Special 64-track, fanout=2 mode for Fortaleza data #380
+232
−17
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
With the following format - channels = 16 - bps = 2 - fanout = 2
This follows mark5access, but is not consistent with the magnitude bits for channels 0,1 and 8,9. Also add more information about these properties to the data descriptions.
mhvk
force-pushed
the
mark4-64track-fanout2
branch
from
4add73c to
6cbf9bf
Compare
|
@shaoguangleo - just to let you know that your Ft settings are now part of v3.2 of baseband, and thus you are now listed as one of the contributors to baseband. Thanks! |
|
@mhvk - Thanks for your kindly addition. I hope this can be useful for those who want to tinker with the data of Ft station. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This continues on #332, by adding support for reading those data. Really, it should be generalized, but leaving that for a separate issue (see #381); this now is a good test case to ensure we continue to support reading it.
For more details, see #332.