You are on page 1of 5

IAETSD JOURNAL FOR ADVANCED RESEARCH IN APPLIED SCIENCES, VOLUME 4, ISSUE 4, SEPT /2017 ISSN (ONLINE): 2394-8442

A REVIEW PAPER ON VARIOUS WIDE BAND CHANNELIZATION TECHNIQUES

P. SRI LEKHA #1 , Dr. K. PUSHPA #2

# Department of ECE, Shri Vishnu Engineering College for Women, Vishnupur, Bhimavaram-534202, Andhra Pradesh, India 1 ece.srilekha@gmail.com

ABSTRACT.

A particular channel selection can be done in wide band communication receivers are performed by using channelization. Generally, channelization performs down conversion of signal to base-band and filtering of channel. Since the features of channelization generally effected by means of software, which is much advantageous to implement channelization performance as much as possible with digital signal processing. Number of channels must be received simultaneously in base stations. This paper will compare and contrast five of the more popular channelization techniques: Digital Down Conversion, Frequency Domain Filtering, Poly-phase FFT Filter Bank, Pipelined Frequency Transform (PFT) technique and Tenable Pipelined Frequency Transform (TPFT) techniques. The analysis begins by presenting a base architecture for a wideband transceiver, and then explores each channelization method within the context of this architecture. The main objective is to establish the optimum solution fo r different application types.

Keyword- Cognitive radio, Coarse Channelization, Channelization Techniques, Software Defined Radio (SDR)

I.

INTRODUCTION

Cognitive Radio (CR) is considered as a technology which is emerging and is used for a Dynamic Spectrum Access (DSA) system. Joseph Mitola [1] was the first to introduce the cognitive radio concept. A cognitive cycle in the CR contain resource management functions four in number which are the spectrum sensing, the spectrum deciding, the spectrum share, and the mobility of the spectrum. Any Cognitive Radio Network (CRN) is one containing the cognitive radios or Secondary Users (SUs). Owing to continuous changes in the available spectrum and different Quality of Services (QoS) the needs of different applications, the CRNs impact some unique challenges. All the SUs in the CRNs adapt best methods dynamically to transmit like the transmission channel, the rate, and the transmit power. This leads to an enhancement in the parameters of the QoS. On seeing an increase in the users of multimedia the CR may prove to be an optimum solution for the transmissions of multimedia. The features of spectral efficiency of the systems of multicarrier may be utilised properly for addressing the transmissions of multimedia over the CRN.

Software- defined radio (SDR) is that wireless communication system that is re- configured by means of software re-programming to be operated on various frequencies and protocols. It is normally executed by the SDR platform. This idea was first used by Mitola [1] stating “The point where the wireless personal digital assistants and the related networks are sufficiently computationally intelligent about radio resources and linked computer to computer communications to identify the needs of communicating user as a function of use context, and providing radio resources and wireless services much related to those needs”.

  • A. Software Defined Radio (SDR)

The Software Defined Radio (SDR) elevates the scope of digital re-configurability. It is particularly known to en- compass the base-band digital processing and its functions like de- modulation and modulation, coding, time recovery, equalization and channelization but the RF functions are usually completed by analog front-end components [2].

39. P. SRI LEKHA AND Dr. K. PUSHPA, .A REVIEW PAPER ON VARIOUS WIDE BAND CHANNELIZATION TECHNIQUES. Journal for Advanced Research in Applied Sciences. Volume 4, Issue 4, Sept-2017 Pages: 38- 42

Generally, a classic approach for building the systems of SDR are divided into 3 phases: the analogue front-end, the digital front- end, and the digital back-end, as shown in Fig. 1. The Analog front- end interfaces the antenna and the DSP hardware. This is a multi-standard front end that allows receiving along with transmitting the bandwidths and arbitrary frequencies. At the following stage, digital front-end groups and the Analogue-to-Digital Converter (ADC) along with the channelizer that is before an independent channel and its operation done using digital backend. These works are also done in various platforms.

39 . P. SRI LEKHA AND Dr. K. PUSHPA, . A REVIEW PAPER ON VARIOUS WIDE
  • B. Channelization

Fig. 1. Practical SDR receiver implementation [2]

The word channelization originally refers to the technology of sharing communication median with different users, so that many conversations can be submitted simultaneously on a signal band, with each conversation being on a separate channel. By this means, each channel is used to transfer different information simultaneously. The commonly known multiplexing methods including TDMA (Time- Division Multiplexing), FDMA (Frequency-Division Multiplexing), and CDMA (Code-Division Multiplexing), belong to the channelization concepts. In recent years, especially after the development of the UWB communication, the word channelization refers specifically to the frequency channel separation of a wide band. Signals are transferred in different channels of a pre- defined frequency band. In the UWB communication systems, the entire UWB frequency range is split into several bands, and each band has many channels.

A major factor in SDR systems is a real- time configurable digital channelizing, that is needed to receive and resample the radio signal promptly, and is also important to keep track of the entire spectrum in order that the in-active bands are identified. Compatibility in various standards of communication desires the channelization to be re-configurable dynamically. Designing the resource efficiently is one more basic need to implement the channelization. Obtaining a good solution to balance targets, like performance and resource is tedious in case of digital channelizing. Many attributes like rate of sampling, band-width, resolution in frequency, dynamic configuring affect the designing and implementation of the channeliz ation. Hence determining the cost/performance trade- offs forms a significant problem in digital channelizing [3].

II. OVERVIEW OF EXISTING CHANNELIZATION TECHNIQUES

Digital channelization is generally implemented using the following methods: (1) Digital Down Converter (DDC) based channelizer; (2) Frequency Domain Filtering (FDF) based channelizer; (3) Polyphase FFT Filter Bank (PFFB) based channelizer; (4) Pipelined Frequency Transform (PFT) based channelizer; (5) Tuneable Pipelined Frequency Transform (TPFT) based channelize.

  • A. Digital Down Conversion (DDC) based Channelizer

A digital down converter provides the channelization function through a classic heterodyne technique [4]. In this technique, the wideband signal is mixed with a synthesized carrier at or near the carrier frequency of the channel of interest to baseband that channel. The resulting signal is then filtered and decimated to isolate and extract the channel of interest from the wideband signal and reduce the overall sample rate to the minimum necessary to support that channel.

Depending on the bandwidth of the channel of interest, one of two different filtering and decimation techniques are typically employed. For wider bandwidth signals, requiring decimations of 8 or less, a wideband finite impulse response (FIR) filter is utilized directly following the baseband mixer. The output of this filter is then decimated by an appropriate amount. For narrower band signals, the filtering and decimation functions are typically split into multiple stages. The initial stage is provided by a Hogenauer filter, also known as a cascade integrator comb (CIC) filter, which provides for reasonable first stage channel isolation while minimizing the number of complex operations that must be performed prior to decimation [5]. Follow on filtering is typically then provided by a narrowband FIR filter, which would typically have programmable taps to allow this filtering to be optimized for the channel of interest.

The computational complexity of these algorithms is dependent upon the details of their implementation. At a minimum, the wideband DDC requires 6 operations for the mixing function and 6 operations per tap (2 multiplies, 2 adds, and 2 shifts) for the FIR filtering. The operations all occur prior to decimation at the input sample rate, and therefore the wideband DDC would most likely be implemented exclusively in an FPGA. Depending on the specific requirements, the wideband DDC could be implemented in less than a million gates in an FPGA, allowing up to six simultaneous wideband channels to coexist in a large device such as an XC2V6000 [6].

Like the wideband DDC, the narrowband DDC also requires six operations for the mixing function. However, the pre- decimation filtering in this technique is limited to the cascade integrator portion of the CIC filter, requiring approximately six operations per stage.

40. P. SRI LEKHA AND Dr. K. PUSHPA, .A REVIEW PAPER ON VARIOUS WIDE BAND CHANNELIZATION TECHNIQUES. Journal for Advanced Research in Applied Sciences. Volume 4, Issue 4, Sept-2017 Pages: 38- 42

After decimation, the cascade comb portion of the CIC filter also requires six operations per stage, and six operations per tap are required for the FIR filtering. Since these latter operations occur at the decimated sample rate, the total operations per sample are significantly reduced over the equivalent wideband structure. As a result, up to three narrowband DDCs can occupy the same footprint as an equivalent wideband DDC, with an even higher number achievable if the baseband processing is split between the FPGA and a DSP.

The primary advantages of the DDC techniques are the flexibility in selecting both the carrier frequency and channel bandwidth. However, for complex channel structures, where both wideband and narrowband channels may occupy the same input signal, a mix of down converter technologies may be required, complicating the architecture of the channelize block.

