Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Galileo tracking carr_error_filt_hz = carrier_doppler_hz? #734

Open
ghost opened this issue Sep 30, 2023 · 5 comments
Open

Galileo tracking carr_error_filt_hz = carrier_doppler_hz? #734

ghost opened this issue Sep 30, 2023 · 5 comments

Comments

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Sep 30, 2023

Within a dump mat file created by the tracking configuration for Tracking_1B.implementation=Galileo_E1_DLL_PLL_VEML_Tracking and Tracking_E6.implementation=Galileo_E6_DLL_PLL_Tracking:
is tracking carr_error_filt_hz = carrier_doppler_hz to be expected (y/n/depends)?

They appear to be two distinct arrays:
trk[2]['carr_error_filt_hz'] is trk[2]['carrier_doppler_hz']
False

gnss-sdr version 0.0.18.git-next-59d70eb33

@ghost ghost closed this as completed Oct 10, 2023
@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Oct 12, 2023

This issue was closed prematurely and then reopened.

@ghost ghost reopened this Oct 12, 2023
@ghost ghost changed the title Galileo E1 tracking carr_error_filt_hz = carrier_doppler_hz? Galileo tracking carr_error_filt_hz = carrier_doppler_hz? Oct 12, 2023
@fgallardo
Copy link

fgallardo commented Dec 29, 2023

Hi,

I think one is the error signal from phase discriminator of the PLL and the other, the input to the NCO (i.e. the smoothed error signal that comes out of the filter)

Error signal from the phase discriminator of the PLL -> carr_error_hz
Output of the Loop filter -> carr_error_filt_hz

loop

Both blocks are on the right part of this diagram:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gnss-sdr/gnss-sdr/next/src/algorithms/libs/volk_gnsssdr_module/volk_gnsssdr/docs/images/VOLK_GNSSSDR_Usage_Example.png

BTW, I guess you already checked, but you can find how these are computed in the LoC 538 and 540 below.

carr_error_hz

carr_error_hz = pll_cloop_two_quadrant_atan(d_correlator_outs[1]) / TWO_PI; // prompt output

carr_error_filt_hz

carr_error_filt_hz = d_carrier_loop_filter.get_carrier_nco(static_cast<float>(carr_error_hz));

Indeed you can see how it uses the carr_error_filt_hz signal to make the new estimate of the carrier frequency in LoC 542.

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Dec 31, 2023

The mat file contains three quantities:
(1) carr_error_hz: Raw carrier error (unfiltered) at the PLL output, in Hz.
(2) carrier_error_filt_hz: Carrier error at the output of the PLL filter, in Hz.
(3) carrier_doppler_hz: Doppler shift, in Hz

I understand the relationship between (1) and (2) as referenced
above but not the relationship between (2) and (3). I plan to look into this further after January 10, 2024. I will update this comment with my findings.

@fgallardo
Copy link

fgallardo commented Jan 2, 2024

Ups, so sorry, I think I did not read your question carefully.

If I understand your question, it is about the relationship between the output of the filter of the PLL loop and the new Doppler estimate, no?

Then, I would say, and I'm a hoping that I am getting your point right:

The value of the estimates of the Doppler at tracking stage starts with the estimate from the ACQ block, LoC 651, as it should be:

https://github.com/gnss-sdr/gnss-sdr/blob/main/src/algorithms/tracking/gnuradio_blocks/dll_pll_veml_tracking.cc#L651

And then. it gets updated in run_dll_pll() to the value of the filtered frequency error, in LoC 1107
https://github.com/gnss-sdr/gnss-sdr/blob/main/src/algorithms/tracking/gnuradio_blocks/dll_pll_veml_tracking.cc#L1107

At that moment in time, it should be the same. I assume.

Does it help somehow? Are you seeing any type of strange behaviour?

Thanks!
Fran

@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Jan 12, 2024 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant