On 05/03/2021 05:47 AM, Nieland, Michael wrote:

Dear all,

I am using two B210 USRP’s to generate and receive DQPSK Signals around 1.53 GHz (two TX and two RX channels). The USRP’s use FW Version 8.0 and FPGA Version 16.0 (Hardware Revision 4). I am having some trouble properly changing the RX frequency at runtime using the message interface. When the RX frequency is varied using a QT Gui Range slider I encounter no issues. However, in my application I have to use the message interface. In general, I assume that my pmt message structure must be correct, since it works fine when the frequency is only changed by a few MHz. Also other commands (like setting tx and rx gains) work as expected. If, however, the frequency is requested to be set to let’s say 2 GHz from 1.53 GHz, an overflow is indicated and the respective USRP Channel completely stops streaming (does not restart).

I tried using the “freq” command (both with indicating the channel and without since it should not make a difference on the B210) and the tune_request. I tried several different message structures but for some reason it only works for the TX Usrp (When using the message port of the TX Usrp to change frequency it is indicating some underflows right when the frequency is changed and is then working fine without any underflows or other issues).

To eliminate the error I am right now testing in an isolated FG with only a USRP source and a Message Edit Box (FG is attached) and the issue occurs here as well.

Any help would be appreciated and maybe someone was/is facing the same issue?

Best regards

Michael


Have you tried using the "direct" interface for tuning--bypassing, for now, the message infrastructure? Just use your rx_freq variable directly in the UHD source block frequency input field? If that also produces overruns during tuning, then the issue
  is deeper inside than the message interface.




_______________________________________________
USRP-users mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to