Return-Path: Received: from mtain-mh03.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtain-mh03.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.96.215]) by air-mc08.mail.aol.com (v129.4) with ESMTP id MAILINMC082-a98c4c6ee39a214; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 16:20:42 -0400 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by mtain-mh03.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id C23AF38000096; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 16:20:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1OmY3z-00035v-RM for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 21:19:43 +0100 Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1OmY3z-00035k-AA for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 21:19:43 +0100 Received: from mail-iw0-f171.google.com ([209.85.214.171]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1OmY3y-0007zg-3r for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 21:19:43 +0100 Received: by iwn42 with SMTP id 42so534999iwn.16 for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 13:19:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=c8Hl9NfO0R/cCqdaORZTXcQbr5sI7wNSmie8+vroF0g=; b=M4l4CSRHBvjbGnrT3I9OkZ9GLjO2pf6Qs1zopRWV5i60QPJtp/5ddyeEDXPnnOIOyJ n1HmVo0/Rq7Ipd2JEoE26FLLerKAIrYQGJJ29FmkVKc04lRhg73LFiQUjoJHoVZ1xzBJ mEKMkRJ8IMCFMOqto4c5gUfEZyhqB5jWv8gUI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=U1+cnkMPLSAILKGCKzJyet0QTxmdSWiM+tuJwT8hozZT9Bt/eNj1cZr4Ph/wQHn1dn MvjxleilybqlAPRklJ6Hqy3sd2xdDpZHMePID1zzgbU+D5obRntRV2wIy/XqAW4Wo6/C +LpOzr10xlt6Jj3XGPeK1hxMyJ7KeWdtmu930= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.30.75 with SMTP id t11mr1743655ibc.27.1282335580702; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 13:19:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.167.2 with HTTP; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 13:19:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 21:19:40 +0100 Message-ID: From: Andy Talbot To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org DomainKey-Status: good (testing) X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,HTML_TAG_EXIST_TBODY=0.126 Subject: Re: LF: Fw: Covert Char per Min to Words per Min ? Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00221538fca2c54a24048e470417 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=5.0 tests=HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE, HTML_TAG_EXISTS_TBODY autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false x-aol-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: mail_rly_antispam_dkim-m240.2 ; domain : googlemail.com DKIM : pass x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d60d74c6ee3984ca6 X-AOL-IP: 193.82.116.20 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) --00221538fca2c54a24048e470417 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Normally you can assume 5 characters per word, that factor is is reasonably constant - the average word is 5 letters The number of bits per character is more complicated to quantify. In CMSK for example, where the character length varies based on the probability of the letter's occurence in typical messages, the effective number of bits per character is less than for ASCII encoding, say around 5 or 6 bits per character average for the whole alphabet. With a heavily source encoded scheme - like WSJT with a small alphabet to start with, - it is possible to get right down to less than 5 signalling bits per character. But particularly in Varicoded data, there are more bits added in framing and synchronisation, so call it total of 7 bits per character complete If you then take note of the error correction overhead, which doubles up the number of bits sent for each message, and add in another 17% of synchronisation bits , you end up with a net rate of something like 17 bits per character for the error corrected message. So, CMSK8 (8 bits per second) equates to about 8/17 characters per second, or 30 characters per minute, or 6 words per rminute - which is rather faster than the 3.75 rate quoted in the table - so I've missed something somewhere? CMSK8 is 8 times faster than CMSK1, but its not the whole story. If the link is too weak to support the faster speed, but the slow one gets through - which is then faster ? CMSK8 that may work tomorrow, if you're lucky, eventually; or will work CMSK1 now? Andy www.g4jnt.com On 20 August 2010 19:09, Graham wrote: > > > *From:* G .. > *Sent:* Friday, August 20, 2010 6:16 PM > *To:* rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > *Subject:* Covert Char per Min to Words per Min ? > > Q How do you convert between Characters per minute and Words per > Minute > > is CMSK-8 data rate faster than MF-1 ? > > Tnx - G. > > > CMSK8 7.8125 12.5Hz 3.75 WPM 12H5F1B CMSK31 31.25 50Hz 15 WPM 50H0F1B > CMSK63 62.55 100Hz 30 WPM 100HF1B CMSK125 31.25 200Hz 60 WPM 200HF1B > > > ROSMF1: 16.7 characters/minute > ROSMF7: 128 characters/minute > > > --00221538fca2c54a24048e470417 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Normally you can assume 5 characters per word, that factor is is reas= onably constant - the average word is 5 letters
=A0
The number of bits per character=A0 is more complicated to quantify.= =A0 In =A0CMSK for example, =A0where the character length varies based on= the probability of the letter's occurence in typical messages, the ef= fective number of bits per character is less than for ASCII encoding, say= around 5 or 6 bits per character=A0average for the whole alphabet.=A0=A0= =A0With a heavily=A0source encoded scheme - like WSJT with a small alphabe= t to start with, - it is possible to get right down to less than 5 signall= ing bits per character.=A0 But particularly in Varicoded data, there are= more bits added in framing and synchronisation, so call it total of 7 bit= s per character complete
=A0
If you then take note of the error correction overhead, which doubles= up the number of bits sent for each message, and add in another 17% of sy= nchronisation bits , you end up with a net rate of something like=A017=A0= =A0bits per character for the error corrected message.=A0 So, CMSK8 (8 bit= s per second) equates to about=A08/17 characters per second,=A0or=A030=A0c= haracters=A0per minute, or=A06 words per rminute - which is rather faster= than the 3.75 rate quoted in the table - so I've missed something som= ewhere?
=A0
CMSK8 is 8 times faster than CMSK1, but its not the whole story.=A0= =A0 If the link is too weak to support the faster speed, but the slow one= gets through - which is then faster ?=A0=A0 CMSK8 that may work tomorrow,= if you're lucky, eventually; =A0or will work CMSK1 now?
=A0
On 20 August 2010 19:09, Graham <g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk<= /a>> wrote:
=A0

Sent: Friday, August 20, 2010 6:16 PM
Subject: Covert Char per Min to Words per Min ?

Q How=A0 do=A0 you=A0 convert between= =A0=A0 Characters=A0 per minute and Words=A0 per Minute
=A0
is=A0 CMSK-8 data rate=A0 faster than= =A0 MF-1 ?
=A0
Tnx - G.
=A0
=A0
CMSK8 = 7.8125 = 12.5Hz = 3.75 WPM = 12H5F1B
CMSK31 = 31.25 = 50Hz = 15 WPM = 50H0F1B
CMSK63 = 62.55 = 100Hz = 30 WPM = 100HF1B
CMSK125 = 31.25 = 200Hz = 60 WPM = 200HF1B
=A0

ROSMF1:=A016.7 characters/minute
ROS= MF7:=A0128 characters/minute



--00221538fca2c54a24048e470417--