Thank you for the information Robert! Isn't it 6 GHz? However, 4 GHz would also be sufficient for me.
How many channels does your system have? I suppose you use some algorithm for phase calibration after power cycling? I plan to do the same, so the 180 deg ambiguity should be manageable. I looked at the N32x, however, they cost twice as much and I dont't plan on using 200 MHz of bandwidth. If I have an external LO signal I can feed it to the N310, so the only difference between N310 and N32x in this regard would be that I need to generate the LO externally when using the N310, right? <[email protected]> schrieb am Mo., 27. Jan. 2020, 14:42: > We use the N310 for DoA estimation, however: > > - you are limited to 4 GHz > > - after power-cycling you get a 180° ambiguity between the two > radios (I do not know if this could also happen when you just change the LO > frequency) > > > > If you want to have >4 channels, have a look at the new N320/N321. No > experience with those, but apparently they can do LO distribution. > > > > Also take into account if maybe later in the project you want to be able > to transmit, which you cannot do with TwinRX. > > > > Regards, > > Robert > > > > *From:* USRP-users [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf > Of *Sammy Welschen via USRP-users > *Sent:* Monday, January 27, 2020 2:19 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [USRP-users] DOA with N310 or X310+TwinRX > > > > Thank you Marcus! So the N310 would be the way to go? I was unsure since > the TwinRX is recommended for phase coherent applications. > > > > Marcus D. Leech via USRP-users <[email protected]> schrieb am > So., 26. Jan. 2020, 18:57: > > On 01/25/2020 11:43 AM, Sammy Welschen via USRP-users wrote: > > Dear all, > > > > I am planning a system with 5-10 channels that is capable of DOA > > estimation. > > > > Concerning the calibration of the resulting array, would there be a > > difference between a system made up of N310 and one made up of X310 > > with TwinRX boards? Would there be other important differences that > > influence estimation performance? > > > > As I understand it, the TwinRX allows LO sharing between the boards in > > a single X310, but this would not help me if I have two or three X310. > > On the other hand, the N310s could be connected to a shared LO. > > > > Are the following thoughts correct? > > > > Suppose I turn on my system. Then I have to calibrate phase offsets > > between channels in any case. Now I change the center frequency. If I > > have N310s without shared LO, I have to recalibrate. Same for the > > X310s, since LOs are shared only internally. If I have N310s with a > > shared LO, I do not have to recalibrate. > > > > If I restart the system, I have to recalibrate in any case. > > > > The devices would by synchronized with PPS in any case and with the 10 > > MHz reference if no external LO is used. > > > > What is the better choice for DOA estimation (N310 or X310 with TwinRX > > or something different)? > > > > Thank you very much > > > > Sammy > > > > > Sammy: > > Your characterization of the two scenarios is correct. > > There may be some folks on this list who have implemented DOA schemes, > but likely few-to-none who have done it on both X310 and N310 > and can comment on the differences they encountered. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > USRP-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com > >
_______________________________________________ USRP-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com
