HDMI Encoder Modulator, 16in1 Digital Headend, HD RF
Modulator at Soukacatv.com
SKD32 IPTV Gateway
Household Universal Encoding & Modulation Modulator
SKD3013 3 Channel HD Encode Modulator
As the work of the 802.11 committee draws to a close, the
chief question potential users of WLAN technology should be asking themselves
is what does it mean? They may be surprised by the answer. In their effort to
reach a consensus on a standard and salvage more than five years of work, the
committee members elected to adopt an approach that will limit the performance
and future improvements in performance for WLAN technology. In turn, these
limitations stand to impede the delivery of bandwidth-intensive solutions, such
as concurrent multi-application support that could grow the market beyond its
heretofore limited base, the exact opposite of what the committee had set out
to do.
In the near term, users will continue to see a wide range
of non-compatible systems marketed until compliant products become available, a
process that will take a year or so to complete. In the long term, most WLAN manufacturers
will probably modify their products to make them standard compliant and either
offer separate compliant and noncompliant product lines, or offer
user-configurable dual-mode systems that operate in either compliant or
noncompliant modes, depending on whether the user feels performance or
interoperability is more important.
Another point the user may want to consider is that even
with the adoption of a standard, direct sequence (DS) and frequency hopping
(FH) WLAN systems will not be able to interoperate. Given the large installed
base of DS systems, the inherent advantage of FH in a Pico cellular environment
and the industry's move from DS to FH as the preferred technology for heavy
traffic, mobile WLAN systems, the confusion in the market is far from over.
Despite the hoopla that the industry will create
following the announcement of the adoption of a standard, most industry
watchers are certain to agree on two points regarding WLAN technology: the
technology that eventually becomes the standard will be dictated by market
requirements, not by committee, and for the market to grow beyond its
traditionally limited base, the products developed based on that technology
will have to perform a lot better than they do today. This article relates
specifically to modulation techniques used in a spread spectrum system. It is
interesting to note that two of the reasons behind the committee's decision not
to consider modulation techniques enabled by recent developments in technology,
such as quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM), was because it would be
inherently more difficult (that is, costly) for members to implement (given
their already high levels of investment without a return) and would further
delay the publication of an industry standard despite the fact that advanced
modulation techniques, such as QAM, enable substantially higher performance.
Background
Although wireless spread spectrum technology has been in use by the military for decades, only within the last 10 years has the basic technology been applied to the development of systems for commercial use. Expectations for the industry ran high initially, but the market for WLAN systems was slow to develop, encumbered by factors including slow performance, high prices, bulky form factors and incompatibility between competing systems.
Although wireless spread spectrum technology has been in use by the military for decades, only within the last 10 years has the basic technology been applied to the development of systems for commercial use. Expectations for the industry ran high initially, but the market for WLAN systems was slow to develop, encumbered by factors including slow performance, high prices, bulky form factors and incompatibility between competing systems.
The limitations of the technology focused the deployment
of WLAN technology to those markets where the amount of data being transmitted
was small (referred to as busty data) and where immediate access to data by
mobile workers over a large but well-defined area (for example, warehouse, and
distribution and retail environments) was crucial. Not surprisingly, the first
companies to exploit the capability for portable WLAN computing were major
system solution providers to those vertical markets.
Because at the time the technology first became available
for commercial use suitable spread spectrum systems did not exist, these
vertical market suppliers developed their own RF capabilities. Today, the
largest suppliers to the vertical retail, warehousing and distribution markets
still account for approximately 80 percent of all WLAN system shipments.1
Several of the early WLAN systems developed for those
vertical markets relied on DS techniques and, consequently, were able to
deliver raw data rates as high as 2 Mbps per channel. These DS-based systems
were ideal for delivering wireless bridge functionality in a point-to-point
configuration, or cells structured in a point-to-multipoint configuration with
limited overlapping. However, DS suffered when used in a microcellular
environment with multiple overlapping cells because DS tends to block itself.
Although FH spread spectrum radio technology did not suffer from the
self-blocking tendency of DS, the raw data rates delivered were substantially
lower than DS.
Both DS and FH spread spectrum WLAN systems suffered from
their inefficient use of the available bandwidth. A typical DS system with a
raw data rate of 2 Mbps can deliver a throughput of 500 kbps. A typical FH
system with a data rate of 1.6 Mbps is lucky to deliver throughput of 400 kbps.
The balance of the available bandwidth goes toward overhead. Since throughput
is what the user has available to support his or her application and since
Windows®-based applications require a maximum of several megabits per second
generally, neither DS nor FH WLAN systems were suitable for portable network
computing in horizontal markets other than for simple e-mail access.
Another key limitation of spread spectrum WLAN systems
was that they were just too big. Most of these systems were two-piece devices,
which used an externally mounted antenna system that had to be affixed to the
back of the PC. The bulkiness of the configuration in and of itself was an
impediment to deployment, particularly given the trend in portable computing
for smaller computing devices.
Infrared (IR) WLAN technology, both focused and diffused,
was also popular early on. IR delivered high rates, used a small form factor
and offered a low cost basis because of its widespread use in devices such as
remote controls for televisions. However, IR was limited in relation to
portable network computing because of its inability to penetrate walls.
Nevertheless, the ability to transfer data inexpensively and rapidly from one
computing device to another, such as a printer, has resulted in the
incorporation of IR technology into almost all portable computing devices
shipped today.
QPSK & QAM Digital Modulation2
Digital modulation transforms input digital signals into waveforms that are compatible with the nature of the communications channel. Examples of various modulation schemes are shown in Figure 1. One of the two major categories of digital modulation uses a constant amplitude carrier and carries the information in phase or frequency variations known as phase-shift keying (PSK) or frequency-shift keying (FSK). The majority of FH WLAN systems today employ simple FSK modulation schemes. The other category of digital modulation, amplitude-shift keying (ASK), conveys the information in carrier amplitude variations.
Digital modulation transforms input digital signals into waveforms that are compatible with the nature of the communications channel. Examples of various modulation schemes are shown in Figure 1. One of the two major categories of digital modulation uses a constant amplitude carrier and carries the information in phase or frequency variations known as phase-shift keying (PSK) or frequency-shift keying (FSK). The majority of FH WLAN systems today employ simple FSK modulation schemes. The other category of digital modulation, amplitude-shift keying (ASK), conveys the information in carrier amplitude variations.
Fig. 1: Modulation techniques; (a)
FSK, (b) QPSK, (c) 16 QAM and (d) 64 QAM
More advanced modulation techniques convey multiple bits
of information simultaneously by providing multiple states in each symbol of
transmitted information. Quadrature PSK (QPSK) conveys two bits per symbol and
is prevalent in satellite communication.
QAM systems combines PSK and ASK to increase the number
of states per symbol. Each state is defined as a specific amplitude and phase,
meaning that the generation and detection of symbols are more complex than a
simple phase detection or amplitude detection device.
Each time the number of states per symbol is increased,
the bandwidth efficiency also increases. This bandwidth efficiency is measured
in bits per second per hertz (bps/Hz). The displayed modulation schemes occupy
the same bandwidth (after comparable filtering), but have varying efficiencies
of (in theory at least) 1 through 6 bps/Hz.
Channel throughput and range are inversely related (as
range increases, throughput decreases). Accordingly, use of QPSK and QAM
modulation means that at any given range, the system will deliver a higher raw
data rate than a system using FSK modulation.
Adaptive Equalization and Retransmission Avoidance2
Since more states produce a higher channel throughput, it would seem that just increasing the number of states would provide a simple way to increase channel capacity. Unfortunately, multipath interference and noise prevent the system from taking advantage of the increased states.
Since more states produce a higher channel throughput, it would seem that just increasing the number of states would provide a simple way to increase channel capacity. Unfortunately, multipath interference and noise prevent the system from taking advantage of the increased states.
One way to deal with noise and other interference such as
multipath is to employ error detection and correction algorithms. Using this
technique, the receiver identifies corrupted signals and asks the transmitter
to resend. The downside of this approach is that retransmissions affect user
data throughput adversely. Satellite systems are able to implement QPSK and QAM
modulation because they employ some of the most powerful error-correction techniques
known. The systems can afford to retransmit without noticeable impact on user
data throughput because of the tremendous amounts of bandwidth they have at
their disposal. However, channel bandwidth available for unlicensed use is
limited and every retransmission lowers user data throughput.
One solution to the problem of improving bandwidth
utilization and minimizing the number of retransmissions is through
implementation of an adaptive equalization technique. The technique allows the
WLAN system to reconstruct the original signal dynamically. Accordingly, and
assuming the same operating environment, a system incorporating adaptive
equalization will deliver higher user data throughput than a system relying
solely on retransmission.
Without adaptive equalization the receiver is unable to
distinguish the various states from the noise. Without adaptive equalization,
effective user data throughput actually can deteriorate with the implementation
of advanced modulation schemes. Figure 2shows the impact of
adaptive equalization on a 16-QAM system.
Fig. 2: A 16 QAM system (a) without
and (b) using adaptive equalization.
Spatial Diversity in the Antenna Systems
Another factor affecting bandwidth utilization is signal strength. Assuming a constant noise level environment, signal strength decreases as the distance between a transmitter and receiver increases, both in absolute terms and as a ratio of signal to noise. As the signal-to-noise ratio decreases, the number of over-the-air errors increases, requiring more and more retransmissions.
One way to combat this effect is simply to increase the
number of antenna elements. Although such a solution is fairly simple to
implement in an external access point, such a solution is impractical for the
small interface device that links to the portable computing device. In almost
all WLAN systems being marketed today, the interface device uses an externally
mounted antenna system, as shown in Figure 3. The addition of a
second antenna would make the system even bulkier.
Fig. 3: A typical 1.6 Mbps WLAN system.
This problem has been addressed by providing an antenna
system that delivers spatial diversity at both the network interface card (NIC)
and access point. To avoid a bulky external antenna system with two antennas
affixed to the portable computing device, a unique antenna design was developed
that delivers spatial diversity and yet is small enough to be embedded fully
into the NIC, as shown in Figure 4. Unlike other PC
card NIC devices that require a physical cable connection to an external
antenna system mounted on the back of the PC, a single-piece PC card type II
design can be easily plugged into a portable computing device no larger than a
calculator.
Fig. 4: A 3.2 Mbps WLAN system with
spatial diversity; (a) the PC card adapter and (b) the access point.
All of the advanced software subsystems that manage such
a WLAN system require a good deal of horsepower. Rather than rely on the user's
portable computing device for processor power, a 32-bit reduced instruction set
computing processor was designed into the silicon of the basic chipset. The
incorporation of a powerful processor engine yields several ancillary benefits.
One benefit is that the need for an external central
processing unit (CPU) within the access point is eliminated. Most WLAN systems
today require that a WLAN PC card be married with an external CPU or PC to form
an access point or the equivalent. The requirement for an external CPU
increases the cost basis for both the system and the network infrastructure
substantially. A chief impediment to the broader deployment of WLAN systems has
been the high cost of access point infrastructure. The cost of installing the
necessary access point infrastructure can be onerous, particularly in a
cost-cutting business environment where the chief benefit may be difficult to
measure.
Another benefit of the processor engine is that the WLAN
system itself becomes a computing platform able to support user-selected
software-based functionality. For example, although a manufacturer will provide
some level of roaming capability within the WLAN system typically, a user or
systems integrator may prefer to use his or her own customized software to
enable the network to retain its own custom look and feel. This type of
flexibility is of particular importance to systems integrators and original
equipment manufacturer suppliers who have invested substantial sums into the
development of proprietary software systems, and who want to continue to supply
a unique system to their customers.
The Possibilities
The result is a small, economical system capable of operating efficiently in a microcell architecture, able to communicate through walls and able to deliver user data throughput adequate enough to support Windows and other applications concurrently, in effect blending the performance of IR with the benefits of RF. Depending on the implementation of the technology, the same basic design is extendable to 64-QAM modulation, which enables the delivery of a raw data rate of 4.8 Mbps with a throughput of 3 Mbps.
The result is a small, economical system capable of operating efficiently in a microcell architecture, able to communicate through walls and able to deliver user data throughput adequate enough to support Windows and other applications concurrently, in effect blending the performance of IR with the benefits of RF. Depending on the implementation of the technology, the same basic design is extendable to 64-QAM modulation, which enables the delivery of a raw data rate of 4.8 Mbps with a throughput of 3 Mbps.
The issue of throughput is important for reasons beyond
convenience and responsiveness; it impacts system economics as well. High
throughput enables concurrent support of multiple applications using the same
network infrastructure.
Established
in 2000, the Soukacatv.com main products are modulators both in analog and
digital ones, amplifier and combiner. We are the very first one in
manufacturing the headend system in China. Our 16 in 1 and 24 in 1 now are the
most popular products all over the world.
For
more, please access to https://www.soukacatv.com.
CONTACT
US
Dingshengwei
Electronics Co., Ltd
Company
Address: Building A, the first industry park of Guanlong, Xili Town, Nanshan,
Shenzhen, Guangdong, China
Tel: +86
0755 26909863
Fax: +86
0755 26984949
Phone:
+86 13410066011
Email:ken@soukacatv.com
Skype:
soukaken
Source: microwavejournal
没有评论:
发表评论