Thanks Thanks:  0
Showing results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: GMSK vs QPSK

  1. #1
    Member Reputation: 83
    Join Date
    2009-02-19
    Posts
    57


    Default GMSK vs QPSK

    Hi friends,

    I am currently working on a thesis and I need some ideas that why we cannot (it is not convenient) use QPSK modulation in GSM (air) communication.

    Can you please provide some drawbacks???

    I have checked the comments in google but I would like to hear the opinions of engineers.

    thank you for your help.

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Posts
    Many
     

  3. #2
    Senior Member Reputation: 502
    Join Date
    2008-11-05
    Posts
    1,025


    Default

    [QUOTE=Klevo;87782]Hi friends,

    I am currently working on a thesis and I need some ideas that why we cannot (it is not convenient) use QPSK modulation in GSM (air) communication.

    Can you please provide some drawbacks???

    I have checked the comments in google but I would like to hear the opinions of engineers.

    thank you for your help.[/QUOTE
    It is related to bandwidth efficiency as GMSK has higher efficiency but the draw back is that need high power than QPSK. and GMSK using filter to reduce intersymbol interference.
    BR
    RF

  4. #3
    Junior Member Reputation: 11
    Join Date
    2010-01-14
    Posts
    31


    Default Re: GMSK vs QPSK

    QPSK requires more digital signal processing at baseband level and its also more complex as compared to GMSK

  5. #4
    Member Reputation: 112
    Join Date
    2009-12-24
    Posts
    131


    Thumbs up Re: GMSK vs QPSK

    Hi,

    I feel that for voice which is something like a real time application, GMSK which uses 0 or 1 is more robust and reliable than QPSK which is symbol based and susceptible to more data loss than GMSK due to various RF factors and the real time experience may be lost!!!

    BRs
    CT

  6. #5
    Member Reputation: 416
    Join Date
    2010-06-16
    Posts
    321


    Default Re: GMSK vs QPSK

    [QUOTE=RF engineer;87794]
    Quote Originally Posted by Klevo View Post
    Hi friends,

    I am currently working on a thesis and I need some ideas that why we cannot (it is not convenient) use QPSK modulation in GSM (air) communication.

    Can you please provide some drawbacks???

    I have checked the comments in google but I would like to hear the opinions of engineers.

    thank you for your help.[/QUOTE
    It is related to bandwidth efficiency as GMSK has higher efficiency but the draw back is that need high power than QPSK. and GMSK using filter to reduce intersymbol interference.
    BR
    RF
    On top of adjacent ch interference (leakage into neighbor 200 kHz ch),
    GMSK has constant envelope and thus it is much easier to make decent transmitter.
    But, GMSK is history: with EDGE, even GSM uses high order modulations so we had to
    replace TRXes with more complex tramsitters and more DSP CPU capacity for more demanding RX algorithms.

    BR
    s52d

  7. #6
    Member Reputation: 101
    Join Date
    2009-01-08
    Posts
    238


    Default Re: GMSK vs QPSK

    Quote Originally Posted by Klevo View Post
    Hi friends,

    I am currently working on a thesis and I need some ideas that why we cannot (it is not convenient) use QPSK modulation in GSM (air) communication.

    Can you please provide some drawbacks???

    I have checked the comments in google but I would like to hear the opinions of engineers.

    thank you for your help.

    GMSK signal has a constant envelope (i.e. signal's amplitude does not change) so we can operate PA's at their saturation point and this means they are highly efficient in terms of power wastage.

    Running a PA at the saturation point results in the generation of undesired harmonics which destroy the output signal through the increase of intersymbol interference. GMSK does not have this problem because of the signal's constant envelope but QPSK suffers from this harmonics generation. the typical solution is to back-off the operating point of the PA. this means that the PA is not as efficient as before but the intersymbol interference is reduced. a 3-dB back-off is typical in most implementations

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •