Hi Ben, In case of using WiFi as signals of opportunity, we do not use directional antennas or set the reference receiver in a specific direction. Here the reference signal is the signal received from a receiver kept in Line of Sight with the main transmitter. The surveillance receiver does use a directional antenna pointed in the general location of the target.
Thank you, Suraj Hanchinal On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 8:07 PM, Benny Alexandar <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Suraj, > > I would like to know for measuring the reference signal how do you > determine the direction of transmitter ? In case of WiFi which direction > you set your antenna for making it as reference ? > > -ben > ------------------------------ > *From:* Discuss-gnuradio <discuss-gnuradio-bounces+ben.alex= > [email protected]> on behalf of suraj hanchinal < > [email protected]> > *Sent:* Sunday, March 25, 2018 7:36 PM > *To:* jmfriedt > *Cc:* [email protected]; [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] [GSoC2018] Adding Passive radar and > multiple device support to gr-radar toolbox > > Hello everyone, > After reading the suggestions as well as feedback from Marcus Muller and > Martin Braun, I have made the suggested changes as well as explained the > algorithms in greater detail. Please read the updated proposal and provide > feedback and suggestions. > > Thanking you, > > Regards, > Suraj Hanchinal > > GSoC Proposal: https://github.com/surajhanchinal/GSoC_proposal/ > blob/master/My%20GSoC%20Proposal.pdf > > On Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 2:18 PM suraj hanchinal <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hello Jean-Michel Friedt, > > Thank you for your valuable feedback. That is a very good insight since I > overlooked the cross-ambiguity function and its calculation considering > them trivial. I will definitely look into the papers that you mentioned and > include them in my proposal. > > Thank you, > > Regards, > Suraj Hanchinal > > On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 2:12 PM, jmfriedt <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > All in all, this is pretty ambitious, but exciting! > > How will you tackle the OFDM signal recovery? I think your reference > > [2] is really much to be completely done in one GSoC, so it would be > > totally OK to say you just picked a reduced approach. Still, if you > > want to do that in all its glory, that would be cool, too, but I'd ask > > Martin how much work he'd expect that to be, and if necessary, reserve > > more time for the algorithmic part alone. I'm also including Jean- > > Michel Friedt of low-cost passive radar fame[A], as I hope he might > > have a moment to read and comment on your proposal. > > I am not sure I can provide useful comments on the proposal, whose > various iterations I have been reading as they were being updated. Real > time passive radar processing seems challenging to me, and I would > advise looking at alternatives to the brute force cross correlation of > the Doppler shifted signal. You might want to have a look at > https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279069212_Batches_ > algorithm_for_passive_radar_A_theoretical_analysis > and especially its Table I which lists computational complexity of > various algorithms. An updated version of the document cited by Marcus > is at http://jmfriedt.free.fr/dvbt_hardware.pdf (submitted for > publication but not yet accepted): beyond the improved batches > algorithm allowing for much faster computation, we also address using > multiple receivers in parallel, each tuned to different carrier > frequencies. > > JM > > -- > JM Friedt, FEMTO-ST Time & Frequency/SENSeOR, 26 rue de l'Epitaphe, > <https://maps.google.com/?q=26+rue+de+l'Epitaphe,+%0D%0A25000+Besancon,+Fr&entry=gmail&source=g> > 25000 Besancon, Fr Michaelance > > >
_______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
