On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 6:36 PM, Guanbo Zheng <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Tom Rondeau <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 6:47 PM, Guanbo Zheng <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all
>>>
>>> I am currently using OFDM benchmark to generate OFDM signal under the
>>> setting of FFT len, CP length, occupied-tones and something.
>>> But I can not find out what is the real bandwidth of signal it generated.
>>>
>>> Because when I changed the Interpolation rate (sampling rate), the
>>> bandwidth at RX changed as well.
>>> Ideally we know that setting enough large sampling rate ( In USRP2, the
>>> max fs = 25MHz), I should observe the constant signal with fixed BW.
>>> It seems to me that BW of the generated signal is too large.
>>>
>>> My question is: how to determine the BW of transmit signal in the codes?
>>> where I can change it.
>>> All I found is actual bit rate =  (converter_) / xrate /
>>> samples_per_symbol = 100MHz/4/2. But this one seems not related to the BW of
>>> signal itself.
>>>
>>> Thanks for any suggestions!
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> Guanbo
>>
>>
>>
>> Guanbo,
>> The bandwidth of the signal changes with the interpolation rate. If you
>> set the interpolation rate such that you get 25 MHz of bandwidth out, then
>> the OFDM signal will also have a 25 MHz bandwidth. What you will _see_ over
>> the air is 25e6 * (occupided_tones/fft_length), since the ratio of the used
>> tones to the number of subcarriers is the amount of occupied bandwidth.
>>
>> You can also think of it this way. The bandwidth of a subcarrier is
>> BW/fft_length, where BW is the sample rate out of the USRP.
>>
>> Tom
>>
>>
> Hi Tom
>
> What you means that,  the bandwidth of OFDM signal is actually equal to the
> sampling rate*occupided_tones/fft_length.
>

I mean exactly that :)


> Then how to understand the sampling theory, in which sampling rate is twice
> of bandwidth?
>

Complex signals. Sample rate is the bandwidth. Have a sample for I and Q, so
we still have enough information so as not to violate Nyquist.


> Thanks,
> Guanbo
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Guanbo
>

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

Reply via email to