Za FSK PDF

Performance Evaluation of M-ary Frequency Shift Keying Radio
Modems via Measurements and Simulations
Submitted by
ERIC NII OTORKUNOR SACKEY
Department of Electrical Engineering
Blekinge Institute of Technology
Karlskrona, Sweden
September 2006
This thesis is presented as part of the Degree of Master of Science in Electrical

Engineering with emphasis on Telecommunications/Signal Processing.
Abstract
M-ary Frequency Shift Keying is a power efficient modulation scheme that is currently
used by manufacturers of low power low data rate data transmission equipment. The
power efficiency of this modulation increases as the signal alphabet increases at the
expense of increased complexity and reduced bandwidth efficiency. There is, however, a
gap between the performance of real world systems employing Frequency Shift Keying
(FSK) and that of theoretical FSK systems. To investigate the nature of this gap, a
comparison is needed between the performance of real world systems using FSK and that
of theoretical FSK systems.
This thesis investigates the nature of this gap by simulating 2, 4 and 8-level FSK systems
in additive white Gaussian noise channel using MATLAB, measuring of the performance
of commercially available data transmission equipment manufactured by RACOM s.r.o
of the Czech Republic, and comparison of their performances.
Some important results have been illustrated and also, it is observed that the gap between
the performance of theoretical and real world systems using FSK is about 1 dB at a bit
error rate (BER) of 10-3 and widens as BER decreases.
2
Acknowledgements
The completion of my studies at Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden would have

been impossible without the generous help of others. Foremost, I give credit to the
almighty God. I also extend my gratitude to my supervisors, Dr. Abbas Mohammed of
the School of Engineering and Mr. Jiri Hruska of RACOM s.r.o of the Czech Republic,
for their encouragement and support.
I also thank the staff of RACOM s.r.o., especially Karel and Marek, who have helped me
during the period of measurements by answering questions and providing a conducive
environment for my work.
Finally, I wish to express my sincere appreciation to Mr. Kwaku Boadu for his support,
guidance and encouragement throughout my studies at Blekinge Institute of Technology,
Sweden.
3
Table of Contents
Abstract 2
Acknowledgements 3
Table of Contents 4
List of Figures 6
List of Tables 8
1 Introduction 9
2 Modulation 10
2.1 Modulation Format 10
2.2 Digital Modulation – an Overview 10
2.3 Factors that Influence the Choice of Digital Modulation 11
2.4 Additive White Gaussian Noise Channel 12
3 FSK Background 15
3.1 Constant Envelope Modulation 15
3.2 Binary Frequency Shift Keying 15
3.2.1 Binary FSK signal Modulator 15
3.2.2 Coherent Demodulation and Error Performance 19
3.2.3 Noncoherent Demodulation and Error Performance 21
3.2.4 Power Spectral Density 24
3.3 M-ary FSK 27
3.3.1 Modulator, Demodulator and Error Performance 27
3.3.2 Coherent Versus Noncoherent 36
3.3.3 Power Spectral Density 38
3.3.4 Bandwidth Efficiency 42
4 Simulations and Results 44

4.1 Simulation of AWGN Channel 44
4.2 Simulation of Binary FSK System in AWGN Channel 45
4.2.1 Coherent System 45
4.2.2 Noncoherent System 46
4.3 Simulation of 4 and 8-level FSK Systems in AWGN Channel 48
5 Measuring of Performance of Commercially Available Radio Modems 52

5.1 RACOM s.r.o 52
5.2 Measurements 52
5.2.1 Extraction of BER from measured PER 54
5.2.2 Calculation of Noise Power 55
5.2.3 Processing of Measurement Data on MR400 Radio Modem 56
5.2.4 Processing of Measurement Data on MX160 Radio Modem 58
4
6 Comparison of Performance of 2, 4 and 8-level FSK Systems 62
6.1 Bounds on Communication 62
6.2 Comparison of Performance of Simulated FSK Systems 64
6.3 Theory versus Reality 66
6.4 Comparison of Performance using Shannon’s Capacity Curve 67
7 Conclusions 69
8 References 70
A Acronyms 71
5
List of Figures
3.1 Noncoherent BFSK modulator 16

3.2 Coherent BFSK modulator 17
3.3 Coherent BFSK demodulator: correlator implementation 19
3.4 Coherent BFSK demodulator: matched filter implementation 20
3.5 Probability of error of coherently demodulated BFSK signal 21
3.6 BFSK noncoherent demodulator: correlator-squarer implementation 22
3.7 BFSK noncoherent demodulator: matched filter implementation 23
3.8 Probability of error of noncoherently demodulated BFSK signal 24
3.9 Coherent M-ary FSK modulator 27
3.10 Coherent M-ary FSK demodulator: correlator implementation 28
3.11 Coherent M-ary FSK demodulator: matched filter implementation 28
3.12 Bit error probability of coherently demodulated M-ary FSK signals 30
3.13 Symbol error probability of coherently demodulated M-ary FSK signals 30
3.14 Noncoherent M-ary FSK modulator 31
3.15 Noncoherent M-ary FSK demodulator: correlator-squarer implementation 32
3.16 Noncoherent M-ary FSK demodulator: matched filter implementation 33
3.17 Noncoherent M-ary FSK demodulator: envelope detector implementation 34
3.18 Bit error probability of noncoherently demodulated M-ary FSK signals 35
3.19 Symbol error probability of noncoherently demodulated M-ary FSK signals 35
3.20 Comparison of BER for coherent and noncoherent BFSK 36
3.21 Comparison of BER for coherent and noncoherent 4-FSK 37
3.22 Comparison of BER for coherent and noncoherent 8-FSK 37
3.23 Power-density spectrum of BFSK signal (h = 0.5, 0.6, 0.7) 39
3.24 Power-density spectrum of BFSK signal (h = 0.8, 0.9, 0.95) 39
3.25 Power-density spectrum of 4-FSK signal (h = 0.2, 0.3, 0.4) 40
3.26 Power-density spectrum of 4-FSK signal (h= 0.5, 0.6, 0.7) 40
3.29 Power-density spectra of M-ary FSK signals for M = 2, 4 and 8 (h = 0.5) 42
4.1 Simulation model for coherent BFSK system 45

4.2 Performance of simulated coherent BFSK system 46
4.3 Simulation model for noncoherent BFSK system 47
4.4 Performance of simulated noncoherent BFSK system 48
4.5 Simulation model for coherent 4-level FSK system 49
4.6 Performance of simulated coherent 4-level FSK system 50
4.7 Performance of simulated noncoherent 4-level FSK system 50
4.8 Performance of simulated coherent 8-level FSK system 51
4.9 Performance of simulated noncoherent 8-level FSK system 51
5.1 MR400 radio modem 53

5.2 MX160 radio modem 53
5.3 PER versus packet length at -108 dBm for MR400 radio modem 56
6
5.4 Performance curve of MR400 radio modem 58
5.5 PER versus packet length at -104 dBm for MX160 radio modem 59
5.6 Performance curve of MX160 radio modem 60
5.7 Comparison of performance of MR400 and MX160 radio modems 61
6.1 Energy versus spectral efficiency of an optimum system 63

6.2 Comparison of simulated symbol error probabilities for coherent M-ary FSK 64
6.3 Comparison of simulated bit error probabilities for coherent M-ary FSK 65
6.4 Comparison of simulated symbol error prob for noncoherent M-ary FSK 65
6.5 Comparison of simulated bit error probabilities for noncoherent M-ary FSK 66
6.6 Comparison of theoretical and practical BER for 2 and 4-level FSK systems 67
6.7 Comparison of theoretical and practical orthogonal modulation techniques
at BER of 10-5 68
7
List of Tables
3.1 Bandwidth efficiency of coherent M-ary FSK signals 43
5.1 Technical data for MR400 and MX160 radio modems 53

5.2 Raw data from measurements on MR400 radio modem 54
5.3 Raw data from measurements on MX160 radio modem 54
5.4 Processed data from measurements on MR400 radio modem 56
5.5 Processed data from measurements on MX160 radio modem 58
6.1 Spectral efficiency and S/N required to achieve BER of 10-5 67
8
Chapter 1
Introduction
M-ary frequency shift keying (FSK) is a power efficient modulation scheme whose
efficiency improves as the number of frequencies employed (M) increases at the expense
of additional complexity and smaller bandwidth efficiency. This scheme has been found
advantageous in low rate low power applications. There is a difference, however,
between the performance of theoretical M-ary FSK systems and that of real world
systems employing M-ary FSK modulation schemes.
The primary objective of this thesis is to simulate 2, 4 and 8-level FSK systems in
additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) channel using MATLAB, compare their
performance to that of real world systems employing Gaussian minimum shift keying
(GMSK) and 4-level FSK modulation techniques and explain the difference. Basic
simulations of both coherent and noncoherent 2, 4 and 8-level FSK systems are
considered and measurements of performance of real world systems are focused on
commercially available data transmission equipment, manufactured by RACOM s.r.o of
the Czech Republic, using GMSK and 4-level FSK modulation schemes. In order to
establish the difference between the performance of theoretical and practical FSK
systems, only basic simulations are considered since their performance is close to that of
theory.
In the following chapters, we discuss general modulation in brief, factors that influence
the choice of a particular digital modulation scheme, how the comparison of performance
of different digital modulation types are made and a model of AWGN channel. Next we
follow with the theoretical background of binary and M-ary frequency shift keying
(FSK). The next chapter would be simulations of 2, 4 and 8-level FSK systems, for both
coherent and noncoherent demodulation, followed by measurements of performance of
commercially available data transmission equipment (radio transceivers), by RACOM
s.r.o. of Czech Republic, using GMSK and 4-level FSK. Finally we compare the
performance of the commercially available data transmission equipment to theory and
end with the conclusions.
9
Chapter 2
Modulation
This chapter describes what modulation is, and an overview of digital modulation. It also
describes the factors that influence the choice of a particular digital modulation scheme,
and a model for additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) channel.
2.1 Modulation Format
A modulation format is the means by which information is encoded unto a signal.

Information, or data, can be carried in the amplitude, frequency, or phase of a signal. A
modulation scheme can be analog (where data is contained in a set of continuous values)
or digital (where the data is contained in a set of discrete values). The information signal
is called modulating waveform. When the information is encoded on a signal, the signal
is called a modulated waveform. The process of bringing the bandpass signal down to
baseband is denoted as demodulation. We distinguish detection from demodulation by
denoting detection as the process of extracting the information from the baseband
demodulated signal. A receiver consists of a demodulator and a detector. Noncoherent
techniques (where the reference phase is unknown; discussed in chapter 3.2.4) can often
be implemented in demodulation or detection, such that the two terms can be used
interchangeably.
2.2 Digital Modulation – an Overview
Modern communication systems use digital modulation techniques. Advancement in

very large-scale integration (VLSI) and digital signal processing (DSP) technology have
made digital modulation more cost effective than analog transmission systems. Digital
modulation offers many advantages over analog modulation. Some advantages include
greater noise immunity and robustness to channel impairments, easier multiplexing of
various forms of information (for example, voice, data, and video), and greater security.
Further more, digital transmissions accommodate digital error-control codes which detect
and/or correct transmission errors, and support complex signal conditioning and
processing techniques such as source coding, encryption, and equalization to improve the
performance of the overall communication link. New multipurpose programmable digital
signal processors have made it possible to implement digital modulators and
demodulators completely in software. Instead of having a particular modem design
permanently frozen as hardware, embedded software implementations now allow
alterations and improvements without having to redesign or replace the modem.
In digital wireless communication systems, the modulating signal (e.g., the
message) may be represented as a time sequence of symbols or pulses, where each
symbol has m finite states. Each symbol represent n bits of information, where n = log2m
bits/symbol. Many digital modulation techniques are used in modern wireless
10
communication systems, and many more are sure to be introduced. Some of these
techniques have subtle differences between one another, and each technique belongs to a
family of related modulation methods. For example, Frequency Shift Keying (FSK) may
be either coherently or noncoherently detected; and may have two, four, eight or more
possible levels per symbol, depending on the manner in which information is transmitted
within a single symbol [1].
2.3 Factors That Influence the Choice of Digital Modulation
Several factors influence the choice of a digital modulation scheme. A desirable

modulation scheme provides low bit error rates at low received signal-to-noise ratios,
performs well in multipath and fading conditions, occupies a minimum bandwidth, and is
easy and cost effective to implement. Existing modulation schemes do not
simultaneously satisfy all of these requirements. Some modulation schemes are better in
terms of bit error rate performance, while others are better in terms of bandwidth
efficiency. Depending on the demands of a particular application, tradeoffs are made
when selecting a digital modulation.
The performance of a modulation scheme is often measured in terms of its power
efficiency and bandwidth efficiency. Power efficiency describes the ability of a
modulation technique to preserve the fidelity of the digital message at low power levels.
In a digital communication system, in order to increase noise immunity, it is necessary to
increase the signal power. However, the amount by which the signal power should be
increased to obtain a certain level of fidelity (i.e., an acceptable bit error probability)
depends on the particular type of modulation employed. The power efficiency
(sometimes called energy efficiency) of a digital modulation scheme is a measure of how
favorable this tradeoff between fidelity and signal power is made, and is often expressed
as the ratio of the signal energy per bit to noise power spectral density (Eb/No) required
at the input of the receiver for a certain probability of error (say 10-5).
Bandwidth efficiency describes the ability of a modulation scheme to
accommodate data within a limited bandwidth. In general, increasing the data rate
implies decreasing the pulse width of a digital symbol, which increases the bandwidth of
the signal. Thus, there is an unavoidable relationship between data rate and bandwidth
occupancy. However, some modulation schemes perform better than others in making
this tradeoff. Bandwidth efficiency reflects how efficiently the allocated bandwidth is
utilized and is defined as the ratio of the throughput data rate per Hertz in a given
bandwidth. If R is the data rate in bits per second, and B is the bandwidth occupied by
the modulated radio frequency signal, then bandwidth efficiency ηB is expressed as
R
ηB = bps/Hz (2.1)
B
The system capacity of a digital communication system is directly related to the
bandwidth efficiency of the modulation scheme, since a modulation with a greater value
of ηB will transmit more data in a given spectrum allocation.
There is a fundamental upper bound on achievable bandwidth efficiency.
Shannon’s channel coding theorem states that for an arbitrary small probability or error,
11
the maximum possible bandwidth efficiency is limited by the noise in the channel, and is
given by channel capacity formula. The Shannon’s bound for additive white Gaussian
noise (AWGN) non-fading channel is given by;
C S
ηBmax = = log2(1 + ) (2.2)
B N
where C is the channel capacity in bits per second, B is the radio frequency (RF)
bandwidth, and S/N is the signal-to-noise ratio.
In design of a digital communication system, very often there is a tradeoff
between bandwidth efficiency and power efficiency. For example, adding error control
coding to a message increases the bandwidth occupancy (and this, in turn, reduces the
bandwidth efficiency), but at the same time reduces the required power for a particular bit
error rate, and hence trades bandwidth efficiency for power efficiency. On the other
hand, higher level modulation schemes (M-ary keying), except M-ary FSK, decrease
bandwidth occupancy but increase the required received power, and hence trades power
efficiency for bandwidth efficiency.
While power and bandwidth considerations are very important, other factors also
affect the choice of a digital modulation scheme. For example, for all personal
communication systems which serve a large user community, the cost and complexity of
the subscriber receiver must be minimized, and a modulation which is simple to detect is
most attractive. The performance of a modulation scheme under various types of channel
impairments such as Rayleigh and Ricean fading and multipath time dispersion, given a
particular demodulator implementation, is another key factor in selecting a modulation.
In wireless systems where interference is a major issue, the performance of a modulation
scheme in an interference environment is extremely important. Sensitivity to detection of
time jitter, caused by time-varying channels, is also an important consideration in
choosing a particular modulation scheme. In general, the modulation, interference, and
implementation of the time-varying effects on a channel as well as the performance of the
specific demodulator are analyzed as a complete system using simulation to determine
relative performance and ultimate selection [1].
2.4 Additive White Gaussian Noise Channel
Additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) channel is a universal channel model for
analyzing modulation schemes. In this model, the channel does nothing but add a white
Gaussian noise to the signal passing through it. This implies that the channel’s amplitude
frequency response is flat (thus with unlimited or infinite bandwidth) and phase response
is linear for all frequencies so that the modulated signal pass through it without any
amplitude or phase loss or distortion of frequency components. Fading does not exist.
The only distortion is introduced by the AWGN. The received signal is then equal to
r(t) = s(t) + n(t) (2.3)

where n(t) is the additive white Gaussian noise, and s(t) is the modulated signal.
12
The whiteness of n(t) implies that it is a stationary random process with a flat
power spectral density (PSD) for all frequencies. It can be observed, however, that if
Sn(f) = C for all frequencies, where C is a constant, then
∞ ∞
∫ S ( f )df
−∞
n = ∫ Cdf = ∞
−∞
so that the total power is infinite. Obviously, no real physical process can have infinite
power and, therefore, a white process may not be a meaningful physical process.
However, quantum mechanical analysis of thermal noise shows that it has a power-
spectral density given by [2]
hf
S(f) = (2.4)
2(e hf / kT
− 1)
in which h denotes Planck’s constant (equal to 6.6 x 10-34 Js), k is Boltzmann’s constant
(equal to 1.38 x 10-23 J/K), and T denotes temperature in Kelvin.
This spectrum achieves it maximum at f = 0, and the value of this maximum is
kT/2. The spectrum goes to zero as f goes to infinity, but the range of convergence to
zero is very slow. For instance, at room temperature (T = 300 K), S(f) drops to 90 % of
its maximum at about f = 2.0 x 1012 Hz, which is beyond the frequencies employed in
conventional communication systems. From this we conclude that thermal noise,
although not precisely white, can be modeled for all practical purposes as a white process
with the power spectrum equaling kT/2. The value kT/2 is usually denoted by N0;
therefore, the power spectral density of additive white Gaussian noise is usually given as
Sn(f) = N0/2 and is sometimes referred to as the two-sided power spectral density,
emphasizing that this spectrum extends to both positive and negative frequencies.
According to the Wiener-Khinchine theorem, the autocorrelation function of the
AWGN is
∫ S ( f )e
j 2πfτ
R(τ) = E{n(t)n(t-τ)} = n df
−∞
∞
df = 0 δ (τ )
N 0 j 2πfτ N
= ∫
−∞
2
e
2
(2.5)
where δ(τ) is the Dirac delta function. This shows that noise samples are uncorrelated no
matter how close they are in time. The samples are also independent since the process is
Gaussian.
At any time instance, the amplitude of n(t) obeys a Gaussian probability density
function given by
1 ⎛ −η 2 ⎞
p(η) = exp⎜⎜ 2 ⎟⎟ (2.6)
2πσ 2 ⎝ 2σ ⎠
13
where η is used to represent the values of the random process n(t) and σ2 is the variance
of the random process. It is interesting to not that σ2 = ∞ for AWGN process since σ2 is
the power of the noise, which is infinite due to its “whiteness”.
However, when r(t) is correlated with an orthonormal function φ (t), the noise in
the output has a finite variance. In fact,
∞
r= ∫ r (t )φ (t )dt
−∞
=s+n
∞
where s= ∫ s(t )φ (t )dt
−∞
∞
and n= ∫ n(t )φ (t )dt
−∞
The variance of n is
∞
E{n2} = E{[ ∫ n(t )φ (t )dt ]2}
−∞
∞ ∞
= E{ ∫ ∫ n(t )φ (t )n(τ )φ (τ )dtdτ }
−∞ −∞
∞ ∞
= ∫ ∫ E{n(t )n(τ )}φ (t )φ (τ )dtdτ
−∞ −∞
∞ ∞
N0
= ∫∫
−∞ −∞
2
δ (t − τ )φ (t )φ (τ )dtdτ
∞
N
= 0 ∫ φ 2 (t )dt
2 −∞
N
= 0
2
Then the probability density function of AWGN can be written as
1 ⎛ − n2 ⎞
p(n) = exp⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
πN 0 ⎝ N0 ⎠
Strictly speaking, the AWGN channel does not exist since no channel can have an
infinite bandwidth. However, when the signal bandwidth is smaller than the channel
bandwidth, many practical channels are approximately an AWGN channel. For example,
the line-of-sight (LOS) radio channels, including fixed terrestrial microwave links and
fixed satellite links, are approximately AWGN channels when the weather is good.
Wideband coaxial cables are also approximately AWGN channels since there is no other
interference except Gaussian noise [3].
14
Chapter 3
FSK Background
This chapter talks briefly about constant envelope modulation; its advantages and
disadvantages, and then discusses binary and M-ary FSK in detail.
3.1 Constant Envelope Modulation
Many practical radio communication systems use nonlinear modulation methods, where
the amplitude of the carrier is constant, regardless of the variation in the modulating
signal. The constant envelope family of modulations has the advantage of satisfying a
number of conditions [1], some of which are:
• Power efficient class C amplifiers can be used without introducing degradation in
the spectrum occupancy of the transmitted signal.
• Low out-of-band radiation of the order of -60 dB to -70 dB can be achieved.
• Limiter-discriminator detector can be used, which simplifies receiver design and
provides high immunity against random frequency modulation noise and signal
fluctuations due to Rayleigh fading.
While constant envelope modulations have many advantages, they occupy a larger
bandwidth than linear modulation schemes. In situations where bandwidth efficiency is
more important than power efficiency, constant envelope modulation is not well-suited.
3.2 Binary Frequency Shift Keying
3.2.1 Binary FSK Signal and Modulator
In binary frequency shift keying (BFSK), the frequency of a constant amplitude carrier
signal is switched between two values according to the two possible message states,
corresponding to a binary 1 or 0. Depending on how the frequency variations are
imparted into the transmitted waveform, the FSK signal will have either a discontinuous
phase or a continuous phase at bit transmissions. In general, a BFSK signal may be
represented as
2 Eb
s1(t) = cos(2πf1t + φ1 ) , 0 ≤ t ≤ Tb , for binary 1
Tb
2 Eb
s2(t) = cos(2πf 2t + φ2 ) , 0 ≤ t ≤ Tb , for binary 0 (3.1)
Tb
15
where φ1 and φ2 are initial phases at t = 0, Tb is the bit period of the binary data, and Eb is
the transmitted signal energy per bit.
One obvious way to generate a FSK signal is to switch between two independent
oscillators according to whether the data bit is a 0 or a 1, as shown in Figure 3.1.
Normally this form of FSK generation results in a waveform that is discontinuous at the
switching times, and for this reason this type of FSK is called discontinuous of
noncoherent FSK. Equation (3.1) represents a discontinuous FSK signal since φ1 and φ2
are not the same in general.
Oscillator 1
f1, Ø1
2 Eb
s1(t) = cos(2πf1t + φ1 )
Tb
Multiplexer fi, Øi
Oscillator 2 f2, Ø2
2 Eb
s2(t) = cos(2πf 2t + φ2 )
Tb
Control line
Binary data input, ak
Figure 3.1 Noncoherent BFSK modulator.
Since the phase discontinuities pose several problems, such as spectral spreading and
spurious transmissions, discontinuous FSK is generally not used in highly regulated
wireless systems.
The second type of FSK is the coherent one where the two signals have the same
initial phase φ at t = 0;
2 Eb
s1(t) = cos(2πf1t + φ ) , 0 ≤ t ≤ Tb , for binary 1
Tb
2 Eb
s2(t) = cos(2πf 2t + φ ) , 0 ≤ t ≤ Tb , for binary 0 (3.2)
Tb
16
This type of FSK can be generated by the modulator as shown in Figure 3.2. The
frequency synthesizer generates two frequencies, f1 and f2, which are synchronized. The
binary input data controls the multiplexer. The bit timing must be synchronized with the
carrier frequencies. If a 1 is present, s1(t) will pass and if a 0 is present, s2(t) will pass.
s1(t) and s2(t) are always there regardless of the data input.
2 Eb f1 , φ
s1(t) = cos(2πf1t + φ )
Tb
fi ,φ
Frequency Synthesizer
Multiplexer
2 Eb f2 ,φ
s2(t) = cos(2πf 2t + φ )
Tb
Control line
Binary data input, ak
Figure 3.2 Coherent BFSK modulator.
For coherent demodulation of the coherent FSK signal, the two frequencies are so chosen
that the two signals are orthogonal:
Tb
∫ s (t )s (t )dt
0
1 2 =0
That is
Tb
∫ cos(2πf t + φ ) cos(2πf t + φ )dt

0
1 2
T
1
= ∫ {cos[2π ( f1 + f 2 )t + 2φ ] + cos[2π ( f1 − f 2 )t ]}dt
20
1 1
= {sin[2π ( f1 + f 2 )t + 2φ ]} T0b + sin 2π ( f 1 − f 2 )t Tb
4π ( f 1 + f 2 ) 4π ( f1 − f 2 )
0
17
1
= [cos 2φ sin 2π ( f1 + f 2 )t + sin 2φ cos 2π ( f1 + f 2 )t ] T0
+
b
4π ( f1 + f 2 )
1
sin 2π ( f1 − f 2 )t T0b
4π ( f 1 − f 2 )
1
= {cos 2φ sin 2π ( f1 + f 2 )Tb + sin 2φ cos( f1 + f 2 )Tb − sin 2φ } +
4π ( f1 + f 2 )
1
sin 2π ( f 1 − f 2 )Tb
4π ( f1 − f 2 )
=0
This implies that
2π ( f1 + f 2 )Tb = 2πn (3.3)

and
2π ( f1 − f 2 )Tb = mπ (3.4)
where m and n are integers. Solving equations (3.3) and (3.4) simultaneously leads to
2n + m 2n − m
f1 = and f 2 =
4Tb 4Tb
m
f1 − f 2 = 2Δf =
2Tb
1
Thus we conclude that for orthogonality f1 and f 2 must be an integer multiple of
4Tb
1
and their difference must be integer multiple of . Using Δf we can rewrite the two
2Tb
frequencies as
f1 + f 2 n
f1 = f c + Δf and f 2 = f c − Δf , which leads to f c = = ,
2 2Tb
1
where f c is the nominal carrier frequency which must be an integer multiple of for
2Tb
orthogonality.
1
When the separation is chosen as , then the phase continuity will be maintained
Tb
at bit transitions, and the FSK is called Sunde’s FSK [3]. As a matter of fact, if the
k
separation is , where k is an integer, the phase of the coherent FSK of equation (3.2) is
Tb
18
1
always continuous. The minimum separation for orthogonality between f1 and f 2 is .
2Tb
However, this separation cannot guarantee continuous phase. A particular form of FSK
called minimum shift keying (MSK) not only has the minimum separation but also has
continuous phase. However, MSK is much more than ordinary FSK, it has properties
that ordinary FSK doesn’t have. It must be generated by methods other than the one
described in Figure 3.2. MSK is an important modulation method scheme but not
included in the scope of this thesis.
3.2.2 Coherent Demodulation and Error Performance in AWGN Channel
Coherent demodulation requires knowledge of the reference phase or exact phase

recovery, meaning local oscillators, phase-lock-loops, and carrier recovery circuits may
be required, adding to the complexity of the receiver. The demodulator can be
implemented with two correlators as shown in Figure 3.3, where the two reference
signals are cos(2πf1t ) and cos(2πf 2t ) . They must be synchronized with the received
signal.
Tb l1
∫
0
dt Threshold detector
1
received l
signal, r(t)
cos(2πf 1t ) ∑ 0
0
Tb
∫
0
dt l2
cos(2πf 2 t )
Figure 3.3 Coherent BFSK demodulator: correlator implementation.
The receiver is optimum in the sense that it minimizes the error probability for equally
likely binary signals. When signal s1(t) is transmitted, the upper correlator yields a signal
l1 with a positive signal component and a noise component. However, the lower
correlator output l2, due to the signal’s orthogonality, has only a noise component. Thus
the output of the summer is most likely above zero, and the threshold detector will most
likely produce a 1. When signal s2(t) is transmitted, opposite things happen to the two
correlators and the threshold detector will most likely produce a 0. However, due to the
noise nature that it values range from -∞ to +∞, occasionally the noise amplitude might
overpower the signal amplitude, and then detection errors happen.
19
An alternative to Figure 3.3 is to use matched filter implementation of the
demodulator that matches cos(2πf1t ) - cos(2πf 2t ) (Figure 3.4). Both correlator and
matched filter implementation are equivalent in terms of error performance.
Sample at
t = Tb Threshold detector
1
received h(Tb - t)
0
signal, r(t) 0
l
h(t) = cos(2πf 1t ) − cos(2πf 2 t )

Figure 3.4 Coherent BFSK demodulator: matched filter implementation.
In the presence of AWGN channel, the received signal is
r(t) = si(t) + n(t), i = 1, 2
where n(t) is the additive white Gaussian noise with zero mean and a two-sided power
spectral density N0/2. The bit error probability for an equally likely binary signal is given
by
⎛ E + E − 2ρ E E ⎞
⎜ 1 2 12 2 ⎟
Pb = Q⎜ ⎟⎟ (3.5) [3]
⎜ 2N0
⎝ ⎠
where E1 and E2 are the energies of the binary signals, ρ12 is the correlation co-efficient
of the binary signals, and Q(z) is the Q-function defined as
∞
1
Q(z) = ∫
z 2π
exp(− z 2 / 2)dz
For Sunde’s FSK signals, E1 = E2 = Eb, and ρ12 = 0 since the signals are orthogonal.
Thus the error probability is
⎛ Eb ⎞
Pb = Q⎜⎜ ⎟
⎟ (3.6)
⎝ N 0 ⎠
where Eb is the average transmitted bit energy of the FSK signal. A plot of equation
(3.6) is shown in Figure 3.5.
20
0
10
-1
10
-2
10
Bit error probability, Pb
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
-7
10
-8
10
0 5 10 15
Eb/No (dB)
Figure 3.5 Probability of error of coherently demodulated BFSK signal.
3.2.3 Noncoherent Demodulation and Error Performance in AWGN Channel
Noncoherent demodulation techniques do not require knowledge of the reference phase,

eliminating the need for phase-lock-loops, local oscillators, and carrier recovery circuits.
Non coherent demodulation techniques are generally less expensive and easier to build
than coherent techniques (since coherent reference signals do not have to be generated),
and are often preferred, though they can degrade performance under certain channel
conditions.
Coherently generated FSK signals can be noncoherently demodulated to avoid the
carrier recovery. Noncoherently generated FSK can only be noncoherently demodulated.
Both are referred to as noncoherent FSK and the demodulation problem becomes a
problem of detecting signals with unknown phases. It can be shown that the optimum
receiver for noncoherent demodulation is a quadrature receiver. It can be implemented
using correlators or equivalently, matched filters. With the assumption that the binary
noncoherent FSK signals are equally likely and of equal energies, the demodulator using
correlators is shown in Figure 3.6.
21
cos(2πf 1t )
Tb
∫
0
dt Squarer
sin( 2πf 1t ) ∑
Tb 2
l1
∫0
dt Squarer
2 2
r(t) If l1 > l 2
cos( 2πf 2 t )
Comparator choose 1
2 2
Tb If l1 < l 2
∫
0
dt Squarer choose 0
2
l2
sin( 2πf 2 t )
∑
Tb
∫
0
dt Squarer
Figure 3.6 BFSK noncoherent demodulator: correlator-squarer implementation.
The received signal (ignoring noise for the moment) with unknown phase can be written
as
si(t) = A cos(2πf it + φ ), i = 1, 2
= A cosθ cos(2πf it ) − A sin θ sin(2πf it )
The signal consists of inphase and quadrature components A cosθ cos(2πf it ) and
A sin θ sin(2πf i t ) respectively. Thus the signal is partially correlated with cos(2πf it ) and
partially correlated to sin(2πf it ) . The outputs of the inphase and quadrature correlators
ATb cosθ ATb sin θ
will be and , respectively. Depending on the value of the unknown
2 2
⎛ − ATb ATb ⎞
phase, these two outputs could be anything in ⎜ , ⎟ . Fortunately the squared
⎝ 2 2 ⎠
sum of these two signals is not dependent on the unknown phase. That is
2 2
⎛ ATb cosθ ⎞ ⎛ ATb sin θ ⎞
2
A2Tb
⎜ ⎟ +⎜ ⎟ =
⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠ 2
22
2
This quantity is actually the mean value of the statistics li when the signal si(t) is
transmitted and noise is taken into consideration. When si(t) is not transmitted the mean
2
value of li is zero. The comparator decides which signal was transmitted by checking
2
these li .
The matched filter equivalence of Figure 3.6, which has the same error
performance, is shown in Figure 3.7.
Sample at t = Tb
cos 2πf1 (Tb − t ) Envelope

Detector
l1 if l1 > l 2
r(t) Comparator choose 1
if l1 < l 2
choose 0
l2
cos 2πf 2 (Tb − t ) Envelop
Detector
Sample at t = Tb
Figure 3.7 BFSK noncoherent demodulator: matched filter implementation.
The probability of error of noncoherent, orthogonal binary FSK signals can be shown to
be
1 ⎛ − Eb ⎞
Pb = exp⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ (3.7)
2 ⎝ 2N0 ⎠
The plot of equation (3.7) is shown in Figure 3.8 below.
23
0
10
-1
10
-2
10
Bit error probability, Pb
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
-7
10
-8
10
0 5 10 15
Eb/No (dB)
Figure 3.8 Probability of error of noncoherently demodulated BFSK signal.
It is worth noting that the demodulators in Figures 3.6 and 3.7 are good for equiprobable,
equal-energy, noncoherent signals. They do not require the signals to be orthogonal.
However, equation (3.7) is only applicable for orthogonal, equiprobable, equal-energy,
noncoherent signals.
It was shown in chapter 3.2.1 that the minimum frequency separation for coherent
FSK signals is 1/2T (where T is the symbol period). It can similarly be shown that that
the minimum separation for noncoherent FSK signals is 1/T instead of 1/2T. Thus the
separations for noncoherent FSK is double that of coherent FSK. Hence more system
bandwidth is required for noncoherent FSK for the same symbol rate.
3.2.4 Power Spectral Density of BFSK
The Sunde’s FSK signal, assuming the initial phase to be zero, can be written as
2 Eb 1
s1(t) = cos 2π ( f c + )t , 0 ≤ t ≤ Tb , for binary 1
Tb 2Tb
2 Eb 1
s2(t) = cos 2π ( f c − )t , 0 ≤ t ≤ Tb , for binary 0 (3.8)
Tb 2Tb
24
It is obvious from equation (3.8) that Sunde’s FSK signal can be further simplified as
2 Eb 1
s(t) = cos 2π ( f c ± )t
Tb 2Tb
2E πt
= cos(2πf c t ± )
Tb Tb
πt
= A cos(2πf ct + ak ) (3.9)
Tb
where
2 Eb
A= , and ak = ± 1
Tb
Expanding equation (3.9) leads to
πt πt
s(t) = A cos(ak ) cos(2πf ct ) − A sin(ak ) sin(2πf ct )
Tb Tb
πt πt
= A cos( ) cos(2πf ct ) − Aak sin( ) sin( 2πf ct ) , 0 ≤ t ≤ Tb
Tb Tb
⎡⎧ πt πt ⎫ ⎤
= Re ⎢⎨ A cos( ) + jAak sin( )⎬e − j 2πf c t ⎥
⎢⎣⎩ Tb Tb ⎭ ⎥⎦
⎡ ⎤
= Re ⎢~ s (t )e − j 2πf ct ⎥ (3.10)
⎣ ⎦
where ~
s (t ) is the complex envelope of the bandpass signal s(t), and defined as
~ πt πt
s (t ) = A cos( ) + jAa k sin( )
Tb Tb
It can be shown that the power spectral density (PSD) of a bandpass signal
[
s(t) = Re ~ ]
s (t )e − j 2πf ct is the shifted version of the equivalent baseband signal or the
complex envelope ~ s (t ) ’s PSD S B ( f ) .
1
Ss ( f ) = [S B ( f − f c ) + S B ( f + f ) c ] ,
4
where S s ( f ) is the power spectral density of the bandpass signal s(t). Therefore it
suffices to determine the PSD of the equivalent baseband signal ~
s (t ) . Since the inphase
and quadrature component of the FSK signal of equation (3.10) are independent of each
other, the PSD for the complex envelope is the sum of the PSDs of these two
components.
25
S B ( f ) = S I ( f ) + SQ ( f )
S I ( f ) can easily be found since the inphase component is independent of data. It is

defined on the entire time axis. Thus
2
⎧ ⎛ πt ⎞⎫
S I ( f ) = F ⎨ A cos⎜⎜ ⎟⎟⎬
⎩ ⎝ Tb ⎠⎭
A⎡ ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎛ 1 ⎞⎤
= ⎢δ ⎜⎜ f − ⎟⎟ + δ ⎜⎜ f + ⎟⎟⎥
4⎣ ⎝ 2Tb ⎠ ⎝ 2Tb ⎠⎦
where F stands for Fourier transform. It is seen that the spectrum of the inphase part of
the Sunde’s FSK signal are two delta functions.
It can also be shown that the PSD of a binary, bipolar, equiprobable, stationary,
and uncorrelated digital waveform is just equal to the energy spectral density of the
symbol shaping pulse divided by the symbol period. The symbol shaping pulse of the
πt
quadrature component is A sin( ) , and therefore
Tb
2
1 ⎧ ⎛ πt ⎞⎫
SQ ( f ) = F ⎨ A sin ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟⎬ ,0 ≤ t ≤ Tb
Tb ⎩ ⎝ Tb ⎠⎭
⎧ ⎛ πt ⎞⎫
Tb
⎛ πt ⎞ − j 2πf
F ⎨ A sin ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟⎬ =
⎝ Tb ⎠⎭
∫ A sin⎜⎜⎝ T
⎟⎟e
b ⎠
dt
⎩ 0
2 ATb cos(πfTb )
=
π [1 − (2Tb f ) 2 ]
Thus,
1 ⎛ 2 ATb cos(πfTb ) ⎞
SQ ( f ) = ⎜⎜ 2 ⎟
⎟
Tb ⎝ π [1 − (2Tb f ) ] ⎠
The complete baseband PSD of the binary FSK signal is the sum of S I ( f ) and S Q ( f ) ;
2
A2 ⎡ ⎛ 1 ⎞ ⎛ 1 ⎞⎤ ⎛ 2 A cos(πfTb ) ⎞
SB ( f ) = ⎢δ ⎜⎜ f − ⎟⎟ + δ ⎜⎜ f + ⎟⎟⎥ + Tb ⎜⎜ 2 ⎟
⎟ (3.11)
4 ⎣ ⎝ 2Tb ⎠ ⎝ 2Tb ⎠⎦ ⎝ π [1 − (2Tb f ) ] ⎠
26
3.3 M-ary FSK
3.3.1 Modulator, Demodulator, and Error Performance in AWGN Channel
The coherent modulator of binary FSK in Figure 3.2 can easily be extended to coherent
M-ary FSK (Figure 3.9). Here the frequency synthesizer generates M signals with the
designed frequencies and coherent phase, and the multiplexer chooses one of the
frequencies, according to the n = log 2 M bits.
f1
f2
Frequency fi
. Multiplexer
Synthesizer
.
.
fM
Control lines
b1 b2 ... bn
Binary input data S/P

Converter
Figure 3.9 Coherent M-ary FSK modulator.
The coherent M-ary FSK demodulator falls in the general form of detector for M-
ary equiprobable, equal-energy signals with known phases. The demodulator consists of
a bank of M correlators or matched filters (Figure 3.10 and Figure 3.11). At sample
times t = kT, the receiver makes decisions based on the largest output of the correlators or
matched filters. It is worth noting that the coherent M-ary FSK receivers in Figures 3.10
and 3.11 only require that the M-ary FSK signals be equiprobable, equal energy, and do
not require them to be orthogonal.
27
Tb l1
∫
0
dt
cos(2πf 1t )
Tb l2 If li > l j
Received ∫0
dt
∀j ≠ i mi
signal, r(t) choose mi
cos(2πf 2t )
. . .
. . .
. . .
Tb lM
∫
0
dt
cos(2πf M t )
Figure 3.10 Coherent M-ary FSK demodulator: correlator implementation.
Sample t = Tb
l1
cos 2πf 1 (T − t )
Sample at t = Tb l2
cos 2πf 2 (T − t ) If li > l j
Received
∀j ≠ i mi
signal, r(t) choose mi
. .
. .
. .
Sample at t = Tb lM
cos 2πf M (T − t )
Figure 3.11 Coherent M-ary FSK demodulator: matched filter implementation.
28
The exact expression for the symbol error probability for symmetrical signal set, equal
energy and equiprobable, is given as
∞
1 ⎪ (
⎧ x − 2E / N 2 ⎫
⎪)
Ps = 1 − ∫ ⎬[1 − Q( x )] dx
0 M −1
exp⎨− s
(3.12) [3]
− ∞ 2π ⎪⎩ 2 ⎪⎭
This expression does not require the signal set to be orthogonal, and cannot be
analytically evaluated. If the signal set is equal-energy and orthogonal (not necessarily
equiprobable), all distances between any two signals are equal. The distance d = 2 E s ,
and the upper bound obtained from equation (3.12) is
⎛ Es ⎞
Ps ≤ ( M − 1)Q⎜ ⎟ (3.13)
⎜ N ⎟
⎝ 0 ⎠
where E s = E b log 2 M , and Q(z) is the Q-function defined in chapter 3.2.2.

For fixed M this bound becomes increasingly tight as Es/N0 is increased. Infact, it
becomes a good approximation for Ps ≤ 10-3.
For equally likely orthogonal M-ary signals, all symbol errors are equiprobable. That is,
the demodulator may choose any one of the ( M − 1) erroneous orthogonal signals with
equal probability. Hence it can be shown that the average bit error probability is given by
2n −1 2 n −1
Pb = P = Ps , where n = log2M.
2n − 1 M −1
s
Bit error probability (Pb) and symbol error probability (Ps) for coherently demodulated,
equal-energy, equiprobable, and orthogonal M-ary FSK signals are shown in Figures 3.12
and 3.13.
29
-1
Bit-error Probability of Coherent M-ary FSK
10
BFSK
4-FSK
-2 8-FSK
10
16-FSK
32-FSK
Bit-error probability, Pb
64-FSK
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
0 5 10 15
Eb/No (dB)
Figure 3.12 Bit error probability of coherently demodulated M-ary FSK.
Symbol-error Probability of Coherent M-ary FSK

-1
10
BFSK
-2 4-FSK
10
8-FSK
16-FSK
-3
10 32-FSK
Symbol-error probability, Ps
64-FSK
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
-7
10
-8
10
0 5 10 15
Eb/No (dB)
Figure 3.13 Symbol error probability of coherently demodulated M-ary FSK.
30
It can be seen from Figures 3.12 and 3.13 that for the same Eb/N0, error probability
reduces when M increases, or for the same error probability, the required Eb/N0 decrease
as M increases. However, the speed of decrease in Eb/N0 slows down when M gets
larger.
The noncoherent modulator for binary FSK in Figure 3.2 can also be easily
extended to noncoherent M-ary FSK by simply increasing the number of independent
oscillators to M (Figure 3.14).
Oscillator 1 f1 , φ1
A cos(2πf 1t + φ1 )
Oscillator 2 f 2 , φ2
A cos(2πf 2 t + φ1 )
Multiplexer f i , φi
. .
. .
. .
Oscillator M f M , φM
A cos(2πf M t + φ M )
Control lines
b1 b2 ... bn
Binary input data S/P

Converter
Figure 3.14 Noncoherent M-ary FSK modulator
The noncoherent demodulator for M-ary FSK falls in the general form of detector for M-
ary equiprobable, equal-energy signals with unknown phases as described in many
communication books. The demodulator can be implemented in correlator-squarer form,
or matched filter-squarer or matched filter-envelope detector form (Figures 3.15, 3.16 and
3.17).
31
Tb
∫0
dt Squarer
2
l1
cos(2πf 1t ) ∑
Tb
∫
0
dt Squarer
sin( 2πf 1t )
Tb
∫
0
dt Squarer
2 2
If li > l j ,
2
l2
r(t) cos(2πf 2t ) ∑ ∀j ≠ i mi
Tb
choose mi
∫
0
dt Squarer
sin( 2πf 2 t ) . . .
. . .
. . .
Tb
∫
0
dt Squarer
2
lM
cos(2πf M t ) ∑
Tb
∫0
dt Squarer
sin( 2πf M t )
Figure 3.15 Noncoherent M-ary FSK demodulator: Correlator-squarer implementation.
32
Sample
at t = Tb
cos 2πf1 (Tb − t ) Squarer
2
Sample l1
at t = Tb
∑
sin 2πf1 (Tb − t ) Squarer
Sample
at t = Tb
cos 2πf 2 (Tb − t ) Squarer

2 2
If li > l j ,
2
l2 ∀j ≠ i
∑
Sample mi
r(t)
at t = Tb
choose mi
sin 2πf 2 (Tb − t ) Squarer
. . .
. . .
. . .
Sample
at t = Tb
cos 2πf M (Tb − t ) Squarer
2
Sample lM
at t = Tb
∑
sin 2πf M (Tb − t ) Squarer
Figure 3.16 Noncoherent M-ary FSK demodulator: matched filter-squarer

implementation.
33
Sample at t = Tb
Envelope l1
cos 2πf1 (T − t ) Detector
Sample at t = Tb
Envelope l2 If li > l j
cos 2πf 2 (T − t ) Detector ∀j ≠ i mi
r(t) . choose mi
. . .
. . .
. .
Sample at t = Tb
Envelope lM
cos 2πf M (T − t ) Detector
Figure 3.17 Noncoherent M-ary FSK demodulator: matched filter-envelope detector

implementation.
The expression for symbol error probability of noncoherently demodulated, equiprobable,

equal-energy, and orthogonal M-ary FSK is given as
M −1
(−1) k +1 ⎛ M − 1⎞ ⎡ kE s ⎤
Ps = ∑ ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ exp ⎢− ⎥ (3.14) [4]
k =1 k + 1 ⎝ k ⎠ ⎣ (k + 1) N 0 ⎦
⎛ M − 1⎞ ( M − 1)!
where ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ = , is the binomial co-efficient.
⎝ k ⎠ ( M − 1 − k )!k!
The first term of the summation in equation (3.14) provides an upper bound as
M −1 ⎡ E ⎤
Ps ≤ exp ⎢− s ⎥ (3.15)
2 ⎣ 2N 0 ⎦
For fixed M this bound becomes increasingly close to the actual value of Ps as Es/N0 is
increased. Figures 3.18 and 3.19 show bit and symbol error probabilities for
noncoherently demodulated, equiprobable, equal-energy, and orthogonal M-ary FSK.
The behavior of the curves with values of M is similar to that of the coherent case.
34
-1
Bit-error Probability of Noncoherent M-ary FSK
10
BFSK
4-FSK
-2 8-FSK
10
16-FSK
32-FSK
64-FSK
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Eb/No (dB)
Figure 3.18 Bit error probability of noncoherently demodulated M-ary FSK signals.
Symbol-error Probability of Noncoherent M-ary FSK

-1
10
BFSK
-2 4-FSK
10
8-FSK
16-FSK
-3
10 32-FSK
Symbol-error probability, Ps
64-FSK
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
-7
10
-8
10
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Eb/No (dB)
Figure 3.19 Symbol error probability of noncoherently demodulated M-ary FSK signals.
35
3.3.2 Coherent Versus Noncoherent
Advantages and disadvantages exist for both coherent and noncoherent techniques. The
most important advantage of noncoherent demodulation is that it is simple and thus
requires a simple receiver, as opposed to coherent demodulation where the receiver is
relatively complex. Coherent demodulation leads to better symbol error performance in
the presence of AWGN.
For coherent demodulation, the minimum frequency separation Δf = f1 − f 2 = 1 / 2T is

necessary to ensure orthogonality of signals over a signaling interval of length T. If
noncoherent demodulation is used (such as envelope or square-law detection of FSK
signals), the minimum frequency separation required for orthogonality of the signals is
f = 1 / T in the presence of AWGN. This separation is twice as large as that required for
coherent detection. This accounts for the performance degradation when noncoherent
demodulation is used instead of coherent demodulation. For example, at BER = 10-4,
coherent M-ary FSK is about 1 dB better than noncoherent M-ary FSK in terms of Eb/N0
(Figures 3.20 – 3.24).
0
Cohernt vrs Noncoherent Bit-error Probability for BFSK
10
Coherent BFSK
-1 Noncoherent BFSK
10
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
-7
10
-8
10
0 5 10 15
Eb/No (dB)
Figure 3.20 Comparison of BER for coherent and noncoherent BFSK.
36
0
Cohernt vrs Noncoherent Bit-error Probability for 4FSK
10
Coherent 4-FSK
-1
10 Noncoherent 4-FSK
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
-7
10
-8
10
0 5 10 15
Eb/No (dB)
Figure 3.21 Comparison of BER for coherent and noncoherent 4-FSK.
0
Cohernt vrs Noncoherent Bit-error Probability for 8FSK
10
Coherent 8-FSK
-1
10 Noncoherent 8-FSK
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
-7
10
-8
10
0 5 10 15
Eb/No (dB)
Figure 3.22 Comparison of BER for coherent and noncoherent 8-FSK.
37
3.3.3 Power Spectral Density
The most important parameter of FSK modulation is not the frequency shift itself, but
rather the relationship of the frequency shift with symbol rate Rs (or equivalently the
2Δf
symbol period, T). The modulation index is defined as h = = 2ΔfT [5], where
Rs
2Δf is the separation between two adjacent frequencies. The modulation index is so
important because it determines the ease of demodulation of the scheme, and its spectral
characteristics.
In an M-ary FSK modulation, the binary data stream is divided into n-tuples of
n = log 2 M bits. All the M possible n-tuples are denoted as M messages; mi , i = 1, 2, …,
M. There are M signals with different frequencies to represent these M messages, and
the expression for the ith signal is si (t ) = A cos(2πf it + φi ), 0 ≤ t ≤ T , for mi , where T is
the symbol period which is n times the bit period. If the initial phases are the same for all
i, the signal set is coherent. The initial phase is most of the time assumed to be zero for
coherent M-ary FSK.
The derivation of the power spectral density of M-ary FSK scheme is very
complicated, and not the purpose of this thesis work, thus I’ll just quote the expression.
The power spectral density (PSD) expression of the complex envelope of M-ary FSK
signal, for equiprobable messages, is given as
A2T M ⎡ sin 2 γ i 1 M
sin γ i sin γ j ⎤
ψ ~s =
M
∑ ⎢
⎢ 2γ i
i =1 ⎣
2
+
M
∑A
j =1
ij
γi γ j ⎦⎥
⎥ (3.16) [3]
where;
A is the signal amplitude and all signals have equal energies,
cos(γ i + γ j ) − C a cos(γ i + γ j − 2πfT )

Aij = ,
1 + C a − 2C a cos(2πfT )
2
γ i = ( fT − mi h / 2)π , i = 1,2,..., M
M /2
2
Ca =
M
∑ cos[hπ (2i − 1)], and
i =1
mi = 2i − ( M + 1), i = 1,2,..., M
Plots of equation (3.16) for various values of h for M = 2, 4, and 8 are shown in Figures
3.23 – 3.28.
38
PSD for BFSK
0.9
h = 0..5
0.8 h = 0.6
h = 0.7
0.7
Normalized power spectral density
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Normalized frequency, (f-fc)T
Figure 3.23 Power-density spectrum of BFSK signal (for h = 0.5, 0.6, 0.7).
PSD for BFSK

0.9
h = 0.80
0.8 h =0.90
h = 0.95
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Figure 3.24 Power-density spectrum of BFSK signal (for h = 0.8, 0.9, 0.95).
39
PSD for 4-FSK
0.9
h = 0.20
0.8 h = 0.35
h = 0.40
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
Figure 3.25 Power-density spectrum of 4-FSK signal (for h = 0.2, 0.35, and 0.4).
PSD for 4-FSK

0.4
h = 0.5
0.35 h = 0.6
h = 0.7
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
40
PSD for 8-FSK
0.9
h = 0.125
0.8 h = 0.2
h = 0.3
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
PSD for 8-FSK

0.25
h = 0.4
h = 0.5
h = 0.6
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
41
Curves are presented for various values of h to show how the spectral shape changes with
h. For small values of h, the spectra are narrow and decrease smoothly towards zero. As
h increases towards unity, the spectrum widens and spectral power is increasingly
concentrated around -0.5 ≤ (f – fc) ≤ 0.5 and its odd multiples. These are the frequencies
of the M signals in the scheme.
For coherent orthogonal case, h = 0.5 (Figure 3.29), most spectral components are in a
bandwidth of M/2T. Thus the transmission bandwidth is set as BT = M/2T. Similarly, for
noncoherent orthogonal case, h = 1, and then BT = M/T.
Comparison of PSD of M-ary FSK at h = 0.5

0.9
BFSK
0.8 4-FSK
8-FSK
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Figure 3.29 Power spectra of M-ary FSK signals for M = 2, 4, and 8 (h = 0.5).
3.3.4 Bandwidth Efficiency
Channel bandwidth and transmit power constitute two very important communication
resources, efficient utilization of which provides the motivation for the search of efficient
schemes. The goal of any efficient scheme is achieve efficiency in bandwidth at a
minimum practical expenditure of average transmit power or, equivalently a channel
perturbed by AWGN, expenditure of average signal-to-noise ratio. The bandwidth
efficiency is defined as the number of bits per second that can be transmitted in one Hertz
of system bandwidth. With the data rate denoted by Rb and the channel bandwidth by BT,
we may express bandwidth efficiency, ρ , as
R
ρ = b bits/sec/Hz
BT
42
The data rate is well defined. Unfortunately, however, there is no universal satisfying
definition for the bandwidth BT. For modulation schemes that have power density
spectral nulls, defining the bandwidth as the width of the main spectral lobe is a
convenient way of bandwidth definition. If the spectrum of the modulated signal does
not have spectral nulls, as in general continuous phase modulation, null-to-null
bandwidth no longer exists. In this case energy percentage bandwidth may be used.
Usually 99 % is used, even though other percentages (e.g., 90 %, 95 %) are also used.
The bandwidth efficiency of coherently demodulated M-ary FSK signal that consists of
an orthogonal set of M frequency-shifted signals is given by;
Rb
ρ= (3.17)
( M / 2T )
where Rb is the data rate in bits per second, and T is the symbol period which is n times
the bit period. Equation (3.17) can be re-written as
2 log 2 M
ρ= (3.18)
M
Table 3.1 gives the values of ρ calculated from equation (3.18) for M = 2, 4, 8, and 16.
Table 3.1 Bandwidth efficiency of coherent M-ary FSK signals

M 2 4 8 16
ρ 1.0 1.0 0.75 0.50
(bits/s/Hz)
43
Chapter 4
Simulations and Results
This chapter presents the simulation of 2, 4, and 8-level FSK systems in AGWN channel
and the results obtained.
4.1 Simulation of Additive White Gaussian Noise (AWGN) Channel
From probability theory it is known that a Rayleigh distributed random variable R, with
probability distribution function
⎧ 0, R < 0
F ( R) = ⎨ − R 2 / 2σ 2
⎩1 − e ,R ≥ 0
is related to a pair of Gaussian random variables X1 and X2 through the transformation
X 1 = R cosθ (4.1)
X 2 = R sin θ (4.2)
where θ is a uniformly distributed variable in the interval (0,2π ) , and the parameter σ 2
is the variance of X1 and X2.
Now, generating a Rayleigh distributed random variable with the computer, we have
2 2
F ( R) = 1 − e − R / 2σ = M (4.3)
where M is a uniformly distributed random variable in the interval (0,2π ) . Solving
equation (4.3) results in
⎛ 1 ⎞
R = σ 2 ln⎜ ⎟ (4.4)
⎝1− M ⎠
If we generate a second uniformly distributed random variable N, and define θ = 2πN ,

then from equations (4.1), (4.2) and (4.4) we obtain two independent Gaussian distributed
random variables X1 and X2 as
⎛ 1 ⎞
X 1 = σ 2 ln⎜ ⎟ × cos(2πN ) and
⎝1− M ⎠
⎛ 1 ⎞
X 2 = σ 2 ln⎜ ⎟ × sin( 2πN ) .
⎝1− M ⎠
44
4.2 Simulation of Binary FSK System in AWGN Channel
In this section, simulations in additive white Gaussian channel and results for both
coherent and noncoherent (square-law detection) binary FSK systems are presented.
4.2.1 Coherent System
A model for the simulation of coherent binary FSK system in AWGN channel is shown
in Figure 4.1.
Uniform Gaussian
RNG RNG
n0 r0
Binary Output data

Detector
data source
n1 r1
Gaussian
RNG
Compare
Error Counter
Figure 4.1 Simulation model for coherent binary FSK system.
Since the signals are orthogonal, when a 0 (signal s1(t)) is transmitted, the correlator
outputs are r0 = Eb + n0 , and r1 = n1 . When a 1 (signal s2(t)) is transmitted, the
correlator outputs are r0 = n0 , and r1 = Eb + n1 .
Figure 4.2 shows the results of the simulation for the transmission of 20,000 bits at
several different values of Eb/N0 and how it compares with theory.
45
0
10
Simulated bit-error rate
-1
10 Theoretical bit-error rate
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
-7
10
-8
10
0 5 10 15
Eb/No in dB
Figure 4.2 Performance of simulated coherent binary FSK system.
4.2.2 Noncoherent (square-law detection) System
A model for the simulation of noncoherent (square-law detection) binary FSK system in
AWGN channel is shown in Figure 4.3. Since the signals are orthogonal, when s1(t) is
transmitted, the first demodulator output is
r1I = Eb cos φ + n1I
r1Q = Eb sin φ + n1Q
and the second demodulator output is
r2 I = n2 I
r2Q = n2Q
where n1I , n1Q , n2 I , n2Q are mutually statistically independent zero-mean Guassian random
variables with variance σ 2 and φ represents the channel-phase shift. The square-law
2 2 2 2
detector computes r1 = r1I + r1q , r2 = r2 I + r2Q and selects the information bit
corresponding to the larger of these two decision variables.
46
Uniform Gaussian Gaussian
RNG RNG RNG
( )2 r1
FSK
signal
selector
( )2
Detector Output data
( )2 r2
( )2
Gaussian Gaussian
RNG RNG
Compare
Error counter
Figure 4.3 Simulation model for noncoherent binary FSK system.
Figure 4.4 shows the results of the simulation for the transmission of 20,000 bits at
several different values of Eb/N0 and how it compares with theory.
47
0
10
-1
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
-7
10
-8
10
0 5 10 15
Eb/No in dB
Figure 4.4 Performance of simulated noncoherent binary FSK system.
4.3 Simulation of 4 and 8-level FSK Systems in AWGN Channel
A model for the simulation of coherent 4-level FSK system in AWGN channel is shown
in Figure 4.5. The block diagram of the simulation of noncoherent 4-level FSK system in
AWGN channel is similar to that in Figure 4.3, the only difference being the number of
correlator (demodulator) outputs.
The block diagram of the simulation of coherent 8-level FSK is similar to that depicted in
Figure 4.5, whiles the model for simulation of noncoherent 8-level FSK systems is
similar to that shown in Figure 4.3.
48
Gaussian RNG
Es
r0
Gaussian RNG
Uniform r1
RNG
Output data
Gaussian RNG Detector
Mapping to r2
signal points
Gaussian RNG
r3
Compare
Error counter
Figure 4.5 Simulation model for coherent 4-level FSK system.
Figures 4.6 - 4.9 illustrates the results of the simulations for the transmission of 20,000
symbols at several different values of Eb/N0 and how it compares with theory.
49
0
10
Simulated symbol-error rate
-1
-2
10
Probability of error
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Eb/No (dB)
Figure 4.6 Performance of simulated coherent 4-level FSK system.
0
10
-1
-2
10
Probability od error
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Eb/No (dB)
Figure 4.7 Performance of simulated noncoherent 4-level FSK system.
50
0
10
-1
-2
10
Probability of error
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Eb/No (dB)
Figure 4.8 Performance of simulated coherent 8-level FSK system
0
10
-1
-2
10
Probability or error
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Eb/No (dB)
Figure 4.9 Performance of simulated noncoherent 8-level FSK system.
51
Chapter 5
Measuring of Performance of Commercially Available Radios Modems

by RACOM
This chapter describes the measurements performed on commercially available data

transmission equipment (manufactured by RACOM s.r.o. of the Czech Republic) that
uses GMSK and 4-level FSK modulation schemes, the results obtained and an analysis of
the results. A brief description of RACOM s.r.o is also given.
5.1 RACOM s.r.o.
RACOM s.r.o., is a company situated in a small town, Nove Mesto na-Morave, in the
Czech Republic. It developes and manufactures devices suitable for data networks, and
is aimed at narrowband radio transmission of data in frequency bands from 140 – 900
MHz. MORSE (MOdems for Radio-based SystEms) is the name given by RACOM to
the telecommunication systems it manufactures. MORSE is a packet communication
system designed for data transfer on narrowband radio channels, and is possible to
integrate other transfer medium (IP, GPRS, etc) into a MORSE network.
RACOM is one of several world manufacturers of narrowband radios. MORSE is
deployed in about 35 countries including both advanced and developing countries.
Germany, Norway, Sweden, and the United States of America are some of the advanced
countries where MORSE networks are deployed. Ghana, Nigeria, Sudan, and Latvia are
examples of developing nations where MORSE networks are in use.
Typical applications for data transmission using equipment manufactured by
RACOM are data transmission in technological process control, transaction networks,
security systems, mobile tracking and fleet management, and et cetera. The MORSE
system is also suitable for building extensive networks in which the data transmission
services are provided to end users. More information on RACOM s.r.o. can be found at
www.racom.cz.
5.2 Measurements
Measurements were made on two of RACOM’s products namely MR400 and MX160.
The MR400 radio modem (picture shown in Figure 5.1) uses 4-level FSK modulation
which is always filtered using root-raised cosine filters ( α = 0.2). While the MX160
radio modem (picture shown in Figure 5.2) uses GMSK modulation ( β T = 0.4). The
detailed technical parameters of MR400 and MX160, relevant to this thesis work, are
shown in Table 5.1. More technical information can be found on RACOM’s website.
MR400 radio modem is in deployment in many countries already. For example, it is used
in Porto, Portugal for fleet management. However, MX160 is a new addition to
RACOM’s products, which is to be deployed in Norway for a Telenor project.
52
Figure 5.1 MR400 radio modem.
Figure 5.2 MX160 radio modem.
Table 5.1 Technical parameters for MR400 and MX160 radio modems
Radio Modem
Technical Parameters MX160 MR400
Frequency range 136 – 180 MHz 380 – 470 MHz
Modulation scheme used GMSK 4-leve FSK
Transmit power 0.1 – 25 W 0.1 – 5 W
Channel bandwidth, B0 200 kHz 16 kHz
Channel spacing 25 kHz 25 kHz
Data rate 140 kbps 21.68 kbps
Frequency deviation 40 kHz 4.7 kHz
Filters used Gaussian ( βT = 0.4) Root-raised cosine ( α = 0.2)
Receiver sensitivity at BER > -107 dBm > -107 dBm
= 10-3
In transmit mode, bits/symbols are passed through the filters, named in table 5.1, to
eliminate the high frequency components which would otherwise cause interference into
adjacent radio channels. In the receive mode, the filters are used to reject high frequency
noise and to equalize the received signal to a form suitable for extracting the
bits/symbols.
The measurements were made by setting up a radio connection between a pair of

radio modems through a variable signal attenuator. The received signal strength (RSS) at
53
the receiver was then varied to several values. Random data of different lengths were
then sent at different RSS levels and the packet error rate (PER) recorded. The packet
error rate is the probability that a packet is discarded either due to synchronization errors
or due to a bit or bits in error. The received signal strength at the receiver were measured
with an oscilloscope, while the other measurements (PER, random data length) were done
using a proprietary software by RACOM called ‘Setr’. The random data were also
generated using ‘Setr’. The unprocessed results of measurements on MR400 and MX160
radio modems are shown in Tables 5.2 and 5.3 respectively.
Table 5.2 Raw data from measurements on MR400 radio modem

User data length in bytes ( Random data)
0 50 200 1000
RSS (dBm) PER PER PER PER
-110 1/3.1 1/2.4 1/1.4 -
-109 1/7.3 1/3.5 1/1.7 -
-108 1/19.3 1/9.0 1/3.2 -
-107 1/160.4 1/81.7 1/32.3 1/6.6
-105 1/409.5 1/322.0 1/93.1 1/21.0
-103 1/829.0 1/459.3 1/396.0 1/231.5
Table 5.3 Raw data from measurements on MX160 radio modem

User data length in bytes (Random data)
0 50 200 1000
RSS (dBm) PER PER PER PER
-107 1/3.5 1/1.7 1/1.1 -
-106 1/12.4 1/5.5 1/2.4 1/1.1
-104 1/69.8 1/27.6 1/7.8 1/2.1
-103 1/160.0 1/112.2 1/54.4 1/13.8
-102 1/532.2 1/343.0 1/235.6 1/68.1
-101 1/551.3 1/382.1 1/277.3 1/272.3
5.2.1 Extraction of Bit Error Rate (BER) form measured Packet Error Rate (PER)
By definition, the packet error rate (PER) from the measurements can be stated
mathematically as
PER(RSS ) = PERSYNC ( RSS ) + PERBER ( RSS ) (5.1)
where PER(RSS) is the total packet error rate obtained from measurements for a
particular RSS, PERSYNC (RSS ) is the packet error rate due to synchronization error, and is
54
assumed to be constant at a given RSS, and PERBER (RSS ) is the packet error rate due to a
bit or bits in error at a given RSS.
Now, a packet without synchronization errors will not be discarded if all bits in the
packet are correctly received. Thus, we can write mathematically that
1 − PERBER ( RSS ) = (1 − BER ) ,

l
and hence
PERBER (RSS ) = 1 − (1 − BER )
l
(5.2)
where l is the number of bits per packet, and BER is the bit error rate at a given RSS.
Substituting equation (5.2) into equation (5.1) yields
PER(RSS ) = PERSYNC ( RSS ) + 1 − (1 − BER )

l
(5.3)
Equation (5.3) shows that BER and PERSYNC (RSS ) can be obtained from the measured
values of PER and l by graphical methods.
5.2.2 Calculation of Noise Power
The total noise at the receiver input is equal to white noise (thermal noise) at the receiver
input plus the noise introduced by the receiver itself (noise figure of the receiver)
modeled as input to the receiver.
Mathematically, the total noise at the receiver input is given by
N = Thermal noise + Noise figure of receiver (5.4)
The receivers used by RACOM has noise figure of 8 dB, and the thermal noise is given
by kT , where k = 1.38 x 10-23 J/K is the Boltzmann’s constant and T is the temperature in
Kelvin. Thus, the total noise power
N = kT + 8 dB. (5.5)
At room temperature,
kT = 300 × 1.38 × 10−23 Watts/Hz
= 10 log10 (300 × 1.38 × 10−23 × 103 ) dBm/Hz
= − 174 dBm/Hz
Therefore,
N = − 174 dBm/Hz + 8 dB
N = − 166 dBm/Hz (5.6)
55
5.2.3 Processing of Measurement Data on MR400 Radio Modem
The processed data of measurements on MR400 radio modem is shown in Table 5.4.
Table 5.4 Processed data from measurements on MR400 radio modem

RSS (dBm) S/N (dB) BER
-110 12 5.053 × 10-4
-109 13 3.53 × 10-4
-108 14 1.873 × 10-4
-107 15 5.955 × 10-5
-105 17 5.86 × 10-6
-103 19 3.714 × 10-7
Sample calculation on how to arrive at Table 5.4 from Table 5.2;
At RSS = − 108 dBm, a graph of PER versus l (packet length in bytes) obtained using
data from Table 5.2 is shown in Figure 5.3.
PER vrs Packet length at RSS of -108 dBm
0.35
y = 0.0013x + 0.0176
0.3
0.25
0.2
PER
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Packet length (bytes)
Figure 5.3 PER versus packet length at -108 dBm for MR400 radio modem.
56
Each packet in the MORSE communication system is made up of;
i. Variable length user data,

ii. 4 bytes cyclic redundancy check (CRC),
iii. 12 bytes header,
iv. 2 bytes header CRC,
v. 6 bytes frame synchronizer.
Thus, the total length of each packet is equal to 24 bytes plus the length of user data. For
example, a user data of length 0 bytes results in a packet length of 24 bytes.
From equation (5.3);
PER( RSS ) = PERSYNC ( RSS ) + 1 − (1 − BER ) , which means that PERSYNC (−108dBm) is the
l
intercept on the PER axis (assuming a linear relation) of Figure 5.3. Hence we can write
PER(−108dBm) = 0.0176 + 1 − (1 − BER ) , from which an expression for BER is obtained
l
as
BER = 1 − 10(log10 {1.0176 − PER ( −108 dBm )} / l ) (5.7)
Now, BER can be calculated using equation (5.7) and data from Table 5.2;
At l = 24 bytes, PER(−108dBm) = 1/19.3, and BER = 1.813 × 10-4.

Average (weighted) BER =

(24 × 1.813 × 10 −4
+ 74 × 1.658 × 10 −4 + 224 × 1.95 × 10 −4 )
(24 + 74 + 224)
= 1.873 × 10−4
Signal-to-noise ratio (S/N in dB) calculation;
From chapter 5.2.2, it was deduced that the total noise power at the input of the receiver
of RACOM modems is given by;
N = − 166 dBm/Hz.
The receiver used for reception of MR400 transmissions has a bandwidth of 22 kHz.
Hence the total noise power at the receiver input of the MR400 radio modem is − 122
dBm, and signal-to-noise ratio is given as
S − 108dBm
= = 14 dB.
N − 122dBm
57
The BER curve for MR400 radio modem is shown in Figure 5.4.
BER curve for MR400 radio modem

-1
10
-2
10
-3
10
Bit-error probability (BER)
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
-7
10
-8
10
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
S/N in dB
Figure 5.4 Performance curve of MR400 radio modem.
5.2.4 Processing of Measurement data on MX160 Radio Modem
The processed data of measurements on MX160 radio modem is shown in Table 5.5.
Table 5.5 Processed data from measurements on MX160 radio modem

RSS (dBm) S/N (dB) BER
-107 5 5.518 × 10-4
-106 6 2.756 × 10-4
-104 8 4.313 × 10-5
-103 9 8.56 × 10-6
-102 10 1.579 × 10-6
-101 11 2.266 × 10-7
Sample calculation o how to arrive at Table 5.5 from Table 5.3;
At RSS = − 103 dBm, a graph of PER versus l (packet length in bytes) obtained using
data from Table 5.3 is shown in Figure 5.5.
58
PER versus Packet length at RSS of -103 dBm
0.08
y = 7E-05x + 0.0041
0.07
0.06
0.05
PER
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Packet length (bytes)
Figure 5.5 PER versus packet length at -104 dBm for MX16000 radio modem.
From Figure 5.5, it is seen that PERSYNC (−103dBm) = 0.0041 and the expression for BER
can be written as
BER = 1 − 10 (log10 {1.0041− PER ( −104 dBm )} / l ) (5.8)
Now, BER can be calculated using equation (5.8) and data from Table 5.3;
At l = 24 bytes, PER(−103dBm) = 1/160, and BER = 1.121 × 10-5.

Average (weighted) BER
=
(24 × 1.121 × 10 −5
+ 74 × 8.1491 × 10 −6 + 224 × 8.0275 × 10−6 + 1024 × 8.644 × 10−6 )
(24 + 74 + 224 + 1024)
= 8.56 × 10−6
59
Signal-to-noise ratio calculation;
From chapter 5.2.2, it was deduced that the total noise power at the input of the receiver
of RACOM modems is given by;
N = − 166 dBm/Hz.
The receiver used for reception of MX160 transmissions has a bandwidth of 230 kHz.
Hence the total noise power at the receiver input of the MX160 radio modem is − 112
dBm, and signal-to-noise ratio is given as
S − 103dBm
= = 9 dB.
N − 112dBm
The BER curve for MX160 radio modem is shown in Figure 5.6.
BER curve for MX160 radio modem

-1
10
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
-7
10
-8
10
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
S/N in dB
Figure 5.6 Performance curve of MX160 radio modem.
A comparison of the energy performance of MR400 and MX160 radio modems is

shown in Figure 5.7. It seen from the graph that at the same BER, MX160 radio modem
is typically 7 dB better than the MR400 radio modem in terms of signal-to-noise ratio
required. The difference can be explained using Shannon’s capacity theorem, which
60
states that there is always a compromise between energy and bandwidth efficiency.
MX160 radio modem uses GMSK (βT = 0.4) modulation scheme and has a bandwidth
efficiency of 0.70, whiles MR400 radio modem uses 4-level FSK modulation scheme and
has a bandwidth efficiency of 1.355. Thus MR400 radio modem trades energy efficiency
for bandwidth efficiency while the opposite is true for MX160 radio modem.
Comparison of BER curves for MR400 and MX160 radio modems

-1
10
MR400 (4-FSK,alpha = 0.2)
-2 MX160 (GMSK, BT = 0.4)
10
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
-7
10
-8
10
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
S/N in dB
Figure 5.7 Comparison of performance of MR400 and MX160 radio modems.
It can also be seen from Figure 5.7 that the curves start at BER of 10-3. This is because it
was very difficult getting any packet through at BER of 10-2. Hence it can be said that
for any reliable communication, the BER must be 10-3 or less.
61
Chapter 6
Comparison of Performance of 2, 4, and 8-level FSK Systems.
6.1 Bounds on Communication.
The celebrated Shannon’s formula for the capacity of an additive white Gaussian noise
channel is
⎛ P ⎞
C = B log 2 ⎜⎜1 + ⎟⎟ (6.1)[4]
⎝ N 0 B ⎠
where, C is the channel capacity in bits per second, B is the channel bandwidth in Hz,
P is the signal power in watts, and N0 is the noise power spectrum.
From equation (6.1) it can be seen that the basic factors that determine the channel
capacity are the channel bandwidth B, the noise power spectrum N0 and the signal power
P. There exists a trade-off between P and B in the sense that one can compensate for the
other. Increasing the input signal power obviously increases the channel capacity.
However, the increase in capacity as a function of power is logarithmic and slow. This
fact not withstanding, the capacity of the channel can be increased to any value by
increasing the input power.
The effect of channel bandwidth, however, is quite different. Increasing
bandwidth B has two effects. On one hand, a higher bandwidth channel can transmit
more samples per second and, therefore, increase the transmission rate. On the other
hand, a higher bandwidth means higher input noise to the receiver and this reduces its
performance. The effect of increasing bandwidth is seen when we let bandwidth B in
equation (6.1) tend to infinity. Using L’Hospital’s rule we obtain
P P
lim C = log 2 e = 1.44 .
N0 N0
This means that, contrary to the power case, by increasing the bandwidth alone cannot
increase the capacity to any desired value.
In any practical communication system, the bit rate, Rb is always less than C. In
AWGN channel we have
⎛ P ⎞
Rb < B log 2 ⎜⎜1 + ⎟ (6.2)
⎝ N 0 B ⎟⎠
E
Now, power is defined as energy per unit time, so we can write P = b = Eb Rb , and
Tb
equation (6.2) becomes
⎛ ER ⎞
Rb < B log 2 ⎜⎜1 + b b ⎟⎟
⎝ N0 B ⎠
Rb ⎛ E R ⎞
= log 2 ⎜⎜1 + b b ⎟⎟
B ⎝ N0 B ⎠
62
Eb ⎞ ⎛
⎟ η = log 2 ⎜⎜1 + η (6.3)
⎝ N 0 ⎟⎠
where η is the bandwidth efficiency defined as Rb/B bits per second per Hertz.
Equivalently, equation (6.3) can be written as
Eb 2η − 1
> (6.4)
N0 η
The plot of equation (6.4) is shown in Figure 6.1.
Shannon Capacity Limit Curve

25
20
Energy Efficiency, Eb/No (dB)
15
10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Bandwidth Efficiency (Bits/sec/Hz)
Figure 6.1 Energy efficiency versus spectral efficiency of an optimum system.
Eb 2η − 1
The curve of Figure 6.1, defined by = divides the plane into two regions. In
N0 η
the region above the curve, reliable communication is possible and in the region below
the curve, reliable communication is not possible. The performance of any
communication system can be denoted by a point in this plane and the closer the point is
to this curve, the closer is the performance of the system to an optimal system. From
E
equation (6.4), it is seen that (as η tends to zero), b > ln 2 = 0.693 ≈ −1.6 dB is the
N0
absolute minimum for reliable communication. In Figure 6.1, whenη << 1 , we are
dealing with a case where bandwidth is large (relative to Rb), and the main concern is
limitation on power. This case is usually referred to as power-limited case. Signaling
schemes, with high dimensionality, such as orthogonal, biorthogonal, and simplex are
frequently used in these cases. The case whereη >> 1 , happens when the bandwidth of
63
the channel is small (relative to Rb), and therefore is referred to as the bandwidth-limited
case. Low dimensional signaling schemes with crowed constellations, for example, 256-
QAM (Quadrature amplitude modulation), are implemented in these case.
6.2 Comparison of Performance of the Simulated Systems.
Comparison of simulated bit and symbol error probabilities for coherent and noncoherent
2, 4, and 8-level FSK systems is shown in Figures 6.2 – 6.5.
0
Comparison of simulated Ps for coherent FSK
10
BFSK
4-FSK
-1 8-FSK
Simulated symbol-error probabilities, Ps
10
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
0 5 10 15
Eb/No in dB
Figure 6.2 Comparison of simulated symbol error probabilities for coherent M-ary FSK.
64
0
Comparison of simulated Pb for coherent M-ary FSK
10
BFSK
4-FSK
-1 8-FSK
10
Simulated bit-error probabilities, Pb
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
0 5 10 15
Eb/No in dB
Figure 6.3 Comparison of simulated bit error probabilities for coherent M-ary FSK.
0
Comparison of simulated Ps for noncoherent M-ary FSK
10
BFSK
4-FSK
-1 8-FSK
Simulated symbol-error probabilities, Ps
10
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
0 5 10 15
Eb/No in dB
Fig 6.4 Comparison of simulated symbol error probabilities for noncoherent M-ary FSK.
65
0
Comparison of simulated Pb for noncohrent M-ary FSK
10
BFSK
4-FSK
-1 8-FSK
10
Simulated bit-error probability, Pb
-2
10
-3
10
-4
10
0 5 10 15
Eb/No in dB
Figure 6.5 Comparison of simulated bit error probabilities for noncoherent M-ary FSK.
It is seen from the graphs that at a particular error probability, the required energy
efficiency (Eb/N0) is lowest for 8-level FSK and largest for binary FSK. Or equivalently,
at a constant Eb/N0, 8-level FSK has the lowest error probability, and binary FSK the
largest. Hence, the curves in Figures 6.2 – 6.5 confirms that M-ary FSK is a power
efficient modulation scheme whose power efficiency increases as the number of
frequencies employed increases.
6.3 Theory Versus Reality
There is a gap between the performance of binary and M-ary FSK in theory and in
reality. An example of this gap is depicted in Figure 6.6 by comparing the performance
of theoretical binary and 4-level FSK to that of commercially available data transmission
equipment which uses GMSK and 4-level FSK modulation schemes. GMSK is a special
modulation technique (uses two orthogonal frequencies like in BFSK) which performs
better than binary FSK because it has the minimum separation required for orthogonality
and at the same time continuous phase at bit transitions. Figure 6.6 confirms this fact.
Since GMSK is quite different from binary FSK, the comparison between theoretical
performance and that of reality reduces to comparison of 4-level FSK.
It is observed, from Figure 6.6, that the gap between performance of theoretical 4-
level FSK and that of MR400 radio modem (which uses 4-level FSK modulation) is
about 1 dB at a BER of 10-3, 3 dB at a BER of 10-4, and 5 dB at a BER of 10-7.
66
0
10
BFSK (theoretical)
-1
10 4-FSK (theoretical)
MR400 (4-FSK,alpha = 0.2)
-2 MX160 (GMSK, BT = 0.4)
10
Bit-error probability, BER
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
-6
10
-7
10
-8
10
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) in dB
Figure 6.6 Comparison of theoretical and practical BER for 2, and 4-level FSK systems.
Typically, the main source of difference between theoretical performance and reality is
the noise bandwidth used in the calculation of signal-to-noise ratio. Other sources of
difference are filtering effects in transmitters and receivers of practical systems, and over
simplification of assumption in theoretical derivations.
6.4 Comparison of Performance using Shannon’s Capacity Curve.
A compact comparison of modulation methods is one that is based on the normalized data
rate Rb/B (bits per second per Hertz of bandwidth) versus the signal-to-noise ratio per bit
(Eb/N0) required to achieve a given error probability. Table 6.1 shows the spectral
efficiency and signal-to-noise ratio per bit required to achieve a BER of 10-5 for different
modulation types.
Table 6.1 Spectral efficiency and S/N required to achieve BER of 10-5 for different
modulation types.
Modulation type Rb/B (bits/s/Hz) S/N (dB)
Theoretical BFSK 1.0 10.0
Theoretical 4-FSK 1.0 12.6
GMSK (BT = 0.4) 0.7 9.0
4-FSK (alpha = 0.2) 1.335 17.0
67
Figure 6.7 illustrates how the performance of MX160 radio modem, MR400 radio
modem, theoretical binary and 4-level FSK modulations compare to that of an optimum
system.
25
Shannon capacity curve
Theoretical BFSK
20 Theoretical 4-FSK
MX160 (GMSK, BT=0.4)
Energy Efficiency, Eb/No (dB)
MR400 (4-FSK, alpha=0.2)
15
10
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

Bandwidth Efficiency (Bits/sec/Hz)
Figure 6.7 Comparison of theoretical and practical orthogonal modulation techniques at

BER of 10-5.
It can be seen from Figure 6.7 that theoretical 4-level FSK performs better than practical
4-level FSK in terms of energy efficiency, while practical 4-level FSK performs better in
terms of bandwidth efficiency. This trend can be attributed to the noise bandwidth used
in the calculation of signal-to-noise ratio and filtering effects of the modulated signal
respectively.
68
Chapter 7
Conclusions
In this thesis work, binary and M-ary FSK modulation techniques are extensively studied.
The performance of 2, 4 and 8-level FSK systems in additive white Gaussian noise
channel is evaluated and compared on the basis of the simulations in MATLAB. The
primary objective of the thesis, the advantage of FSK modulation technique, factors
influencing the choice of a particular digital modulation scheme, a model for AWGN
channel, generation and detection of binary and M-ary FSK modulated signals, and error
performance of binary and M-ary FSK modulation systems in AWGN channel, have been
discussed in detail in the first three chapters of the thesis. Simulations in MATLAB and
results are presented in chapter four.
The results of measurements on commercially available data transmission equipment,

using GMSK and 4-level FSK, and how performance curves are extracted from the
measurement results are presented in chapter 5. The results show that the noise
bandwidth used in the calculation of signal-to-noise ratio and the type of filters employed
in modulators (transmitters) and demodulators (receivers) play a very important role in
the performance evaluation of a modulation scheme.
The practical measurements results and simulation results compared to theory in chapter
6 confirms that M-ary FSK is a power efficient modulation scheme whose efficiency
improves as the number of frequencies employed increases at the expense of bandwidth
efficiency. And also shows that the gap between the performance of theoretical and
practical M-ary FSK systems widens as the bit error rate (BER) decreases, with
theoretical FSK systems always performing better.
69
Chapter 8
References
[1] Theodore S. Rappaport, “Wireless Communications: Principles and Practice”,

Prentice Hall, Second Edition.
[2] J. G. Proakis, M. Saheli, “Communication Systems Engineering”, Prentice Hall,

Second Edition.
[3] Fuqin Xiong, “Digital Modulation Techniques”, Artech House Publishers, 2002.
[4] J. G. Proakis, M. Saheli, “Digital Communication”, Prentice Hall, Third Edition.
[5] Alister Burr, “Modulation and Coding for Wireless Communications”, Prentice Hall,
2001.
70
Appendix A
Acronyms
AWGN Additive White Gaussian Noise.
BER Bit Error Rate.
BFSK Binary Frequency Shift Keying.
CRC Cyclic Redundancy Check.
DSP Digital Signal Processing.
FSK Frequency Shift Keying.
GMSK Gaussian Minimum Shift Keying.
PER Packet Error Rate.
PSD Power Spectral Density.
VLSI Very Large-Scale Integration.
71

Za FSK PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Za FSK PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Performance Evaluation of M-ary Frequency Shift Keying Radio

Modems via Measurements and Simulations

ERIC NII OTORKUNOR SACKEY

Department of Electrical Engineering

Blekinge Institute of Technology

This thesis is presented as part of the Degree of Master of Science in Electrical

The completion of my studies at Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden would have

4 Simulations and Results 44

5 Measuring of Performance of Commercially Available Radio Modems 52

3.1 Noncoherent BFSK modulator 16

4.1 Simulation model for coherent BFSK system 45

5.1 MR400 radio modem 53

6.1 Energy versus spectral efficiency of an optimum system 63

3.1 Bandwidth efficiency of coherent M-ary FSK signals 43

5.1 Technical data for MR400 and MX160 radio modems 53

6.1 Spectral efficiency and S/N required to achieve BER of 10-5 67

2.1 Modulation Format

A modulation format is the means by which information is encoded unto a signal.

2.2 Digital Modulation – an Overview

Modern communication systems use digital modulation techniques. Advancement in

2.3 Factors That Influence the Choice of Digital Modulation

Several factors influence the choice of a digital modulation scheme. A desirable

2.4 Additive White Gaussian Noise Channel

r(t) = s(t) + n(t) (2.3)

3.1 Constant Envelope Modulation

3.2 Binary Frequency Shift Keying

3.2.1 Binary FSK Signal and Modulator

Binary data input, ak

Figure 3.1 Noncoherent BFSK modulator.

Binary data input, ak

Figure 3.2 Coherent BFSK modulator.

∫ cos(2πf t + φ ) cos(2πf t + φ )dt

This implies that

2π ( f1 + f 2 )Tb = 2πn (3.3)

3.2.2 Coherent Demodulation and Error Performance in AWGN Channel

Coherent demodulation requires knowledge of the reference phase or exact phase

h(t) = cos(2πf 1t ) − cos(2πf 2 t )

In the presence of AWGN channel, the received signal is

r(t) = si(t) + n(t), i = 1, 2

Figure 3.5 Probability of error of coherently demodulated BFSK signal.

3.2.3 Noncoherent Demodulation and Error Performance in AWGN Channel

Noncoherent demodulation techniques do not require knowledge of the reference phase,

Figure 3.6 BFSK noncoherent demodulator: correlator-squarer implementation.

cos 2πf1 (Tb − t ) Envelope

Figure 3.7 BFSK noncoherent demodulator: matched filter implementation.

The plot of equation (3.7) is shown in Figure 3.8 below.

Figure 3.8 Probability of error of noncoherently demodulated BFSK signal.

3.2.4 Power Spectral Density of BFSK

S I ( f ) can easily be found since the inphase component is independent of data. It is

3.3.1 Modulator, Demodulator, and Error Performance in AWGN Channel

Binary input data S/P

Figure 3.9 Coherent M-ary FSK modulator.

Figure 3.10 Coherent M-ary FSK demodulator: correlator implementation.

Figure 3.11 Coherent M-ary FSK demodulator: matched filter implementation.

where E s = E b log 2 M , and Q(z) is the Q-function defined in chapter 3.2.2.

Figure 3.12 Bit error probability of coherently demodulated M-ary FSK.

Symbol-error Probability of Coherent M-ary FSK

Figure 3.13 Symbol error probability of coherently demodulated M-ary FSK.

Binary input data S/P

Figure 3.14 Noncoherent M-ary FSK modulator

Figure 3.15 Noncoherent M-ary FSK demodulator: Correlator-squarer implementation.

cos 2πf1 (Tb − t ) Squarer

cos 2πf 2 (Tb − t ) Squarer