Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21926 invoked from network); 8 Jan 2001 16:29:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO warrior-inbound.servers.plus.net) (212.159.14.227) by extortion.plus.net with SMTP; 8 Jan 2001 16:29:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 7587 invoked from network); 8 Jan 2001 16:32:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by warrior with SMTP; 8 Jan 2001 16:32:17 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14Ff6B-0006WX-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 08 Jan 2001 16:24:43 +0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from d06lmsgate-3.uk.ibm.com ([195.212.29.3]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #1) id 14Ff69-0006WM-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 08 Jan 2001 16:24:42 +0000 Received: from d06relay02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.166.84.148]) by d06lmsgate-3.uk.ibm.com (1.0.0) with ESMTP id QAA176996 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 16:15:30 GMT Received: from usa.net (ss2.bld.socks.ibm.com [9.14.4.67]) by d06relay02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.8.8m3/NCO v4.95) with ESMTP id QAA49434 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 16:23:56 GMT X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3A59E97B.F6BBE8A8@usa.net> Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 17:23:23 +0100 From: "Alberto di Bene" Organization: Undisclosed X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win95; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: LF: RE: LF Receiver References: <65AECDF1F89AD411900400508BFC869F0D74EF@pdw-mail-1.dera.gov.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: Talbot Andrew wrote: > [snip] > Anyway, direct zero IF conversion will still need extensive input > filtering for anti-alliassing and in this case will be even more > stringent unless an artificially high sampling rate is employed. For > example, assuming 80dB spurious levels, the input signal has to be at > -80dB at half the sampling rate separation from the edge of the > passband. If a high speed A/D is considered - lets sample at 100kHz > for now - then we need -80dB at 50kHz away from the centre of the band. > (In fact, within this allias bandwidth are some very strong signals, so > the 80dB requirement may have to become 100dB anyway) so we end up with > filtering more stringent than the double conversion approach. And at > least to get rid of 1MHz signals, more filtering can be thrown at the > finished unit without degrading in band performance. > [snip] Andy and the group, perhaps I didn't make myself clear. What I was suggesting was not to digitize directly at 136 kHz. My idea is along the following line : Using a DDS with quadrature outputs (AD9854, if memory serves), feed the two signals to two mixers, each of them gets also the wanted RF (in phase). The DDS operates at the direct frequency you want to receive. The two analytic signals generated, I and Q, are in the 0 - 3 kHz range, while any off band signal will generated far removed frequencies. So at this point you need just a couple of low pass filters to keep only what you want. We still are in the analogue domain at this point, so no aliasing will take place. After the low pass filters, you digitize with a low sampling rate, let's say 8 kHz, the two I and Q components, then you enter into a dedicated DSP chip for the processing you need (demodulation, filtering, FFT, AGC, etc.). Using those chips I mentioned in a my previous post, this can be done with minimal hardware, without the stability and temperature dependance problems that would affect a purely analogue design (please don't shot me !). 73 Alberto I2PHD