Return to KLUBNL.PL main page
| To: | [email protected] |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: LF: Smart noise cancelling?!? |
| From: | "Max IK0VVE" <[email protected]> |
| Date: | Fri, 4 Nov 2016 07:25:59 +0100 |
| Dkim-signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=aruba.it; s=a1; t=1478240760; bh=ir95BG2ShwvE3np0xf7K4vcpvE2bzGilOXXnvJvc1Lk=; h=Date:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:From:To; b=A3inX9E9yHpbbNnkaSwQ815It9oSWNnajcgh2Bw3o3ptS9ERRdeNFZNlUBeTvHS7v v7gu7PdIHpLQ9c1t2HNvbbu7Ki0iQRP4PIUErocd9TwgmCAKO5EbBSRJHWDUEzlfIX 2pWUz5KPYmtpbHDAhDht+sepZqJvhGngknl39wJKBcPp6q9//lQdZ/bAkBGxwiVQ6K 6/4UjX8WyXVurcl4yn5T8XEoMpC6IPi7p4nBNsfHkfkRwVjhfXfni/8ZAFflsA/otr cHqCyJxTWJsHP/dILKxrrmqybbxfH9K0OZkmhdImpwLmCntHiIv1e1mKaC1y6qqV43 5yCcEgTtfsxWA== |
| In-reply-to: | <[email protected]> |
| References: | <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> |
| Reply-to: | [email protected] |
| Sender: | [email protected] |
|
Dear friends,
in the list there is an elite of eminent professionals, so my participation to this post could sound like a cry of a newborn, HI, but I would give my 1/2 €cent to discussion. Are about 2 years that I receive strong noise from neighbour LED PS light, strong means that I'm completely deaf from 0 to 150 MHz! The only real solution I've found is the use of the X-phase killer with a little upgrade to better work on MF and LF. Now I can hear your signals again, it works great. So thinking to VLF that is an "audio" frequency, could it be possible to use the same principle and put the noise in 180° antiphase receiving sferics with another RX some khz far (also a cheap LW radio) from main freq as some noise cancelling headphones do? Probably there is some problem that I didn't considered yet (band wide, delay, etc...) Thanks to all. 73, Max IK0VVE ______________________________ ...here some of my HAM Radio projects... Cc:
Data: Thu, 03 Nov 2016 19:37:48 +0100
Oggetto: Re: LF: Smart noise cancelling?!?
Hi Peter, That sounds interesting and looks convincing. But it only works for 'compressed' spectra covering several kHz and hours, right? As far as i understand this method can't be done for weak signal detections because you 'need' all the energy available from the weak signal to fill the bin (one pixel) and just throw away what causes a reduction of the SNR, so just the stronger QRN bursts are blanked and most of the signal is coming through whereas your method selects just a small fraction of the incoming energy (?). My idea/question came from the consideration that different kind of QRN has different optimum blanker settings. Am 02.11.2016 21:25, schrieb Paul Nicholson: > > Even more aggressive sferic blanking raises > the decode to Eb/N0 +1.7 dB BER 38.2% > S/N 16.10 dB in 25.4 uHz. So, if propagation changes, the optimal blanker settings will change. So they vary all the time. If a post-processing of a transmission/recording taking several hours and night/day changes, it could be useful to dynamically vary the blanker settings. So these blanker setting levels would have to be determined/calculated by the incoming signal and then applied in a next step. This may be CPU-load intensive, i don't know, it's behind my current skills. But the idea is there... 73, Stefan Am 03.11.2016 18:55, schrieb Peter: > Hi Stefan et al., > > On 03.11.2016 14:22, DK7FC wrote: >> ... >> Last night i thought a bit about noise cancelling on LF/VLF. > > ... > > Running an experimental receiver at VLF/LF for SID-detection (on RPi > 3) I chose an almost non-parametric procedure running in frequency > domain. It works as follows: > Do a windowed FFT, compute the median (by sorting) from the power > spectrum. Store all spectra and corresponding median values. Next > choose a time period (let's say 100ms), pick the spectrum with the > lowest median, plot it, drop all the others. The key is that "Median > values" are more robust to outliers compared to other averaging > procedures. > > See what happened when switching from simple averaging to median > selection algorithm (~16:50 utc): > http://lf-radio.de/cgi-bin/test/show_wf.cgi?date=16-10-02 > > I know that this won't work in case of searching for coherent signal > detection, or would be hard to implement. But using this method I'm > detecting such very weak signals from far east like NDI or RTZ on a > regular basis. > > Drawbacks? Yes; it's throwing away a lot of information which may be > useful. Another pitfall has to be mentioned: using 1 sec. as a > selection window strong time service transmitters nearly vanished > since the algorithm will unerringly choose the gaps [^_^]. Therefore > I'm using only the spectral part between 15 and 50 kHz for computing > the median values. > > Peter, df3lp > |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: LF: Smart noise cancelling?!?, Alan Melia |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: LF: Smart noise cancelling?!?, Paul Nicholson |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: LF: Smart noise cancelling?!?, Paul Nicholson |
| Next by Thread: | LF: RE: Smart noise cancelling?!?, hvanesce |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |