Forum: GNU Radio Re: Channel estimation/equalization in OFDM

75eea4d3b5f68cea8929894e51b35592?d=identicon&s=25 Mohammed Karmoose (Guest)
on 2013-08-22 18:59
(Received via mailing list)

Thank you for your reply. Please, check my replies below.

>> Mohammed,
>> you should also check the new OFDM implementation (see
>> examples/ofdm/rx_ofdm.grc and python/digital/ Much more
>> modular.
>> On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 11:33:26AM +0200, Mohammed Karmoose wrote:
>> > However, there are two differences in the implementation in relation
to this
>> > equation: 1) the block computes the inverse of the channel coefficient
>> > (d_known_symbol/symbol), and 2) there is a frequency compensation term
>> > (coasre_freq_comp) which basically rotates the complex samples by phase
>> > corresponding to the frequency deviation and obtained via the
preceding sync
>> > block. One final note is that channel coefficient is obtained in every
>> sub-carrier spacing. Interpolation is done in frequency direction (the
>> Schmidl & Cox sync algo requires double sub-carrier spacing on the sync
>> symbol).
>> > 2) By modifying the VERBOSE variable to be equal to 1 in
>> >, the block also plots the estimated
>> > coefficients in the following order: transmitted symbol --> known
symbol -->
>> > estimated channel inverse --> output). I noticed that when using a
file source/
>> > sink to store/receive packets from OFDM benchmark transmitter and
receiver, the
>> > channel coefficients are still not equal to 1, despite the fact that
no receive
>> > noise nor wireless fading occurs. What do these coefficients represent?
>> Most likely phase rotation due to cyclic prefix and timing errors. Have
>> you checked the magnitude? It's probably 1.

I checked, and it was not 1. I can't seem to find a pattern in the

>> > 3) Are the obtained coefficients eligible to be used in further
precoding of
>> > transmitted packets, assuming that the channel between Tx/Rx is
reciprocal, and
>> > that a receiver can switch roles with the transmitter?
>> That's more of a signal processing question, and as such the (annoying)
>> answer is: Depends on your application. Are you attempting some kind of
>> waterfilling algorithm? In any case, discard the phase before you do
>> so, and make sure you have some kind of limiter.

The main idea was to perform cooperative beamforming in order to null
transmission at certain locations. Based on the acquired channel
a precoding matrix can be obtained to cancel the sum of transmitted
at certain receiving nodes. However, a precise estimate of the channel
coefficients (magnitude and phase) should be obtained. Therefore, I
simply discard the phase part. Is there some sort of uncompensated phase
ambiguity in the hardware of the used USRP nodes?

>> Kaiserstra?e 12
>> Building 05.01
>> 76131 Karlsruhe
>> Phone: +49 721 608-43790
>> Fax: +49 721 608-46071
>> <>

>> KIT -- University of the State of Baden-W?rttemberg and
>> National Laboratory of the Helmholtz Association

*Mohammed Hassan Karmoose*
*Teaching Assistant, Electrical Engineering Dept.*
*Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University*
*Al-Horeya Rd, El-Hadara,* *Alexandria, Egypt - 21544*
*Tel: **(++203)592-1852* | *Fax: **(++203)592-1853*
*Email: m <>_h_karmoose@a <>*
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.