10:54 am
Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] OFDM Updates
To: CHIN-YA HUANG <address@hidden>
Cc: address@hidden


> I wonder if you are told several more times that it is already 
> released 
> in an svn branch if you will finally look to see how to get it?
> 
> http://gnuradio.org/trac/browser/gnuradio/branches/developers/trondeau/ofdm
> 
> That took me less than 2 minutes to find.  It will take you less than 
> 
> two minutes to figure out how to do an svn download on that source.
> 
> What doesn't work is up to you to fix.  That is the nature of GPL 
> projects such as this one. 
> 
> Have fun.
> 
> Bob
> 
> 
> 
> CHIN-YA HUANG wrote:
> > Hi Tom,
> >
> > Would you mind release your modified code for me as reference first? 
> Thanks
> >
> > Chin-Ya
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Tom Rondeau <address@hidden>
> > Date: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 9:50 am
> > Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] OFDM Updates
> > To: CHIN-YA HUANG <address@hidden>
> > Cc: address@hidden
> >
> >   
> >> CHIN-YA HUANG wrote:
> >>     
> >>> Hello Tom,
> >>>
> >>> Based on your information below I know the problem will be 
> receiver. 
> >>>       
> >> However, if I want to solve the receiver's problem. Where is the 
> >> starting point you suggestion? From the gnu-radio core part?
> >>     
> >>> Chin-Ya
> >>>   
> >>>       
> >> This problem will be fixed once I get time to merge my current 
> branch, 
> >>
> >> which will be in a few days, hopefully.
> >>
> >> Tom
> >>
> >>
> >>     
> >>> From:     Tom Rondeau
> >>> Subject:  [Discuss-gnuradio] OFDM Updates
> >>> Date:     Thu, 07 Feb 2008 14:09:58 +0000
> >>> User-agent:       Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)
> >>> For anyone working with the OFDM code, my latest check-in to the 
> >>>       
> >> trunk fixes some of the main issues of transmitting over the air. 
> >> Using benchmark_ofdm_rx and benchmark_ofdm_tx on different 
> machines, I 
> >> am now able to successfully capture most packets with any 
> modulation 
> >> at the appropriate signal level.
> >>     
> >>> I say most packets because there is still an issue involved in the 
> 
> >>>       
> >> receiver where the regenerator signal pops up before the peak 
> detector 
> >> signal resets it and causes a problem in the packet sampler. To see 
> 
> >> what I mean, run
> >>     
> >>> "benchmark_ofdm.py --log"
> >>>
> >>> And look at the output of the regen and peak detector blocks:
> >>> gr_plot_char.py ofdm_sync_pn-regen_b.dat ofdm_sync_pn-peaks_b.dat
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> This will plot a series of 0's with a few 1's, where the peaks 
> >>>       
> >> occur. The peak detector sends it out once, and then the 
> regenerator 
> >> takes over. For every packet, there is one output of the peak 
> >> detector. If you look, sometimes the peak detector will hit just 
> after 
> >> a regenerated signal. By this point, it's too late and the 
> >> ofdm_sampler has already triggered off of the regen signal and 
> ignores 
> >> the peak.
> >>     
> >>> It's a bit of a hassle, but I'll look into it soon. Any help is 
> >>>       
> >> appreciated, though :)
> >>     
> >>> Tom
> >>>
> >>>   
> >>>       
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
> >
> >   
> 
> 
> -- 
> AMSAT Director and VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL,
> TAPR, Packrats, NJQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. ARRL SDR WG Chair
> "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
> Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by
> definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan 
> 




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]