Posted 23 May 2017
As you may recall from previous posts, I have been collaborating with my long-time friend and mentor John Jenkins on the idea to use square-wave modulation of the charging station IR beam to suppress ‘flooding’ from ambient IR sources such as overhead incandescent lighting and/or sunlight.
More than likely, If it is possible to implement a software processing algorithms to recover steering information from potentially corrupted data, it will have to be housed on a dedicated processor. So, I decided to set up a separate test setup using two processors – one to generate a square-wave modulation waveform, and another to receive that waveform through an IR link. The link can then be modified in a controlled way to simulate link losses and/or ‘flooding’. The initial hardware setup is shown below.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6569d/6569d8e647a26f164a3e0556f8443b9e163e3ad5" alt=""
Initial test bed verification using 12cm separation
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6a633/6a6337653b4b2a4db749bcb937b7c0561ed051ad" alt=""
Scope shot showing transmitted and received waveforms, 12cm separation
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ba51c/ba51c97b1a7e9abca9f505ebe42deded0b87e221" alt=""
Algorithm test bed with IR link range set to 78cm
Then I ran my little test program on the receiver processor that simply acquires 100 samples at roughly 20 samples/cycle and then prints out the results. The following two images are Excel plots of the results for 12cm & 78cm separation.
As can be seen from these two plots, the 12 & 78cm separation values provide a reasonably good simulation of the ‘very good’ and ‘reasonably crappy’ signal conditions.
Next I verified that I can successfully ‘flood’ the receiver with my portable battery-operated IR signal generator. I monitored the transmitted and received waveforms, without and then with flooding. In both cases, the bottom trace is the 5V square-wave transmitted signal, shown at 2V/div, and the top trace is the received signal shown at 1V/div. The ground for both traces is the same line on the scope screen.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/979e0/979e0714da4fbb4bf3a302ee7862a665a37342ce" alt=""
78cm separation, no flooding signal. Bottom trace is transmit @ 2V/cm, top is receive @ 1V/cm, ground for both is same line
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/38fb0/38fb050a72b856a2ff02bf316394c4fa644f248e" alt=""
78cm separation, with flooding signal. Bottom trace is transmit @ 2V/cm, top is receive @ 1V/cm, ground for both is same line
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/88049/88049f7fbfce0347fa429bd8b037ac048efff944" alt=""
Applying flooding signal with battery-operated IR signal generator
As can be seen in the scope photos, I can indeed produce almost 2V of ‘flooding’ using the IR signal generator, so I should be able to determine whether or not a particular recovery algorithm is successful at suppressing flooding effects.
Stay tuned
Frank
Pingback: IR Modulation Processing Algorithm Development – Part II - Paynter's Palace