Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by klubnl.pl (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u2) with ESMTP id x3CCefO9031382 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2019 14:40:43 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1hEvMe-000546-80 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2019 13:33:04 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1hEvMW-00053x-Qt for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2019 13:32:56 +0100 Received: from simba.netcom.co.uk ([185.53.59.69]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1hEvMV-00020G-7G for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2019 13:32:55 +0100 X-DKIM-Result: Domain=abelian.org Result=Signature OK DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=abelian.org ; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Cc: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=BXjqziwtAwEYFw5VoNfzdamK+MUXaeNRjq77ldPcxr8=; b=+UyoRwk0jTr6cw4LyIpE6VJJZW Bvs30z6hJvTwXsH4Ya6NzlB/pShr0J7beFuDpkEv5M25Z3MtvhT7t1p7i5ydesop5x3oSivD1XxLb 8e0rl+3rXyD+OKs3Rcw9ij2iGTNIx2EyBy179buLMo8qgKvthaKZyMjE8WzF74bug48c=; Received: from i-194-106-52-83.freedom2surf.net ([194.106.52.83]:41488 helo=pn.abelian.org) by simba.netcom.co.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from ) id 1hEvMU-0004kQ-9H for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 12 Apr 2019 13:32:54 +0100 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pn.abelian.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73BD9400310 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2019 12:32:33 +0000 (UTC) To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: From: Paul Nicholson Message-ID: Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2019 12:32:33 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - simba.netcom.co.uk X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - blacksheep.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - abelian.org X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: simba.netcom.co.uk: authenticated_id: catchall@abelian.org X-Authenticated-Sender: simba.netcom.co.uk: catchall@abelian.org X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Jacek wrote: > the results i get from ebnaut are different depending on > signal bandwidth. This is possible and quite common. > 10Hz: > found rank 6348 ber 4.2147e-01 Eb/N0 -2.0 > carrier Eb/N0: -0.3 dB Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [185.53.59.69 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Scan-Signature: 6ffbd2c9950b634d6cc91f9565b01a8b Subject: Re: LF: ebnaut results depend on sample rate Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=5.0 tests=FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS 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 Jacek wrote: > the results i get from ebnaut are different depending on > signal bandwidth. This is possible and quite common. > 10Hz: > found rank 6348 ber 4.2147e-01 Eb/N0 -2.0 > carrier Eb/N0: -0.3 dB > 240Hz: > found rank 16679 ber 4.3029e-01 Eb/N0 -3.1 > carrier Eb/N0: -1.6 dB For the carrier Eb/N0, the value of N0 is measured using the full bandwidth of the input signal. When the band is wider it may present a higher N0 because of things like mains sidebands and harmonics, and other interference. That's probably the case here. For the decode there should not be much difference, and indeed we see a similar BER. 42.1% and 43.0%. The Eb/N0 in the 'found' log message is estimated from the BER and the slope is quite steep, accuracy is poor for weak signals. The carrier Eb/N0 is usually more realistic, unless you have interference in the input band. I usually resample down to about 10 or 20 times the symbol rate, but at least 10Hz so as to get a reasonable N0 estimate. If I expect to have to sweep for the time stamp I might use a higher sample rate to get more resolution with the -T argument. -- Paul Nicholson --