  • B. Frequency Domain Filtering (FDF) based Channelizer

The frequency domain filtering (FDF) approach makes use of the properties of the fast Fourier transform (FFT) to simplify the baseband conversion, filtering, and decimation functions identified in the digital down converter approach [7, 8]. In this technique, input data is buffered into overlapping blocks, with an FFT performed on each of the blocks. The FFT bins representing the frequency components for each channel of interest are extracted for follow-on processing, with the extraction process effectively performing the baseband mixing and decimation operations. Baseband filtering occurs by multiplying each bin in the resulting baseband signal by an associated filter coefficient representing the frequency response of the baseband filter using the “overlap-and-add” or “overlap-and-save” technique [9]. The resulting baseband signal is then reconverted to the time domain using an inverse FFT, with one inverse FFT performed for each carrier channel.

The computational complexity of the FDF Channelizer is driven by the initial FFT, requiring NLogxN operations, were N is the number of FFT bins and x is the FFT radix. For N equals 4096 points, the FFT can be accommodated on an XC2V3000 at a sample rate in excess of 200MSPS, with up to a 16K point FFT accommodated on an XC2V6000 without the use of external memory [10]. The initial FFT is followed, for each channel, with one complex multiply per tap for baseband filtering and an inverse FFT, again requiring MLogxM operations, with M typically being a much smaller number than N. Note that an I/Q balancing block can be inserted immediately following the initial FFT providing for easier support of Zero IF conversion techniques.

Unlike the DDC implementation, where the carrier signal used for mixing is synthesized ver y accurately, the mixing function of this technique is solely dependent upon the spacing of the FFT bins. As a result, a secondary mixing function may need to be applied after the inverse FFT to fully baseband the channel of interest. In addition, since this mixing operation is performed on a block of data vs. continuous time processing, the effective “carrier phase” of the mixing signal is reset to zero for each block of data, creating a rotating phase offset between each block if the carrier cycle at the A/D sample rate is not an integer multiple of the block size. To compensate for this, a phase rotation would be applied to each output sample, with a different rotation required for each inverse FFT. It should be noted that, in any coherent modulation scheme, some level of frequency and phase adjustment is required after the channelizer anyway, to maintain coherent operation. The carrier compensation requirements for this scheme can therefore be conveniently rolled into this second phase of “tuning”, minimizing the computational expense of this part of the channelization algorithm.

Using the FDF channelization approach, a large number of both wideband and narrowband operations can coexist in the same channelizer structure, providing for improved flexibility and higher channel density than the DDC technique. However, to make optimal use of this capability, a programmable device such as a DSP must be used for the baseband channelization processing to support dynamic loading of baseband filtering and inverse FFT components of various sizes on a per channel basis.

  • C. Polyphase FFT Filter Bank (PFFB) based Channelizer

The Polyphase FFT Filter Bank (PFFB) channelizer improves upon the efficiency of the frequency domain filtering technique by assuming redundancy within the frequency plan of the wideband channel [11]. This structure makes use of a polyphase filter to isolate and decimate the various channels, and then employs an FFT to efficiently convert each channel to baseband. The polyphase filter is created through the decomposition of the low pass filter used to provide channel isolation on a per channel basis. In general, the number of channels in this technique must equal the decimation rate, and as such the sampling rate must be a power of two times the baseband bandwidth.

Although this technique is limited to channel structures consisting of equally spaced channels, it is extremely efficient, requiring only a single FIR filtering structure and a small FFT, with the FFT typically driving the complexity of the overall channelizer [12]. The entire structure for the channelizer supporting hundreds of channels could be implemented in a single FPGA, with a 64 channel architecture easily fitting on less than half a million gates operating a input speeds of well over 200 MSPS [13, 14]. Other techniques are available to reduce the complexity of this algorithm even further, depending on the specific frequency allocation in use [15].

  • D. Pipelined Frequency Transform (PFT) based Channelizer

A novel form of processing, known as the Pipelined Frequency Transform (PFT) uses a different approach. Based on a “tree” structure, successive splitting and filtering of the frequency band is used to achieve a finer and finer resolution of the broad band. Time interleaving of common processes can lead to a very efficient structure. Advantages include the availability of simultaneous outputs from successive stages, which are at different frequency resolutions and also the ability to independently tailor the filters for different frequency bins. Furthermore, if certain frequency bins or blocks of spectrum are not required, it is simple to exclude them from the processing, leading to greater efficiency.

The underlying concept is one of frequency band splitting where each successive stage of the PFT increases the number of bands by a factor of two. This could be achieved, for example, by a simple tree structure. The input, which is complex, to preserve positive and negative frequencies, is firstly split into two equal bands using complex down conver ter (CDC) and a complex up convertor (CUC) it would be possible to halve the sample rate for each of the sub-bands since the band width of each has been halved. In practice, a degree of over-sampling is used at the output of the first stage.

41. P. SRI LEKHA AND Dr. K. PUSHPA, .A REVIEW PAPER ON VARIOUS WIDE BAND CHANNELIZATION TECHNIQUES. Journal for Advanced Research in Applied Sciences. Volume 4, Issue 4, Sept-2017 Pages: 38- 42

For all successive stages, the output is decimated by two, preserving the overall two times over-sampling throughout the system. The most obvious disadvantage of this approach is that, for all number of channels, the tree gets impossibly large. For example, 1024 channels would require 2046 complex (CDC or CUC) modules.

  • E. Tuneable Pipelined Frequency Transform (TPFT) based Channelizer

In its simplest form, the PFT above still produces equally spaced frequency bins. To overcome this limitation, a derived form, known as the “Tuneable PFT” (TPFT) may be used. This allows independent tuning of the centre frequency of all bins as well as independent filters for each bin. Because of the availability of different stage outputs, with different frequency resolutions, the end result is equivalent to having the flexibility of the DDC approach but with the efficiency of the PFT which is important for a larger number of channels.

This is an interesting development which makes use of the PFT cascade structure where intermediate outputs are readily available by [17]. It is possible, by means of modifying the PFT architecture, not only to extract frequency bands of the desired size, but also to ensure these bands are cantered at any given frequency. This level of tuneability is achieved in two stages: firstly, the signals are coarsely tuned within the PFT stages, then fine tuned by a complex converter whose local oscillator (LO) is a numerically controlled oscillator (NCO) driven by the routing engine. The main advantage of performing the tuning operation in two steps is the reduction of size for a given frequency resolution, of the LUT used for fine tuning. This is because the tuning range required at each successive stage is reduced by a factor of two whereas a DDC would need the fine tuning over the whole input bandwidth. Overall, the structure is ideal for the replacement of multiple DDC’s in applications such as multi-standard base-stations, satellite communications and intelligent antenna systems.

III.

COMPARISONS

An initial comparison of the first three channelization techniques presented shows that, although the Polyphase FFT Filter Bank is fairly limited in the types of frequency plans that it can support, the DDC and FDF approaches offer very similar capabilities in terms of flexibility. This comparison extends to performance as well, as evidenced through the simulation of a communications channel supported by each channelizer approach in the presence of additive white gaussian noise. A test bed for such a simulation using a BPSK modulation scheme was developed in Mat lab and the results are presented in Reference [18]. The DDC and FDF channelizer schemes tracked fairly well in bit error rate performance, operating to within a dB of theory over the range of signal to noise ratios that were tested. Note that carrier and phase detection where not included in this simulation since they would not materially impact the results. Also, a carrier frequency of Fs/8 was selected for the BPSK waveform to eliminate the need for the frequency and phase offset correction outside of the channelization function. Further comparison between the various channelization approaches is seen by mapping the number of operations per baseband sample against the total number of supported channels by Lee Pucker [18]. For this analysis, a decimation of 64 was assumed, and a Radix 4 FFT was utilized for both the FDF and PFFB approaches. As can be seen, for equip-spaced channels, the efficiency of the PFFB approach exceeds the efficiency of the DDC approach after around 3 channels. Similarly, the efficiency of the FDF approach exceeds the DDC for any type of channel spacing and bandwidth after around 18 channels. Even greater computational efficiency can be obtained if it is possible to move to a higher radix FFT operation.

The most obvious conclusion is that the stacked DDC approach is very inefficient compared with the other PFT and TPFT techniques. To be fair, the particular design used did not make use of the dedicated multipliers available in Xilinx Vertex 2 devices. Even so, the use of stacked DDC’s for more than about 8 bins is uneconomical. The PFT has been configured as a “multiplier-less” design and does not make use of the dedicated multipliers. Also, it must be remembered that the PFT has outputs available at each stage, making it very useful in certain applications. Furthermore, silicon efficiency is much improved if it is only necessary to output bins over selected portions of the broad-band. The general conclusion is that for smaller numbers of bins (up to around 256) the silicon requirements are similar. For tuneable filter banks, the best comparison is between stacked DDC’s and the PFT. Figure 2 compares the logic requirements of the two approaches for up to 256 bins. Above about 16 bins, the PFT and TPFT win rapidly.

41 . P. SRI LEKHA AND Dr. K. PUSHPA, . A REVIEW PAPER ON VARIOUS WIDE

Fig. 2. Comparison of PFT and DDC from 2 to 256 bins

42. P. SRI LEKHA AND Dr. K. PUSHPA, .A REVIEW PAPER ON VARIOUS WIDE BAND CHANNELIZATION TECHNIQUES. Journal for Advanced Research in Applied Sciences. Volume 4, Issue 4, Sept-2017 Pages: 38- 42

IV.

CONCLUSION

This paper has explored five channelization approaches: the DDC approach, the FDF approach, the PFFB approach, the PFT approach and the TPFT approach. A comparison based on computational complexity, however, reveals that the use of the DDC technique is inefficient beyond a handful of channels. If redundancy exists in the channel structure, then the polyphase FFT filter bank appears to be the most efficient choice, and if flexibility is required, then the FDF approach seems to make the most sense. Whereas, PFT and TPFT provides an elegant and highly efficient method for channelizing very wide band signals. They are particularly useful where a large number of channels are required together with good filter performance. Overall, the TPFT fills the gap between the comparatively inflexible FFT or PFT approaches and the use of DDCs, which is extremely flexible but becomes increasingly inefficient above a certain number of channels. The TPFT provides a highly flexible and efficient means of frequency channelization, fully reconfigurable within its hardware frame.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors wish to acknowledge John Lillington and Lee Pucker for taking their papers as the basis in writing this review paper .

REFERENCES

[1] J. Mitola, "Cognitive Radio: An Integrated Agent Architecture for Software Defined Radio," PhD Thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, KTH, 2000. [2] Alvaro Palomo Navarro, "Channelization for multi standard software-defined radio base stations," PhD Thesis, National University of Ireland, October, 2011.

[3] Xue Liu, Ze-Ke Wang, Qing- Xu Deng, “Design and FPGA implementation of a reconfigurable 1024 channel channelization architecture for SDR application”, IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI) Systems, vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 2449-2461, July 2016.

[4]

Xilinx, Inc., “Digital Down Converter V1.0 Product Specification”, www.xilinx.com /ipcenter /catalog /logicore /docs /ddc.pdf

[5]

M. Donadio, “Cascade Integrator- Comb (CIC) Filter Introduction”, http://www.dspguru.com/info/tutor/cic2.html.

[6]

Spectrum Signal Processing, Inc., “ePMC-FPGA DDC Images for Narrow Band and Wide Band - User Guide”.

[7]

F. J. Harris, “The discrete fourier transform applied to time domain signal processing”, IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 20, no.

3, pp. 13 – 22., May 1982. [8] S.J. Campanella, S. Sayegh, and M. Elamin, “A Study of On-Board Multi- carrier Digital Demultiplexor for a Multi-Beam Mobile

[9]

Satellite Payload”, Proceedings of AIAA International Communication Satellite Conference and Exhibit, March 1990. J. Proakis and D. Manolakis, Digital Signal Processing Principles, Algorithms, and Applications, Prentice Hall, 1996.

[10]

RF Engines Limited, “The Vectis Range of Pipelined FFT Cores 8 to 64K Points”, www.rfel.com/download/D02002-Pipelined FFT

[11]

data sheet.pdf. R.E. Crochiere and L.R. Rabiner, Multirate Digital Signal Processing, Prentice Hall, 1983.

[12]

K. C. Zangi and R. D. Koilpillai, “Software Radio Issues in Cellular Base Stations”, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in

Communications, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 561 – 573, April 1999. [13] S. R. Powell and T. M. Cesear, “Rapid Design and Exploration of Signal Processing Systems Using a VHDL Generator Based

Paradigm”, www.vhdl.org /vhdl_intl /vltimes /43-POWELL.html. [14] Xilinx, Inc., “High- Performance 64-Point Complex FFT/IFFT V2.0 Product Specification”, www.xilinx.com /ipcenter

/catalog/logicore/docs/vfft64v2.pdf.

[15] K. C. Zangi and R. D. Koilpillai, “Efficient Filterbank Channelizers for Software Radio Receivers”, ICC 1998 -IEEE International Conference on Communications, no. 1, pp. 1566 – 1570, June 1998.

[16]

John Lillingtion, “Comparison of wideband channelization architectures”, IEEE Xplore Conference: DSP enabled Radio, 2003.

[17]

TPFT-Tuneable Pipelined Frequency Transform, http://www.rfel.com /download /W02003-TuneablePFT White Paper.pdf.

[18]

Lee Pucker “Channelization Techniques for Software Defined Radio,” Spectrum Signal Processing Inc., Burnaby, B.C, Canada, 2003.