Phase spectrum with python and FFT - python

I'm trying to calculate a phase spectrum of sinusoid.
The following code generates 1Hz sinusoid with zero initial phase.
import numpy
from numpy import pi, sin, arange
from pylab import plot, show, xlabel, ylabel, xlim, grid
sampling_rate = 500
sampling_time = 1 / sampling_rate
length = 1 # in seconds
n = sampling_rate * length # number of points
time = arange(0, n * sampling_time, sampling_time)
# Generate sinusoid: frequency=1Hz, phase=0
signal = sin(2 * pi * time)
fft = numpy.fft.fft(signal)
fft_phase = numpy.angle(fft)
fft_freq = numpy.arange(n) * sampling_rate / n
plot(fft_freq, fft_phase)
ylabel("FFT Angle")
xlabel("Frequency (Hz)")
xlim(left=0, right=5)
grid(True)
show()
But result doesn't match my expectations. It has non-zero phase of 1 Hz component:
It shows incorrect phase of 1 Hz harmonic. What's wrong with the code (or approach)?

When the magnitude is zero, then the phase is given by numerical imprecision.
If you display the values computed by fft you’ll see that the values you expect to be 0 are actually in the order of 1e-16 or something like that. This is numerical imprecision caused by rounding in the floating-point computations.
The solution is to compute both the magnitude and the phase, and ignore the phase component if the magnitude is too small.

Related

Interpreting the FFT plot of time series data [duplicate]

There are many questions on this topic, and I have cycled through a lot of them getting conceptual pointers on handling frequencies (here and here), documentation on numpy functions (here), how-to information on extracting magnitude and phase (here), and stepping outside the site, for example this or this.
However, only the painful "proving it" to myself with simple examples and checking the output of different functions contrasted to their manual implementation has given me a bit of an idea.
The answer attempts to document and share details related to the DFT in Python that may constitute barriers of entry if not explained in simple terms.
The DFT (FFT being its algorithmic computation) is a dot product between a finite discrete number of samples N of an analogue signal s(t) (a function of time or space) and a set of basis vectors of complex exponentials (sin and cos functions). Although the sample is naturally finite and may show no periodicity, it is implicitly thought of as a periodically repeating discrete function. Even when dealing with real-valued signals (the usual situation) it is convenient to work with complex numbers (Euler's equation). It may be intimidating to implement the function on a signal with np.fft.fft(s) only to get the output coefficients in complex numbers and get stuck in their interpretation. Some steps are essential:
What are the frequencies in the complex exponentials?
The DFT does not necessarily preserve the sampling frequency in Hertz. The frequencies are indices (k).
The indices k range from 0 to N - 1 and can be thought of as having units of cycles / set (the set being the N samples of the signal s). I will omit discussing the Nyquist limit, but for real signals the frequencies form a mirror image after N / 2, and given as negative decreasing values after that point (not a problem within the framework of implicit periodicity). The frequencies used in the FFT are not simply k, but k / N, thought of as having units of cycles / sample. See this reference. Example (reference): If a signal is sampled N = 5 times the frequencies are: np.fft.fftfreq(5), yielding [ 0 , 0.2, 0.4, -0.4, -0.2], i.e. [0/5, 1/5, 2/5, -2/5, -1/5].
To convert these frequencies to meaningful units (e.g. Hetz or mm) the values in cycles/sample above will need to be divided by sampling interval T (e.g. distance in seconds between samples). Continuing with the example above, there is a built-in call: np.fft.fftfreq(5, d=T): If the analogue signal s is sampled 5 times at equidistant intervals T = 1/2 sec for a total sample of NT = 5 x 1/2 sec, the normalized frequencies will be np.fft.fftfreq(5, d = 1/2), yielding [0 0.4 0.8 -0.8 -0.4] or [0/NT, 1/NT, 2/NT, -2/NT, -1/NT].
Either normalized or un-normalized frequencies are used to control angular frequencies (ω_m), expressed as ω_m = 2π k/NT. Note that NT is the total duration for
which the signal was sampled. The index k does result in multiples of a fundamental frequency (ω-naught) corresponding to k = 1 - the frequency of (co-)sine wave that completes
exactly one oscillation over NT (here).
Magnitude, frequency and phase of the coefficients in the FFT
Given the output of the FFT S = fft.fft(s), the magnitude of the output coefficients (here) is just the Euclidean norm of the complex numbers in the output coefficients adjusted for the symmetry in real signals (x 2) and for the number of samples 1/N: magnitudes = 1/N * np.abs(S)
The frequencies are matched to the call explained above np.fft.fftfreq(N), or more expediently to incorporate the actual analogue frequency units, frequencies = np.fft.fftfreq(N, d=T).
The phase of each coefficients is the angle of the complex number in polar form phase = np.arctan(np.imag(S)/np.real(S))
How to find the dominant frequencies in the signal s in the FFT and their coefficients?
Plotting aside, finding the index k corresponding the frequency with the highest magnitude can be accomplished as index = np.argmax(np.abs(S)). To find the 4 indices with the highest magnitude, for example, the call is indices = np.argpartition(S,-4)[-4:].
And finding the actual corresponding coefficient: S[index] with frequency freq_max = np.fft.fftfreq(N, d=T)[index].
Reproducing the original signal after obtaining the coefficients:
Reproducing s through sines and cosines (p.150 in here):
Re = np.real(S[index])
Im = np.imag(S[index])
s_recon = Re * 2/N * np.cos(-2 * np.pi * freq_max * t) + abs(Im) * 2/N * np.sin(-2 * np.pi * freq_max * t)
Here is a complete example:
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
N = 10000 # Sample points
T = 1/5000 # Spacing
# Total duration N * T= 2
t = np.linspace(0.0, N*T, N, endpoint=False) # Time: Vector of 10,000 elements from 0 to N*T=2.
frequency = np.fft.fftfreq(t.size, d=T) # Normalized Fourier frequencies in spectrum.
f0 = 25 # Frequency of the sampled wave
phi = np.pi/8 # Phase
A = 50 # Amplitude
s = A * np.cos(2 * np.pi * f0 * t + phi) # Signal
S = np.fft.fft(s) # Unnormalized FFT
index = np.argmax(np.abs(S))
print(S[index])
magnitude = np.abs(S[index]) * 2/N
freq_max = frequency[index]
phase = np.arctan(np.imag(S[index])/np.real(S[index]))
print(f"magnitude: {magnitude}, freq_max: {freq_max}, phase: {phase}")
print(phi)
fig, [ax1,ax2] = plt.subplots(nrows=2, ncols=1, figsize=(10, 5))
ax1.plot(t,s, linewidth=0.5, linestyle='-', color='r', marker='o', markersize=1,markerfacecolor=(1, 0, 0, 0.1))
ax1.set_xlim([0, .31])
ax1.set_ylim([-51,51])
ax2.plot(frequency[0:N//2], 2/N * np.abs(S[0:N//2]), '.', color='xkcd:lightish blue', label='amplitude spectrum')
plt.xlim([0, 100])
plt.show()
Re = np.real(S[index])
Im = np.imag(S[index])
s_recon = Re*2/N * np.cos(-2 * np.pi * freq_max * t) + abs(Im)*2/N * np.sin(-2 * np.pi * freq_max * t)
fig = plt.figure(figsize=(10, 2.5))
plt.xlim(0,0.3)
plt.ylim(-51,51)
plt.plot(t,s_recon, linewidth=0.5, linestyle='-', color='r', marker='o', markersize=1,markerfacecolor=(1, 0, 0, 0.1))
plt.show()
s.all() == s_recon.all()

