Combined Linear & Constant Envelope Modulation
M-ary modulation: digital baseband data sent by varying RF
carrier
(i) envelope ( eg. MASK)
(ii) phase /frequency ( eg. MPSK, MFSK)
(iii) envelope & phase H offer 2 degrees of freedOm ( eg.
MQAM)
(i) n bits encoded into 1 of M symbols, M H 2"
(ii) each symbol mapped to signal s,(I), M possible signals:
s (t), ..., s g(t)
(iii) a signal, .i, i) , sent during each symbol period, T, =
Combined Linear & Constant Envelope Modulation
M-ary modulation is useful in bandlimited channels
• greater O f‹e2M
R
• significantly higher BER
- smaller distances in constellation
- sensitive to timing jitter
MPSK
MQAM
MFSK
OFDM
2
Mary Phase Shift Keying
Carrier phase takes I of M possible values — amplitude
constant
8, 2(i-/)WM, i 7,2,
Modulated waveform:
i
Co
T, "’ 1’ 0 Ltd i 1,2,
E, log T„per
energy
M -Eb symbol symbol
period
written inT„quadrature
—— log form as: Basis Signal
M Tb ‘/
*cos(2 .t)— sin (i — I) *sin(2 r)*
, com (i — I) M
Ts /E, 2
2
for i 3
Mary Phase Shift Keying
Orthogonal basis
signals
— COS
2
sin
defined over 0 < I
Ts
MPSK signal can be expressed as
i
Mary Phase Shift Keying
MPSK basis has 2 signdls G 2 dimensiondl constellation
• M-ary message points equally spaced on circle with radius
• MPSK is constant envelope when no pulse shaping is used
t)
MPSK signal can be
• coherently detected
•8 Arctan(Y/X)
•Minimum 1 8 - 8 1
• non-coherent
detected with differential M
encoding
Mary Phase Shift Keying
Probability of symbol error in AWGN channel —
using
M
distance between adjacent symbols as 2 sin
P -- average symbol error probability in AWGN
channel
pq 2Q 2E b ltiS2 M
When differentially encoded & non-coherently
detected,
P estimated for M 4 as:
6
Power Spectrum of MPSK
T, -- Tbl•gzM
- Ts -- symbol duration
- Th -- bit duration
2 2
sin2c(f M + $sin 2c(—
E b log2 M — f;)T b log2 M
*’›iPshf 2 f,.)TTbo 2
f 2+(—/
fq)Tb g2 M
1
7
PSD for Jf = 8 & 3f = 16
0
rect pulses
RCF
-20 .- Increase in ñ f
with fi held
-
constant
30
•„B
-40
decreases
> rB
• denser
- increases
50 constellation
- G higher BER
60
MPSK Bandwidth EGciency vs Power EGciency
M 2 4 8 l6 32 64
R
05 10 1.5 2 2.5 3
Bnull
• qg = bandwidth efficiency
E fN • fi 10.5 =10.5 14.0 15.5 23.4
bit rate 28.5
(dB) • B„„ -— I t null bandwidth
• E fN for BER = 10 6
bandwidth efficienc y & powder e ficienc›’ assume
• Ideal Nyquist Pulse Shaping (RC filters)
• AWGN channel without timing jitter or
fading 9
Mary Phase Shift Keying
Advantages:
Bandwidth efficiency increases with M
Drawbacks:
Jitter & fading cause large increase in BER as M
increases EMI & multipath alter instantaneous phase of
signal
— cause error at
detector Receiver design also impacts
BER
Power efficiency
reduces for higher M
10
Mary- Quadrature Amplitude Modulation
• allows amplitude & phase to vary
• general form of M-ary QAM signal given by
a; cos(2 c )+ b, sin(2@
Ts Ts i)
E„„, —- energy of signal with lowest amplitude
n„ b, = independent integers related to location of signal point
T = symbol period
• energy per symbol / distance between adj. symbols isn't constant G
probability of correct symbol detection is not same for all
symbols
• Pilot tones used to estimate channel effects 11
Mary- Quadrature Amplitude Modulation
Assuming rectangular pulses - basis functions given
by
t
Ts
T
sin
QAM signal given by:
s; 0 t< i
ai81'1 +
(tl Th 1,2, ...M
bi82'1
coordinates of ith message point and
(ai, hi) ——element in L! matrix, where
L 12
Mary- Quadrature Amplitude Modulation
e.g. let M = 16, then ai,b; given based
on
a,$;{t)
b,$z{t)
+
(—1,3) (1,3)
(—I,— (1,—
3) 3)
x;j(t)
——
13
16 ary- Quadrature Amplitude Modulation
iol› i I
io o
QAM: of
hybrid modulated
phase & signal is , p:
amplitude
i l,,io i.i,i
modulation : :.
• each message point
corresponds to a quadbit
,
•€, is not constant —
requires linear channel
14
Mary- Quadrature Amplitude Modulation
In general, for any M = L2
!—L 3, L
!—L+ 1, L — l)
— 3) !—L+ 3,€ —
3)
... !L — l,—
!—L l,—L+ L+1)
l) !—L+ 3,—L
l) 15
Mary- Quadrature Amplitude Modulation
The average error probability, P for M-ary QAM is approximated
by
• assuming coherent
1 ai
r detection
• AWGN channel
• no fading, timing jitter
In terms of average energy, E,„,
l
(/ l)N t)
iY
Power Spectrum & Bandwidth Efficiency of QAM =
MPSK Power Efficiency of QAM is better than MPSK
16
Mary- Quadrature Amplitude Modulation
M-ary QAM - Bandwidth Efficienc y & Power Efficienc
y
• Assume Optimum RC filters in AWGN
• Does not consider fading, jitter, - overly optimistic
M 4 l6 64 256 1024 4096
UB R /B„JJ 1 2 3 4 5 6
E N (BER = 10 10.5 l5 18.5 24 28 33.5
6)
17
Mary Frequency Shift Keying
MFSK - transmitted signals defined
as
• f, = n/2T,
• n, -- fixed integer
Each of M signals have
• equal energy
• equal duration
• adjacent sub carrier frequencies separated by 1/2T, Hz
• sub carriers are orthogonal to each other
18
Mary Frequency Shift Keying
MFSK coherent detection - optimum receiver
• receiver has bank of M correlators or matched filters
• each correlator tuned to 1 of M distinct carrier frequencies
• average probability of error, Pe (based on union bound)
19
Mary Frequency Shift Keying
FSK non-coherent detection
• using matched filters followed by envelope
detectors
• average probability of error, P
M —
— —! (1)kN M
k+ exp kE
k 1k {k +1)N O
—— 1
1
bound Pe N use leading terms of binomial
expansion
’2
20
MFSK Channel Bandwidth
Coherent detection B
R„
Non-coherent detection 2 lM
og2 M
B
Impact of increasing M on MFSK perfOrmance
bandwidth efficiency (pR ) of MFSK decreases
• MFSK signals are bandwidth inefficient (unlike MPSK)
power efficiency (q„) increases
• with M orthogonal signals G signal space is not
crowded
• power efficient non-linear amplifiers can be used without
21
M-ary QAM - Bandwidth Efficienc y & Power Efficienc
y
Äf 4 16 64 256 1024 4096
' RQ/ 1 2 3 4 5 6
Bnu1l
E/N (BER 10.5 15 18.5 24 28 33.5
10’6)
Coherent M-ary FSK - Bandwidth Efficienc y & Power
Ejficienc
M 2 4 8 16 32 64
GB Rb/B 1U1l 0.4 0.57 0.55 0.42 0.29 0.18
E ßN (BER = 10 13.5 10.8 9.3 8.2 7.5 6.9
6)
22
Summary of M-ary modulation in AWGN Channel
MPSK/QAM
Coherent
MFSK
)4 1 32 64 M
8 6
25
(BER = 10 ’)
20
E B /N„
Coherent MFSK
0 4 16 32 64 M
23
Shannon Limit:
• Most schemes are away from E,/N of —1.6 dB by 4dB or
more
• FEC helps to get closer to Shannon limit
• FSK allows exchange of BW efficiency for power efficiency
log, E„/ N„
16 PSK
BFSK
4 I SK
4
sx PSK/QAM
J6 FSX
Error Free Region
-l
24
Power & BW Efficiency
Bandwidth Efficiency
log2 + ‘b‘
Power EGciency E fN -- energ y used by a bit for
detection
25
S Eb
N {dB) ——
{dB)+B
N ‹dB) Power & BW
Efficiency
if C B log (1+ S/N) -3i' error free communication is possible
if C > B log (1s SAN) H some errors will occur
• assumes only AWGN (ok il BW << channel center frequency)
• in practice < 3dB (50%) is feasible
S = € C is the average signal power (measured W receiver)
N B N is the average noise power
Ed -— S T is the average received bit energy at receiver
Nd —— k T (Watts Hz 1) is the noise power density
(Watts/Hz),
- thermal noise in lHz bandwidth in any transmission line 26
