Re: Strategies to save/display low sample-rate data

[Daniel Estévez]

On 10/04/2024 19:44, John Ackermann N8UR wrote:
> On 4/10/24 11:29, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
>
> > Both the decimation and 80 size 1024 FFTs per second should be peanuts
> > for any modern PC...
> >
> > And of course you don't need to do the FFT again for every sample,
> > it just generates a lot of redundant data.
>
> I understood that if you have a 1024 bin waterfall, it takes that many 
> samples to fill it and output a vector.  With a sample rate of 80, that 
> means about 12.8 seconds to show one line of the waterfall.  Or do I 
> have that wrong?
>
> (I used 80 samples/sec for simplicity.  The actual rate after decimating 
> from a 1.536 ms/s stream is 93.75.)

Hi John,

Yes, that is correct. Ultimately you're hitting the uncertainty 
principle for the Fourier transform. A 1024-point FFT at 80 samples/s 
has a frequency resolution of 78 mHz. You need to process at least 1 / 
78 mHz = 12.8 seconds of signal to achieve that resolution.

Best,
Daniel.

OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature