[TangerineSDR] FW: Elevator Pitch for Tangerine PSWS

Mon Oct 14 12:14:18 EDT 2019

Hi All-

I saw the thread about the elevator pitch into EOS.    I am a little bit concerned that this might be premature?  Shouldn't we have a working prototype first and then perhaps pitch what it can be used for?  Or possibly some initial data?

I am open to other options, but EOS is a broad audience, so I feel we should have something that is more complete... but that is my just my two cents.

73,
Steve AD0AE
------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen R. Kaeppler, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Physics and Astronomy
Clemson University
Clemson, SC 29634
Email: skaeppl at clemson.edu
Phone: 864-656-4275
Web: http://science.clemson.edu/kaeppler/
Amateur Radio Callsign: AD0AE
------------------------------------------------------------

On 10/14/19, 12:00 PM, "TangerineSDR on behalf of tangerinesdr-request at lists.tapr.org" <tangerinesdr-bounces at lists.tapr.org on behalf of tangerinesdr-request at lists.tapr.org> wrote:

Send TangerineSDR mailing list submissions to
	tangerinesdr at lists.tapr.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/tangerinesdr_lists.tapr.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	tangerinesdr-request at lists.tapr.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	tangerinesdr-owner at lists.tapr.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of TangerineSDR digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: TangerineSDR Digest, Vol 7, Issue 10 (Scotty Cowling)
   2. Re: Elevator Pitch for Tangerine PSWS (Scotty Cowling)
   3. Re: Seeking your Review and Comment on Tangerine SBC
      Functional Specification (Engelke, Bill)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2019 13:59:08 -0700
From: Scotty Cowling <scotty at tonks.com>
To: tangerinesdr at lists.tapr.org
Subject: Re: [TangerineSDR] TangerineSDR Digest, Vol 7, Issue 10
Message-ID: <c238a2b4-38c7-0854-141d-e46844bcf4a5 at tonks.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed

Hi Larry,

Welcome to the list! What kind of data are you looking for in the 15 to 
30 MHz spectrum? Are you just looking for energy content or are you 
looking to demodulate certain sub bands? Or maybe energy content in 
specific sub-bands?

Just trying to get an idea of the processing that the TangerineSDR will 
need to do on the input data in order to make sure that we can fulfill 
your use case.

73,
Scotty WA2DFI

On 2019-10-12 09:29, Larry Dodd via TangerineSDR wrote:
> Hi
> I?m a member of the NASA volunteer RadioJOVE project. We are very interested in your work to produce a PSWS with TangerineSDR. We monitor the 15 to 30 MHz spectrum 24/7/365 for Jupiter storms, Solar avtivity and the ionosphere in general and looking for an SDR to meet our future needs. Thanks to everyone working on this project.
> Larry
> K4LED
>
>> On Oct 12, 2019, at 12:00 PM, tangerinesdr-request at lists.tapr.org wrote:
>>
>> ?Send TangerineSDR mailing list submissions to
>>     tangerinesdr at lists.tapr.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>     http://lists.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/tangerinesdr_lists.tapr.org
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>     tangerinesdr-request at lists.tapr.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>     tangerinesdr-owner at lists.tapr.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of TangerineSDR digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>    1. Elevator Pitch for Tangerine PSWS (Kristina Collins)
>>    2. Re: Elevator Pitch for Tangerine PSWS (Phil Erickson)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 15:06:22 -0400
>> From: Kristina Collins <kvc2 at case.edu>
>> To: tangerinesdr at lists.tapr.org
>> Subject: [TangerineSDR] Elevator Pitch for Tangerine PSWS
>> Message-ID:
>>     <CAEeerr78U8UZP96jECqp3wW+wQEZpjg5_oE-E7GuiYOZcxKEpQ at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm putting together an article for Eos (eos.org) on the use of ham radio
>> in geoscience, focusing on the two versions of the PSWS. What salient
>> points should I be making about the Tangerine and its role? I have a few
>> hundred words to work with for that part of the article.
>>
>> Bonus question for the space scientists in the audience (looking at you,
>> Phil & Nathaniel): What should I say about TIDs and other phenomena we want
>> to characterize?
>>
>> -KC
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/tangerinesdr_lists.tapr.org/attachments/20191011/b0ab43b4/attachment-0001.html>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 15:08:46 -0400
>> From: Phil Erickson <phil.erickson at gmail.com>
>> To: TAPR TangerineSDR Modular Software Defined Radio
>>     <tangerinesdr at lists.tapr.org>
>> Subject: Re: [TangerineSDR] Elevator Pitch for Tangerine PSWS
>> Message-ID:
>>     <CAAZaqEuy31y=S5Q=6k3TOTJ4+g9CH+odKCSZu2U_AxjisJONkQ at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Hi Kristina,
>>
>>   I can't answer that question until I see the context of the rest of the
>> article.  Best to put a draft together and share it in an editable online
>> place such as Overleaf (if LaTeX source) or Google Docs, and then we can
>> crowdsource it.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Phil
>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 3:07 PM Kristina Collins via TangerineSDR <
>>> tangerinesdr at lists.tapr.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I'm putting together an article for Eos (eos.org) on the use of ham radio
>>> in geoscience, focusing on the two versions of the PSWS. What salient
>>> points should I be making about the Tangerine and its role? I have a few
>>> hundred words to work with for that part of the article.
>>>
>>> Bonus question for the space scientists in the audience (looking at you,
>>> Phil & Nathaniel): What should I say about TIDs and other phenomena we want
>>> to characterize?
>>>
>>> -KC
>>> --
>>> TangerineSDR mailing list
>>> TangerineSDR at lists.tapr.org
>>> http://lists.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/tangerinesdr_lists.tapr.org
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> ----
>> Phil Erickson
>> phil.erickson at gmail.com
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/tangerinesdr_lists.tapr.org/attachments/20191011/b6bd032d/attachment-0001.html>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Subject: Digest Footer
>>
>> TangerineSDR mailing list
>> TangerineSDR at lists.tapr.org
>> http://lists.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/tangerinesdr_lists.tapr.org
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> End of TangerineSDR Digest, Vol 7, Issue 10
>> *******************************************

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2019 15:59:08 -0700
From: Scotty Cowling <scotty at tonks.com>
To: tangerinesdr at lists.tapr.org
Subject: Re: [TangerineSDR] Elevator Pitch for Tangerine PSWS
Message-ID: <5f9d9f8d-dec2-53d4-9cb9-a6c60d04185d at tonks.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"

Hi Kristina,

The main points of the TangerineSDR are:
Wide-band Direct Sampling DDC (four 500MByte/s digital input paths) with 
on-board FPGA
High-speed data interfaces (USB 3.0 (@5Gbps) *and* dual GBe)
Modularity and expandability (up to 4 RF input channels, selectable 
oscillator quality (TCXO/OCXO/GPSDO) and expandable low- and high-speed I/O)
Easy pairing with SBC or Desktop PC (dual GBe ports) allows inexpensive 
pre-processing and network authentication

Is that some help in filling a few hundred words? The above is more like 
a features list, so here are a few tie-ins to PSWS:
oscillator can be upgraded to GPSDO for PSWS high-resolution data 
time-stamping
dual, synchronously clocked 14-bit ADCs for synchronous RF sampling
seamlessly integrates with a Single-Board Computer to provide PSWS 
pre-processing and authentication
high-speed data interfaces provide wide simultaneous receive bandwidth? 
(>20MHz via GBe, >100MHz USB3.0 maximum)
FPGA can split data into eight 192KHz simultaneous virtual receive 
streams, each centered anywhere within 0-60MHz antenna input

Hope some of this is helpful.

73,
Scotty WA2DFI

On 2019-10-11 12:06, Kristina Collins via TangerineSDR wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm putting together an article for Eos (eos.org <http://eos.org>) on 
> the use of ham radio in geoscience, focusing on the two versions of 
> the PSWS. What salient points should I be making about the Tangerine 
> and its role? I have a few hundred words to work with for that part of 
> the article.
>
> Bonus question for the space scientists in the audience (looking at 
> you, Phil & Nathaniel): What should I say about TIDs and other 
> phenomena we want to characterize?
>
> -KC
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.tapr.org/pipermail/tangerinesdr_lists.tapr.org/attachments/20191013/06d71c12/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 15:22:30 +0000
From: "Engelke, Bill" <bill.engelke at ua.edu>
To: Rob Wiesler <robert.wiesler at case.edu>, "TAPR TangerineSDR Modular
	Software Defined Radio" <tangerinesdr at lists.tapr.org>
Subject: Re: [TangerineSDR] Seeking your Review and Comment on
	Tangerine SBC Functional Specification
Message-ID: <52047bd0a2254d3c80ed98c98973629a at ua.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Rob, I added the distribution list as you suggested. I greatly value your knowledgeable feedback, so please keep it coming.

