Spike Channel Power measurement (all for that matter)

Hi guys,

A quickie for an improvement:

Move Channel power measurement to the top (or have it as a preferences setting). It all too frequently sits obscured by the trace…

J

Hi Jared,

Thanks for the input. I’ll play around with a few ideas. Out of curiosity, are you setting the text and traces to the same color? A temporary solution might be to change one of the colors, as the text is painted over the trace.

Regards,
A.J.

Hi Jared,

Just released an update to Spike. It includes the ability to change the color and opacity of the channel power bars. Change it through the preferences menu. Should help make the text visible when the trace and text color match.

Regards,
A.J.

Cool – about to install the latest version.
BUG?
On the channel power setup, I have 3 counts, width set to 50k and Spacing set to 100k, however if I set the width to 51k I only see one shaded region…
count, width and spacing are displayed as
fc-spacing +/-width/2,
fc +/-width/2 and
fc+spacing +/-width/2
With these settings I should be able to increase the width right up to ~99k (and have a 2kHz gap between channels).
Do you have a sanity check in there causing this? Should I not be able to run the channel boundaries almost adjacent to each other??

Hi Jared,

Are the outside of the channels by chance stepping out of the frequency range? If the channels start or stop frequency fall out of the current span I remove the channel. If not, then can you share the full frequency range setup. I was unable to reproduce using the CP setup. It could be dependent on other settings as well.

Regards,
A.J.

Hi AJ,
Ah yeah – that’s what is happening… simply a limitation in RTBW for SA44B?
How do you handle this in the BB60C with a 250kHz span setting?

Hi Jared,

The same limitation would happen with the BB60C. Our implementation requires the channels fit within the span. If you weren’t using the device in real-time mode, I would simply suggest increasing your span to 300kHz. Otherwise we would need to change our implementation to integrate partial channels when available (non-ideal) or allow custom adjacent channel sizes (ideal). It’s on the TODO list and something I’ve been wanting to add for a while (individually selectable channel bandwidths) I’ll see if I can’t get it pushed up the list.

I apologize for the inconvenience.

Regards,
A.J.

[Author]

Posts