| 8,7 → 8,7 |
|---|
| |
| As a consequence, there already exists an effort to control the radiofrequency spectrum. As result of attempts to control the radiofrequency spectrum, the frequency allocation table was created \cite[radio-astronomy-frequency]. The radio-frequency allocation table contains special bands allocated to radioastronomy use. However, for many reasons these bands are not clean enough to be used in radioastronomy observations directly. As a result, we cannot work in the same way as did the radioastronomers in the very beginnings of radioastronomy do. Many experiments, namely Cosmic microwave background detection or pulsar detection, cannot be realised nowadays in their original forms with satisfactory results. |
| |
| Supporting evidence of such an effect is RadioJOVE project. NASA engineers who originally created the RadioJOVE project had a great idea. The RadioJOVE project brought an opportunity for creating a publicly available, cheap radioastronomy receiver. However, they used an old-fashioned construction design which, on one hand, can operate in unoccupied harsh environments like deserts, but on the other hand it simply did not meet the criteria that would make it possible to be used in modern civilisation, as we know it in Europe \cite[radio-jove]. |
| Supporting evidence of such an effect is RadioJOVE project. NASA \glos{NASA}{National Aeronautics and Space Administration} engineers who originally created the RadioJOVE project had a great idea. The RadioJOVE project brought an opportunity for creating a publicly available, cheap radioastronomy receiver. However, they used an old-fashioned construction design which, on one hand, can operate in unoccupied harsh environments like deserts, but on the other hand it simply did not meet the criteria that would make it possible to be used in modern civilisation, as we know it in Europe \cite[radio-jove]. |
| The source of its dysfunction is a presence of strong radiofrequency interferences. These interferences are orders of magnitude stronger than Jupiter decametric emissions, whose detection was the main aim of the RadioJOVE project. |
| From what we have already seen in the light pollution mitigation pursuit, there is only a small chance to improve the situation in radiofrequency spectrum radically. |
| |
| 20,13 → 20,13 |
|---|
| |
| In the beginnings of radioastronomy, the receivers were constructed as simple stations with single antenna or multi antenna array with fixed phasing. This approach was used because of the existing limits of electronic components and technologies. The main challenges of those times were the problem of noise number and low sensitivity, both present due to the poor characteristics of active electronic components such as transistors and vacuum tubes. |
| |
| Most of the present-day operating radioastronomy equipment has been constructed in similar manner. It was produced usually shortly after the WWII or during The Cold War as a part of military technology. |
| Most of the present-day operating radioastronomy equipment has been constructed in similar manner. It was produced usually shortly after the WWII \glos{WWII}{Second World War} or during The Cold War as a part of military technology. |
| |
| Today we have an access to components having quality, repeatability and price completely different from the components accessible by previous generation of radioastronomers. That is why we can develop better radioastronomical equipment, powerful enough to make new astronomical discoveries possible.\fnote{Most of astronomy-related discoveries in the last fifty years came from radioastronomy.} |
| |
| We have the capacities necessary to develop a receiver which will have wide bandwidth, high Third-order intercept point and preferably an option for phase and frequency locking to other receivers located at another radioastronomical site at Earth. Currently there exist several receivers with the above-mentioned parameters, for example USRP2, USRP B210 or HackRF and all are commercially available. However all of them lack scalability and have high prices. It is exactly the scalability and redundancy that are the main requirements of noise reduction algorithms. |
| We have the capacities necessary to develop a receiver which will have wide bandwidth, high Third-order intercept point and preferably an option for phase and frequency locking to other receivers located at another radioastronomical site at Earth. Currently there exist several receivers with the above-mentioned parameters, for example USRP2, USRP B210 \glos{USRP}{Universal Software Radio Peripheral} or HackRF and all are commercially available. However all of them lack scalability and have high prices. It is exactly the scalability and redundancy that are the main requirements of noise reduction algorithms. |
| |
| New radio astronomy systems such LOFAR are explicit examples of the scalability and redundancy approach. LOFAR has completely different and novel structure developed to solve the problems of radioastronomy signal reception. It exclusively uses multi antenna arrays and mathematical algorithms for signal handling. Radio signals recorded by LOFAR can be used in multiple ways: radio images can be computed (if sufficient cover of u/v plane is achieved), radiation intensity can be measured, spectrum can be analysed for velocity measurement, etc. |
| New radio astronomy systems such LOFAR \glos{LOFAR}{Low-Frequency Array} are explicit examples of the scalability and redundancy approach. LOFAR has completely different and novel structure developed to solve the problems of radioastronomy signal reception. It exclusively uses multi antenna arrays and mathematical algorithms for signal handling. Radio signals recorded by LOFAR can be used in multiple ways: radio images can be computed (if sufficient cover of u/v plane is achieved), radiation intensity can be measured, spectrum can be analysed for velocity measurement, etc. |
| |
| \sec Required receiver parameters |
| |
| 40,8 → 40,8 |
|---|
| |
| \label[dynamic-range-theory] |
| |
| Dynamic range represents a huge problem of current radioastronomical receivers. This parameter is enforced by everywhere present humans made EMI radiation on RF frequencies. The modern radio astronomy receiver must not be saturated by this high levels of signals but still needs to have enough sensitivity to see faint signals from natural sources. Dynamic range is limited either by the construction of analogue circuitry in receiver or by the digitalisation unit. |
| The maximal theoretical dynamic range of ADC could be estimated from ADC bit depth using a following formula \ref[dynamic-range] |
| Dynamic range represents a huge problem of current radioastronomical receivers. This parameter is enforced by everywhere present humans made EMI \glos{EMI}{Electromagnetic interference} radiation on RF \glos{RF}{Radio frequency} frequencies. The modern radio astronomy receiver must not be saturated by this high levels of signals but still needs to have enough sensitivity to see faint signals from natural sources. Dynamic range is limited either by the construction of analogue circuitry in receiver or by the digitalisation unit. |
| The maximal theoretical dynamic range of ADC \glos{ADC}{analog-to-digital converter} could be estimated from ADC bit depth using a following formula \ref[dynamic-range] |
| |
| \label[dynamic-range] |
| $$ |
| 64,12 → 64,12 |
|---|
| \endinsert |
| |
| If we look at actual spectrum occupancy in Europe (measured in power spectral density) we see that signal dynamic range in spectra |
| easily reaches more than 80 dB above natural noise levels \cite[spectrum-observatory]. If we don't want to deal with receiver saturation or poor sensitivity we need a receiver and digitalization unit which has comparable dynamical range of with received signals. This imply use of least 14 bit ADC without any spare of range. But 16 bit range should be optimal as we have spare range for strongest RF signals. Two bytes sample range has in addition a good efficiency in use standard power of 2 data types length. We lock for use 16bit digital range as optimal for our design. |
| easily reaches more than 80 dB above natural noise levels \cite[spectrum-observatory]. If we don't want to deal with receiver saturation or poor sensitivity we need a receiver and digitalization unit which has comparable dynamical range of with received signals. This imply use of least 14 bit ADC without any spare of range. But 16 bit range should be optimal as we have spare range for strongest RF signals. Two bytes sample range has in addition a good efficiency in use standard power of 2 data types length. We lock for use 16 bit digital range as optimal for our design. |
| |
| |
| \secc Bandwidth |
| |
| Historically, the parameter of bandwidth in radioastronomical receiver used to be within the kilohertz range. Small bandwidth was acceptable because observations were processed directly by listening or by paper chart intensity recorder. Chart recorder integrated energy of signal over defined small bandwidth which was suitable for detecting the intensity variance of microwave background. No wide-band transmitters existed in that era (except for TV transmitters) and tuning to other neighbouring frequency was easy as they were mostly vacant. Parallel observations from several places were unnecessary as well because the electromagnetic conditions were nearly same at all locations. |
| Historically, the parameter of bandwidth in radioastronomical receiver used to be within the kilohertz range. Small bandwidth was acceptable because observations were processed directly by listening or by paper chart intensity recorder. Chart recorder integrated energy of signal over defined small bandwidth which was suitable for detecting the intensity variance of microwave background. No wide-band transmitters existed in that era (except for TV \glos{TV}{Television} transmitters) and tuning to other neighbouring frequency was easy as they were mostly vacant. Parallel observations from several places were unnecessary as well because the electromagnetic conditions were nearly same at all locations. |
| |
| \sec State of the art receivers digitalization units |
| |
| 77,7 → 77,7 |
|---|
| |
| \secc Custom digitalization system |
| |
| Custom designs usually uses non-recurring engineering for development specific solution for observation project thus costs of this instruments are very high if developed instrument are not reproduced many times. Typical example of instrument developed and manufactured in one piece with enormous founding resources draws is Arecibo ALFA survey multi beam feed Array. |
