<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Equal Gain Combining (EGC)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dsplog.com/2008/09/19/equal-gain-combining/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dsplog.com/2008/09/19/equal-gain-combining/</link>
	<description>Signal Processing for Communication</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 01:03:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Krishna Sankar</title>
		<link>http://www.dsplog.com/2008/09/19/equal-gain-combining/#comment-24366</link>
		<dc:creator>Krishna Sankar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 00:10:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dsplog.com/?p=236#comment-24366</guid>
		<description>@Sharad: In EGC, we make sure that the phases add constructively. Hence the sum of squares of powers makes sense. Agree?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Sharad: In EGC, we make sure that the phases add constructively. Hence the sum of squares of powers makes sense. Agree?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sharad</title>
		<link>http://www.dsplog.com/2008/09/19/equal-gain-combining/#comment-21766</link>
		<dc:creator>Sharad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Feb 2010 09:54:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dsplog.com/?p=236#comment-21766</guid>
		<description>Krishna,
In the first expression for effective Eb/No, shouldn&#039;t it be the square of the sum of all h&#039;s(power of the combined signal) rather than sum of squares(sum of the powers of individual signals)? With the expression that&#039;s mentioned here, I don&#039;t see how you get to the next expression.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Krishna,<br />
In the first expression for effective Eb/No, shouldn&#8217;t it be the square of the sum of all h&#8217;s(power of the combined signal) rather than sum of squares(sum of the powers of individual signals)? With the expression that&#8217;s mentioned here, I don&#8217;t see how you get to the next expression.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ramy Baly</title>
		<link>http://www.dsplog.com/2008/09/19/equal-gain-combining/#comment-17911</link>
		<dc:creator>Ramy Baly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2010 20:56:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dsplog.com/?p=236#comment-17911</guid>
		<description>Hello
I was trying to do a simulation for EGC using Monte Carlo simulation (not as shown above).
I followed the same steps, but the BER values still high (order of 10^-1). I don&#039;t know why?
Please, can anybody help?

Thanks</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello<br />
I was trying to do a simulation for EGC using Monte Carlo simulation (not as shown above).<br />
I followed the same steps, but the BER values still high (order of 10^-1). I don&#8217;t know why?<br />
Please, can anybody help?</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ramy Baly</title>
		<link>http://www.dsplog.com/2008/09/19/equal-gain-combining/#comment-17840</link>
		<dc:creator>Ramy Baly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 15:12:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dsplog.com/?p=236#comment-17840</guid>
		<description>Hello Sir,
I tried to implement the EGC using the Monte Carlo simulation and it didn&#039;t work. Is there any explanation?
when trying to take the BER average for only two iterations I get answers of the order (10^-1) while when trying it only one time, I get very low values of BER which is what I want.

Thanks</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Sir,<br />
I tried to implement the EGC using the Monte Carlo simulation and it didn&#8217;t work. Is there any explanation?<br />
when trying to take the BER average for only two iterations I get answers of the order (10^-1) while when trying it only one time, I get very low values of BER which is what I want.</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Communications Engineer</title>
		<link>http://www.dsplog.com/2008/09/19/equal-gain-combining/#comment-17522</link>
		<dc:creator>Communications Engineer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Dec 2009 15:55:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dsplog.com/?p=236#comment-17522</guid>
		<description>Krishna,

Can you tell me if Equal Gain Combining is possible is time domain. 

If so, can I implement it this way, that I simply sum up the number of chips that come in a Spreading Factor.

So, if SF = 4 and the received spread signal is, 

x =   [1 1 1 1   -1 -1 -1 1]

then,

EGC(x)@SF=4 = [4   -2]

Is this the correct approach?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Krishna,</p>
<p>Can you tell me if Equal Gain Combining is possible is time domain. </p>
<p>If so, can I implement it this way, that I simply sum up the number of chips that come in a Spreading Factor.</p>
<p>So, if SF = 4 and the received spread signal is, </p>
<p>x =   [1 1 1 1   -1 -1 -1 1]</p>
<p>then,</p>
<p>EGC(x)@SF=4 = [4   -2]</p>
<p>Is this the correct approach?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Krishna Sankar</title>
		<link>http://www.dsplog.com/2008/09/19/equal-gain-combining/#comment-16694</link>
		<dc:creator>Krishna Sankar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Dec 2009 00:02:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dsplog.com/?p=236#comment-16694</guid>
		<description>@communications_engineer: Well, once you despread at the receiver, are you seeing the same information as was transmitted? Maybe to debug, try without spreading.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@communications_engineer: Well, once you despread at the receiver, are you seeing the same information as was transmitted? Maybe to debug, try without spreading.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: communications_engineer</title>
		<link>http://www.dsplog.com/2008/09/19/equal-gain-combining/#comment-16350</link>
		<dc:creator>communications_engineer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 15:12:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dsplog.com/?p=236#comment-16350</guid>
		<description>Hello, I am using Equal Gain Combining to extract frequency domain diversity in  MC-CDMA, but having problems with it.

At the transmitter, I modulate the binary data and repeat the symbols of each user on a given number of subcarriers, multiply it by a frequency domain spreading code (a row vector) and add the spread data of all users to have a composite signal.

At the receiver, for user 1, I multiply it by the same spreading code, and then use EGC to combine the modulation symbols.

I first want to test this algorithm without channel noise/impairments, 
therefore, I think EGC will be 
                   EGC = sum(RepSubcarDeSprdU1,1)
To get the sum of all symbols.

The problem, is the when I demodulate the result, there is a large error.

I must mention that this runs will for BPSK but shows errors for QPSK.

Any suggestions?

Thanks Krishna</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello, I am using Equal Gain Combining to extract frequency domain diversity in  MC-CDMA, but having problems with it.</p>
<p>At the transmitter, I modulate the binary data and repeat the symbols of each user on a given number of subcarriers, multiply it by a frequency domain spreading code (a row vector) and add the spread data of all users to have a composite signal.</p>
<p>At the receiver, for user 1, I multiply it by the same spreading code, and then use EGC to combine the modulation symbols.</p>
<p>I first want to test this algorithm without channel noise/impairments,<br />
therefore, I think EGC will be<br />
                   EGC = sum(RepSubcarDeSprdU1,1)<br />
To get the sum of all symbols.</p>
<p>The problem, is the when I demodulate the result, there is a large error.</p>
<p>I must mention that this runs will for BPSK but shows errors for QPSK.</p>
<p>Any suggestions?</p>
<p>Thanks Krishna</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Served from: www.dsplog.com @ 2012-02-11 00:09:42 -->
