Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

LF: Re: WOLF Beacon

To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Subject: LF: Re: WOLF Beacon
From: "James Moritz" <james.moritz@btopenworld.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 11:47:44 +0100
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=btopenworld.com; h=Received:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Message-ID:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE; b=lBg9CXppYh/UpWkaPaw3Wu3X8TdxCV3JJmSL3L/2Q38DzbpvdFnq2u4sersG+lsii57oatMrxocGTFk4ekJaosEbm7Ru0IJq+0J+BzMkWjbPx3JG7n/+HSw0ZeCAzudUbrKS5I0sD29BfHbi8ivbazvfavc3KKZhnWypCxOCvlM= ;
Domainkey-status: good (testing)
In-reply-to: <4AA95413.9090902@sighthound.demon.co.uk>
References: <9afca2640909100938x1536a035iaf1c571e92ca8622@mail.gmail.com> <003b01ca3248$087945c0$0217aac0@jimdesk> <4AA95413.9090902@sighthound.demon.co.uk>
Reply-to: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Dear LF Group,

Thanks for the reports on the WOLF beacon overnight. The beacon closed down at 0600utc Unfortunately, I drifted off to sleep shortly after starting it up ... all this beaconing is getting a bit exhausting! So I have only just seen the comments posted overnight.
As people have noticed, WOLF is quite critical in terms of setting-up 
required, and neccessary frequency accuracy and stability. The software 
expects the signal frequency to be within hertz of the specified value, so 
the receiver has to be accurate to this kind of level. The frequency drift 
has to be lower still, so much more demanding than WSPR. Wolf transmits a 
data frame of 10 baud BPSK lasting 96 seconds, which contains a 15-character 
message with highly redundant encoding. The 96s frame is repeated back to 
back. If the SNR is good enough, the WOLF decoder can successfully decode 
the message from only 1/4 of the complete frame after 24s. On the other 
hand,  if the signal is very weak, it allows several frames of the signal to 
be integrated over a period of time, potentially making it much more 
sensitive than WSPR. After every 96s, WOLF makes a new attempt to decode the 
accumulated signal, which is what each line of text on the decoder display 
represents.
For this to work, the timing of both transmitter and receiver have to be 
quite accurate as well as the frequency, so that the pattern of bits in 
successive frames does not get "out of step". This is governed mostly by the 
sample rate of the sound card, and for WOLF to successfully decode very weak 
signals, this needs to be calibrated within a few tens of parts per million, 
which is rather better than sound card manufacturers specify their products. 
The calibration utility in WOLF can do this by measuring the frequency of of 
an accurate audio tone, unfortunately, not every amateur has a suitably 
accurate audio source. I am using an audio source made from a TCXO and 
digital divider for calibration, made some years ago specially for this 
purpose. The problem with using an off-air signal such as 198kHz to 
calibrate the sound card is that the actual audio frequency coming out of an 
SSB/CW receiver then depends on the error in the receiver's oscillators, and 
the measured frequency depends on the error in the sound card sample rate, 
so there are two unknown errors that have to be resolved. So while an 
off-air signal can be used to calibrate the received frequency with more 
than adequate accuracy, the sound card sample rate is a bit more tricky.
The sample rate error will probably be small enough without calibration when 
the signal is strong, where successful decodes can be obtained from short 
periods of signal, but is likely to prevent the successful accumulation of a 
weak signal over many frames. Also, the experience with WSPR shows that 
quite large timing errors can appear for unknown reasons with "some 
computers". I think W1TAG has a good point about WOLF being possibly less 
satisfactory at 500kHz than 136k, due to the more rapidly changing phase in 
the propagation path at the higher frequency. The signal strength of the 
beacon in the UK and nearby during the last few days has undoubtedly been 
too high for a good assesment of the weak-signal performance of WOLF - if 
anyone is interested, I could try a low-power beacon this weekend for the 
benefit of UK stations.
Cheers, Jim Moritz
73 de M0BMU




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>