[USRP-users] USRP E312 incompatible FPGS image issue

[Mahesh Jena via USRP-users]

Hi All,

I have 2 USRP E312 devices, out of which one device is showing
incompatible  FPGA issue with following error:

*uhd_usrp_probe --args "addr=192.168.1.187"*

*Mac OS; Clang version 9.0.0 (clang-900.0.39.2); Boost_106501;
UHD_003.010.002.000-MacPorts-Release*


*-- Detecting internal GPS *

*UHD Error:*

*An error occured making GPSDd interface: RuntimeError: Failed to
connect to gpsd: can't connect to host/port pair*

*Initializing core control...*

*-- Performing register loopback test... pass*

*Error: RuntimeError: Expected FPGA compatibility number 16.x, but got
14.0:*

*The FPGA build is not compatible with the host code build.*

*Please run:*


* "/opt/local/lib/uhd/utils/uhd_images_downloader.py"*

However, the other device is working as expected.
Both the devices have UHD image: *UHD_003.009.002-0-unknown*

Can you please help me with figuring out how to solve the issue with this
device?

Thanks in advance!

Kind Regards,


*Mahesh *

-- 


*DISCLAIMER*

THIS MESSAGE, TOGETHER WITH ANY ATTACHMENTS, IS CONFIDENTIAL, IS INTENDED 
ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE(S), AND MAY HAVE INFORMATION THAT IS 
COVERED BY LEGAL, PROFESSIONAL OR OTHER PRIVILEGE. ANY OPINIONS EXPRESSED, 
IMPLIED, OR PRESENTED ARE SOLELY THOSE OF THE AUTHOR AND ARE NOT THOSE OF 
PRETLIST. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, THEN PLEASE DESTROY THIS 
EMAIL AND ITS ATTACHMENTS, AND LET US KNOW AT ONCE. ANY COPYING, 
DISTRIBUTION OR USE OF THIS EMAIL, ITS ATTACHMENTS, OR ANY INFORMATION 
CONTAINED HERE IS PROHIBITED.
___
USRP-users mailing list
USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com

Re: [USRP-users] B200 Noise Figure Meter

[Dan CaJacob via USRP-users]

I was gonna say, there's actually three of them ;)

On Thu, Feb 1, 2018, 9:06 PM Robin Coxe via USRP-users <
usrp-users@lists.ettus.com> wrote:

> On p.8 of B200 schematic:
> T801 is Macom ETC1-1-13TR (RF2)
> T800 is Minicircuits TC1-1-43A+ (RF3)
> U802 is Anaren BD3150L50100AHF (RF1)
>
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 5:45 PM, Ron Economos via USRP-users <
> usrp-users@lists.ettus.com> wrote:
>
>> There's also a balun on the AD9361 input. Unfortunately, the balun part
>> number for the low frequency path is not on the schematic.
>>
>> Ron
>> On 02/01/2018 05:39 PM, Dan CaJacob via USRP-users wrote:
>>
>> That's an interesting thought. The 9361 does have a pretty bad match.
>> I'll try adding a 50 Ohm attenuator and see if that helps.
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 5:14 PM Robin Coxe  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dan.   Both the B200 and the E312 use the Analog Devices AD9361 RF
>>> integrated transceiver. This chip does have an integrated LNA.   Perhaps
>>> there's some sort of mismatch between your DUTs and this integrated LNA at
>>> <1 GHz?
>>>
>>> ADI publishes the RX S-parameters:
>>> https://ez.analog.com/thread/41208#137929
>>>
>>> -Robin
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 7:46 AM, Dan CaJacob via USRP-users <
>>> usrp-users@lists.ettus.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hey guys,

 I have put together a noise figure meter application that uses a USRP
 as the sensing device. It started off as a way to measure the NF of the
 USRP itself. I have a calibrated noise source from an HP 8970B Noise Figure
 Meter. To test the NF of the USRP, I connect the head to the USRP input. My
 GNURadio flowgraph maximizes the USRP gain and measures a moving average of
 the received power while I switch the noise source on and off. The
 difference in the received power level, in addition to the ENR table from
 the noise source, can then be used to calculate the NF of the USRP itself
 using the y-factor method.

 Once you have the NF for the USRP at many frequencies (I test every 50
 MHz from 50 MHz - 6000 MHz), you can modify the same procedure to test the
 NF of a Device Under Test (DUT) which is connected between the noise source
 and the (now calibrated) USRP. You can use the USRP cal table we generated
 in the previous step to derive the NF of the DUT corrected for the NF of
 the USRP.

 In short, this all works incredibly well and garners very repeatable
 results. One complication is that you will see wild NF at certain
 frequencies due to local interference like LTE and WIFI. I've also compared
 the results to that which the HP device measures and they're very
 comparable. ... Except below ~ 1GHz.

 And here's the issue - I am seeing higher NF for DUTs below about 1GHz
 and particularly worse below 500 MHz. I was hoping someone at Ettus might
 be able to shed some light on why this might be. Curiously, the USRPs NF
 doesn't seem to be too bad, just the DUT.

 I'll note that I am nominally using a B200 for these tests, but I also
 tried an E312 just in case the filter banks might help out somehow. I
 didn't see a difference - they both had the same problem.

 I have used several DUTs for this test, including LNA boards we have
 designed ourselves and a Mini-Circuits ZX60-P103LN+ (
 https://www.minicircuits.com/pdfs/ZX60-P103LN+.pdf). Both seem to
 exhibit higher NF when measured with a USRP below 1 GHz. When testing them
 on the HP NF meter, the NF is as expected all the way down to 50 MHz.

 I have attached the B200 cal data for your enjoyment as well as the
 B200-measured ZX60 NF and the HP-measured ZX60. The HP NF meter only goes
 up to 1600 MHz, which is why that data file stops there. I was surprised to
 see the B200 seemed to have a better NF than the E312, which averaged 8 dB
 NF, by the way.
 --
 Very Respectfully,

 Dan CaJacob

 ___
 USRP-users mailing list
 USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
 http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com


>>> --
>> Very Respectfully,
>>
>> Dan CaJacob
>>
>>
>> ___
>> USRP-users mailing 
>> listUSRP-users@lists.ettus.comhttp://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> USRP-users mailing list
>> USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
>> http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com
>>
>>
> ___
> USRP-users mailing list
> USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
> http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com
>


-- 
Very Respectfully,

Dan CaJacob
___
USRP-users mailing list
USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com

Re: [USRP-users] B200 Noise Figure Meter

[Robin Coxe via USRP-users]

On p.8 of B200 schematic:
T801 is Macom ETC1-1-13TR (RF2)
T800 is Minicircuits TC1-1-43A+ (RF3)
U802 is Anaren BD3150L50100AHF (RF1)

On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 5:45 PM, Ron Economos via USRP-users <
usrp-users@lists.ettus.com> wrote:

> There's also a balun on the AD9361 input. Unfortunately, the balun part
> number for the low frequency path is not on the schematic.
>
> Ron
> On 02/01/2018 05:39 PM, Dan CaJacob via USRP-users wrote:
>
> That's an interesting thought. The 9361 does have a pretty bad match. I'll
> try adding a 50 Ohm attenuator and see if that helps.
>
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 5:14 PM Robin Coxe  wrote:
>
>> Hi Dan.   Both the B200 and the E312 use the Analog Devices AD9361 RF
>> integrated transceiver. This chip does have an integrated LNA.   Perhaps
>> there's some sort of mismatch between your DUTs and this integrated LNA at
>> <1 GHz?
>>
>> ADI publishes the RX S-parameters:  https://ez.
>> analog.com/thread/41208#137929
>>
>> -Robin
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 7:46 AM, Dan CaJacob via USRP-users <
>> usrp-users@lists.ettus.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey guys,
>>>
>>> I have put together a noise figure meter application that uses a USRP as
>>> the sensing device. It started off as a way to measure the NF of the USRP
>>> itself. I have a calibrated noise source from an HP 8970B Noise Figure
>>> Meter. To test the NF of the USRP, I connect the head to the USRP input. My
>>> GNURadio flowgraph maximizes the USRP gain and measures a moving average of
>>> the received power while I switch the noise source on and off. The
>>> difference in the received power level, in addition to the ENR table from
>>> the noise source, can then be used to calculate the NF of the USRP itself
>>> using the y-factor method.
>>>
>>> Once you have the NF for the USRP at many frequencies (I test every 50
>>> MHz from 50 MHz - 6000 MHz), you can modify the same procedure to test the
>>> NF of a Device Under Test (DUT) which is connected between the noise source
>>> and the (now calibrated) USRP. You can use the USRP cal table we generated
>>> in the previous step to derive the NF of the DUT corrected for the NF of
>>> the USRP.
>>>
>>> In short, this all works incredibly well and garners very repeatable
>>> results. One complication is that you will see wild NF at certain
>>> frequencies due to local interference like LTE and WIFI. I've also compared
>>> the results to that which the HP device measures and they're very
>>> comparable. ... Except below ~ 1GHz.
>>>
>>> And here's the issue - I am seeing higher NF for DUTs below about 1GHz
>>> and particularly worse below 500 MHz. I was hoping someone at Ettus might
>>> be able to shed some light on why this might be. Curiously, the USRPs NF
>>> doesn't seem to be too bad, just the DUT.
>>>
>>> I'll note that I am nominally using a B200 for these tests, but I also
>>> tried an E312 just in case the filter banks might help out somehow. I
>>> didn't see a difference - they both had the same problem.
>>>
>>> I have used several DUTs for this test, including LNA boards we have
>>> designed ourselves and a Mini-Circuits ZX60-P103LN+ (
>>> https://www.minicircuits.com/pdfs/ZX60-P103LN+.pdf). Both seem to
>>> exhibit higher NF when measured with a USRP below 1 GHz. When testing them
>>> on the HP NF meter, the NF is as expected all the way down to 50 MHz.
>>>
>>> I have attached the B200 cal data for your enjoyment as well as the
>>> B200-measured ZX60 NF and the HP-measured ZX60. The HP NF meter only goes
>>> up to 1600 MHz, which is why that data file stops there. I was surprised to
>>> see the B200 seemed to have a better NF than the E312, which averaged 8 dB
>>> NF, by the way.
>>> --
>>> Very Respectfully,
>>>
>>> Dan CaJacob
>>>
>>> ___
>>> USRP-users mailing list
>>> USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
>>> http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com
>>>
>>>
>> --
> Very Respectfully,
>
> Dan CaJacob
>
>
> ___
> USRP-users mailing 
> listUSRP-users@lists.ettus.comhttp://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com
>
>
>
> ___
> USRP-users mailing list
> USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
> http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com
>
>
___
USRP-users mailing list
USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com

Re: [USRP-users] B200 Noise Figure Meter

[Ron Economos via USRP-users]

There's also a balun on the AD9361 input. Unfortunately, the balun part 
number for the low frequency path is not on the schematic.


Ron

On 02/01/2018 05:39 PM, Dan CaJacob via USRP-users wrote:
That's an interesting thought. The 9361 does have a pretty bad match. 
I'll try adding a 50 Ohm attenuator and see if that helps.


On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 5:14 PM Robin Coxe > wrote:


Hi Dan.   Both the B200 and the E312 use the Analog Devices AD9361
RF integrated transceiver. This chip does have an integrated LNA. 
 Perhaps there's some sort of mismatch between your DUTs and this
integrated LNA at <1 GHz?

ADI publishes the RX S-parameters:
https://ez.analog.com/thread/41208#137929

-Robin

On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 7:46 AM, Dan CaJacob via USRP-users
>
wrote:

Hey guys,

I have put together a noise figure meter application that uses
a USRP as the sensing device. It started off as a way to
measure the NF of the USRP itself. I have a calibrated noise
source from an HP 8970B Noise Figure Meter. To test the NF of
the USRP, I connect the head to the USRP input. My GNURadio
flowgraph maximizes the USRP gain and measures a moving
average of the received power while I switch the noise source
on and off. The difference in the received power level, in
addition to the ENR table from the noise source, can then be
used to calculate the NF of the USRP itself using the y-factor
method.

Once you have the NF for the USRP at many frequencies (I test
every 50 MHz from 50 MHz - 6000 MHz), you can modify the same
procedure to test the NF of a Device Under Test (DUT) which is
connected between the noise source and the (now calibrated)
USRP. You can use the USRP cal table we generated in the
previous step to derive the NF of the DUT corrected for the NF
of the USRP.

In short, this all works incredibly well and garners very
repeatable results. One complication is that you will see wild
NF at certain frequencies due to local interference like LTE
and WIFI. I've also compared the results to that which the HP
device measures and they're very comparable. ... Except below
~ 1GHz.

And here's the issue - I am seeing higher NF for DUTs below
about 1GHz and particularly worse below 500 MHz. I was hoping
someone at Ettus might be able to shed some light on why this
might be. Curiously, the USRPs NF doesn't seem to be too bad,
just the DUT.

I'll note that I am nominally using a B200 for these tests,
but I also tried an E312 just in case the filter banks might
help out somehow. I didn't see a difference - they both had
the same problem.

I have used several DUTs for this test, including LNA boards
we have designed ourselves and a Mini-Circuits ZX60-P103LN+
(https://www.minicircuits.com/pdfs/ZX60-P103LN+.pdf). Both
seem to exhibit higher NF when measured with a USRP below 1
GHz. When testing them on the HP NF meter, the NF is as
expected all the way down to 50 MHz.

I have attached the B200 cal data for your enjoyment as well
as the B200-measured ZX60 NF and the HP-measured ZX60. The HP
NF meter only goes up to 1600 MHz, which is why that data file
stops there. I was surprised to see the B200 seemed to have a
better NF than the E312, which averaged 8 dB NF, by the way.
-- 
Very Respectfully,


Dan CaJacob

___
USRP-users mailing list
USRP-users@lists.ettus.com 
http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com


--
Very Respectfully,

Dan CaJacob


___
USRP-users mailing list
USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com


___
USRP-users mailing list
USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com

Re: [USRP-users] B200 Noise Figure Meter

[Dan CaJacob via USRP-users]

That's an interesting thought. The 9361 does have a pretty bad match. I'll
try adding a 50 Ohm attenuator and see if that helps.

On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 5:14 PM Robin Coxe  wrote:

> Hi Dan.   Both the B200 and the E312 use the Analog Devices AD9361 RF
> integrated transceiver. This chip does have an integrated LNA.   Perhaps
> there's some sort of mismatch between your DUTs and this integrated LNA at
> <1 GHz?
>
> ADI publishes the RX S-parameters:
> https://ez.analog.com/thread/41208#137929
>
> -Robin
>
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 7:46 AM, Dan CaJacob via USRP-users <
> usrp-users@lists.ettus.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey guys,
>>
>> I have put together a noise figure meter application that uses a USRP as
>> the sensing device. It started off as a way to measure the NF of the USRP
>> itself. I have a calibrated noise source from an HP 8970B Noise Figure
>> Meter. To test the NF of the USRP, I connect the head to the USRP input. My
>> GNURadio flowgraph maximizes the USRP gain and measures a moving average of
>> the received power while I switch the noise source on and off. The
>> difference in the received power level, in addition to the ENR table from
>> the noise source, can then be used to calculate the NF of the USRP itself
>> using the y-factor method.
>>
>> Once you have the NF for the USRP at many frequencies (I test every 50
>> MHz from 50 MHz - 6000 MHz), you can modify the same procedure to test the
>> NF of a Device Under Test (DUT) which is connected between the noise source
>> and the (now calibrated) USRP. You can use the USRP cal table we generated
>> in the previous step to derive the NF of the DUT corrected for the NF of
>> the USRP.
>>
>> In short, this all works incredibly well and garners very repeatable
>> results. One complication is that you will see wild NF at certain
>> frequencies due to local interference like LTE and WIFI. I've also compared
>> the results to that which the HP device measures and they're very
>> comparable. ... Except below ~ 1GHz.
>>
>> And here's the issue - I am seeing higher NF for DUTs below about 1GHz
>> and particularly worse below 500 MHz. I was hoping someone at Ettus might
>> be able to shed some light on why this might be. Curiously, the USRPs NF
>> doesn't seem to be too bad, just the DUT.
>>
>> I'll note that I am nominally using a B200 for these tests, but I also
>> tried an E312 just in case the filter banks might help out somehow. I
>> didn't see a difference - they both had the same problem.
>>
>> I have used several DUTs for this test, including LNA boards we have
>> designed ourselves and a Mini-Circuits ZX60-P103LN+ (
>> https://www.minicircuits.com/pdfs/ZX60-P103LN+.pdf). Both seem to
>> exhibit higher NF when measured with a USRP below 1 GHz. When testing them
>> on the HP NF meter, the NF is as expected all the way down to 50 MHz.
>>
>> I have attached the B200 cal data for your enjoyment as well as the
>> B200-measured ZX60 NF and the HP-measured ZX60. The HP NF meter only goes
>> up to 1600 MHz, which is why that data file stops there. I was surprised to
>> see the B200 seemed to have a better NF than the E312, which averaged 8 dB
>> NF, by the way.
>> --
>> Very Respectfully,
>>
>> Dan CaJacob
>>
>> ___
>> USRP-users mailing list
>> USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
>> http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com
>>
>>
> --
Very Respectfully,

Dan CaJacob
___
USRP-users mailing list
USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com

Re: [USRP-users] UHD release vs. gnuradio release - compatibility table?

[Ron Economos via USRP-users]

I think the incompatibility issues folks have are due to trying to use 
gr-uhd (a component in GNU Radio) that was built against a certain 
version of UHD with a different version of UHD.


If you're building from source, you should be able to use pretty much 
any recent version of UHD with any recent version of GNU Radio.


I would suggest using a release tag for UHD instead of the maint branch. 
For example:


git checkout release_003_009_007

or

git checkout release_003_010_003_000

Ron W6RZ


On 02/01/2018 10:23 AM, Tom McDermott via USRP-users wrote:

Thanks for the announcement of the new UHD 3.10.3 release.

I've noticed on the gnuradio mailing list some comments about possible 
incompatibility
of certain UHD versions and Gnuradio versions (assuming I'm reading 
things correctly).


Is there a table that lists compatibility of the various UHD branches 
and tags
against gnuradio branches and tags?  Or a table of recommended 
versions between

the two release streams?

I am running gnuradio 3.7.11.1 maint    and UHD maint 122bfae  (which 
is quite

a few behind).


-- Tom, N5EG





___
USRP-users mailing list
USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com

Re: [USRP-users] JTAG connector for B200mini

[liu Jong via USRP-users]

Hi Michael,
I found it.thank you.

2018-01-31 4:03 GMT+08:00 Michael West :

> Hi Jon,
>
> There are 2 cable kits available.  One is 4" and the other is 24".  They
> can be found here:
>
> https://www.ettus.com/product/details/JTAG-FX3-Cable-4
> https://www.ettus.com/product/details/JTAG-FX3-Cable-24
>
> Regards,
> Michael
>
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 5:18 PM, liu Jong via USRP-users <
> usrp-users@lists.ettus.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>> What is type the JTAG connector for B200mini?Where could we purchase it?
>>
>> best regards
>> Jon
>>
>> ___
>> USRP-users mailing list
>> USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
>> http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com
>>
>>
>
___
USRP-users mailing list
USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com

Re: [USRP-users] X300 Environment (IO) error

[Nate Temple via USRP-users]

Hi Jacob,

Can you try upgrading to UHD 3.10.3.0 to see if it resolves this error?

Regards,
Nate Temple

On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 5:09 PM, Jacob Knoles via USRP-users <
usrp-users@lists.ettus.com> wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I have an application that utilizes an X300 radio to play a short burst of
> pulses. This burst style transmission will be repeated hundreds of times
> during the lifetime of the application along with several other types of
> bursts and a brief capture activity.
>
> Some of these functions are being done using GNURadio while some are done
> using the UHD api directly, but the common point is that a usrp_source
> block and usrp_sink are created at the applications start and held through
> the life of the app.
>
> Now, the issue I am having is this, everything works fine until I try a
> second function, meaning, I play a short burst of signal and when playing a
> second burst I get this error:
>
> EnvironmentError: IOError: [0/Radio_0] user_reg_read32() failed:
> EnvironmentError: IOError: [0/Radio_0] sr_read32() failed:
> EnvironmentError: IOError: Block ctrl (CE_01_Port_40) no response packet -
> AssertionError: buff->size() > 0
>   in unsigned __int64 __cdecl ctrl_iface_impl::wait_for_ack(const bool)
>   at Z:\gr-build\src-stage1-dependencies\uhd-release_003_
> 010_001_001\host\lib\rfnoc\ctrl_iface.cpp:206
>
> I have no idea what is causing this error and I need advice on how to
> correct it. Any ideas?
>
> Thanks.
> -
> Jacob Knoles
>
>
> ___
> USRP-users mailing list
> USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
> http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com
>
>
___
USRP-users mailing list
USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com

