Hello,

I did 3 more experiments to test the performance of Reed Solomon in gr.atsc, 
but I got some contradictory results. I don't know what else I can do on this. 
Hope Dr. Corgan could help me this time.

1,I did a simulation with Reed-Solomon coding scheme on my laptop and add 
std::cout << nerrors_corrrected << std::endl;, it functioned very well. When 
the number of errors is less than 10, the number will be output, otherwise, it 
will output -1, which means there are more than 10 symbols corrupted. 

2,I added that coding scheme into packet_utils.py (I coded the payload+crc). 
While ten packets were sent out from the TX and all of the received packets 
were true (ok = True), the nerrors_corrected were all -1, which were supposed 
to be 0.

3, I also checked whether the output of the RS encoder matched the input of the 
RS decoder, and the answer is YES, which means the packet before decoding was a 
correct packet, and the nerrors_corrected should not be -1!

I think I did all of what I can......, but the result is really confusing me.

Dr. Corgan, could u give me a little help?

Bill

--- On Sat, 5/9/09, Bill Stevenson <[email protected]> wrote:

From: Bill Stevenson
 <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] a question about Reed-Solomon in GNURadio!
To: "Bill Stevenson" <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Date: Saturday, May 9, 2009, 12:44 AM

Hi!

I have successfully implemented the Reed-Solomon coding scheme in gr.atsc on 
USRP, the receiver can receive packets now. But after running tons of 
experimentation and comparing the performance between DQPSK without coding and 
DQPSK with Reed-Solomon, I cannot observe any performance improvement of the 
DQPSK with Reed-Solomon scheme. For the same PDR and BER, the RSSIs which are 
read using
 probe.level() are similar, and Reed-Solomon did show any correcting effect. 

Does the reed-solomon in gr.atsc take effect? I coded the payload+crc part. 
Thanks!

Bill

--- On Fri, 5/1/09, Bill Stevenson <[email protected]> wrote:

From: Bill Stevenson <[email protected]>
Subject: [Discuss-gnuradio]
 a question about Reed-Solomon in GNURadio!
To: [email protected]
Date: Friday, May 1, 2009, 2:41 AM

I implemented the reed-solomon coding scheme in gr-atsc onto benchmark_tx.py 
and benchmark_rx.py. Following describes the results I got:

1, The transmitter can transmit reed-solomon coded stream with no problem. The 
receiver just keeps on waiting for the packets. There is no response at the 
receiver.

2, To fit the needs of USRP and the format of atsc data segment, the entire 
packet before the reed-solomon coding is packed in this way: 
MPEG_SYNC_BYTE+transport error byte+preamble+access code+header+ some padding 
(pad it into 256 bytes)+payload+ some padding+...+crc+..., the length of packet 
size is 1098, so after packing process,
 there are 6 data
 segments sent out in each packet.

3, I uncommented the assert(in[i].pli.regular_seg_p()) in atsc_rs_decoder.cc and
 atsc_derandomizer.cc because without uncommenting them, the corresponding 
error message will pop out the moment I run the benchmark_rx.py -f 2400M..... 
command at the receiver side.

4, I simulated this system in my laptop without connecting to any USRPs, and 
the result showed that the reed-solomon performance is apparently much better 
than that without reed-solomon.

Based on my limited knowledge, there might be two reasons: one is because of 
erasing the assert(in[i].pli.regular_seg_p()) phrase, but I don't think it is 
the culprit since the similer simulation did not indicate anying wrong with 
that method; the second one is MPEG_SYNC_BYTE+transport error byte ruined the 
correlating process of access code because it seemed that there were 3 preamble 
out there, but I am not sure about my conclusion.

I don't know what makes my receiving process down. Is that because of the 
MPEG_SYNC_BYTE in front of the preamble code? I really hope
 someone could give me some help on this problem! Thanks a lot!!! :)

Bill
 


      
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio



      


      
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio

Reply via email to