choosing the modulation technique

Can I get some feedback on my thought process below for choosing a
modulation technique?

I am in the process of choosing the modulation and coding for the
following system:
- frequency band: 2 - 20 Hz
- bit rate: configurable 2 - 16 bps
- transmitter: battery powered
- receiver: PC based (i.e. lots of processing power)
- channel: some burst noise
- adjacent signals/channels: none
- traffic: 1 direction, single user, bursty, asynchronous
- data in payload: 1 to 150 bits

I was considering either bpsk, qpsk, msk or 4-cpfsk. The transmitter can
accomodate psk or fsk.

I ranked the modulations as follows:
- bspk/qpsk: good error rate performance curve
- msk: smaller bandwith and same BER as bpsk; thus I can use a narrower
filter and get better performance
- 4-cpfsk (mod index = 0.5): better BER curve than bpsk and msk (according
to Matlab)

Given that 4-cpfsk has a better BER curve, does it make sense to use
4-CPFSK even for low bit rates? I.e which
is better:
1) bspk/qpsk
2) msk
3) 4-cpfsk (mod index = 0.5)
4) bspk with spreading
5) msk with spreading

From what I know, spreading doesn't provide any coding gain, but only
provides immunity to frequency drop-outs
frequency jamming, thus 3) should be the best. Correct?

Given the short payload, I don't think convolutional coding is applicable.
I will be using a reed-solomon
code.

In the receiver, I will be implementing a coherent detector.

thanks,
barry

On Apr 1, 3:38 pm, "barry_b" <bbuternow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Can I get some feedback on my thought process below for choosing a
> modulation technique?
>
> I am in the process of choosing the modulation and coding for the
> following system:
> - frequency band: 2 - 20 Hz
> - bit rate: configurable 2 - 16 bps
> - transmitter: battery powered
> - receiver: PC based (i.e. lots of processing power)
> - channel: some burst noise
> - adjacent signals/channels: none
> - traffic: 1 direction, single user, bursty, asynchronous
> - data in payload: 1 to 150 bits
>
> I was considering either bpsk, qpsk, msk or 4-cpfsk. The transmitter can
> accomodate psk or fsk.
>
> I ranked the modulations as follows:
> - bspk/qpsk: good error rate performance curve
> - msk: smaller bandwith and same BER as bpsk; thus I can use a narrower
> filter and get better performance
> - 4-cpfsk (mod index = 0.5): better BER curve than bpsk and msk (according
> to Matlab)
>
> Given that 4-cpfsk has a better BER curve, does it make sense to use
> 4-CPFSK even for low bit rates? I.e which
> is better:
> 1) bspk/qpsk
> 2) msk
> 3) 4-cpfsk (mod index = 0.5)
> 4) bspk with spreading
> 5) msk with spreading
>
> From what I know, spreading doesn't provide any coding gain, but only
> provides immunity to frequency drop-outs
> frequency jamming, thus 3) should be the best. Correct?
>
> Given the short payload, I don't think convolutional coding is applicable.
> I will be using a reed-solomon
> code.
>
> In the receiver, I will be implementing a coherent detector.
>
> thanks,
> barry

What is the channel?

On Apr 1, 3:38 pm, "barry_b" <bbuternow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Can I get some feedback on my thought process below for choosing a
> modulation technique?
>
> I am in the process of choosing the modulation and coding for the
> following system:
> - frequency band: 2 - 20 Hz
> - bit rate: configurable 2 - 16 bps
> - transmitter: battery powered
> - receiver: PC based (i.e. lots of processing power)
> - channel: some burst noise
> - adjacent signals/channels: none
> - traffic: 1 direction, single user, bursty, asynchronous
> - data in payload: 1 to 150 bits
>
> I was considering either bpsk, qpsk, msk or 4-cpfsk. The transmitter can
> accomodate psk or fsk.
>
> I ranked the modulations as follows:
> - bspk/qpsk: good error rate performance curve
> - msk: smaller bandwith and same BER as bpsk; thus I can use a narrower
> filter and get better performance
> - 4-cpfsk (mod index = 0.5): better BER curve than bpsk and msk (according
> to Matlab)
>
> Given that 4-cpfsk has a better BER curve, does it make sense to use
> 4-CPFSK even for low bit rates? I.e which
> is better:
> 1) bspk/qpsk
> 2) msk
> 3) 4-cpfsk (mod index = 0.5)
> 4) bspk with spreading
> 5) msk with spreading
>
> From what I know, spreading doesn't provide any coding gain, but only
> provides immunity to frequency drop-outs
> frequency jamming, thus 3) should be the best. Correct?
>
> Given the short payload, I don't think convolutional coding is applicable.
> I will be using a reed-solomon
> code.
>
> In the receiver, I will be implementing a coherent detector.
>
> thanks,
> barry

What is the channel?

On Apr 1, 3:38 pm, "barry_b" <bbuternow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Can I get some feedback on my thought process below for choosing a
> modulation technique?
>
> I am in the process of choosing the modulation and coding for the
> following system:
> - frequency band: 2 - 20 Hz
> - bit rate: configurable 2 - 16 bps
> - transmitter: battery powered
> - receiver: PC based (i.e. lots of processing power)
> - channel: some burst noise
> - adjacent signals/channels: none
> - traffic: 1 direction, single user, bursty, asynchronous
> - data in payload: 1 to 150 bits
>
> I was considering either bpsk, qpsk, msk or 4-cpfsk. The transmitter can
> accomodate psk or fsk.
>
> I ranked the modulations as follows:
> - bspk/qpsk: good error rate performance curve
> - msk: smaller bandwith and same BER as bpsk; thus I can use a narrower
> filter and get better performance
> - 4-cpfsk (mod index = 0.5): better BER curve than bpsk and msk (according
> to Matlab)
>
> Given that 4-cpfsk has a better BER curve, does it make sense to use
> 4-CPFSK even for low bit rates? I.e which
> is better:
> 1) bspk/qpsk
> 2) msk
> 3) 4-cpfsk (mod index = 0.5)
> 4) bspk with spreading
> 5) msk with spreading
>
> From what I know, spreading doesn't provide any coding gain, but only
> provides immunity to frequency drop-outs
> frequency jamming, thus 3) should be the best. Correct?
>
> Given the short payload, I don't think convolutional coding is applicable.
> I will be using a reed-solomon
> code.
>
> In the receiver, I will be implementing a coherent detector.
>
> thanks,
> barry

What is the channel?

On Apr 1, 3:38 pm, "barry_b" <bbuternow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Can I get some feedback on my thought process below for choosing a
> modulation technique?
>
> I am in the process of choosing the modulation and coding for the
> following system:
> - frequency band: 2 - 20 Hz
> - bit rate: configurable 2 - 16 bps
> - transmitter: battery powered
> - receiver: PC based (i.e. lots of processing power)
> - channel: some burst noise
> - adjacent signals/channels: none
> - traffic: 1 direction, single user, bursty, asynchronous
> - data in payload: 1 to 150 bits
>
> I was considering either bpsk, qpsk, msk or 4-cpfsk. The transmitter can
> accomodate psk or fsk.
>
> I ranked the modulations as follows:
> - bspk/qpsk: good error rate performance curve
> - msk: smaller bandwith and same BER as bpsk; thus I can use a narrower
> filter and get better performance
> - 4-cpfsk (mod index = 0.5): better BER curve than bpsk and msk (according
> to Matlab)
>
> Given that 4-cpfsk has a better BER curve, does it make sense to use
> 4-CPFSK even for low bit rates? I.e which
> is better:
> 1) bspk/qpsk
> 2) msk
> 3) 4-cpfsk (mod index = 0.5)
> 4) bspk with spreading
> 5) msk with spreading
>
> From what I know, spreading doesn't provide any coding gain, but only
> provides immunity to frequency drop-outs
> frequency jamming, thus 3) should be the best. Correct?
>
> Given the short payload, I don't think convolutional coding is applicable.
> I will be using a reed-solomon
> code.
>
> In the receiver, I will be implementing a coherent detector.
>
> thanks,
> barry

What is the channel?

>On Apr 1, 3:38 pm, "barry_b" <bbuternow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Can I get some feedback on my thought process below for choosing a
>> modulation technique?
>>
>> I am in the process of choosing the modulation and coding for the
>> following system:
>> - frequency band: 2 - 20 Hz
>> - bit rate: configurable 2 - 16 bps
>> - transmitter: battery powered
>> - receiver: PC based (i.e. lots of processing power)
>> - channel: some burst noise
>> - adjacent signals/channels: none
>> - traffic: 1 direction, single user, bursty, asynchronous
>> - data in payload: 1 to 150 bits
>>
>> I was considering either bpsk, qpsk, msk or 4-cpfsk. The transmitter
can
>> accomodate psk or fsk.
>>
>> I ranked the modulations as follows:
>> - bspk/qpsk: good error rate performance curve
>> - msk: smaller bandwith and same BER as bpsk; thus I can use a
narrower
>> filter and get better performance
>> - 4-cpfsk (mod index = 0.5): better BER curve than bpsk and msk
(according
>> to Matlab)
>>
>> Given that 4-cpfsk has a better BER curve, does it make sense to use
>> 4-CPFSK even for low bit rates? I.e which
>> is better:
>> 1) bspk/qpsk
>> 2) msk
>> 3) 4-cpfsk (mod index = 0.5)
>> 4) bspk with spreading
>> 5) msk with spreading
>>
>> From what I know, spreading doesn't provide any coding gain, but only
>> provides immunity to frequency drop-outs
>> frequency jamming, thus 3) should be the best. Correct?
>>
>> Given the short payload, I don't think convolutional coding is
applicable.
>> I will be using a reed-solomon
>> code.
>>
>> In the receiver, I will be implementing a coherent detector.
>>
>> thanks,
>> barry
>
>What is the channel?
>

The channel is:
- transmitter and receiver are not moving
- wireless 
- signal is coupled to the ground with antennas
- ground acts as a low pass filter which has acceptable attenuation below
20 Hz

Hello Barry,

Your system looks very much like some of the projects that I worked on. 
If this is a commercial application, I would be glad to offer my 
services. The contact is at the web site in my signature.

BTW, if this meant to be the electric or the electromagnetic channel, 
using the frequency band of 2...20 Hz doesn't seem to be a good choice 
due to the very high level of noise (it almost obeys 1/F law).


Vladimir Vassilevsky
DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant
http://www.abvolt.com


barry_b wrote:

> Can I get some feedback on my thought process below for choosing a
> modulation technique?
> 
> I am in the process of choosing the modulation and coding for the
> following system:
> - frequency band: 2 - 20 Hz
> - bit rate: configurable 2 - 16 bps
> - transmitter: battery powered
> - receiver: PC based (i.e. lots of processing power)
> - channel: some burst noise
> - adjacent signals/channels: none
> - traffic: 1 direction, single user, bursty, asynchronous
> - data in payload: 1 to 150 bits
> 
> I was considering either bpsk, qpsk, msk or 4-cpfsk. The transmitter can
> accomodate psk or fsk.
> 
> I ranked the modulations as follows:
> - bspk/qpsk: good error rate performance curve
> - msk: smaller bandwith and same BER as bpsk; thus I can use a narrower
> filter and get better performance
> - 4-cpfsk (mod index = 0.5): better BER curve than bpsk and msk (according
> to Matlab)
> 
> Given that 4-cpfsk has a better BER curve, does it make sense to use
> 4-CPFSK even for low bit rates? I.e which
> is better:
> 1) bspk/qpsk
> 2) msk
> 3) 4-cpfsk (mod index = 0.5)
> 4) bspk with spreading
> 5) msk with spreading
> 
> From what I know, spreading doesn't provide any coding gain, but only
> provides immunity to frequency drop-outs
> frequency jamming, thus 3) should be the best. Correct?
> 
> Given the short payload, I don't think convolutional coding is applicable.
> I will be using a reed-solomon
> code.
> 
> In the receiver, I will be implementing a coherent detector.
> 
> thanks,
> barry
> 
> 
> 

On Tue, 01 Apr 2008 15:47:05 -0500, "barry_b" <bbuternowsky@gmail.com>
wrote:

