schemas

jfriedt
1 parent 77328a1b2a
Showing 3 changed files with 154 additions and 48 deletions Side-by-side Diff
ifcs2018_poster.tex
schema.fig
schema2.fig
@@ -40,78 +40,93 @@
 \\}}
 \end{center}
  
-\vspace{-0.7cm}
+\vspace{-0.35cm}
 % Authors
 \begin{center}
 \addalignedblock{0.18\textwidth}{flushleft}{%
 \includegraphics[height=1.6cm]{images/logo_ubfc}
 }
 \addalignedblock{0.28\textwidth}{center}{%
-G. \textsc{Goavec-M\'erou},\\
-P.-Y. \textsc{Bourgeois}, J.-M \textsc{Friedt}\\
-$^{*}$FEMTO-ST, Time \& Frequency dept., Besan\c con, France
-}
-\addalignedblock{0.28\textwidth}{center}{%
 A. \textsc{Hugeat}$^{*}$, J. \textsc{Bernard}\\
 ~\\
 FEMTO-ST, DISC dept., Besan\c con, France
 }
+\addalignedblock{0.28\textwidth}{center}{%
+G. \textsc{Goavec-Merou},\\
+P.-Y. \textsc{Bourgeois}, J.-M \textsc{Friedt}\\
+$^{*}$FEMTO-ST, Time \& Frequency dept., Besan\c con, France
+}
 \addalignedblock{0.18\textwidth}{flushright}{%
 \includegraphics[height=1.4cm]{images/logo_femto}
 }
 \end{center}
  
 % First part
-\vspace{-.71cm}
+\vspace{-.61cm}
 \newsection{Digital signal processing of ultrastable clock signals}
  
 \vspace{-.21cm}
+%\begin{minipage}[t]{\linewidth}
+%\begin{minipage}{.7\linewidth}
 \begin{itemize}[leftmargin=*]
 \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
 \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
 \item
 {\bf Digital phase noise characterization}: flexibility (software defined local 
-oscillator), stability (no long term drift), reconfigurabilty
-$\Rightarrow$ {\bf software defined radio} oscillator phase noise 
-characterization
+oscillator),\\ stability (no long term drift), reconfigurabilty
+$\Rightarrow$ {\bf software defined radio} oscillator \\
+phase noise characterization
 \item analog to digital conversion of radiofrequency signal, software
-defined local oscillator, mixer and {\bf low pass filter}
+defined local oscillator, 
+mixer and {\bf low pass filter}
 \item low pass filter uses most resources and introduces latency (phase delay
 in feedback loop): needs to be optimized
 \end{itemize}
+%\end{minipage}
+%\begin{minipage}{.28\linewidth}
  
-\vspace{-.21cm}
+\vspace{-3cm}\hfill\includegraphics[width=.28\linewidth]{schema}
+%\end{minipage}
+%\end{minipage}
+
+\vspace{1.21cm}
 \hrule{\hfill}
 % Second part
-\vspace{-.71cm}
+\vspace{-.61cm}
 \newsection{Filter design and implementation strategy:}
 %\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=*]
 %\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
 %\setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
-\vspace{-.41cm}
-  \addblock{0.48\textwidth}{
-  \begin{enumerate}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
-    \item \textbf{Classical way:}\\
+\vspace{-.40cm}
+  \addblock{0.44\textwidth}{
+%  \begin{enumerate}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
+%    \item 
+\textbf{Classical way:}\\
     Compute the transfer function of a monolithic filter
     \begin{itemize}[label=$\Rightarrow$, noitemsep, nolistsep]
       {\color{Green}\item Simplest way to design filter}
       {\color{Green}\item Great rejection}
       {\color{Red}\item Consume lot of resources on FPGA}
     \end{itemize}
-  \end{enumerate}
+%  \end{enumerate}
   }
-  \addblock{0.48\textwidth}{
-  \begin{enumerate}
-    \setcounter{enumi}{1}
-    \item \textbf{Alternative way (our focus):}\\
+  \addblock{0.40\textwidth}{
+%  \begin{enumerate}
+%    \setcounter{enumi}{1}
+%    \item 
+\textbf{Alternative way (our focus):}\\
     Chain of small filters
     \begin{itemize}[label=$\Rightarrow$, noitemsep, nolistsep]
       {\color{Green}\item Great rejection}
       {\color{Green}\item Consume less resources on FPGA}
       {\color{Red}\item Harder way to design filter}
     \end{itemize}
-  \end{enumerate}
+%  \end{enumerate}
   }
+
+\vspace{-2.6cm}\hfill\includegraphics[width=.2\linewidth]{schema2}
