I have spent a great week attending GRCon22 remotely. Besides trying to follow all the talks as usual, I have been participating in the Capture The Flag. I had sent a few challenges for the CTF, and I wanted to have some fun and see what challenges other people had sent. I ended up in 3rd position. In this post I’ll give a walkthrough of the challenges I submitted, and of my solution to some of the other challenges. The material I am presenting here is now in the grcon22-ctf Github repository.
I have a couple of ideas in mind that involve connecting an ADALM-Pluto SDR to a phone or tablet. Usually, the Pluto is connected to a PC through USB, and the Pluto acts as an Ethernet device, so that network communications between the PC and Pluto are possible. I want to have the same thing running with my Android phone, which is an unrooted Xiaomi Mi 11 Lite (model M2101K9AG, if anyone is curious).
As usual when trying to do something slightly advanced with Android, this hasn’t worked on the first go, so I’ve spent some time debugging the problem. Long story short, in the end, the only thing I need to make this work is to run
# fw_setenv usb_ethernet_mode ecm # fw_setenv ipaddr 192.168.89.1
on the Pluto once and reboot (these settings are saved as uBoot environment variables to persistent storage), then enable Ethernet tethering on the phone every time that I connect the Pluto. I can go to the web browser in the phone and check that I can access the Pluto web server at 192.168.89.1.
Hopefully the rest of this post will give useful information about how everything works behind the scenes, as your mileage may vary with other Android devices (or if you try with an iOS device, of which I know next to nothing).
I haven’t seen many people doing this, so the documentation is scarce. PABR did a set up with LeanTRX, the Pluto and an Android phone, but they were running the Pluto in host mode and the Android phone in device mode, and I’m doing the opposite. Note that when you connect a Pluto and phone together, the roles they take will depend on the USB cable. My phone has USB-C, so I’m using a USB-C plug to type-A receptacle cable (USB-C OTG cable) together with the usual USB type-A plug to USB micro-B plug cable (the cable provided with the Pluto). There is also this thread in the ADI forums, but it doesn’t really say anything about Ethernet over USB.
In a previous post, I showed my orbit determination experiments of the GEO satellite Es’hail 2 using the beacons transmitted from Bochum (Germany) through the QO-100 amateur radio transponder on-board this satellite. By measuring the phase difference of the BPSK and 8APSK beacons, which are spaced apart by 245 kHz in the transponder, we can compute the three-way range-rate between the transmitter at Bochum and my receiver in Spain. This data can then be used for orbit determination with GMAT.
I have continued collection more data for these experiments, so this post is an update on the results.
In a previous post, I showed my experiment about measuring the phase difference of the 8APSK and BPSK beacons of the QO-100 NB transponder. The main goal of this experiment was to use this data to do orbit determination with GMAT. Over the last week I have continued these experiments and already have started to perform some orbit determination in GMAT.
Here I give an update about several aspects of the experiment, and show how I am setting up the orbit determination.
In my previous post I set out to measure the phase difference between the QO-100 8APSK and BPSK beacons. One of the things I mentioned is that the frequency separation between these two beacons was approximately 1.6 Hz larger than the nominal 245 kHz.
A frequency error of a couple of Hz is typical when working with SDRs unless special care is taken. Many SDRs allow choosing the sample rate and centre frequency with great flexibility, but the drawback is that the frequencies that are achieved are often not exactly the ones we indicated. Fractional-N synthesis PLLs are used to generate the sampling clock and local oscillator, so there are small rounding errors in the generated frequencies.
With enough knowledge of how the SDR hardware works and how it is configured, it is possible to determine these frequency errors exactly, as a rational number \(p/q\) that we can calculate explicitly, multiplied by the reference frequency of the SDR. Then we can use this exact value to correct our measurements.
I have asked Mario Lorenz DL5MLO and Kurt Moraw DJ0ABR the details of how the beacons are generated in the Bochum groundstation. Two ADALM Pluto‘s are used: one generates the CW and BPSK beacons, and the other generates the 8APSK multimedia beacon. With the data they have given me, I have been able to compute the frequency separation of the 8APSK and BPSK beacons exactly, and the result matches well my experimental observations.
In this post we will look at how the fractional-N synthesis calculations for the Pluto can be done. Since the Pluto uses an AD9363 RFIC, these calculations are applicable to any product using one of the chips from the AD936x family, and to the FMCOMMS3 evaluation board.
Since a couple months ago, the QO-100 NB transponder has now two digital beacons being transmitted continuously: the “traditional” 400 baud BPSK beacon, and the new 2.4 kbaud 8APSK multimedia beacon. This transponder is an amateur radio bent-pipe linear transponder on board the Es’hail 2 GEO satellite. It has an uplink at 2400.25 MHz, a downlink at 10489.75 MHz, and 500 kHz bandwidth. The two beacons are transmitted from the AMSAT-DL groundstation in Bochum, Germany, with a nominal frequency separation of 245 kHz.
In some posts in the last few years (see this, for instance), I have been measuring the frequency of the BPSK beacon as received by my grounstation in Madrid, Spain. In these frequency measurements we can see the daily Doppler curve of the satellite, which is not completely stationary with respect to the surface of Earth. However, we can also see the frequency variations of the local oscillator of the transponder (including some weird effects called “the wiggles“). For this reason, the frequency of the BPSK beacon is not an ideal measurement for orbit determination, since it is contaminated by the onboard local oscillator.
If we measure the frequency (or phase) of the 8APSK and BPSK beacons and subtract the two measurements, the effects caused by the transponder local oscillator cancel out. The two beacons have slightly different Doppler, because they are not at the same frequency. The quantity that remains after the subtraction is only affected by the movement of the satellite.
Bochum and my station use both references locked to GPS. Therefore, the phase difference of the two beacons gives the group delay from Bochum through the transponder to my station. This indicates the propagation time of the signal, which is often known as three-way range. The three-way range is roughly the sum of distances between the satellite and each groundstation (roughly, but not exactly, due to the light-time delay). It is a quantity that is directly applicable in orbit determination.
In this post I present my first results measuring the phase difference of the beacons and the three-way range.
On July 13, the Vega-C maiden flight delivered the LARES-2 passive laser reflector satellite and the following six cubesats to a 5900 km MEO orbit: AstroBio Cubesat, Greencube, ALPHA, Trisat-R, MTCube-2, and CELESTA. This is the first time that cubesats have been put in a MEO orbit (see slide 8 in this presentation). The six cubesats are very similar to those launched in LEO orbits, and use the 435 MHz amateur satellite band for their telemetry downlink (although ALPHA and Trisat-R have been declined IARU coordination, since IARU considers that these missions do not meet the definition of the amateur satellite service).
Communications from this MEO orbit are challenging for small satellites because the slant range compared to a 500 km LEO orbit is about 10 times larger at the closest point of the orbit and 4 times larger near the horizon, giving path losses which are 20 to 12 dB higher than in LEO.
I wanted to try to observe these satellites with my small station: a 7 element UHF yagi from Arrow antennas in a noisy urban location. The nice thing about this MEO orbit is that the passes last some 50 minutes, instead of the 10 to 12 minutes of a LEO pass. This means that I could set the antenna on a tripod and move it infrequently.
As part of the observation, I wanted to perform an absolute power calibration of my SDR (a USRP B205mini) in order to be able to measure the noise power at my location and also the power of the satellite signals power, if I was able to detect them.
Satellite RF signals are shifted in frequency proportionally to the line-of-sight velocity between the satellite and groundstation, due to the Doppler effect. The Doppler frequency depends on time, on the location of the groundstation, and on the orbit of the satellite, as well as on the carrier frequency. In satellite communications, it is common to correct for the Doppler present in the downlink signals before processing them. It is also common to correct for the uplink Doppler before transmitting an uplink signal, so that the satellite receiver sees a constant frequency.
For Earth satellites, these kinds of corrections can be done in GNU Radio using the gr-gpredict-doppler out-of-tree module and Gpredict (see this old post). In this method, Gpredict calculates the current Doppler frequency and sends it to gr-gpredict-doppler, which updates a variable in the GNU Radio flowgraph that controls the Doppler correction (for instance by changing the frequency of a Frequency Xlating FIR Filter or Signal Source).
I’m more interested in non Earth orbiting satellites, for which Gpredict, which uses TLEs, doesn’t work. I want to perform Doppler correction using data from NASA HORIZONS or computed with GMAT. To do this, I have added a new Doppler Correction C++ block to gr-satellites. This block reads a text file that lists Doppler frequency versus time, and uses that to perform the Doppler correction. In this post, I describe how the block works.
This post is a continuation of my series about LTE signal analysis. In the previous post I showed how to decode the PHICH. Now we will decode two other downlink channels, the PBCH (physical broadcast channel) and the PDDCH (physical downlink control channel).
The PBCH is used to transmit the MIB (master information block). This is a small data packet that all the UEs must decode after detecting a cell using the synchronization signals. The MIB contains essential information for the usage of the cell, such as the cell bandwidth and PHICH configuration. The PDDCH contains control information, such as uplink grants and the scheduling of the PDSCH (physical downlink shared channel).
The PBCH and PDDCH use the same kind of channel coding: a tail-biting k=7, r=1/3 convolutional code with a circular buffer for rate matching that performs puncturing and repetition coding as needed to obtain the required codeword size. The remaining aspects of the PBCH and PDDCH are quite different, so they will be treated separately.
As usual, we will be using a short IQ recording from my local cell site. The link to the recording is given at the end of the post.
This is a continuation of my series of posts about LTE. In the previous post we looked at the downlink cell-specific reference signals (CRS), transmit diversity equalization, and the demodulation of the PBCH (physical broadcast channel), PCFICH (physical control format indicator channel) and PDSCH (physical downlink shared channel). In this post we will look at the PHICH (physical hybrid ARQ indicator channel). As usual, I will be analysing the recording of a base station that I did in the first post about the LTE downlink.
The PHICH is used to send hybrid-ARQ ACK/NACKs to the UEs. Each PHICH transmission carries a single bit, either ACK (encoded by the bit 1) or NACK (encoded by the bit 0). Repetition encoding is used to increase the chances of correct decoding, and an orthogonal overlay code allows transmitting information for several UEs using the same resource elements.
The PHICH is transmitted in the control region of the subframe, which is formed by the first 1, 2, or 3 symbols of the subframe (according to the CFI value). As other control channels, the PHICH uses REGs. Recall that a REG is a set of 4 resource elements which are not used for the transmission of the CRS and which are adjacent in frequency if we ignore the resource elements used for the CRS. For instance, when 2 or 4 antenna ports are used for the CRS, in the first symbol of the subframe two resource elements in every block of 6 are used for the CRS. The other 4 resource elements form a REG. Therefore, there are 2 REGs per resource block. In symbols 2 and 3 there may not be resource elements allocated to the CRS, so there are 3 REGs per resource block in that case.
A PHICH transmission uses 3 REGs which are equally spaced over the bandwidth of the cell, in order to give frequency diversity. This is similar to the PCFICH, which uses 4 equally spaced REGs in the first symbol of the subframe. Depending on the configuration of a parameter called PHICH duration, the PHICH can either use the first symbol in each subframe (normal PHICH duration), or the first 2 or 3 symbols in each subframe (extended PHICH duration). Here we will only look at the normal PHICH duration, which is what is used in the recording. In the normal duration, the 3 REGs are transmitted simultaneously in the first symbol of the subframe. In the extended duration the 3 REGs are distributed over the first 2 or 3 symbols of the subframe.
In the waterfall below we can see a PHICH transmission. In the first symbol of each subframe we can see the 4 REGs used by the PCFICH (the lower frequency REG, at around -4 MHz is barely visible). In the subframe near the centre of the image (which incidentally contains the synchronization signals), in addition to these 4 REGs, there are 3 more REGs in use, which I have marked with red ticks. These form a PHICH transmission.