mirror of
https://gitlab.science.ru.nl/mthesis-edeboone/m.internship-documentation.git
synced 2024-12-22 21:13:32 +01:00
Thesis: Beacon: introduction update
This commit is contained in:
parent
cd22995d1f
commit
81c55db079
1 changed files with 33 additions and 27 deletions
|
@ -27,10 +27,9 @@ For radio antennas, an in-band solution can be created using the antennas themse
|
|||
With the position of the transmitter known, the time delays can be inferred and thus the arrival times at each station individually.
|
||||
Such a mechanism has been succesfully employed in \gls{AERA} reaching an accuracy better than $2 \ns$ \cite{PierreAuger:2015aqe}.
|
||||
\\
|
||||
|
||||
% Active vs Parasitic
|
||||
For this section, it is assumed that the beacon is actively introduced to the array and is fully tuneable.
|
||||
It is foreseeable that ``parasitic'' setups, where sources that are not under control of the experiment introduce similar signals, can be analysed in a similar manner.
|
||||
For this section, it is assumed that the transmitter is actively introduced to the array and is therefore fully controlled in terms of produced signals and the transmitting power.
|
||||
It is foreseeable that ``parasitic'' setups, where sources that are not under control of the experiment introduce signals, can be analysed in a similar manner.
|
||||
However, for such signals to work, they must have a well-determined and stable origin.
|
||||
\\
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -145,7 +144,7 @@ However, for our purposes relative synchronisation is enough.
|
|||
|
||||
% extending to array
|
||||
In general, we are interested in synchronising an array of antennas.
|
||||
As \eqref{eq:synchro_mismatch_clocks} applies for any two antennas in the array, all the antennas that record the signal can determine the synchronisation mismatches simultaneously.
|
||||
As \eqref{eq:synchro_mismatch_clocks} applies for each pair of antennas in the array, all the antennas that record the signal can determine the synchronisation mismatches simultaneously.
|
||||
\\
|
||||
The mismatch terms for any two pairs of antennas sharing one antenna $\{ (i,j), (j,k) \}$ allows to find the closing mismatch term for $(i,k)$ since
|
||||
\begin{equation*}
|
||||
|
@ -163,7 +162,7 @@ Taking one antenna as the reference antenna with $(\tClock)_r = 0$, the mismatch
|
|||
In the former, the mechanism of measuring $(\tMeasArriv)_i$ from the signal has been deliberately left out.
|
||||
The nature of the beacon allows for different methods to determine $(\tMeasArriv)_i$.
|
||||
In the following sections, two approaches for measuring $(\tMeasArriv)_i$ are examined.
|
||||
|
||||
\\
|
||||
%%%% >>>
|
||||
%%%% Pulse
|
||||
%%%%
|
||||
|
@ -317,45 +316,48 @@ It shows that, as long as the pulse is (much) stronger than the noise ($\mathrm{
|
|||
%%%% >>>
|
||||
%%%% Sine
|
||||
%%%%
|
||||
\section{Sine Beacon}% <<<
|
||||
\section{Sine Beacon}% <<< Continuous
|
||||
\label{sec:beacon:sine}
|
||||
% continuous -> can be discrete
|
||||
In the case the stations need continuous synchronisation, a different route must be taken.
|
||||
Still, the following method can be applied as a non-continuous beacon if required.
|
||||
\\
|
||||
% continuous -> affect airshower
|
||||
A continuously emitted beacon will be recorded simultaneously with the signals from airshowers.
|
||||
The strength of the beacon at each antenna must therefore be tuned such to both be prominent enough to be able to synchronise,
|
||||
and only affect the airshower signals recording upto a certain degree\Todo{reword}, much less saturating the detector.
|
||||
% continuous -> affect air shower
|
||||
A continuously emitted beacon will be recorded simultaneously with the signals from air showers.
|
||||
It is therefore important that the beacon does not fully perturb the recording of the air shower signals, but still be prominent enough for synchronising the antennas.
|
||||
\\
|
||||
% Use sine wave to filter using frequency
|
||||
By implementing the beacon signal as one or more sine waves, the beacon can be recovered from the waveform using Fourier Transforms (see Section~\ref{sec:fourier}).
|
||||
It is then relatively straightforward to discriminate the beacon from the air shower signals, resulting in a relatively unperturbed air shower recording for analysis.
|
||||
\\
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
% continuous -> period multiplicity
|
||||
The continuity of the beacon poses a different issue.
|
||||
Because the beacon must be periodic, differentiating between consecutive periods is not possible using the beacon alone.
|
||||
The $\tTrueEmit$ term describing the transmitter time in \eqref{eq:transmitter2antenna_t0} is no longer uniquely defined,
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
This effect is observable in the $\tMeasArriv$ term in \eqref{eq:transmitter2antenna_t0}, describing the time when the signal is measured at the detector, being no longer uniquely defined,
|
||||
\begin{equation}\label{eq:period_multiplicity}%<<<
|
||||
\phantom{,}
|
||||
\label{eq:period_multiplicity}
|
||||
\tTrueEmit = \left[ \frac{\pTrueEmit}{2\pi} + k\right] T
|
||||
\tMeasArriv
|
||||
%= \tTrueArriv + kT\\
|
||||
= \left[ \frac{\pMeasArriv}{2\pi} + k\right] T\\
|
||||
,
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
with $-\pi < \pTrueEmit < \pi$ the phase of the beacon at time $\tTrueEmit$, $T$ the period of the beacon and $k \in \mathbb{Z}$.
|
||||
\end{equation}%>>>
|
||||
with $-\pi < \pMeasArriv < \pi$ the phase of the beacon at time $\tMeasArriv$, $T$ the period of the beacon and the unknown period counter $k \in \mathbb{Z}$.
|
||||
\\
|
||||
This changes the synchronisation mismatches in \eqref{eq:synchro_mismatch_clocks} to
|
||||
\begin{equation}
|
||||
\label{eq:synchro_mismatch_clocks_periodic}
|
||||
\phantom{.}
|
||||
Ofcourse, this means that the clock defects $\tClock$ can only be resolved upto this period counter $k$,
|
||||
changing the synchronisation mismatches in \eqref{eq:synchro_mismatch_clocks} to
|
||||
\begin{equation}\label{eq:synchro_mismatch_clocks_periodic}%<<<
|
||||
\begin{aligned}
|
||||
\phantom{.}
|
||||
(\Delta \tClock)_{ij}
|
||||
&\equiv (\tClock)_i - (\tClock)_j \\
|
||||
&= (\Delta \tMeasArriv)_{ij} - (\Delta \tTrueArriv)_{ij} \\
|
||||
&= (\Delta \tMeasArriv)_{ij} - (\Delta \tProp)_{ij} - \Delta k_{ij} T\\
|
||||
&= \left[ \frac{ (\Delta \pMeasArriv)_{ij}}{2\pi} - \frac{(\Delta \pProp)_{ij} }{2\pi} - \Delta k_{ij} \right] T\\
|
||||
&\equiv \left[ \frac{ (\Delta \pClock)_{ij} }{2\pi} - \Delta k_{ij} \right] T\\
|
||||
&\equiv \left[ \frac{ (\Delta \pClock)_{ij} }{2\pi} - \Delta k_{ij} \right] T
|
||||
.\\
|
||||
\end{aligned}
|
||||
.
|
||||
\end{equation}
|
||||
\end{equation}%>>>
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure}
|
||||
\begin{subfigure}{\textwidth}
|
||||
|
@ -375,7 +377,7 @@ This changes the synchronisation mismatches in \eqref{eq:synchro_mismatch_clocks
|
|||
\begin{subfigure}{\textwidth}
|
||||
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{beacon/08_beacon_sync_synchronised_period_alignment.pdf}
|
||||
\caption{
|
||||
Lifting period degeneracy ($k=n-m=7$ periods) using the optimal overlap between impulsive signals.
|
||||
Lifting period degeneracy ($\Delta k_{ij} =n-m=7$ periods) using the optimal overlap between impulsive signals.
|
||||
}
|
||||
\label{fig:beacon_sync:period_alignment}
|
||||
\end{subfigure}
|
||||
|
@ -411,15 +413,19 @@ With an estimated accuracy of the \gls{GNSS} below $50 \ns$ the correct beacon p
|
|||
Another scheme is using an additional discrete signal to declare a unique $\tTrueEmit$ (see Figure~\ref{fig:beacon_sync:sine}).
|
||||
This relies on the ability of counting how many beacon periods have passed since the discrete signal has been recorded.
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure}
|
||||
\begin{figure}%<<<
|
||||
\centering
|
||||
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{beacon/auger/1512.02216.figure2.beacon_beat.png}
|
||||
\caption{
|
||||
From Ref~\cite{PierreAuger:2015aqe}.
|
||||
The beacon signal that the \gls{Auger} has employed in \gls{AERA}.
|
||||
The beating between 4 frequencies gives a total period of $1.1\us$ (indicated by the arrows).
|
||||
With a synchronisation uncertainty below $100\ns$ from the \gls{GNSS}, it fully resolves the period degeneracy.
|
||||
}
|
||||
\label{fig:beacon:pa}
|
||||
\end{figure}
|
||||
\end{figure}%>>>
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\bigskip
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue