Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Hi Ian, The DMT Electrical BTB measurements on page 15 (page 14 footer numbering) show the combined effect of DAC and ADC quantization. This is an elegant measurement that has been used for the past 30 years to show the total electrical SNDR (Signal-to-Noise Distortion Ratio) in communications systems due to DAC quantization in TX and ADC quantization in RX. When the quantization contribution is uncorrelated with the signal, as is the case for the PMD proposals in 802.3bs, the contribution can be approximated as an additive noise term Nq’ in SNR at the decision slicer. The Wiki reference discusses this nicely. SNR (w/o quantization) = S/N SNR (w/ quantization) = ~S/(N + Nq’) The reason for the prime term is that this is a filtered version of the quantization noise that is measured by the electrical BTB measurement. Some DSP algorithms, for example for sigma delta converters, dramatically reduce the quantization term. For finite quantization: Nq’ > 0 Therefore: S/N > S/(N + Nq) Since Nq reduces or degrades the SNR, it is a penalty. As pointed out in an earlier email, the tricky part is that the is an additive term, whereas penalties are multiplicative (dB). To convert Nq effect on SNR to a penalty, it has to be calculated together with all other impairments, i.e. a full end to end link simulation. The penalty is the difference between SNR with finite quantization and SNR with no quantization. This is similar to how TDP is calculated. For the 2km LAN-WDM DMT proposal in 802.3bs, we calculated the SNR penalty with quantization (6 ENOB DAC and 6 ENOB ADC) as 3dB (excluding other RX design limitations) of which we allocated 2.5dB to TDP and 0.5dB as RX quantization penalty. The latter is in rough agreement with your 10% estimate, which corresponds to a 0.4dB SNR penalty. We also agree that this is not the dominant term. The dominant term is the modulation penalty including PAPR effects which is 9dB.
Chris From: Dedic, Ian [mailto:Ian.Dedic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Just to make it clear, the page referred to does not really show the effects of quantisation noise as such – it shows the effect on bit rate of using better ADCs and DACs with higher ENOB (Effective Number Of Bits), which includes everything causing noise and distortion (including jitter). At these sample rates ADC/DAC performance is not limited by quantisation noise in either case, other causes of noise and distortion dominate – for example if an 8 bit ADC or DAC has ENOB=6.3 (a good figure!) the ideal quantisation noise (ENOB=8.0) is 10dB below the overall noise, so only contributes 10% with 90% coming from other sources. I guess American page numbering has the title slide labelled as page 1, where European numbering has the first content slide labelled as page 1, just like a book J Ian Ian Dedic Chief Engineer Communications Business Unit Fujitsu Semiconductor Europe GmbH 3 Concorde Park, Concorde Road Maidenhead SL6 4FJ, UK Tel : +44 (0) 1628 504 711 Mob : +44 (0) 7795 534 253 *** NEW *** From: Chris Cole [mailto:chris.cole@xxxxxxxxxxx] While the technical results in Ian’s July presentation are impressive, his page numbering is off. Or we have the same problem as with how floors are numbered in a building, with Ian following the European convention. Below is the correct link to the page showing the additive effects of TX and RX quantization: http://www.ieee802.org/3/bs/public/14_07/dedic_3bs_01a_0714.pdf#page=15 Chris From: Chris Cole [mailto:chris.cole@xxxxxxxxxxx] Hi Sudeep, An elegant measurement showing the additive effects of TX and RX quantization is shown in Ian’s July presentation: http://www.ieee802.org/3/bs/public/14_07/dedic_3bs_01a_0714.pdf#page=14 Chris From: Chris Cole Hi Sudeep, Here is a nice discussion on the subject: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantization_(signal_processing) Chris From: Sudeep Bhoja [mailto:sbhoja@xxxxxxxxx] Chris, I am still struggling to understand what you mean by quantization noise penalty in TX and RX. Can you please explain? Thanks, Sudeep
|