[USRP-users] X300 Environment (IO) error

[Jacob Knoles via USRP-users]

Hello all,

I have an application that utilizes an X300 radio to play a short burst of
pulses. This burst style transmission will be repeated hundreds of times
during the lifetime of the application along with several other types of
bursts and a brief capture activity.

Some of these functions are being done using GNURadio while some are done
using the UHD api directly, but the common point is that a usrp_source
block and usrp_sink are created at the applications start and held through
the life of the app.

Now, the issue I am having is this, everything works fine until I try a
second function, meaning, I play a short burst of signal and when playing a
second burst I get this error:

EnvironmentError: IOError: [0/Radio_0] user_reg_read32() failed:
EnvironmentError: IOError: [0/Radio_0] sr_read32() failed:
EnvironmentError: IOError: Block ctrl (CE_01_Port_40) no response packet -
AssertionError: buff->size() > 0
  in unsigned __int64 __cdecl ctrl_iface_impl::wait_for_ack(const bool)
  at
Z:\gr-build\src-stage1-dependencies\uhd-release_003_010_001_001\host\lib\rfnoc\ctrl_iface.cpp:206

I have no idea what is causing this error and I need advice on how to
correct it. Any ideas?

Thanks.
-
Jacob Knoles
___
USRP-users mailing list
USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com

Re: [USRP-users] Running RFNoC examples on E310

[Ronakraj Gosalia via USRP-users]

Hey everyone!


This is my very first message, so apologies if I didnt send this correctly
.


I am also facing the same issue outlined by Paul and would really
appreciate some assistance with this. I am using an Ettus USRP E312, GNU
Radio 3.7.10.2 <+6137102> and Ubuntu 16.04.3. <+6116043> Here is what I
tried.


I first started by following the PyBOMBS process in [1] to setup the
cross-compile environment on my host machine (laptop). After using sshfs on
my sdr (USRP E312) I was unable to use the set_env file in the ~/usr
directory, but instead had to source the set_env file in ~/usr/usr. After
this, uhd_find_devices was routed properly, but uhd_usrp_probe gave me the
following error:


Error: RuntimeError: Expected FPGA compatibility number 255.x, but got 14.0:
The FPGA build is not compatible with the host code build.

Now I think this error is due to the fact that the script was trying to run
the default fpga image stored
in/usr/share/uhd/images/usrp_e310_fpga_sg3.bit which was developed for an
older (or different?) version of UHD. From the uhd_usrp_probe output it
says that my current version is UHD_4.0.0.rfnoc-devel-409-gec9138eb so I
tried to download the FPGA images for this version and store them inside
~/usr/usr/share/uhd/images/ and running "uhd_usrp_probe
--args='fpga=/home/root/usr/usr/share/uhd/images/usrp_e3xx_fpga_idle_sg3.bit'"
this
loaded up and gave me the exact same output error as what Paul got. I also
cannot run any uhd examples and get the same runtime error.


Following this, I tried [2], and the fosphor example at the end ran really
well. However, again I was unable to run any of the uhd examples after
this. I also found issues trying to run a simple BPSK transmitter that I
made with the B205. I was unable to use the USRP sink/sources in my GNU
Radio flowchart as it gave me the following error when running the python
script:


Traceback (most recent call last):
File "simple_tx_e312.py", line 229, in 
main()
File "simple_tx_e312.py", line 218, in main
tb = top_block_cls()
File "simple_tx_e312.py", line 68, in __init__
channels=range(1),
File
"/home/root/usr/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gnuradio/uhd/__init__.py",
line 122, in constructor_interceptor
return old_constructor(*args)
File
"/home/root/usr/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gnuradio/uhd/uhd_swig.py",
line 2082, in make
return _uhd_swig.usrp_sink_make(*args)
RuntimeError: RuntimeError: On node 0/FIFO_0, output port 0 is already
connected


