Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9392 invoked from network); 23 Mar 2001 09:02:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO murphys-inbound.servers.plus.net) (212.159.14.225) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 23 Mar 2001 09:02:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 3173 invoked from network); 23 Mar 2001 09:02:48 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by murphys with SMTP; 23 Mar 2001 09:02:48 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.16 #2) id 14gNJG-00044v-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Mar 2001 08:52:38 +0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be ([134.58.10.6]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #2) id 14gNJA-00041F-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 23 Mar 2001 08:52:32 +0000 Received: from LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be (LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be [134.58.80.15]) by mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be (8.9.3/8.9.0) with SMTP id JAA229066 for ; Fri, 23 Mar 2001 09:52:05 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.20010323095454.2c3f177e@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be> X-Sender: pb623250@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (16) Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 09:54:54 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Rik Strobbe" Subject: LF: WOLF (BPSK) modulation In-reply-to: <3ABA02DD.6056.F8FBF9@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Hello Mike & group, With Mike's suggestion to cut the signal for a short time during the phase tranisitions the cure might be worse than the illness : WOLF is (currently) used at 10BPS, so you would need to cut the signal (worst case) 10 times a second for a short time (few milliseconds). This will create a lot of sidebands, the signal might be worse than with 'rude BPSK'. Jim's signal is remarkable clean, as could be expected from a PSK-like signal. The 2 'disadvantages' (in my opinion) are : - 'high power' electronics involved - giving away 3dB (by the envelope AM), versus 'rude BPSK' An alternative way to get a 'clean' signal might be to have a smooth phase transition. Instead of a 180 degrees instant phase jump one could have a gradual phase change, let's say over 10 milliseconds. At 10BPS this would leave the signal for 90% of the time in the 'correct phase'. Advantages would be : - additional electronics would be at the 'low power end' - any PA (wether linear or not) could be used without any changes - signals would be only 0.54dB down versus 'rude BPSK' Depending on the amount of sidebands that is acceptable the transision period could be changed. A shorter transisition period would give a better SNR, but more sidebands while a longer transistion period would give a cleaner signal but less SNR. There would be different ways to implement the smooth phase shifting, going from the classic phase modulator to digital techniques. But before I start any project in that direction I would like the opinion of the experts, maybe I have just overseen some facts that make my whole suggestion worthless ... 73, Rik ON7YD