A radio is a device that wirelessly transmits or receives signals in the radio frequency (RF) part of the electromagnetic spectrum to facilitate the transfer of information. Today, radios exist in a multitude of items such as cell phones, computers, car door openers, vehicles, and televisions.
Traditional hardware based radios limit cross-functionality and can only be modified through physical intervention. This results in higher production costs and minimal flexibility in supporting multiple wireless communication standards. By contrast, software defined radio (SDR) technology provides an efficient and comparatively inexpensive solution to this problem, allowing multi-mode, multi-band and/or multi-functional radios that can be enhanced using software upgrades.
SDR defines a collection of hardware and software technologies where some or all of the radio's operating functions (also referred to as physical layer (PHY) processing) are implemented through modifiable software or firmware operating on programmable processing technologies. These devices include field programmable gate arrays (FPGA), digital signal processors (DSP), general purpose processors (GPP), programmable System on Chip (SoC) or other application specific programmable processors. The use of these technologies allows new wireless features and capabilities to be added to existing radio systems without requiring new hardware.
Thus, a SDR is a radio whose components, which in a hardware-based radio would have been implemented in hardware (e.g. mixers, filters, amplifiers, modulators/demodulators, detectors, etc.), are instead implemented by means of software on a personal computer or embedded computing devices. Software defined radios find use in the afore-mentioned personal computer and a number of other portable devices. A basic SDR may include a personal computer equipped with analog-to-digital converter, preceded by a radio frequency (RF) frontend. Significant amounts of signal processing are handled by a programmed general-purpose processor, rather than being done in special-purpose hardware. Such a design produces a radio that can receive and transmit widely different wireless communication protocols based solely on the software used.
The detailed description refers to the following drawings in which like numerals refer to like items, and in which;
Software defined radios (SDRs) suffer from a complicated protocol development process and poor integration with existing wireless standards. This is because the entire PHY/MAC (physical/media access control) protocol for a SDR has to be implemented and tuned for the specific SDR device. However, SDR PHY designs often require the same basic digital signal processing building blocks that already exist in application specific integrated circuits (ASICs) that are found in commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) wireless devices.
The PHY portion consists of the RF, mixed-signal and analog portions, often called transceivers, and the digital baseband portion of a radio platform. These portions place high demand on digital signal processing (DSP) and communication algorithm processing, including channel codes. These PHY portions may be integrated with the media access control (MAC) layer in System-on-a-Chip (SOC) implementations.
An instantiation of a PHY device connects a link layer device (often called a MAC) to a physical medium such as an optical fiber or copper cable.
Disclosed herein is a hybrid platform that integrates COTS wireless devices with FPGA-based SDRs. The hybrid platform benefits from the reuse of PHY/MAC implementations within a COTS ASIC to reduce development overhead and out-of-the-box compatibility with current wireless standards. In the disclosed hybrid platform, the COTS device connects to the SDR by way of an antenna port and may be swapped easily for a different COTS device to maintain compatibility with different types of wireless protocols. In an embodiment, the hybrid platform occupies about half the number of FPGA logic slices as the current WARP OFDM Reference design and still can communicate with other COTS devices. The WARP OFDM Reference design refers to a FPGA-based Wireless Open Access Research Platform (WARP) that implements an Orthogonal Frequency-Division Multiplexing (OFDM) modulation scheme. Thus, the hybrid platform leverages PHY/MAC implementations within a COTS device and saves the SDR resources (such as FPGA logic slices or CPU cycles) and development effort/time used for the PHY/MAC implementations. The saved resources and time can be used to implement more advanced features on top of what the COTS device originally provides. This simplifies the development of new SDR PHY protocols and speeds up the integration of new PHY technologies into current wireless devices and networks.
However, a “software” defined radio is a misnomer, since the PHY operations will always have some hardware components. One difference between different SDR platforms is the manner in which the actual radio and other processing components are combined.
The hybrid platform allows placement of the SDR at various locations within the overall wireless device architecture relative to the actual radio and other processing components. The various embodiments disclosed herein illustrate and describe architectural arrangements of the SDR and the other components (i.e., the actual radio and other processing components). However arranged, the embodiments will include an antenna, which is part of a RF frontend and a baseband processor of the COTS device and the SDR. In a radio receiver circuit, the RF frontend is a generic term for the circuitry between the antenna and the first intermediate frequency (IF) stage. The RF frontend includes the components in the receiver that process the signal at the original incoming radio frequency (RF), before the signal is converted to a lower intermediate frequency (IF). In a hardware implementation, the RF frontend digitizes and down-converts analog signals into baseband samples.
A baseband processor (also known as baseband radio processor, BP, or BBP) is a device (a chip or part of a chip) in a network interface that manages most of the radio functions. In a digital wireless system such as that used in a SDR, the digital data are considered baseband before they are modulated into a carrier frequency for over-the-air transmission. The baseband processor may use its own RAM and firmware. The rationale of separating the baseband processor from the SDR includes: (1) radio performance: radio control functions (signal modulation, encoding, radio frequency shifting, etc.) are highly timing dependent, and require a real time operating system; (2) legal: some authorities (e.g. the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC)) require that the entire software stack running on a device which communicates with the cellular network must be certified, and separating the baseband processor into a different component allows reusing the baseband processor of the COTS device without having to certify the full SDR; and (3) radio reliability: separating the baseband processor into a different component ensures proper radio operation while allowing application and operating system changes.
For example, most smart phones contain two processors. The phone's operating system, user interface, and applications will run on the main applications processor (AP), such as an ARM-based CPU. The actual phone radio communications and control software, however, are separated out and run on the baseband processor. The AP communicates to the baseband processor over a defined control link, such as a serial connection or via GPIO lines coming from the AP. The main reason for separating out the radio functionality into the baseband processor is because radio control functions (signal modulation, encoding, radio frequency shifting, etc.) are highly timing dependent. The only practical way to run these functions on the main CPU is if the phone is running a real time operating system (OS). Another benefit of utilizing a baseband processor is that once designed and certified, the baseband processor should function properly regardless of application and OS changes. Also, the FCC requires that the entire software stack running on a device which communicates with the cellular network be certified. Since the AP is considered a separate device from the baseband processor (which creates the radio signals), phone designers may be more free in designing the phone's user interface and applications.
The herein disclosed hybrid SDR platform addresses and solves two technical problems that heretofore have prevented the effective combination of a SDR with COTS devices. The first technical problem relates to transmit/receive (Tx/Rx) distortion that occurs in certain possible SDR designs, which are described later in this disclosure. For example, in a synchronous SDR design (see as an example,
The second technical problem that has plagued attempts to couple SDRs and COTS devices is synchronization. To couple a SDR to a COTS device, all signals entering the SDR have to be processed properly to eliminate distortions between the RF frontend and the SDR, and the SDR and the baseband processor.
At an output of the SDR 40, digital-to-analog converters (not shown) are used to generate an analog signal for transmission by the RF frontend 20.
Thus, the SDR 40 used in the platform embodiment 10 of
The hybrid platforms 10 and 100 of
Furthermore, the SDR 240 processes only received signals, and not transmitted signals. Thus, the embodiment shown in
The platform embodiments 200 and 300, just as with the platforms 10 and 100, benefit form incorporating existing COTS devices with a SDR. The platforms 200 and 300 may be ideal for the low powered SDRs or SDRs that cannot keep up with the high signal throughput between the RF frontend and the baseband processor. For example, SDRs 240 and 340 may connect to baseband processor 260, 360, respectively using a BasicRx daughterboard. However, the platforms 200 and 300 still would suffer for synchronous distortion problems without the addition of a properly designed and implemented SDR, such as those shown in
Finally, the asynchornicity in the platforms 200 and 300 may suit SDR applications that are too complex for FPGA implementation, but have software implementations that are too slow for real-time operation. An aspect of these platforms is that component reuse and interoperability requirements are automatically achieved since the SDR does not modify any transmitted or received signal.
The FPGA 44 may include control logic 48. The control logic 48 may at least operate to minimize or eliminate Tx/Rx distortion, where applicable, and distortion due to coupling a SDR and a COTS device.
The SDR 40 further includes transmit (Tx) processing chains 43, receive (Rx) processing chains 45, and a cancellation circuit 47. The processing chains 43 and 45 operate to process signals into and out of the SDR 40. The cancellation circuit 47 may be an analog device that cancels or mitigates Tx distortion at the Rx input
As noted above, one form of distortion may be caused by feedback between the Tx and Rx processing chains. The control logic 48, in an embodiment, addresses this form of distortion by alternating processing between the Rx and Tx chains so that no feedback occurs. In another embodiment, the control logic 48 maintains the Rx chains 45 in an always on state and switches or toggles the Tx chains 43 between On and Off. In this embodiment, with the Rx chain 45 always On, the received signals are ignored when the Tx chains 43 is on and processing signals. In one alternative of this embodiment, the Tx and Rx chains are separate radios.
Finally, the control logic 48 operates to determine a protocol of the baseband processor and the RF frontend, and to adapt the protocol of the SDR (the FPGA 44) to match that of the baseband processor (i.e., the COTS device). The SDR 40 is capable of operating according to one of several wireless protocols. By matching protocols, the control logic 48 minimizes distortion that might exist because of connections between the SDR 40 and the COTS devices.
The cancellation circuit 47 may be implemented apart from the FPGA 44 as shown in
Entry |
---|
D. Katabi, S. Gollakota, and S. D. Perli, “Interference alignment and cancellation,” SIGCOMM CCR, 2009 (12 pages). |
G. J. Minden et al., “KUAR : A Flexible Software-Defined Radio Development Platform,” New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks, 2007 (12 pages). |
K. Tan et al., “Sora: High performance software radio using general purpose multi-core,” in NSDI, 2009 (27 pages). |
K. Tan, H. Liu, J. Fang, W. Wang, J. Zhang, M. Chen, and G. Voelker, “SAM: enabling practical spatial multiple access in wireless LAN,” in Mobicom, 2009 (12 pages). |
M. C. Ng, K. E. Fleming, M. Vutukuru, and S. Gross, “Airblue : A System for Cross-Layer Wireless Protocol Development,” in ACM/IEEE Symposium on Architectures for Networking and Communications Systems, 2010 (11 pages). |
Miljanic et al., The WINLAB Network Centric Cognitive Radio Hardware Platform WiNC2R, Publisher: IEEE, 2007, pp. 155-160. |
P. Murphy and A. Sabharwal, “Design of warp: A wireless open-access research platform,” Proceedings of EUSIPCO, 2006 (5 pages). |
T. R. M. and A. A. Frohlich, “HyRA: A Software-defined Radio Architecture for Wireless Embedded Systems,” in ICN 2011 : The Tenth International Conference on Networks, 2011 (11 pages). |
Y. Lin et al., “SODA: A low-power architecture for software radio,” in ACM SIGARCH Computer Architecture News, 2006 (12 pages). |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20130287070 A1 | Oct 2013 | US |