Jump to content

Talk:Software-defined radio

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 24.251.186.204 (talk) at 18:19, 11 July 2011 (→‎The box at the top that complains about insufficient "in-line citations" in 2009: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconComputing Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconRadio Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio articles
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
To-do List:
WikiProject iconAmateur radio Start‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Amateur radio, which collaborates on articles related to amateur radio technology, organizations, and activities. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Amateur radioWikipedia:WikiProject Amateur radioTemplate:WikiProject Amateur radioamateur radio articles
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
To-do list:

Improve to GA-Class:

Expand and improve:

Create:

External Links

The link for SDR Forum Software Defined Radio Design Process and Tools Work Group Wiki was removed. This was a valuable link to a collaborative forum for the SDR community. I do not see this as spam. It is a place to discuss how to design and implement SDR's. How do we get it added back in? AndrewDauman 22:02, 19 June 2007 (UTC)AndrewDauman[reply]

The WP:EL guideline says to avoid external links to wikis. Besides, this SDR article already has 3 sdrforum.org external links, any more would be excessive. (Requestion 22:29, 19 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Can we whittle down the list of external links. It would be better to cite some of these as references at specific points in the article, while removing the rest. Jehochman (Talk/Contrib) 16:55, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Can I add a Seminar Paper Presented On SDR? Virtual11234 03:55, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The title of Mitola's paper seems to be wrong. It is: "Software radios - survey, critical evaluation and future directions". 2008-11-18

Redirects

It appears that there are three pages for Software Defined Radio. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_radio http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software-defined_radio http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_defined_radio Even though it appears as though they somehow sync-up, I suggest one be maintained and the other two deleted Jennifersteinberg 20:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Two of those are redirects to the main Software-defined radio page. Software Receiver is another redirect. Only the main page is being maintained. (Requestion 20:47, 4 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

It isn't 2003 anymore

Current (2003) digital electronics is to slow to process signals from 10kHz to 2.4GHz? Might be a bit outdated. In 2007, I think we're either there or getting there, and while we cannot receive the entire radio spectrum, projects such as HPSDR are developing hardware (the mercury board) that can directly sample the radio spectrum from 0-65MHz. - Ryan 19:26, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

contradiction in definition?

from the intro: SDR [uses] … the soundcard of a general purpose computer (PC), or a reconfigurable home-made piece of digital electronics. But, the military examples given don't sound like either 'a soundcard' or 'home-made digital electronics'. Should it instead say that the processing is done in a type of computer hardware known as a DSP such as what is found in soundcards? 「ѕʀʟ·✎」 06:21, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why "Soundcard"?

In the second paragraph: "An SDR performs significant amounts of signal processing with the soundcard of a general purpose computer (PC)..." Why soundcard? In my opinion soundcard equals to audio card. It's kind of confusing here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.40.139.171 (talk) 08:06, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

comparsion to oscope/fn-generator

It seems that digital oscilloscopes and function-genertors are bit similar to sdr. any comments? 193.167.107.251 (talk) 19:25, 28 January 2008 (UTC) <---- This assertion is too vague to respond to.[reply]

Misinterpretation of the Nyquist Theorem

There are several technical inaccuracies in the section on practical receivers. The statement that digital electronics are too slow to receive signals over 40 MHz is incorrect. Remember that the Nyquist Theorem states that the sampling rate must be at least twice the bandwidth of the signal. This means that, in theory, we can sample signals anywhere in the spectrum (with some limitations depending on where the signal is located in relation to the sampling frequency). The limiting factor in actual radios is a measure called the aperture jitter, which quantifies the ability of the ADC to sample at a precise interval (assuming a jitter-free sampling clock, of course). If you are interested more in the subject a google of "undersampling" turns up several excellent references.

The statements on recovering the phase and bit timing are also incorrect. The reason we need to recover phase and bit information is that the transmitter and receiver clocks are not in sync with each other. By recovering this information we will be able to integrate over the entire bit and thus receive the most power and improve the accuracy of the entire radio.

As far as authority goes, I am an electrical engineer who designs digital radios for a living. Roddefig (talk) 07:06, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Radio protocol?

Can someone define radio protocol, as used several times in the article? --Abdull (talk) 12:49, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Radio protocols are obviously the sets of rules, parameters and conventions needed for radios to communicate. I don't think explicit definition is necessary here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.251.186.204 (talk) 22:25, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Handset soc chips

The part "Receivers" is copied from NXP itself.
There are more companies claiming to have a chip implementation of SDR for a handset soc. from google
217.140.96.21 (talk) 07:51, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FPGA programming

In the section "SPEAKeasy phase II", at the end, it is claimed that "The time to reprogram these [FPGAs] is an issue limiting application of the radio." This is misleading. The time to write a program for an FPGA is significant; the time to download a stored FPGA program is around 20 milliseconds. This means an SDR could change transmission protocols and frequencies in one fiftieth of a second, probably not an intolerable interruption for that task. I am speaking from my experience with Gigaoperations, the maker of the FPGA computing platform chosen by Xilinx in the 1990s. I imagine with much bigger, but faster, FPGAS today, download times are similar. Rhodesh (talk) 22:43, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please change the article as you suggest. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 04:12, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The box at the top that complains about insufficient "in-line citations" in 2009

It's half past 2011 at the moment and there are lots of citations. The box should be deleted immediately. It's pure gnome shit.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Software-defined_radio&oldid=438948678"