Skip to main content
Amateur Radio

Return to Answer

mention random noise assumption
Source Link
pidloop
pidloop
  • 79
  • 7

It's arbitrary. As mentioned by hobbs, I would guess they used 2500 for direct comparison to other modes.

But it's easy to change if we assume the noise is purely random. To find the SNR for a different bandwidth, just add 3 db for each halving. This is because half the bandwidth will contain half the noise power so the S/N ratio will be twice as large. So an SNR of -20 based on 2500 Hz bandwidth would be -17 based on 1250, -14 based on 625 etc etc.

It's arbitrary. As mentioned by hobbs, I would guess they used 2500 for direct comparison to other modes.

But it's easy to change. To find the SNR for a different bandwidth, just add 3 db for each halving. This is because half the bandwidth will contain half the noise power so the S/N ratio will be twice as large. So an SNR of -20 based on 2500 Hz bandwidth would be -17 based on 1250, -14 based on 625 etc etc.

It's arbitrary. As mentioned by hobbs, I would guess they used 2500 for direct comparison to other modes.

But it's easy to change if we assume the noise is purely random. To find the SNR for a different bandwidth, just add 3 db for each halving. This is because half the bandwidth will contain half the noise power so the S/N ratio will be twice as large. So an SNR of -20 based on 2500 Hz bandwidth would be -17 based on 1250, -14 based on 625 etc etc.

Source Link
pidloop
pidloop
  • 79
  • 7

It's arbitrary. As mentioned by hobbs, I would guess they used 2500 for direct comparison to other modes.

But it's easy to change. To find the SNR for a different bandwidth, just add 3 db for each halving. This is because half the bandwidth will contain half the noise power so the S/N ratio will be twice as large. So an SNR of -20 based on 2500 Hz bandwidth would be -17 based on 1250, -14 based on 625 etc etc.