+\vspace{-0.3cm}
+
   The 2\textsuperscript{nd} way could be considered as an optimization problem:
     \begin{itemize}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
       \item One or many {\bf performance criteria} (rejection, noise, 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
@@ -122,61 +137,68 @@
   3 degrees of freedom:
  
 \vspace{.1cm}
-\hfill
-\parbox{.60\linewidth}{
-  \begin{enumerate}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
-    \item The size of chain filters
-    \item The number of coefficients for each filter $i$: $N_i$
-    \item The number of bits for each coefficients and for each filter $i$: $c_i$
-  \end{enumerate}
-}
+%\parbox{.60\linewidth}{
+%  \begin{enumerate}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
+%    \item 
+\noindent
+size of chain filters,
+%    \item 
+number of coefficients for each filter $i$: $N_i$,
+%   \item
+number of bits for each coefficients and for each filter $i$: $c_i$
+%  \end{enumerate}
+%}
 %\end{itemize}
-\vspace{-1.0cm}
+\vspace{-0.5cm}
 \newsection{Filter selection}
 \vspace{-0.3cm}
 \begin{itemize}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
   \item For select the filter design we need to evaluate the rejection like:
-  \begin{enumerate}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
-    \item The mean value of rejection
-    \item The median value of rejection
-    \item A custom criterion (we penalize the rejection in base band and we keep only the maximum rejection on the filter tail)
-  \end{enumerate}
+
+%  \begin{enumerate}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
+%    \item The mean value of rejection
+%    \item The median value of rejection
+%    \item A custom criterion (we penalize the rejection in base band and we keep only the maximum rejection on the filter tail)
+%  \end{enumerate}
   \begin{minipage}[t]{0.30\textwidth}
     \includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{images/noise-rejection-mean}
-    \captionof{figure}{Mean criterion}
+    %\captionof{figure}
+{Criterion=mean value of rejection}
   \end{minipage}
   \begin{minipage}[t]{0.30\textwidth}
     \includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{images/noise-rejection-median}
-    \captionof{figure}{Median criterion}
+%    \captionof{figure}{
+{Criterion=median value of rejection}
   \end{minipage}
   \begin{minipage}[t]{0.30\textwidth}
     \includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{images/noise-rejection-custom}
-    \captionof{figure}{Custom criterion}
+%    \captionof{figure}
+{Criterion=max value of rejection}
   \end{minipage}
+\vspace{0.4cm}
   \item All rejection criteria produce the same kind of result: the best filters seem to be in the edge of pyramid
   \item For each criteria, we associate the rejection to the related filter and we let GLPK choose the best configuration\\
   \begin{minipage}[t]{0.30\textwidth}
     \includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{images/fir-mono-vs-fir-series-noise-fixe-mean.pdf}
-    \captionof{figure}{Mean criterion}
+%    \captionof{figure}{
+{Criterion=mean value of rejection}
   \end{minipage}
   \begin{minipage}[t]{0.30\textwidth}
     \includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{images/fir-mono-vs-fir-series-noise-fixe-median.pdf}
-    \captionof{figure}{Median criterion}
+%    \captionof{figure}
+{Criterion=median value of rejection}
   \end{minipage}
   \begin{minipage}[t]{0.30\textwidth}
     \includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{images/fir-mono-vs-fir-series-noise-fixe-jmf.pdf}
-    \captionof{figure}{Custom criterion}
+%    \captionof{figure}
+{Criterion=max value of rejection}
   \end{minipage}
-<<<<<<< HEAD
+\vspace{0.4cm}
   \item {\bf Rejection}: the last configuration is better than the first but worse 