>>On Apr 1, 3:38 pm, "barry_b" <bbuternow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Can I get some feedback on my thought process below for choosing a
>>> modulation technique?
>>>
>>> I am in the process of choosing the modulation and coding for the
>>> following system:
>>> - frequency band: 2 - 20 Hz
>>> - bit rate: configurable 2 - 16 bps
>>> - transmitter: battery powered
>>> - receiver: PC based (i.e. lots of processing power)
>>> - channel: some burst noise
>>> - adjacent signals/channels: none
>>> - traffic: 1 direction, single user, bursty, asynchronous
>>> - data in payload: 1 to 150 bits
>>>
>>> I was considering either bpsk, qpsk, msk or 4-cpfsk. The transmitter
>can
>>> accomodate psk or fsk.
>>>
>>> I ranked the modulations as follows:
>>> - bspk/qpsk: good error rate performance curve
>>> - msk: smaller bandwith and same BER as bpsk; thus I can use a
>narrower
>>> filter and get better performance
>>> - 4-cpfsk (mod index = 0.5): better BER curve than bpsk and msk
>(according
>>> to Matlab)
>>>
>>> Given that 4-cpfsk has a better BER curve, does it make sense to use
>>> 4-CPFSK even for low bit rates? I.e which
>>> is better:
>>> 1) bspk/qpsk
>>> 2) msk
>>> 3) 4-cpfsk (mod index = 0.5)
>>> 4) bspk with spreading
>>> 5) msk with spreading
>>>
>>> From what I know, spreading doesn't provide any coding gain, but only
>>> provides immunity to frequency drop-outs
>>> frequency jamming, thus 3) should be the best. Correct?
>>>
>>> Given the short payload, I don't think convolutional coding is
>applicable.
>>> I will be using a reed-solomon
>>> code.
>>>
>>> In the receiver, I will be implementing a coherent detector.
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>> barry
>>
>>What is the channel?
>>
>
>The channel is:
>- transmitter and receiver are not moving
>- wireless 
>- signal is coupled to the ground with antennas
>- ground acts as a low pass filter which has acceptable attenuation below
>20 Hz

I'll second Vladimir's input on the noise, and also that phase noise
becomes very problematic at such low bit rates.   So phase-modulated
signals may not be the best choice for such low rates.

Since it's wireless, what's the carrier frequency?  Expected range?
Indoor or outdoor or mixed?





Eric Jacobsen
Minister of Algorithms
Abineau Communications
http://www.ericjacobsen.org

On Apr 1, 4:47 pm, "barry_b" <bbuternow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Apr 1, 3:38 pm, "barry_b" <bbuternow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Can I get some feedback on my thought process below for choosing a
> >> modulation technique?
>
> >> I am in the process of choosing the modulation and coding for the
> >> following system:
> >> - frequency band: 2 - 20 Hz
> >> - bit rate: configurable 2 - 16 bps
> >> - transmitter: battery powered
> >> - receiver: PC based (i.e. lots of processing power)
> >> - channel: some burst noise
> >> - adjacent signals/channels: none
> >> - traffic: 1 direction, single user, bursty, asynchronous
> >> - data in payload: 1 to 150 bits
>
> >> I was considering either bpsk, qpsk, msk or 4-cpfsk. The transmitter
> can
> >> accomodate psk or fsk.
>
> >> I ranked the modulations as follows:
> >> - bspk/qpsk: good error rate performance curve
> >> - msk: smaller bandwith and same BER as bpsk; thus I can use a
> narrower
> >> filter and get better performance
> >> - 4-cpfsk (mod index = 0.5): better BER curve than bpsk and msk
> (according
> >> to Matlab)
>
> >> Given that 4-cpfsk has a better BER curve, does it make sense to use
> >> 4-CPFSK even for low bit rates? I.e which
> >> is better:
> >> 1) bspk/qpsk
> >> 2) msk
> >> 3) 4-cpfsk (mod index = 0.5)
> >> 4) bspk with spreading
> >> 5) msk with spreading
>
> >> From what I know, spreading doesn't provide any coding gain, but only
> >> provides immunity to frequency drop-outs
> >> frequency jamming, thus 3) should be the best. Correct?
>
> >> Given the short payload, I don't think convolutional coding is
> applicable.
> >> I will be using a reed-solomon
> >> code.
>
> >> In the receiver, I will be implementing a coherent detector.
>
> >> thanks,
> >> barry
>
> >What is the channel?
>
> The channel is:
> - transmitter and receiver are not moving
> - wireless
> - signal is coupled to the ground with antennas
> - ground acts as a low pass filter which has acceptable attenuation below
> 20 Hz

You might consider using subaudible tones, like radios use for
squelch. Look up CTCSS. The idea is to define a set of tones, say 16,
and map each group of four bits to a tone. The receiver would need to
detect what tone is present to decide the four bits.

John

The channel frequency band is fixed at 2-20 Hz (maybe up to 30 Hz). The
transmitter works in this range and cannot be changed. We have a working
system that uses bpsk at 12 Hz (bit rate is 4 bps). I am looking into
improving the performance of the system, thus I am wondering if other
modulation techniques (msk, 4-cpfsk, etc) may provide a better error rate.
The system works outdoors for up to 2 km.

>
>You might consider using subaudible tones, like radios use for
>squelch. Look up CTCSS. The idea is to define a set of tones, say 16,
>and map each group of four bits to a tone. The receiver would need to
>detect what tone is present to decide the four bits.
>
>John
>