discuss-gnuradio
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] gr-dsp Library Block Parameters


From: Almohanad Fayez
Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] gr-dsp Library Block Parameters
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 14:00:29 -0400 (EDT)

that was a while back that I fixed it, I'm currently in the process of verifying that all of the code I have on github is the same code that is on my computers.  I'm almost at the point where I'll be validating the DSP code ... I'll use your test case test file and step through the code with a JTAG to figure what's going on.

al



-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Dean <address@hidden>
To: Almohanad Fayez <address@hidden>
Cc: discuss-gnuradio <address@hidden>
Sent: Thu, Jul 14, 2011 12:53 pm
Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] gr-dsp Library Block Parameters

I compiled the DSP code, as of Monday.  How long ago did you find/fix the issue?


On 7/14/2011 12:50 PM, Almohanad Fayez wrote:
Did you recompile the DSP code or did you download the the precompiled binary?  I think there was an issue that I fixed in the DSP code but didn't update the binary.

al

-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Dean <address@hidden>
To: Almohanad Fayez <address@hidden>
Cc: discuss-gnuradio <address@hidden>
Sent: Thu, Jul 14, 2011 11:12 am
Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] gr-dsp Library Block Parameters

Hi Al,

That really clears things up conceptually.  Thanks for the insight.

Given that, I went back and modified the dsp test case to use a scaling factor of 15, normalized input, and normalized output, so the block invocation was "dsp.fir_ccf (src_coeff, 15, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0)".  Running the test provides:

  -0.0102 - 0.0102i
  -0.0104 - 0.0103i
  -0.0105 - 0.0105i
  -0.0106 - 0.0106i
  -0.0107 + 0.0010i
   0.0111 + 0.0031i
   0.0334 + 0.0061i
   0.0671 + 0.0102i
   0.1122 + 0.0154i
  
However, this differs from the output of the gr.fir_filter_ccf block and the result of direct computation in MATLAB:

   0.0010 + 0.0111i
   0.0030 + 0.0334i
   0.0061 + 0.0671i
   0.0102 + 0.1122i
   0.0154 + 0.1689i
   0.0205 + 0.2255i
   0.0257 + 0.2822i
   0.0308 + 0.3388i
   0.0360 + 0.3954i

I've checked the magnitude and phase of each of these results, and it doesn't look like they're a simple rotation or multiple of each other.

I thought that it might just not work for decimal sources/coefficients, so I adjusted the tests so that src = "" and src_coeff = (1,1,1,1,1).

Since we no longer needed to scale it before or after, our block invocation is "dsp.fir_ccf (src_coeff, 15, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0)".  This gives the output:

   1.0e+04 *

   3.2748 + 3.2751i
   3.2762 + 3.2752i
   3.2762 + 3.2767i
   3.2763 - 3.2768i
  -3.2768 - 0.0001i
        0 - 0.0002i
        0 - 0.0003i
        0 - 0.0004i
        0 - 0.0005i
        0         
        0         
        0         
        0         
        0         
   2.8678 - 3.2752i
  -3.2757 - 3.2751i
  -3.2757 + 0.0001i
   0.0005 - 3.2768i
  -3.2768
 
The output from the gr.fir_filter_ccf test is the first nine elements of the MATLAB output: 

     1
     2
     3
     4
     5
     5
     5
     5
     5
     
Finally, I thought that the issue might be that I'm not normalizing my source coefficients.  So, I normalized them in MATLAB, yielding src_coeff = (0.4472, 0.4472, 0.4472, 0.4472, 0.4472), which provided the output:

   1.0e+03 *

   6.5440 + 6.5450i
   6.5500 + 6.5460i
   6.5500 + 6.5520i
   6.5510 + 6.5530i
   6.5530 - 0.0010i
        0 - 0.0010i
        0 - 0.0020i
        0 - 0.0020i
        0 - 0.0030i

What am I doing wrong?

Thanks,

Chris

On 7/13/2011 7:14 PM, Almohanad Fayez wrote:
Hey Chris, if you reached this far I'm assuming that the new packages have solved your issues ... Since you're passing normalized values to the DSP you will need to scale them or they will be converted to zeros when moved to the DSP

float             fixed
0.3333    =     0
3.3333    =     3
33.333    =     33

so your scaling factor should be 15.  Regarding input/output signature it allows you to define if the input is normalized (signature = 0) meaning that the easycom-gpp library would need to scale it before transferring it to the dsp and the same for the output you'll tell it if it should scale it back to normalized numbers or should it keep it as fixed point numbers.  The motivation for this is the USRP1 with non-uhd drivers would provide fixed point data during receive mode and normalized data for transmit mode.



al



src_coeff, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0) 
 




-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Dean <address@hidden>
To: Almohanad Fayez <address@hidden>
Cc: discuss-gnuradio <address@hidden>
Sent: Wed, Jul 13, 2011 3:37 pm
Subject: gr-dsp Library Block Parameters

Hi Al, 
 
We're trying to use your gr-dsp library and are having difficulty verifying the output of your DSP.fir_ccf blocks. To allow for easy comparison to the standard filter type, gr.fir_filter_ccf, we generated a very simple block diagram in GRC. This consisted of a vector source, an fir_filter_ccf block, and a file sink. All of the original data and filter taps are the same, but the outputs are not lining up with their expected values. 
 
I have included the full script file at the bottom of this email. The relevant calls to the filter constructors are shown in the text. 
 
For instance: 
 
We have: 
 
src = "">   0.02+0.22j, 
  0.03+0.33j, 
  0.04+0.44j, 
  0.05+0.55j, 
  0.06+0.66j, 
  0.07+0.77j, 
  0.08+0.88j, 
  0.09+0.99j) 
 
src_coeff = (0.101, 0.102, 0.103, 0.104, 0.105) 
 
Without scaling (scaling_factor = 0, so scaling by 2^0 = 1): 
 
  gr.fir_filter_ccf(1, src_coeff) 
 
  This produces output: 
  0.0010 + 0.0111i 
  0.0030 + 0.0334i 
  0.0061 + 0.0671i 
  0.0102 + 0.1122i 
  0.0154 + 0.1689i 
  0.0205 + 0.2255i 
  0.0257 + 0.2822i 
  0.0308 + 0.3388i 
  0.0360 + 0.3954i 
 
  What we thought would be the equivalent call using the fir_ccf block is: 
 
  self.gr_fir_filter_xxx_0 = dsp.fir_ccf (src_coeff, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0) 
 
  This produces output: 
 
  0 
  0 
  0 
  0 
  0 
  0 
  0 
  0 
  0 
 
With scaling (scaling_factor = 15, so scaling by 2^15): 
 
  gr.fir_filter_ccf(1, src_coeff) 
  The data was manually scaled by 2^15 in MATLAB, producing output: 
 
  1.0e+04 * 
 
  0.0033 + 0.0364i 
  0.0100 + 0.1096i 
  0.0200 + 0.2199i 
  0.0334 + 0.3677i 
  0.0503 + 0.5533i 
  0.0672 + 0.7389i 
  0.0840 + 0.9245i 
  0.1009 + 1.1102i 
  0.1178 + 1.2958i 
 
  dsp.fir_ccf (src_coeff, 15, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0) 
 
  * output-signature = 1, so we want the output to be have the same scale factor that it is on the DSP. 
 
  This produces output: 
 
  1.0e+03 * 
 
  0.3350 + 0.3350i 
  0.3400 + 0.3390i 
  0.3430 + 0.3440i 
  0.3470 + 0.3470i 
  0.3500 - 0.0340i 
  -0.3650 - 0.1000i 
  -1.0960 - 0.2000i 
  -2.1990 - 0.3350i 
  -3.6770 - 0.5030i 
 
In neither of these cases do the dsp implementation and the gpp implementation give the same output. 
 
I'm pretty sure that the issue is in my interpretation of your parameters. I've already been using the online documentation to figure out what the parameters do, so I know the basic jist of it, but obviously I haven't got it figured out yet. Could you please explain the use of the scaling_factor, input_signature, and output_signature parameters in more detail? 
 
Also, for the input_signature parameter to be 0, like it is in the examples qa_fir_ccf2.py and qa_fir_ccf3.py, doesn't the input need to be normalized? By my understanding, normalized vectors are unit vectors, so they should have length 1. But src (above) has length 9, so it's not normalized and the input_signature parameter should be 1. Is that correct? 
 
Thanks, 
 
Chris 
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
#!/usr/bin/env python 
################################################## 
# Gnuradio Python Flow Graph 
# Title: Top Block 
# Generated: Wed Jul 13 11:09:34 2011 
################################################## 
 
from gnuradio import eng_notation 
from gnuradio import gr 
from gnuradio.eng_option import eng_option 
from gnuradio.gr import firdes 
from optparse import OptionParser 
from gnuradio import dsp 
 
class top_block(gr.top_block): 
 
  def __init__(self): 
  gr.top_block.__init__(self, "Top Block") 
 
  ################################################## 
  # Variables 
  ################################################## 
  self.samp_rate = samp_rate = 32000 
 
  ################################################## 
  # Blocks 
  ################################################## 
  self.gr_vector_source_x_0 = gr.vector_source_c((0.01+0.11j,0.02+0.22j,0.03+0.33j,0.04+0.44j,0.05+0.55j, 0.06+0.66j, .07+0.77j, 0.08+0.88j, 0.09+0.99j), False, 1) 
  #self.gr_fir_filter_xxx_0 = gr.fir_filter_ccf(1, (0.101, 0.102, 0.103, 0.104, 0.105)) 
  # Uncomment the previous line, comment in the next three lines to switch from dsp-based to gpp-based filter. 
  src_coeff = (0.101, 0.102, 0.103, 0.104, 0.105) 
  dsp.init() 
  self.gr_fir_filter_xxx_0 = dsp.fir_ccf (src_coeff, 15, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0) 
 
  self.gr_file_sink_0 = gr.file_sink(gr.sizeof_gr_complex*1, "filtertest-dsp2.dat") 
  self.gr_file_sink_0.set_unbuffered(False) 
 
  ################################################## 
  # Connections 
  ################################################## 
  self.connect((self.gr_vector_source_x_0, 0), (self.gr_fir_filter_xxx_0, 0)) 
  self.connect((self.gr_fir_filter_xxx_0, 0), (self.gr_file_sink_0, 0)) 
 
  def get_samp_rate(self): 
  return self.samp_rate 
 
  def set_samp_rate(self, samp_rate): 
  self.samp_rate = samp_rate 
 
if __name__ == '__main__': 
  parser = OptionParser(option_class=eng_option, usage="%prog: [options]") 
  (options, args) = parser.parse_args() 
  if gr.enable_realtime_scheduling() != gr.RT_OK: 
  print "Error: failed to enable realtime scheduling." 
  tb = top_block() 
  tb.start() 
  raw_input('Press Enter to quit: ') 
  tb.stop() 
 

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]