| Custom designs usually uses non-recurring engineering for development specific solution for observation project thus costs of this instruments are very high if developed instrument are not reproduced many times. Typical example of instrument developed and manufactured in one piece with enormous founding resources draws is Arecibo ALFA \glos{ALFA}{Arecibo L-Band Feed Array} survey multi beam feed Array. |
| Another opposite example for custom receiver and digitalization unit design is LOFAR system developed by Astron in Netherlands \cite[lofar]. |
| |
| LOFAR is innovative radioastronomy system which uses the phased antenna array approach in enormous scale and thousands (around $2 \cdot 10^4$) of antennas are manufactured an deployed on field. The centrer of LOFAR system is situated in Netherlands and peripheral antennas and connection network are extended to other European countries. |
| 85,19 → 85,19 |
|---|
| \midinsert |
| \clabel[lofar-antenna]{Lofar antenna configuration} |
| \picw=10cm \cinspic ./img/lofar_antenna.jpg |
| \caption/f One LOFAR LBA antenna element. |
| \caption/f One LOFAR LBA \glos{LBA}{Low Band Antenna} antenna element. |
| \endinsert |
| |
| LOFAR project must use low cost hardware due to systems scale. Special construction techniques are used to keep overall project budget at acceptable levels (specially designed polystyrene supporting blocks for HBA antennas for example). Many of used components are manufactured in mass scale for other than scientific use LBA antennas masts are made from standard PVC plastic waste pipes and LOFAR uses low cost direct sampling receiver. Whole project has been designed by Netherlands Institute for Radio Astronomy, which produces many similarly sophisticated devices\cite[astron-devices]. |
| LOFAR project must use low cost hardware due to systems scale. Special construction techniques are used to keep overall project budget at acceptable levels (specially designed polystyrene supporting blocks for HBA \glos{HBA}{High Band Antenna} antennas for example). Many of used components are manufactured in mass scale for other than scientific use LBA antennas masts are made from standard PVC \glos{PVC}{Polyvinyl chloride} plastic waste pipes and LOFAR uses low cost direct sampling receiver. Whole project has been designed by Netherlands Institute for Radio Astronomy, which produces many similarly sophisticated devices\cite[astron-devices]. |
| |
| \secc Modular digitalization systems |
| |
| Due to cost restrictions in science and astronomy instruments development, an reuse of engineering work should be useful. One modular digitalization and data processing system currently exit. It is being developed at Berkley\cite[casper-project]. CASPER is in development from around 2005. CASPER's designers an engineers remarkably noticed a lack of such hardware in radioastronomy science, theirs ideas are summarised in paper \cite[casper-paper]. Unfortunately they use proprietary connector standard and technology and develops modular system based purely on Tyco Z-DOK+ connectors family. CASPER data processing board with Z-DOK connectors is shown in picture \ref[casper-roach]. Z-DOK connectors have relatively high pricing (around 40 USD) \cite[Z-DOK-connectors]. Z-DOK connectors are high quality differential pairs connectors, but price of these connectors is comparable with value of one ADC channel in our design described in following part of document. |
| Due to cost restrictions in science and astronomy instruments development, an reuse of engineering work should be useful. One modular digitalization and data processing system currently exit. It is being developed at Berkley\cite[casper-project]. CASPER \glos{CASPER}{Collaboration for Astronomy Signal Processing and Electronics Research} is in development from around 2005. CASPER's designers an engineers remarkably noticed a lack of such hardware in radioastronomy science, theirs ideas are summarised in paper \cite[casper-paper]. Unfortunately they use proprietary connector standard and technology and develops modular system based purely on Tyco Z-DOK+ connectors family. CASPER data processing board with Z-DOK connectors is shown in picture \ref[casper-roach]. Z-DOK connectors have relatively high pricing (around 40 USD) \cite[Z-DOK-connectors]. Z-DOK connectors are high quality differential pairs connectors, but price of these connectors is comparable with value of one ADC channel in our design described in following part of document. |
| |
| \midinsert |
| \clabel[casper-roach]{CASPER's ROACH data processing board} |
| \picw=10cm \cinspic ./img/Roach2_rev0_2xcx4mezz.jpg |
| \caption/f CASPER project ROACH-2 data processing board. White Z-DOK connectors for daughter ADC Boards can be easily seen in front. |
| \caption/f CASPER project ROACH-2 \glos{ROACH}{ Reconfigurable Open Architecture Computing Hardware (ROACH) board} data processing board. White Z-DOK connectors for daughter ADC Boards can be easily seen in front. |
| \endinsert |
| |
| In opposite to professional astronomers which uses proprietary digitalization units, amateur radioastronomers currently uses multichannel sound cards \cite[amateur-fringes] or self designed digitalisation units. Devices constructed by amateurs are usually non reproducible \cite[amateur-sdr] . It is evident that current radioastronomy lacks of proper hardware which could be used on both communities - professionals and amateurs. Optimal solution for this situation should be open-source hardware. |