How to interpret the results of the Discrete Fourier Transform (FFT) in Python

There are many questions on this topic, and I have cycled through a lot of them getting conceptual pointers on handling frequencies (here and here), documentation on numpy functions (here), how-to information on extracting magnitude and phase (here), and stepping outside the site, for example this or this.
However, only the painful "proving it" to myself with simple examples and checking the output of different functions contrasted to their manual implementation has given me a bit of an idea.
The answer attempts to document and share details related to the DFT in Python that may constitute barriers of entry if not explained in simple terms.
The DFT (FFT being its algorithmic computation) is a dot product between a finite discrete number of samples N of an analogue signal s(t) (a function of time or space) and a set of basis vectors of complex exponentials (sin and cos functions). Although the sample is naturally finite and may show no periodicity, it is implicitly thought of as a periodically repeating discrete function. Even when dealing with real-valued signals (the usual situation) it is convenient to work with complex numbers (Euler's equation). It may be intimidating to implement the function on a signal with np.fft.fft(s) only to get the output coefficients in complex numbers and get stuck in their interpretation. Some steps are essential:
What are the frequencies in the complex exponentials?
The DFT does not necessarily preserve the sampling frequency in Hertz. The frequencies are indices (k).
The indices k range from 0 to N - 1 and can be thought of as having units of cycles / set (the set being the N samples of the signal s). I will omit discussing the Nyquist limit, but for real signals the frequencies form a mirror image after N / 2, and given as negative decreasing values after that point (not a problem within the framework of implicit periodicity). The frequencies used in the FFT are not simply k, but k / N, thought of as having units of cycles / sample. See this reference. Example (reference): If a signal is sampled N = 5 times the frequencies are: np.fft.fftfreq(5), yielding [ 0 , 0.2, 0.4, -0.4, -0.2], i.e. [0/5, 1/5, 2/5, -2/5, -1/5].
To convert these frequencies to meaningful units (e.g. Hetz or mm) the values in cycles/sample above will need to be divided by sampling interval T (e.g. distance in seconds between samples). Continuing with the example above, there is a built-in call: np.fft.fftfreq(5, d=T): If the analogue signal s is sampled 5 times at equidistant intervals T = 1/2 sec for a total sample of NT = 5 x 1/2 sec, the normalized frequencies will be np.fft.fftfreq(5, d = 1/2), yielding [0 0.4 0.8 -0.8 -0.4] or [0/NT, 1/NT, 2/NT, -2/NT, -1/NT].
Either normalized or un-normalized frequencies are used to control angular frequencies (ω_m), expressed as ω_m = 2π k/NT. Note that NT is the total duration for
which the signal was sampled. The index k does result in multiples of a fundamental frequency (ω-naught) corresponding to k = 1 - the frequency of (co-)sine wave that completes
exactly one oscillation over NT (here).
Magnitude, frequency and phase of the coefficients in the FFT
Given the output of the FFT S = fft.fft(s), the magnitude of the output coefficients (here) is just the Euclidean norm of the complex numbers in the output coefficients adjusted for the symmetry in real signals (x 2) and for the number of samples 1/N: magnitudes = 1/N * np.abs(S)
The frequencies are matched to the call explained above np.fft.fftfreq(N), or more expediently to incorporate the actual analogue frequency units, frequencies = np.fft.fftfreq(N, d=T).
The phase of each coefficients is the angle of the complex number in polar form phase = np.arctan(np.imag(S)/np.real(S))
How to find the dominant frequencies in the signal s in the FFT and their coefficients?
Plotting aside, finding the index k corresponding the frequency with the highest magnitude can be accomplished as index = np.argmax(np.abs(S)). To find the 4 indices with the highest magnitude, for example, the call is indices = np.argpartition(S,-4)[-4:].
And finding the actual corresponding coefficient: S[index] with frequency freq_max = np.fft.fftfreq(N, d=T)[index].
Reproducing the original signal after obtaining the coefficients:
Reproducing s through sines and cosines (p.150 in here):
Re = np.real(S[index])
Im = np.imag(S[index])
s_recon = Re * 2/N * np.cos(-2 * np.pi * freq_max * t) + abs(Im) * 2/N * np.sin(-2 * np.pi * freq_max * t)
Here is a complete example:
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
N = 10000 # Sample points
T = 1/5000 # Spacing
# Total duration N * T= 2
t = np.linspace(0.0, N*T, N, endpoint=False) # Time: Vector of 10,000 elements from 0 to N*T=2.
frequency = np.fft.fftfreq(t.size, d=T) # Normalized Fourier frequencies in spectrum.
f0 = 25 # Frequency of the sampled wave
phi = np.pi/8 # Phase
A = 50 # Amplitude
s = A * np.cos(2 * np.pi * f0 * t + phi) # Signal
S = np.fft.fft(s) # Unnormalized FFT
index = np.argmax(np.abs(S))
print(S[index])
magnitude = np.abs(S[index]) * 2/N
freq_max = frequency[index]
phase = np.arctan(np.imag(S[index])/np.real(S[index]))
print(f"magnitude: {magnitude}, freq_max: {freq_max}, phase: {phase}")
print(phi)
fig, [ax1,ax2] = plt.subplots(nrows=2, ncols=1, figsize=(10, 5))
ax1.plot(t,s, linewidth=0.5, linestyle='-', color='r', marker='o', markersize=1,markerfacecolor=(1, 0, 0, 0.1))
ax1.set_xlim([0, .31])
ax1.set_ylim([-51,51])
ax2.plot(frequency[0:N//2], 2/N * np.abs(S[0:N//2]), '.', color='xkcd:lightish blue', label='amplitude spectrum')
plt.xlim([0, 100])
plt.show()
Re = np.real(S[index])
Im = np.imag(S[index])
s_recon = Re*2/N * np.cos(-2 * np.pi * freq_max * t) + abs(Im)*2/N * np.sin(-2 * np.pi * freq_max * t)
fig = plt.figure(figsize=(10, 2.5))
plt.xlim(0,0.3)
plt.ylim(-51,51)
plt.plot(t,s_recon, linewidth=0.5, linestyle='-', color='r', marker='o', markersize=1,markerfacecolor=(1, 0, 0, 0.1))
plt.show()
s.all() == s_recon.all()

Correct normalization of discrete power spectral density in python for a real problem

I am struggling with the correct normalization of the power spectral density (and its inverse).
I am given a real problem, let's say the readings of an accelerometer in the form of the power spectral density (psd) in units of Amplitude^2/Hz. I would like to translate this back into a randomized time series. However, first I want to understand the "forward" direction, time series to PSD.
According to [1], the PSD of a time series x(t) can be calculated by:
PSD(w) = 1/T * abs(F(w))^2 = df * abs(F(w))^2
in which T is the sampling time of x(t) and F(w) is the Fourier transform of x(t) and df=1/T is the frequency resolution in the Fourier space. However, the results I am getting are not equal to what I am getting using the scipy Welch method, see code below.
This first block of code is taken from the scipy.welch documentary:
from scipy import signal
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
fs = 10e3
N = 1e5
amp = 2*np.sqrt(2)
freq = 1234.0
noise_power = 0.001 * fs / 2
time = np.arange(N) / fs
x = amp*np.sin(2*np.pi*freq*time)
x += np.random.normal(scale=np.sqrt(noise_power), size=time.shape)
f, Pxx_den = signal.welch(x, fs, nperseg=1024)
plt.semilogy(f, Pxx_den)
plt.ylim(\[0.5e-3, 1\])
plt.xlabel('frequency \[Hz\]')
plt.ylabel('PSD \[V**2/Hz\]')
plt.show()
First thing I noticed is that the plotted psd changes with the variable fs which seems strange to me. (Maybe I need to adjust the nperseg argument then accordingly? Why is nperseg not set to fs automatically then?)
My code would be the following: (Note that I defined my own fft_full function which already takes care of the correct fourier transform normalization, which I verified by checking Parsevals theorem).
import scipy.fftpack as fftpack
def fft_full(xt,yt):
dt = xt[1] - xt[0]
x_fft=fftpack.fftfreq(xt.size,dt)
y_fft=fftpack.fft(yt)*dt
return (x_fft,y_fft)
xf,yf=fft_full(time,x)
df=xf[1] - xf[0]
psd=np.abs(yf)**2 *df
plt.figure()
plt.semilogy(xf, psd)
#plt.ylim([0.5e-3, 1])
plt.xlim(0,)
plt.xlabel('frequency [Hz]')
plt.ylabel('PSD [V**2/Hz]')
plt.show()
Unfortunately, I am not yet allowed to post images but the two plots do not look the same!
I would greatly appreciate if someone could explain to me where I went wrong and settle this once and for all :)
[1]: Eq. 2.82. Random Vibrations in Spacecraft Structures Design
Theory and Applications, Authors: Wijker, J. Jaap, 2009
The scipy library uses the Welch's method to estimate a PSD. This method is more complex than just taking the squared modulus of the discrete Fourier transform. In short terms, it proceeds as follows:
Let x be the input discrete signal that contains N samples.
Split x into M overlapping segments, such that each segment sm contains nperseg samples and that each two consecutive segments overlap in noverlap samples, so that nperseg = K * (nperseg - noverlap), where K is an integer (usually K = 2). Note also that:
N = nperseg + (M - 1) * (nperseg - noverlap) = (M + K - 1) * nperseg / K
From each segment sm, subtract its mean (this removes the DC component):
tm = sm - sum(sm) / nperseg
Multiply the elements of the obtained zero-mean segments tm by the elements of a suitable (nonsymmetric) window function, h (such as the Hann window):
um = tm * h
Calculate the Fast Fourier Transform of all vectors um. Before performing these transformations, we usually first append so many zeros to each vector um that its new dimension becomes a power of 2 (the nfft argument of the function welch is used for this purpose). Let us suppose that len(um) = 2p. In most cases, our input vectors are real-valued, so it is best to apply FFT for real data. Its results are then complex-valued vectors vm = rfft(um), such that len(vm) = 2p - 1 + 1.
Calculate the squared modulus of all transformed vectors:
am = abs(vm) ** 2,
or more efficiently:
am = vm.real ** 2 + vm.imag ** 2
Normalize the vectors am as follows:
bm = am / sum(h * h)
bm[1:-1] *= 2 (this takes into account the negative frequencies),
where h is a real vector of the dimension nperseg that contains the window coefficients. In case of the Hann window, we can prove that
sum(h * h) = 3 / 8 * len(h) = 3 / 8 * nperseg
Estimate the PSD as the mean of all vectors bm:
psd = sum(bm) / M
The result is a vector of the dimension len(psd) = 2p - 1 + 1. If we wish that the sum of all psd coefficients matches the mean squared amplitude of the windowed input data (rather than the sum of squared amplitudes), then the vector psd must also be divided by nperseg. However, the scipy routine omits this step. In any case, we usually present psd on the decibel scale, so that the final result is:
psd_dB = 10 * log10(psd).
For a more detailed description, please read the original Welch's paper. See also Wikipedia's page and chapter 13.4 of Numerical Recipes in C

Python Implementation of Bartlett Periodogram

I am trying to implement Periodogram in Python based on the description from Bartlett's method, and compared the result with those from Scipy, by setting overlap=0, use window='boxcar' (rectangle window). However, my result is off by some scale factor. Can someone points out what was wrong with my code? Thanks
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from scipy import signal
def my_bartlett_periodogram(x, fs, nperseg, nfft):
nsegments = len(x) // nperseg
psd = np.zeros(nfft)
for segment in x.reshape(nsegments, nperseg):
psd += np.abs(np.fft.fft(segment))**2 / nfft
psd[0] = 0 # important!!
psd /= nsegments
psd = psd[0 : nfft//2]
freq = np.linspace(0, fs/2, nfft//2)
return freq, psd
def plot_output(t, x, f1, psd1, f2, psd2):
fig, axs = plt.subplots(3,1, figsize=(12,15))
axs[0].plot(t[:300], x[:300])
axs[1].plot(freq1, psd1)
axs[2].plot(freq2, psd2)
axs[0].set_title('Input (len=8192, fs=512)')
axs[1].set_title('Bartlett Periodogram (nfft=512, zero-overlap, no-window)')
axs[2].set_title('Scipy Periodogram (nfft=512, zero-overlap, no-window)')
axs[0].set_xticks([])
axs[2].set_xlabel('Freq (Hz)')
plt.show()
# Run
fs = nfft = nperseg = 512
t = np.arange(8192) / fs
x = np.sin(2*np.pi*50*t) + np.sin(2*np.pi*100*t) + np.sin(2*np.pi*150*t)
freq1, psd1 = my_bartlett_periodogram(x, fs, nperseg, nfft)
freq2, psd2 = signal.welch(x, fs, nperseg=nperseg, nfft=nfft, window='boxcar', noverlap=0)
plot_output(t, x, freq1, psd1, freq2, psd2)
TL;DR:
Nothing wrong with the code. But welch returns the power spectral density, which is the power spectrum times fs and it compensates for cutting away half the spectrum by multiplying with 2.
To compensate, psd2 * fs / 2 should be very similar to psd.
According to Wikipedia the calculation of psd seems correct:
The original N point data segment is split up into K (non-overlapping) data segments, each of length M
For each segment, compute the periodogram by computing the discrete Fourier transform (DFT version which does not divide by M), then computing the squared magnitude of the result and dividing this by M.
Average the result of the periodograms above for the K data segments.
So whom shall we trust more, Wikipedia or scipy? I would tend towards the latter, but we can find out for ourselves. According to Parseval's theorem the integral over the squared signal should be the same as the integral over the sqared FFT magnitude. Since the Periodogram is obtained from the squared FFT the theorem should hold approximately.
print(np.mean(y**2)) # 1.499727698431174
print(np.mean(psd)) # (1.4999999999999991+0j)
print(np.mean(psd2)) # 0.0058365758754863788
That's close enough for psd, so let's assume it's correct. But I refuse to believe that scipy should be so blatantly wrong! Let's take a closer look at the documentation and see what they have to say about the scaling argument (emphasis mine):
Selects between computing the power spectral density (‘density’) where Pxx has units of V**2/Hz and computing the power spectrum (‘spectrum’) where Pxx has units of V**2, if x is measured in V and fs is measured in Hz. Defaults to ‘density’
Uh-huh! welch's result is the power spectral density, which means it has units of Power per Hz. However, we compared it against the signal power. If we multiply psd2 with the sampling rate to get rid of the 1/Hz units it's the same as psd. Well, except for a factor 2. This factor is meant to compensate for cutting away half the spectrum. If we set return_onesided=False to get the full spectrum that factor is gone.

FFT lots of detail around certain frequency

I have an arbitrary signal and I need to know the frequency spectrum of the signal, which I obtain by doing an FFT. The issue is, I need lots of resolution only around this one particular frequency. The issue is, if I increase my window width, or if I up the sample rate, it goes too slow and I end up with a lot of detail everywhere. I only want a lot of detail in one point, and minimal detail everywhere else.
I tried using a Goertzel filter around just the area I need, and then FFT everywhere else, but that didn't get me any more resolution, which I suppose was to be expected.
Any ideas? My only idea at the moment is to sweep and innerproduct around the value I want.
Thanks.
Increasing the sample rate will not give you a higher spectral resolution, it will only give you more high-frequency information, which you are not interested in. The only way to increase spectral resolution is to increase the window length. There is a way to increase the length of your window artificially by zero-padding, but this only gives you 'fake resolution', it will just yield a smooth curve between the normal points. So the only way is to measure data over a longer period, there is no free lunch.
For the problem you described, the standard way to reduce computation time of the FFT is to use demodulation (or heterodyning, not sure what the official name is). Multiply your data with a sine with a frequency close to your frequency of interest (could be the exact frequency, but that is not necessary), and then decimate your date (low-pass filtering with corner frequency just below the Nyquist frequency of your down-sampled sample rate, followed by down-sampling). In this way, you have much less points, so your FFT will be faster. The resulting spectrum will be similar to your original spectrum, but simply shifted by the demodulation frequency. So when making a plot, simply add f_demod to your x-axis.
One thing to be careful about is that if you multiply with a real sine, your down-sampled spectrum will actually be the sum of two mirrored spectra, since a real sine consists of positive and negative frequencies. There are two solutions to this
demodulate by both a sine and a cosine of the same frequency, so that you obtain 2 spectra, after which taking the sum or difference will get you your spectrum.
demodulate by multiplying with a complex sine of the form exp(2*pi*i*f_demod*t). The input for your FFT will now be complex, so you will have to calculate a two-sided spectrum. But this is exactly what you want, you will get both the frequencies below and above f_demod.
I prefer the second solution. Quick example:
from __future__ import division
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from matplotlib.mlab import psd
from scipy.signal import decimate
f_line = 123.456
f_demod = 122
f_sample = 1000
t_total = 100
t_win = 10
ratio = 10
t = np.arange(0, t_total, 1 / f_sample)
x = np.sin(2*np.pi*f_line * t) + np.random.randn(len(t)) # sine plus white noise
lo = 2**.5 * np.exp(-2j*np.pi*f_demod * t) # local oscillator
y = decimate(x * lo, ratio) # demodulate and decimate to 100 Hz
z = decimate(y, ratio) # decimate further to 10 Hz
nfft = int(round(f_sample * t_win))
X, fx = psd(x, NFFT = nfft, noverlap = nfft/2, Fs = f_sample)
nfft = int(round(f_sample * t_win / ratio))
Y, fy = psd(y, NFFT = nfft, noverlap = nfft/2, Fs = f_sample / ratio)
nfft = int(round(f_sample * t_win / ratio**2))
Z, fz = psd(z, NFFT = nfft, noverlap = nfft/2, Fs = f_sample / ratio**2)
plt.semilogy(fx, X, fy + f_demod, Y, fz + f_demod, Z)
plt.xlabel('Frequency (Hz)')
plt.ylabel('PSD (V^2/Hz)')
plt.legend(('Full bandwidth FFT', '100 Hz FFT', '10 Hz FFT'))
plt.show()
Result:
If you zoom in, you will note that the results are virtually identical within the pass-band of the decimation filter. One thing to be careful of is that the low-pass filters used in decimate will become numerically instable if you use decimation ratios much larger than 10. The solution to this is to decimate in several passes for large ratios, i.e. to decimate by a factor of 1000, you decimate 3 times by a factor 10.

Categories

Resources