Again, if one uses the vector-probe block, one can call the appropriate function from a function-probe, at that point, you have a variable with the contents of the FFT output vector in it, which can be used in a call to your
own Python code.
On 2014-10-17 12:01, Brad Hein wrote:
This sounds interesting - do you have any sample code?
Can anybody explain the concept of "size" of an fft (Arg 1 of fft.fft_vcc) comes into play if the output of that FFT generates as many samples as it receives?
From: "John Malsbury" <address@hidden> To: "Brad Hein" <address@hidden> Cc: "Martin Braun" <address@hidden>, address@hidden Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 1:50:31 AM Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] help accessing fft bins in python script
Sometimes when I want to grab samples and perform some periodic operation like CNR estimation, or fine-frequency estimation I sometimes use a vector_sink, and then two function probe blocks - one to read the data and one to reset it (yes I call the reset function from the function probe). This seems to work wonderfully for certain corner cases where a vector sink doesn't work well. And I mostly use this technique when I want to prototyping something quickly before writing a block. But am I asking for trouble with memory allocation issues???
Also, I was thinking, it would be good to have the option, either a block parameter or an overloaded function) to reset the vector_sink, each time .data() is called... I can code this up unless anyone thinks this functionality would lead to regressions.
But I agree the vector sink block is much more convenient for FFTs...
-John
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
|