odd results working at 250ksp/s

Sylvain AZARIAN sylvain.azarian at gmail.com
Sun Feb 9 19:55:01 UTC 2014


Hi,

With a lot of delay and my apologizes, as promised a while ago, I finally
published some quick notes on the VOR signal today.
The complete signal analysis as been posted on my blog at this page :
http://www.f4gkr.org/2014/02/in-depth-study-of-the-vor-signals/

I need to save the recorded WAV signals somewhere so people interested in
good SNR recordings would get it.
I decided to return close to the nearby VOR transmitter (Rambouillet, south
west Paris) and put the RTL SDR on my car rooftop and turn on the laptop to
capture some signals...

Best regards
sylvain F4GKR


2013-10-22 17:07 GMT+02:00 David Jacobowitz <david.jacobowitz at gmail.com>:

> I originally posted about 115.8 and 116.8 MHz, both square in the VOR band
> of 108 to 117.95. I might have sent something else in a PM, but if so it
> was a typo. :-) I am definitely only interested in the VOR band right now
> -- though, as you say, it is adjacent to commercial FM with its high power.
>
> My application is simple in concept: A fully auomatic VOR-based
> positioning system, a fallback from GPS. I want to scan the entire VOR
> band, looking for signals in the standard VOR format that can be
> demodulated. I do the initial scan with a fast sample rate and FFT, just
> looking for peaks. From those, I examine the signals to see if it looks
> like a VOR signal. From that list, I will "park" on each signal long enough
> (~30s) to decode the VOR's morse code station ID. From that, I will have a
> short list of VORs that I can currently receive. From those, if the
> geometry is appropriate (I know the VORs positions from a database) I can
> calculate a position.
>
> The software then just round-robin tunes the VORs in range and continually
> tries to calculate positions. If too many drop out, it returns to the
> initial scan mode.
>
> Not being able to receive this VOR or that VOR is not generally a problem,
> but obviously, the more the better. With extra VORs I have better options
> for choosing the closest ones or the ones with the best geometry.
>
>
> This is actually quite difficult to test, because VORs can generally only
> be received line-of-sight -- which means in the air. I'm a private pilot
> but I found that flying and noodling with a laptop is too much trouble.
> From my office window, on a high floor in Oakland, CA, I can receive one
> VOR from the Oakland airport. And I have now discovered a ridge near my
> home with a scenic overlook from which I can receive two.
>
> I've tested the software enough to know that the initial scan function
> seems to work, and the morse decoding kind of works, but I am not confident
> I'll get it to work very well. (One transmitter's dit looks a lot like
> another's dah.) The nav signal decoding is simple. (A 30 Hz AM modulated
> tone is phase compared with a 30 Hz tone FM modulated at 9960 Hz. The phase
> obtained is the azimuth to the station.)
>
>
> If I ever get this working, I looking forward to sharing it with the
> community. In the process of building this, I created a simple SDR toolkit
> of DSP functions. It's like Gnuradio in concept, but 16b fixed-point, and
> has no external dependencies, and C89, so is easier to build on weird and
> limited platforms. It also has perl bindings. Compared to GR, it looks like
> the work of a rank amateur just learning DSP, but I do like the concept of
> there being a GR-like library out there, lightweight and embedded-friendly.
>
>
> Regards,
> Dave J
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 3:06 AM, jdow <jdow at earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> He sent me two frequencies in private email. These were in the FM
>> broadcast band (in the US). He probably needs to notch them out
>> in order to get adequate response.
>>
>> As for wanting narrow bandwidth - I am not quite sure why he thinks
>> that is a benefit. I use a large FFT (about 10 Hz per bin) and use
>> the zoom control to see fine detail. (Different FFT settings suite
>> different uses. This one seems to be a good compromise with my two
>> needs. I'm too lazy to change it.)
>>
>> {^_^}
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2013/10/22 02:08, Sylvain Munaut wrote:
>>
>>> Effective filtering must occur between antenna and receiver. All the
>>>> problems that a saturated preamp and ADC cause can't be repaired by
>>>> software. Never.
>>>>
>>>
>>> But his original problem is not with saturated preamps or ADC ... it's
>>> aliasing ... and that can be solved in the digital domain provided
>>> fast enough ADC.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>>     Sylvain
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/osmocom-sdr/attachments/20140209/b7efe923/attachment.html>


More information about the osmocom-sdr mailing list