 than the monolithic filter
   \item Resources {\bf consumption}: last filter is better than the single monolithic filter
 (monolithic does not fit in available resources)
 \vspace{-.33cm}
-=======
-  \item For the rejection: the last configuration is better than the first one but it's worst than monolithic filter
-  \item For the resources consumption: the last one is better than the single filter
->>>>>>> de0f544773b03c4215f07cea693fc7eb145ff20a
   \begin{center}
     \begin{tabular}{|c|ccccc|}\hline
     FIR & BlockRAM36 & BlockRAM18 & LookUpTables & DSP & rejection (dB)\\\hline\hline
+#FIG 3.2  Produced by xfig version 3.2.6a
+Landscape
+Center
+Metric
+A4
+100.00
+Single
+-2
+1200 2
+1 3 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 1 0.0000 4860 4140 270 270 4860 4140 5130 4140
+1 3 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 1 0.0000 6210 4140 180 180 6210 4140 6390 4140
+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 3
+	 5130 4140 5310 4140 5490 3915
+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 5
+	 5310 4140 5490 4365 5850 4365 5850 3915 5490 3915
+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
+	 5850 4140 6030 4140
+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
+	 6075 4005 6345 4275
+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
+	 6345 4005 6120 4275
+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
+	 6210 4320 6210 4455
+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
+	 6390 4095 6525 4095
+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
+	 6390 4185 6525 4185
+2 2 0 1 4 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 5
+	 6525 3960 6930 3960 6930 4320 6525 4320 6525 3960
+2 1 0 1 4 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 3
+	 6570 4050 6795 4050 6885 4230
+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
+	 6930 4095 6975 4095
+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
+	 6930 4185 6975 4185
+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 1 0 2
+	0 0 1.00 60.00 120.00
+	 7065 4005 7065 4275
+2 2 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 5
+	 6975 3960 7155 3960 7155 4320 6975 4320 6975 3960
+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
+	 7155 4185 7200 4185
+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
+	 7155 4095 7200 4095
+3 0 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 0 4
+	 4680 4140 4770 3960 4950 4320 5040 4140
+	 0.000 1.000 1.000 0.000
+4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 4 135 390 4680 4590 DUT\001
+4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 4 135 405 5400 4185 ADC\001
+4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 4 135 405 5985 4635 NCO\001
+4 0 0 50 -1 0 8 0.0000 4 120 105 6390 4320 Q\001
+4 0 0 50 -1 0 8 0.0000 4 90 45 6390 4050 I\001
+4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 1.5708 4 120 345 7335 4320 atan\001
+#FIG 3.2  Produced by xfig version 3.2.6a
+Landscape
+Center
+Metric
+A4
+100.00
+Single
+-2
+1200 2
+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 1 0 2
+	0 0 1.00 60.00 120.00
+	 4680 4680 4680 3510
+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 1 0 2
+	0 0 1.00 60.00 120.00
+	 4680 4680 6210 4680
+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 3
+	 4680 3780 5310 3780 6030 4680
+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 3.000 0 0 -1 1 1 2
+	0 0 1.00 60.00 120.00
+	0 0 1.00 60.00 120.00
+	 4680 4050 5310 4050
+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 3.000 0 0 -1 1 1 2
+	0 0 1.00 60.00 120.00
+	0 0 1.00 60.00 120.00
+	 5580 4050 6210 4050
+4 0 0 50 -1 1 12 0.0000 4 135 120 4725 3645 P\001
+4 0 0 50 -1 1 12 0.0000 4 180 60 6120 4590 f\001
+4 0 0 50 -1 1 8 0.0000 4 90 540 4770 4230 BP=40%\001
+4 0 0 50 -1 1 8 0.0000 4 90 570 5670 3960 BW=40%\001
+4 0 0 50 -1 1 8 0.0000 4 120 525 5670 3825 rejection\001
+4 0 0 50 -1 1 6 1.5708 4 75 1020 5535 4590 transition width=20%\001
...	...	@@ -40,78 +40,93 @@
40	40	\\}}
41	41	\end{center}
42	42
43		-\vspace{-0.7cm}
	43	+\vspace{-0.35cm}
44	44	% Authors
45	45	\begin{center}
46	46	\addalignedblock{0.18\textwidth}{flushleft}{%
47	47	\includegraphics[height=1.6cm]{images/logo_ubfc}
48	48	}
49	49	\addalignedblock{0.28\textwidth}{center}{%
50		-G. \textsc{Goavec-M\'erou},\\
51		-P.-Y. \textsc{Bourgeois}, J.-M \textsc{Friedt}\\
52		-$^{*}$FEMTO-ST, Time \& Frequency dept., Besan\c con, France
53		-}
54		-\addalignedblock{0.28\textwidth}{center}{%
55	50	A. \textsc{Hugeat}$^{*}$, J. \textsc{Bernard}\\
56	51	~\\
57	52	FEMTO-ST, DISC dept., Besan\c con, France
58	53	}
	54	+\addalignedblock{0.28\textwidth}{center}{%
	55	+G. \textsc{Goavec-Merou},\\
	56	+P.-Y. \textsc{Bourgeois}, J.-M \textsc{Friedt}\\
	57	+$^{*}$FEMTO-ST, Time \& Frequency dept., Besan\c con, France
	58	+}
59	59	\addalignedblock{0.18\textwidth}{flushright}{%
60	60	\includegraphics[height=1.4cm]{images/logo_femto}
61	61	}
62	62	\end{center}
63	63
64	64	% First part
65		-\vspace{-.71cm}
	65	+\vspace{-.61cm}
66	66	\newsection{Digital signal processing of ultrastable clock signals}
67	67
68	68	\vspace{-.21cm}
	69	+%\begin{minipage}[t]{\linewidth}
	70	+%\begin{minipage}{.7\linewidth}
69	71	\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=*]
70	72	\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
71	73	\setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
72	74	\item
73	75	{\bf Digital phase noise characterization}: flexibility (software defined local
74		-oscillator), stability (no long term drift), reconfigurabilty
75		-$\Rightarrow$ {\bf software defined radio} oscillator phase noise
76		-characterization
	76	+oscillator),\\ stability (no long term drift), reconfigurabilty
	77	+$\Rightarrow$ {\bf software defined radio} oscillator \\
	78	+phase noise characterization
77	79	\item analog to digital conversion of radiofrequency signal, software
78		-defined local oscillator, mixer and {\bf low pass filter}
	80	+defined local oscillator,
	81	+mixer and {\bf low pass filter}
79	82	\item low pass filter uses most resources and introduces latency (phase delay
80	83	in feedback loop): needs to be optimized
81	84	\end{itemize}
	85	+%\end{minipage}
	86	+%\begin{minipage}{.28\linewidth}
82	87
83		-\vspace{-.21cm}
	88	+\vspace{-3cm}\hfill\includegraphics[width=.28\linewidth]{schema}
	89	+%\end{minipage}
	90	+%\end{minipage}
	91	+
	92	+\vspace{1.21cm}
84	93	\hrule{\hfill}
85	94	% Second part
86		-\vspace{-.71cm}
	95	+\vspace{-.61cm}
87	96	\newsection{Filter design and implementation strategy:}
88	97	%\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=*]
89	98	%\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
90	99	%\setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
91		-\vspace{-.41cm}
92		- \addblock{0.48\textwidth}{
93		- \begin{enumerate}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
94		- \item \textbf{Classical way:}\\
	100	+\vspace{-.40cm}
	101	+ \addblock{0.44\textwidth}{
	102	+% \begin{enumerate}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
	103	+% \item
	104	+\textbf{Classical way:}\\
95	105	Compute the transfer function of a monolithic filter
96	106	\begin{itemize}[label=$\Rightarrow$, noitemsep, nolistsep]
97	107	{\color{Green}\item Simplest way to design filter}
98	108	{\color{Green}\item Great rejection}
99	109	{\color{Red}\item Consume lot of resources on FPGA}
100	110	\end{itemize}
101		- \end{enumerate}
	111	+% \end{enumerate}
102	112	}
103		- \addblock{0.48\textwidth}{
104		- \begin{enumerate}
105		- \setcounter{enumi}{1}
106		- \item \textbf{Alternative way (our focus):}\\
	113	+ \addblock{0.40\textwidth}{
	114	+% \begin{enumerate}
	115	+% \setcounter{enumi}{1}
	116	+% \item
	117	+\textbf{Alternative way (our focus):}\\
107	118	Chain of small filters
108	119	\begin{itemize}[label=$\Rightarrow$, noitemsep, nolistsep]
109	120	{\color{Green}\item Great rejection}
110	121	{\color{Green}\item Consume less resources on FPGA}
111	122	{\color{Red}\item Harder way to design filter}
112	123	\end{itemize}
113		- \end{enumerate}
	124	+% \end{enumerate}
114	125	}
	126	+
	127	+\vspace{-2.6cm}\hfill\includegraphics[width=.2\linewidth]{schema2}
	128	+\vspace{-0.3cm}
	129	+
115	130	The 2\textsuperscript{nd} way could be considered as an optimization problem:
116	131	\begin{itemize}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
117	132	\item One or many {\bf performance criteria} (rejection, noise,
118	133
119	134
120	135
121	136
122	137
123	138
124	139
125	140
126	141
127	142
128	143
...	...	@@ -122,61 +137,68 @@
122	137	3 degrees of freedom:
123	138
124	139	\vspace{.1cm}
125		-\hfill
126		-\parbox{.60\linewidth}{
127		- \begin{enumerate}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
128		- \item The size of chain filters
129		- \item The number of coefficients for each filter $i$: $N_i$
130		- \item The number of bits for each coefficients and for each filter $i$: $c_i$
131		- \end{enumerate}
132		-}
	140	+%\parbox{.60\linewidth}{
	141	+% \begin{enumerate}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
	142	+% \item
	143	+\noindent
	144	+size of chain filters,
	145	+% \item
	146	+number of coefficients for each filter $i$: $N_i$,
	147	+% \item
	148	+number of bits for each coefficients and for each filter $i$: $c_i$
	149	+% \end{enumerate}
	150	+%}
133	151	%\end{itemize}
134		-\vspace{-1.0cm}
	152	+\vspace{-0.5cm}
135	153	\newsection{Filter selection}
136	154	\vspace{-0.3cm}
137	155	\begin{itemize}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
138	156	\item For select the filter design we need to evaluate the rejection like:
139		- \begin{enumerate}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
140		- \item The mean value of rejection
141		- \item The median value of rejection
142		- \item A custom criterion (we penalize the rejection in base band and we keep only the maximum rejection on the filter tail)
143		- \end{enumerate}
	157	+
	158	+% \begin{enumerate}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
	159	+% \item The mean value of rejection
	160	+% \item The median value of rejection
	161	+% \item A custom criterion (we penalize the rejection in base band and we keep only the maximum rejection on the filter tail)
	162	+% \end{enumerate}
144	163	\begin{minipage}[t]{0.30\textwidth}
145	164	\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{images/noise-rejection-mean}
146		- \captionof{figure}{Mean criterion}
	165	+ %\captionof{figure}
	166	+{Criterion=mean value of rejection}
147	167	\end{minipage}
148	168	\begin{minipage}[t]{0.30\textwidth}
149	169	\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{images/noise-rejection-median}
150		- \captionof{figure}{Median criterion}
	170	+% \captionof{figure}{
	171	+{Criterion=median value of rejection}
151	172	\end{minipage}
152	173	\begin{minipage}[t]{0.30\textwidth}
153	174	\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{images/noise-rejection-custom}
154		- \captionof{figure}{Custom criterion}
	175	+% \captionof{figure}
	176	+{Criterion=max value of rejection}
155	177	\end{minipage}
	178	+\vspace{0.4cm}
156	179	\item All rejection criteria produce the same kind of result: the best filters seem to be in the edge of pyramid
157	180	\item For each criteria, we associate the rejection to the related filter and we let GLPK choose the best configuration\\
158	181	\begin{minipage}[t]{0.30\textwidth}
159	182	\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{images/fir-mono-vs-fir-series-noise-fixe-mean.pdf}
160		- \captionof{figure}{Mean criterion}
	183	+% \captionof{figure}{
	184	+{Criterion=mean value of rejection}
161	185	\end{minipage}
162	186	\begin{minipage}[t]{0.30\textwidth}
163	187	\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{images/fir-mono-vs-fir-series-noise-fixe-median.pdf}
164		- \captionof{figure}{Median criterion}
	188	+% \captionof{figure}
	189	+{Criterion=median value of rejection}
165	190	\end{minipage}
166	191	\begin{minipage}[t]{0.30\textwidth}
167	192	\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{images/fir-mono-vs-fir-series-noise-fixe-jmf.pdf}
168		- \captionof{figure}{Custom criterion}
	193	+% \captionof{figure}
	194	+{Criterion=max value of rejection}
169	195	\end{minipage}
170		-<<<<<<< HEAD
	196	+\vspace{0.4cm}
171	197	\item {\bf Rejection}: the last configuration is better than the first but worse
172	198	than the monolithic filter
173	199	\item Resources {\bf consumption}: last filter is better than the single monolithic filter
174	200	(monolithic does not fit in available resources)
175	201	\vspace{-.33cm}
176		-=======
177		- \item For the rejection: the last configuration is better than the first one but it's worst than monolithic filter
178		- \item For the resources consumption: the last one is better than the single filter
179		->>>>>>> de0f544773b03c4215f07cea693fc7eb145ff20a
180	202	\begin{center}
181	203	\begin{tabular}{\|c\|ccccc\|}\hline
182	204	FIR & BlockRAM36 & BlockRAM18 & LookUpTables & DSP & rejection (dB)\\\hline\hline
	1	+#FIG 3.2 Produced by xfig version 3.2.6a
	2	+Landscape
	3	+Center
	4	+Metric
	5	+A4
	6	+100.00
	7	+Single
	8	+-2
	9	+1200 2
	10	+1 3 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 1 0.0000 4860 4140 270 270 4860 4140 5130 4140
	11	+1 3 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 1 0.0000 6210 4140 180 180 6210 4140 6390 4140
	12	+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 3
	13	+ 5130 4140 5310 4140 5490 3915
	14	+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 5
	15	+ 5310 4140 5490 4365 5850 4365 5850 3915 5490 3915
	16	+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
	17	+ 5850 4140 6030 4140
	18	+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
	19	+ 6075 4005 6345 4275
	20	+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
	21	+ 6345 4005 6120 4275
	22	+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
	23	+ 6210 4320 6210 4455
	24	+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
	25	+ 6390 4095 6525 4095
	26	+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
	27	+ 6390 4185 6525 4185
	28	+2 2 0 1 4 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 5
	29	+ 6525 3960 6930 3960 6930 4320 6525 4320 6525 3960
	30	+2 1 0 1 4 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 3
	31	+ 6570 4050 6795 4050 6885 4230
	32	+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
	33	+ 6930 4095 6975 4095
	34	+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
	35	+ 6930 4185 6975 4185
	36	+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 1 0 2
	37	+ 0 0 1.00 60.00 120.00
	38	+ 7065 4005 7065 4275
	39	+2 2 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 5
	40	+ 6975 3960 7155 3960 7155 4320 6975 4320 6975 3960
	41	+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
	42	+ 7155 4185 7200 4185
	43	+2 1 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 -1 0 0 2
	44	+ 7155 4095 7200 4095
	45	+3 0 0 1 0 7 50 -1 -1 0.000 0 0 0 4
	46	+ 4680 4140 4770 3960 4950 4320 5040 4140
	47	+ 0.000 1.000 1.000 0.000
	48	+4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 4 135 390 4680 4590 DUT\001
	49	+4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 4 135 405 5400 4185 ADC\001
	50	+4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 0.0000 4 135 405 5985 4635 NCO\001
	51	+4 0 0 50 -1 0 8 0.0000 4 120 105 6390 4320 Q\001
	52	+4 0 0 50 -1 0 8 0.0000 4 90 45 6390 4050 I\001
	53	+4 0 0 50 -1 0 12 1.5708 4 120 345 7335 4320 atan\001