Rev. 2 | |
Forward Error Correction | CD/CIM550.IOM |
A fixed computational clock is used to process input symbols, and to search backwards and forwards in time to determine the correct decoding path. At lower data rates there are sufficient number of computational cycles per input symbol to permit the decoding process to perform optimally. However, as the data rate increases, there are fewer cycles available, leading to a reduction in coding gain. This is clearly illustrated in the performance curves which follow. For data rates above ~1 Mbps, Viterbi should be considered the better alternative.
Table
FOR | AGAINST |
Higher coding gain (1 | Pronounced threshold effect - does not |
lower data rates, compared to | fail gracefully in poor Eb/No conditions. |
Viterbi. |
|
| Higher processing delay than Viterbi |
| (~4 k bits) - not good for |
| voice. |
|
|
| Coding gain varies with data rate - favors |
| lower data rates. |
Turbo coding is an FEC technique developed within the last few years, which delivers significant performance improvements compared to more traditional techniques. Unlike the popular method of concatenating a
Two general classes of Turbo Codes have been developed, Turbo Convolutional Codes (TCC), and Turbo Product Codes (TPC, a block coding technique). TCC suffers from an irreducible BER of approximately 1 x
A Turbo Product Code is a 2 or 3 dimensional array of block codes. Encoding is relatively straightforward, but decoding is a very complex process requiring multiple iterations of processing for maximum performance to be achieved.
93