Regarding Celery: I am not crazy about Celery; I mention it only because it is used in the SatNOGS system.  We have decided that we wish base the PSWS Central Control system/database on SatNOGS (at least for Phase 1), as its functionality and UI seems to overlap so much on our needs. Having said that (since you mention that Celery may not fit the need), we should probably discuss what data is going to be generated, and then seek the right package for managing the uploads.  (As an aside, I have the entire SatNOGS system running on a server; if you like, we can look at it together on a Zoom session, and see what they are actually using Celery for).

On the topic of heterogeneous vs homogeneous data, right now we envision two distinct data types:

1. Raw I/Q data from ring buffer ("Use Case 1").  These data are stored in ring buffer in Digital RF format. On request from Central Control, a selected chunk of data (from start time A to end time B) are to uploaded. Upon receipt, Central Control stores these as Digital RF files, with the file name being generated automatically, and the file name being stored in the database.

2. Pre-processed data.  ("Use Case 3") This case is for users with low bandwidth. An upload occurs about once per second (or could be as low as once per minute). GNURadio samples the bands (normally a few Hz around each WWV station), and does an FFT. The FFT is uploaded (along with magnetometer data) and stored directly in a database table.

(There is a third situation, "Use Case 2," or "firehose," where raw data is streamed directly to a server. Central Control does not support that; it would be received by the institution's server farm or supercomputer).

Use Case 3, best I can tell, matches what SatNOGS does: they pre-process received spectrum into a waterfall, and that's what they upload. We can certainly ask them why they picked Celery to use (for all I know, maybe they regret it). Maybe they are using Celery for something else (i.e., not for uploading). Its complexity definitely increases project risk.

There are numerous other queueing packages. I have used IBM's Websphere MQ (works great, but costs a fortune) and MQTT, both with good success; however, I also gather we need to distinguish between task queueing and data queueing. Maybe there is an apples-to-oranges here.  Anyway , let me know your thoughts.    

-73- Bill, AB4EJ

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Wiesler <robert.wiesler at case.edu> 
Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2019 6:03 PM
To: Engelke, Bill <bill.engelke at ua.edu>
Subject: Re: Seeking your Review and Comment on Tangerine SBC Functional Specification

Bill, I won't re-add the mailing list to the distribution list without your permission, but in general please keep responses on-list, as it becomes difficult for anyone else to participate otherwise.

On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 4:33 PM Engelke, Bill <bill.engelke at ua.edu> wrote:
> Rob - for file backlogs, the plan is to use Celery, 
> (http://www.celeryproject.org/) , this works very well for uploading 
> the large # of files for SatNOGS, and integrates well with Django.  I 
> had been hoping to continue to use that. (I will still research 
> inotify so I know what it can do as well ) -

I highly recommend not adding a dependency on Celery for this particular thing (or, preferably, at all).  Celery is a queue for asynchronous processing of heterogeneous tasks, while what we need is a queue for serial processing of homogeneous data.  We don't want our individual data files to end up in different tasks, because that implies a separate connection to upload each file (versus a single TCP stream where each data file is sent in serial for better throughput).
We want one upload task, and a data queue (not a task queue) sitting in front of it.  If SatNOGs uses Celery, it's probably not involved in the step you're thinking of, and if I'm wrong about that, then that's a giant, fluorescent red flag saying that we shouldn't be following their lead on this.

I'll also point out that Celery is a incredibly complicated library
(>7000 lines without counting dependencies) that introduces a ton of dependencies.  The Celery FAQ gives lame, half-baked excuses for why this doesn't matter, but it definitely does matter (which I could get into, but for now that's outside the scope of this document).  The only upside is that Celery is actually packaged for Debian, so if we did decide to use it (for a purpose to which it's actually suited), those dependencies are somewhat more manageable.

Why do you think that Django integration is relevant?  I wasn't aware that there was any interaction between the store-forward mechanism and a web page running on the SBC.  Even if we want to publish how many stored, unsent data files there are (and how much space they're taking up (In memory? On disk?) and how much space is left), there are significantly better ways to do that.

The first draft of this email had more reasons not to use Celery, because it isn't at all suited as a store-forward system.  Now that I'm awake and thinking clearly, we don't necessarily want to store every single data file to an actual disk in case of power loss before the upload catches up with the backlog (since that's currently a sticking point for the ringbuffer), so those points are moot.
However, I will say that if we overcome the problems associated with the ringbuffer, then Celery is *definitely* not what we want to use.
Note also that inotify still works in a memory-backed tmpfs, so if we wanted to write an in-memory data queue first, then turn it into a on-disk ringbuffer later, that would be a trivial change.

------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

TangerineSDR mailing list
TangerineSDR at lists.tapr.org
http://lists.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/tangerinesdr_lists.tapr.org

------------------------------

End of TangerineSDR Digest, Vol 7, Issue 12
*******************************************