I was able to run code by replacing the USRP Sink with an RFNoC Radio TX
block, however the FPGA image is missing the DMAFifo and DUC RFNoC blocks
so I directly connected my flowchart to a FIFO buffer -> RFNoC:Radio
TXblock. This produced a signal with a desired frequency response, but I
was unable to decode the signal when I ran it over the air and via a
coaxial cable. I tried many different configurations (over the air and via
coaxial cable) including an E312 TX -> E312 (another one) RX, E312 TX ->
B205 RX. I also tried B205 TX -> E312 RX and this worked perfectly. B205 TX
-> B205 RX with the same code also works well. This is why I think the
issue is due to the RFNoC Radio TX block. I am also unable to use the
Channel B TX/RX antennas or the GPSDO timing source as the images provided
in "uhd-images_4.0.0.rfnoc-devel-238-g39a41476 <+6141476>" and
"uhd-images_4.0.0.rfnoc-devel-409-gec9138eb" do not support these options
(I can send more specifics about this if it helps, otherwise I will create
a new thread in the near future).


Lastly, I have been following [3]. At the top of this document it does
state "
*However*, this document only covers using RFNoC for the USRP X300/X310.
Using RFNoC with the E310/E312 will be covered in another document.
" which is why I did not initially follow the instructions on this
document. Having read that now I found that there are several references to
the E310 throughout the document, which was very confusing. The document
states that the non-RFNOC fpga images should have DMAFifo and DUC blocks,
however whenever I tried loading these images via "uhd_usrp_probe
--args='fpga=...'" it always gave me same output as that in Paul's message
with always the following blocks included:


|*   |/
*|*   |   |   RFNoC blocks on this device:
*|*   |   |
*|*   |   |   * Radio_0
*|*   |   |   * FIFO_0
*|*   |   |   * Window_0
*|*   |   |   * FFT_0
*|*   |   |   * fosphor_0
*|*   |   |   * FIFO_1
*|*   |   |   * FIR_0*


My next strategy is to create a custom FPGA image and try this by following
the instructions in [3]. Is this the only way to install the DMAFifo, DUC
RFNoC blocks to transmit on my E312? I may have made a mistake in my
understanding/diagnosis somewhere and would appreciate any help that you
may be able to give me. Thank you for your time in advance.


Ronakraj



References:


[1] https://kb.ettus.com/Software_Development_on_the_E310_and_E312

[2] 

Re: [USRP-users] B200 Noise Figure Meter

[Robin Coxe via USRP-users]

Hi Dan.   Both the B200 and the E312 use the Analog Devices AD9361 RF
integrated transceiver. This chip does have an integrated LNA.   Perhaps
there's some sort of mismatch between your DUTs and this integrated LNA at
<1 GHz?

ADI publishes the RX S-parameters:
https://ez.analog.com/thread/41208#137929

-Robin

On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 7:46 AM, Dan CaJacob via USRP-users <
usrp-users@lists.ettus.com> wrote:

> Hey guys,
>
> I have put together a noise figure meter application that uses a USRP as
> the sensing device. It started off as a way to measure the NF of the USRP
> itself. I have a calibrated noise source from an HP 8970B Noise Figure
> Meter. To test the NF of the USRP, I connect the head to the USRP input. My
> GNURadio flowgraph maximizes the USRP gain and measures a moving average of
> the received power while I switch the noise source on and off. The
> difference in the received power level, in addition to the ENR table from
> the noise source, can then be used to calculate the NF of the USRP itself
> using the y-factor method.
>
> Once you have the NF for the USRP at many frequencies (I test every 50 MHz
> from 50 MHz - 6000 MHz), you can modify the same procedure to test the NF
> of a Device Under Test (DUT) which is connected between the noise source
> and the (now calibrated) USRP. You can use the USRP cal table we generated
> in the previous step to derive the NF of the DUT corrected for the NF of
> the USRP.
>
> In short, this all works incredibly well and garners very repeatable
> results. One complication is that you will see wild NF at certain
> frequencies due to local interference like LTE and WIFI. I've also compared
> the results to that which the HP device measures and they're very
> comparable. ... Except below ~ 1GHz.
>
> And here's the issue - I am seeing higher NF for DUTs below about 1GHz and
> particularly worse below 500 MHz. I was hoping someone at Ettus might be
> able to shed some light on why this might be. Curiously, the USRPs NF
> doesn't seem to be too bad, just the DUT.
>
> I'll note that I am nominally using a B200 for these tests, but I also
> tried an E312 just in case the filter banks might help out somehow. I
> didn't see a difference - they both had the same problem.
>
> I have used several DUTs for this test, including LNA boards we have
> designed ourselves and a Mini-Circuits ZX60-P103LN+ (
> https://www.minicircuits.com/pdfs/ZX60-P103LN+.pdf). Both seem to exhibit
> higher NF when measured with a USRP below 1 GHz. When testing them on the
> HP NF meter, the NF is as expected all the way down to 50 MHz.
>
> I have attached the B200 cal data for your enjoyment as well as the
> B200-measured ZX60 NF and the HP-measured ZX60. The HP NF meter only goes
> up to 1600 MHz, which is why that data file stops there. I was surprised to
> see the B200 seemed to have a better NF than the E312, which averaged 8 dB
> NF, by the way.
> --
> Very Respectfully,
>
> Dan CaJacob
>
> ___
> USRP-users mailing list
> USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
> http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com
>
>
___
USRP-users mailing list
USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com

[USRP-users] UHD release vs. gnuradio release - compatibility table?

[Tom McDermott via USRP-users]

Thanks for the announcement of the new UHD 3.10.3 release.

I've noticed on the gnuradio mailing list some comments about possible
incompatibility
of certain UHD versions and Gnuradio versions (assuming I'm reading things
correctly).

Is there a table that lists compatibility of the various UHD branches and
tags
against gnuradio branches and tags?  Or a table of recommended versions
between
the two release streams?

I am running gnuradio 3.7.11.1 maintand UHD maint   122bfae  (which is
quite
a few behind).


-- Tom, N5EG
___
USRP-users mailing list
USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com

Re: [USRP-users] uhd_rx_cfile giving peaks at Fs/2

[Jeff Long via USRP-users]

You could see this if you're outputting one data type from uhd_rx_cfile 
and reading samples as a different data type in Matlab.


On 02/01/2018 11:38 AM, Yeswanth via USRP-users wrote:

Hello Everyone,

I am new to using USRP . I am capturing samples on a CBX board using

“Uhd_rx_cfile -A “TX/RX” -r 20e6 -f 2412e6  -g 20 capture.dat  “    and 
read them into matlab using “load_samples(capture.dat)”


I have plotted the spectrum and I see that I get a peak at Fs/2 i.e at 
10MHz. Correspondingly in time domain I see amplitude varying


Every 1 sample.

When I do uhd_fft at the same frequency I don’t see any peak at the same 
freq. I think I am making some mistake in writing into file using 
uhd_rx_cfile or reading back.


Can anyone suggest a method to fix this issue or reliably process the 
data offline?


Regards,

Yeswanth

Sent from Mail  for 
Windows 10




___
USRP-users mailing list
USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com



___
USRP-users mailing list
USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com

[USRP-users] uhd_rx_cfile giving peaks at Fs/2

[Yeswanth via USRP-users]

Hello Everyone,

I am new to using USRP . I am capturing samples on a CBX board using

“Uhd_rx_cfile -A “TX/RX” -r 20e6 -f 2412e6  -g 20 capture.dat  “    and read 
them into matlab using “load_samples(capture.dat)”

I have plotted the spectrum and I see that I get a peak at Fs/2 i.e at 10MHz. 
Correspondingly in time domain I see amplitude varying 
Every 1 sample. 

When I do uhd_fft at the same frequency I don’t see any peak at the same freq. 
I think I am making some mistake in writing into file using uhd_rx_cfile or 
reading back.

Can anyone suggest a method to fix this issue or reliably process the data 
offline?

Regards,
Yeswanth

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

___
USRP-users mailing list
USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com