From: Jerry Avins on
Rune Allnor wrote:
> On 22 Mar, 00:55, "WWalker" <william.walker(a)n_o_s_p_a_m.imtek.de>
> wrote:
>> Hi Rune,
>>
>> Although the system is dispersive, provided the phase and amplitude reponse
>> of the system are linear over the bandwidth of the signal, the signal will
>> propagate undistorted. This is satisfied in my system with a 50MHz
>> Modulation, 500MHz Carrier AM signal. I simply want to measure a predicted
>> 3 degree phase shift of the Modulation. In order to do that I need to
>> extract the modulation and compare it to the modulation before the
>> propagation. I do not know if this can be done. This is why I am asking.
>
> Why didn't you say that first time around?

Amen! This underscores the consultant's dilemma: give the client what he
asks for, or what he needs.

I understand how we got here. Walker embarked on an inappropriate method
for getting a result and ran into difficulties. He asked about
resolving those (unnecessary) difficulties, rather than about solving
the real problem. It didn't help that a number of unwarranted
assumptions blocked his understanding of the suggestions we made, but it
didn't hurt much either because we were talking at cross purposes
anyway. I feel rather silly for not having figured it out.

Jerry
--
Discovery consists of seeing what everybody has seen, and thinking what
nobody has thought. .. Albert Szent-Gyorgi
�����������������������������������������������������������������������
From: WWalker on
Hi Rune,

The cross correlation technique does not seem to work very well with
sinusoidally modulated AM signals but it does seem to work with pulsed AM
signals. It appears that if the signal is not windowed properly one gets
leakage effects, whereas a pulsed AM signal is automatically windowed
properly.

>"Deviate 3 degrees from light speed" ???

ph=wt=360*f*d/c where: ph=phase in deg, f=freq, c=speed light, r=wave
propagation distance. For a light speed propagating signal, at r=20cm, the
carrier will phase shift 120deg [360*500MHz*20cm/(3E8)] and the modulation
will phase shift 12 deg [360*50MHz*20cm/(3E8)]. I expect the modulation to
arrive 3 degrees earlier (i.e at 9 deg).

William

>On 22 Mar, 11:55, "WWalker" <william.walker(a)n_o_s_p_a_m.imtek.de>
>wrote:
>> Hi Rune,
>>
>> The question you are asking is complicated but I will try to explain. I
am
>> trying to measure the speed of information transmission in the nearfield
of
>> a dipole source. This can be done by measuring the time delay of the
>> envelope of an AM signal between two dipole antennas. Theoretical
>> calculations show that the envelope should deviate about 3 degrees from
>> light speed for a 50MHz modulated, 500MHz carrier signal.
>
>"Deviate 3 degrees from light speed" ???
>
>Again, one of the best ways to measure the effects of the
>system is to measure both the input and the output and then
>examine the cross correlation bewteen the two. This standard
>approach will extract the relative changes through the system
>while at the same time avoiding questions about absolute phase,
>which depends on all kinds of details you couldn't possibly
>track down anyway.
>
>Get a copy of the book "Random Data" by Bendat and Piersol.
>
>Rune
>
From: Rune Allnor on
On 22 Mar, 00:48, glen herrmannsfeldt <g...(a)ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:

> After a signal goes through a dispersive
> medium (such as optical fiber), it then goes through a phase
> conjugation device.  That reverses the effect such that passing
> through the same amount of fiber restores the original signal.
> That is, dispersive fiber+phase conjugation+dispersive fiber
> is, overall, not dispersive!

I remember reading some time in the mid / late '90s about a phase
conjugation tecnique used in a multipath scenario, in the context
of active sonars. Since phase conjugation in time domain amounts
to time reversal, these guys suggested to

1) Emit a known waveform into the water
2) Record the echo reflected off the target (which suffers from
reverberation, multipath and what not)
3) Reverse the recorded signal and emit
4) Record the reflection from the time-reversed recording

I never understood what the purpose of all this might have
been.In 'standard mode' there are all kinds of problems
detecting the reflection of interest inbetween all the
multipaths and distortions. If you already know these
factors, you also know the reference time around which
to flip the signal.

If you are unable to untangle the recieved signal, you don't
know the key references, and effectively emit a random signal.
Even if the idea works, and you recieve something that is close
to the original pulse, you have no idea which part of the
emitted signal interacted with the target.

In the end, one have spent an awful lot of effort for no
gain at all.

Rune
From: Jerry Avins on
WWalker wrote:

...

> ph=wt=360*f*d/c where: ph=phase in deg, f=freq, c=speed light, r=wave
> propagation distance. For a light speed propagating signal, at r=20cm, the
> carrier will phase shift 120deg [360*500MHz*20cm/(3E8)] and the modulation
> will phase shift 12 deg [360*50MHz*20cm/(3E8)]. I expect the modulation to
> arrive 3 degrees earlier (i.e at 9 deg).

A misconception. The frequencies of the signals carrying the modulation
are 450 and 550 MHz. Together with the carrier, they produce the beat
pattern seen as an envelope.

...

Jerry
--
Discovery consists of seeing what everybody has seen, and thinking what
nobody has thought. .. Albert Szent-Gyorgi
�����������������������������������������������������������������������
From: Rune Allnor on
On 22 Mar, 14:27, "WWalker" <william.walker(a)n_o_s_p_a_m.imtek.de>
wrote:
> Hi Rune,
>
> The cross correlation technique does not seem to work very well with
> sinusoidally modulated AM signals but it does seem to work with pulsed AM
> signals. It appears that if the signal is not windowed properly one gets
> leakage effects, whereas a pulsed AM signal is automatically windowed
> properly.
>
> >"Deviate 3 degrees from light speed" ???
>
> ph=wt=360*f*d/c where: ph=phase in deg, f=freq, c=speed light, r=wave
> propagation distance. For a light speed propagating signal, at r=20cm, the
> carrier will phase shift 120deg [360*500MHz*20cm/(3E8)] and the modulation
> will phase shift 12 deg [360*50MHz*20cm/(3E8)]. I expect the modulation to
> arrive 3 degrees earlier (i.e at 9 deg).

First of all - you are wrong.

The phase shift of the *demodulated* 50 MHz signal depends on
all kinds of details in the demodulating system, details you
have no way of knowing with sufficient accuracy.

Again: The only way you *might* come close, is to measure both
the input and output, run both through as similar processing
stages as possible (watch out for effects of variables in
the physical implementations!) and then run a cross correlation
analysis.

The spatial phase you talk about should be measured at 550 MHz,
which is the signal that actually propagates down the physical
channel.

And again: You haven't said anything about *why* you want to
do this. Relying on phase meaurements is very poor way of doing
anything. There is almost certainly a better way of doing
whatever it is you are up to.

Rune