In my inexperienced opinion, as long as you don't crank the frequency
up too much, you should be OK. the reflections should settle in a few
microseconds, so if you stay under a few hundred kHz you should be ok.
Cheers,
- Marcel

On 10/14/07, Brendan Moran <annirack@shaw.ca> wrote:
>  >Why FM ?  there are other technologies that are more easily applied.
>  >What distance do you want to transmit ?  What data rate ?  Do you
>  >want to transmit in both directions ?  Any chance of interfering
>  >units being nearby ?
>
> Ah, the other questions.  I'm transmitting over and an area of about
> 3x3m.  I actually would like to not use antennas, but rather use the
> rails of the model railroad setup this will be on.  I want to control
> various aspects of the setup, and I don't like DCC or any of the other
> variants.  Consequently, I want to use a better signaling technology.
>
> I realised why I was having so much trouble finding the modulators that
> I was looking for.  I was searching for FM, but the technology I wanted
> is actually FSK.  I think my confusion is understandable since FSK is
> the binary version of FM.
>
> So I'm looking at implementing GFSK using the CC1101 multiprotocol
> transceiver from TI, since it has differential antenna connections.
>
> Could I simply use a bandpass filter for each antenna connection, and
> run my signal straight into my rails?  Or are signal reflections going
> to kill a non-impedance matched setup like I have?
>
> Thanks,
> Brendan
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist