This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

IWRL6432AOP: Vital signs lab's phase unwrapping function

Part Number: IWRL6432AOP


Tool/software:

Hello,

I have a question related to the implementation of the phase unwrapping algorithm in the vital signs' lab. I have replicated that process on Python, compared its performance with the numpy function unwrap(), and I have obtained very different results. In the first row of the image below, you can see the input for the algorithm (they correspond to the phase value on a certain chirp sample of 256 frames). Then, on the second row is  the result of applying the numpy.unwrap() function (default, without extra arguments) and the third is the result after the application of the lab's phase unwrapping algorithm.



The conclusion for me is that the numpy function is able to correct the phase evolution in a much smoother way than the one of the lab. I would like to ask if this makes sense to you and if this is what you were expecting to see.

Regards.

  • Hi

    Sorry for the delayed response. The graphs in the second row would indicate the way unwrapped phase would look. But I am unable to understand what the graph in row 3 correspond to. If you are plotting the same as computed in python, I suspect, there is something missing in the phase unwrapping depicted in row3

    Row2 plots look to be correct as phase unwrapped plot would look similar

    Regards