Return-Path: X-Spam-DCC: paranoid 1481; Body=2 Fuz1=2 Fuz2=2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on lipkowski.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL, SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.1.3 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by paranoid.lipkowski.org (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id u9MA8YAf002588 for ; Sat, 22 Oct 2016 12:08:34 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1bxt6l-00036H-Pj for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 22 Oct 2016 11:00:55 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.34] (helo=relay2.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1bxt6k-000368-Vv for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 22 Oct 2016 11:00:54 +0100 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.15]) by relay2.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1bxt6h-0007P6-2C for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 22 Oct 2016 11:00:53 +0100 Received: from Clemens0811 ([79.237.138.206]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx002) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LwJFG-1d0Nxu0iLu-0185Co for ; Sat, 22 Oct 2016 12:00:48 +0200 From: "Clemens Paul" To: References: <1585067730.20161012155231@chriswilson.tv> <1173910789.20161013103634@chriswilson.tv> In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2016 12:00:46 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Thread-Index: AdIlS+V7HefMQ+KSQMOxvTp0FbRo2AG/TfhQ X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.1.7601.17609 X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:jfEXHOTTbGrkXkCWi7/mVBhM0rir6T7ZuJAv/xv8pW9tiD+3Ujc E+L8+Po2rp/d2SRARwrDa8jLmQgwLthV/M1Wo6MTqtP8RjfBvuM5p0Br50rp1NpRkCLfMyu jL0q1/GzvJ/7yX4eUCjYYkMczYT2TCdKf4xmuBLKAwozf/eRPtfUWtkLXL33mh45YvNqG4s Gr6LSWV4nXqjFEKl0laQA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:0uf4oMz6h+8=:wHbailc8dQzByaZThJe4P2 DiZhMgNdLbD+xoAdnsm9X+RNhIXMbbjLGI0MQG5xVSh5SWsAywKhv8xgde7S9nM6S7ormQWtj jXpjEid+f5mx39yDwHljBvErvzOZcNwcvfbTnOtb/Q7cjXXtrVggV6wTrFbVf8rbRb1zENvRS wqro0Wg5JtvfzbYe0VDm17I4dGxDepI5BIApaIXtyK83aiNkhI1obc6rI4RqKmaN+QqKemUmZ kn33zMaBiyQ2jbet+tp4j06LTaqEws5yPsaaaCR1QJZ1ewzyeNhG5HJLQd5r1Ua7BazD3g+Zw ifRJ1TwKmC/Dkrx8qalitJC8iJ8Bh8h+eFjuSDb/4LG5bBOcGfC2inuOIYuodnYErMMKLUsmu MvGf+5mJWoD727M8AUnxKfUMpZ2blX9X2XXh5MXvcZXmQQ5iyYZmIl3b9xCJpY3ubHN91GNzG MM8gwehjo1qDOiwUo7ShnPf9OOLF6DWtEhDWri66O8Qufn/LBhrINeaLdUfwuMdlcdM4h7gT9 3dKx5QBjYwpOZUEzAsc4+72wFVrRaMgs7gfgWul8j/UjJ9/9RSL6V70QUGRC5v0gPQjGQ+C/c 4/nE1bYNgfF++Wn2SAfEEilIyBAm16vjJapIRz0lbL5GocVb6lt5TWXjtf0vzcJZXw25Ubc+E +g6s1itUNGl1WHZZtfRGKjnxDNBdRuChUAgfkm1jboOc9rLUAG74hQC+PGZPxUB2PVxz32vgY Od4t1Qo9bH3cTJZdAOmadiw7kSSKFZRSu6oKdLf4eybqsBp3S8xpA2nLSkQpoQtXyW2vL6+qn qeBL+00 X-Scan-Signature: ad9c0e3658f56f4dbb01cd425a6a8031 Subject: RE: Re[2]: LF: Running 2 WSPR transmissions, how to stop them TX'ing at the same time?? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.56 on 10.1.3.11 Content-Length: 7723 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 9142 Hello Andy, >As the WSJT standard for S/N is to express it in a 2.5kHz >bandwidth, simply dividing the previously measured S value by >this N (for 2.5kH input) will give the final S/N value. If >DSP prefiltering has been included in the software, the noise >will have been measured over just this pre-filtered bandwidth >and the lower resulting N is then scaled up to what it would >be in 2.5kHz. Noise power is proportional to bandwidth, so a >250Hz prefilter means the measured total noise is now 10dB >lower and this correction has ot be added on *If* there is a DSP pre-filtering in the SW and the noise measured in this BW is scaled up to 2.5kHz which includes the appropriate correction then a hardware filter (or digital filter in a SDR like perseus) narrower than 2.5kHz in the RX itself *ahead* of the WSPR-DSP would not affect/falsify the calculated S/N as long as this filter is not narrower than the DSP prefilter of the WSPR SW. I have the impression that in the 'old' WSPR SW there is no DSP prefiltering in the SW but in WSJT-X there is. 73 Clemens DL4RAJ >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >[mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] On Behalf Of Andy Talbot >Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2016 2:17 PM >To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org >Subject: Re: Re[2]: LF: Running 2 WSPR transmissions, how to >stop them TX'ing at the same time?? > >No 41dB is NOT a real S/N figure and is due solely to your >artificially restricting the noise bandwidth gon gin ! If >you use a receiver bandwidth any narrower than the full SSB >bandwidth then the S/N reporting will be wrong. > >With just one exception (*) there is no benefit at all to be >gained from using a narrow receiver filter. It does >absolutely nothing to improve signal reception and just makes >your noise measurement wrong. The reasons are as follows : > >All filtering of the signal is done in the DSP software, where >for WSPR it is bandpass filtered to a bank of 1.46Hz wide >filters, called bins (as in dustbin) - this being the tone >spacing and the speed of a WSPR signal. There may be some >incidental pre-filtering on the way to getting down to this >narrow bandwidth, but it is not relevant to the process. ONLY >the final 1.46Hz bandwidth is the one that matters. > >Measuring the signal level (the S part of the S/N) is >straightforward. Your four tones fall in four of the 1.46Hz >wide adjacent parallel filter banks corresponding to each of >the four tones transmitted. The sum of the power in the >tones is then the signal in the four adjacent bins added >together and is just a relative number. > >But to get S/N we now have to make a noise measurement and >here is where it gets difficult. There are many ways of >estimating the noise and one of the simplest is to take >everything going into the soundcard / software and assume that >as it is so wide, a few weak signals present won't affect the >average too much; ie. that it is all noise. >An assumption has to be made about the input now, and since >SSB radios are used, the assumption is made that the noise is >bandpass filtered at this point to 2.5kHz width - this being >the bandwidth of a typical SSB filter. By measuring the >signal over this full bandwidth a value for N in 2.5kHz can be >obtained. > >As the WSJT standard for S/N is to express it in a 2.5kHz >bandwidth, simply dividing the previously measured S value by >this N (for 2.5kH input) will give the final S/N value. If >DSP prefiltering has been included in the software, the noise >will have been measured over just this pre-filtered bandwidth >and the lower resulting N is then scaled up to what it would >be in 2.5kHz. Noise power is proportional to bandwidth, so a >250Hz prefilter means the measured total noise is now 10dB >lower and this correction has ot be added on > >Simples ! Except it is all too easy to go very wrong. > >First of all, if the input noise is externally filtered (say >by a narrow CW filter) its total power will be lower by the >proportion of this BW to 2.5kHz. So the value of N will be >less. S stays the same (it is filtered in software to 4 * >1.46Hz) so same S, lower N results in a higher S/N when the >input is bandpass filtered. > >This is clearly why a certain F station consistently reports >ridiculously high values of S/N for everyone. > >Next is what happen when strong signals come up inside the SSB >filter width but outside the WSPR band. These can get lumped >into the overall measurement and give an artificially high >value of N. They are some way away from the signal of >interest so don't actually affect the decoding process, but to >lead to a falsely low value for S/N. This is probably >happening for stations who consistently report lower than >expected S/N for many stations. > >There are many ways that more accurate estimates of noise can >be obtained, using statistics and probability distributions to >separate out genuine noise from signals. Others just by >looking for the presence of signals and adding everything else >up that doesn't fit that criteria of 'signal'. All are used >in the electronic Warfare and Communications Intercept >business to automatically detect and then classify signals. >But it is a complicated process just to obtain an incidental >measurement value for information only, that does nothing to >help the actual decoding process. > >(*) The one exception, where a narrow input filter will help >is if a very strong local signal appears in the SSB filter >passband that is sufficient to depress the AGC. This can >degrade the wanted signal. However, if the receiver is >properly designed, the S/N of the wanted signal in the now >depressed audio should still be the same. A soundcard has >typically 80dB dynamic range or more, so unless the unwanted >signal is say 60 to 70dB above the WSPR signal of interest, >it should still cope. Although the N measurement will be >wrong for the reasons detailed above > >For a description of how signals can be detected in noise, >take a look at the RadCom Data columns for April and June >2008. There's also a description on page 47 my book >"Command, Computers, Microcontrollers and DSP for the Radio >Amateur". RSGB still have a few copies - I saw it on the >stand at the Convention! (Although several sections in there >are embarrassingly out of date by now). > >Andy G4JNT > > > > > >On 13 October 2016 at 10:36, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > Hello Andy, > > Thursday, October 13, 2016 > > Thanks for the detailed explanation Andy. Good copy >thoughout the > night on your WSPR2 and 15 signals. Early this morning I greatly > reduced the filter width to just encompass the needed >section of the > band to hear your WSPR2 signal and the level reported >from WSPR went > mad high. I read a paper you wrote on S/N levels in >WSPR and filter > width but it rather went over my head. I assume +41 SNR is not a > "real" figure when filter width is reduced right down? > > > Best regards, > Chris 2E0ILY >mailto:chris@chriswilson.tv > > My part time LF grabber is at >http://www.chriswilson.tv/grabber.html > > > > > Correct. I have a PIC that reads timing data from a >GPS and at > > the right timing uses a set of pre-stored WSPR >symbols to calculate > > the frequencies for the tones and sends the resulting >data to an > > AD9852 DDS. Different symbol sets (for the two messages) and > > frequency data is stored for each of the two modes. > > > > > > > >