In telecommunication, a four-wire circuit is a two-way circuit using two paths so arranged that the respective signals are transmitted

in one direction only by one path and in the other direction by the other path. Late in the 20th century, almost all connections between telephone exchanges were four-wire circuits, while conventional phone lines into residences and businesses were two-wire circuits. The four-wire circuit gets its name from the fact that, historically, a balanced pair of conductors were used in each of two directions for full-duplex operation. The name may still be applied to, for example, optical fibers, even though only one fiber is required for transmission in each direction. When transmission directions are separated by frequency duplex, the benefits of a four-wire circuit are realized even while the same wire pair is used in both directions.

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/four-wire-circuit#ixzz1lDyJ3Gmo

Echo Control Techniques

There are four methods of controlling Talker Echo:
(A) (B) (C) (D) Careful balance of impedances. Insertion of loss into the 4-wire path. The installation of echo suppressors or cancellers. Minimizing Delay.

Of these methods, the first three ('A' through 'C' above) are also effective in controlling Listener Echo as well. A comparison of these methods is provided by the following table:

The following sub-sections discuss each of these methods in further detail.

Impedance Balancing
Each hybrid transformer is equipped with a balancing network that is designed to minimize impedance mismatches. The amount of reflected energy in the hybrid transformer is measured in terms of Return Loss. As noted in 'Notes On The Network' and CCITT G.100, Return loss can be expressed in dB by the following formula:
- Return Loss = 20 Log | Zn + Zl | | ------- | dB 10 | Zn - Zl |

Zn = impedance of the balancing network Zl = impedance looking into the 2-wire circuit.

Since Return Loss is also a function of frequency, Echo Return Loss (ERL) values are used, since ERL is a weighted average of the Return Losses over a band of frequencies from 500 to 2500 Hz. Since the 2-wire path usually varies from connection to connection, as different telephone 2-wire paths are used. It is because of this fact that the hybrid balancing networks are often referred to as "Compromise Balancing" networks.

Loss Insertion
The introduction of loss into the 4-wire circuit is also an effective method for echo control. Inserted loss appears once in the Primary Signal Path and twice in the Talker and Listener Echo Paths. As a general rule-of-thumb, as circuit delays increase, inserted loss should also increase. The relationship between delay, loss, and perceived voice quality is discussed further on in this document. Loss insertion within a voice network is sometimes referred to as a Loss Plan and should not be implemented without careful consideration. An ideal loss plan should provide a level of loss that is close to the optimal value for all voice circuit connections. Types of Loss Plans are discussed further on in other documents. IF THE LOSS IS NOT KNOWN, IT IS SUGGESTED THAT A FIXED AMOUNT BE INSERTED ON THE ANALOG TRUNK FACILITY.

Echo Suppression/Cancellation
Echo Suppressors and Cancellers can often be used to control Talker and Listener echo problems. Echo Suppressors Echo Suppressors operate such that when the suppressor detects Talker energy in the Primary Signal Path, it inserts a large amount of loss into the return path. Most echo suppressors are installed at the 'far-end' of the circuit; that is to say, that when the local talker is active, the echo suppression takes place at the far-end of the circuit. Echo Suppressors do a fairly good job but do have some serious limitations, particularly when both talkers are active at the same time (Double-Talk). During double-talk scenarious, only minimal attenuation is offered. This can result in unsatisfactory speech quality, particularly on circuits with very long delays. The switching between (to and from) the suppression and double-talk modes can also result in the 'clipping' of speech signals. Furthermore, in noisy environments, the suppression of the far-end signal may result in a dead set phenomenon, since the background noise from the far-end will be suppressed when the local talker is active. Echo suppressors will typically implement a disable function upon detection of a 2100 Hz tone followed by continual speech energy, or under manual control. The tone disable signal must be 2100 Hz +/- 21 Hz (2079 Hz to 2121 Hz) at a level of -12 +/- 6

dBM0, as specified in CCITT V.21. The suppressor should be disabled when the disable tone is detected at levels between 0 and -31 dBM0 for 300 +/- 100 mS. The echo suppressor disable should not release for dropouts less than 100 mS. CCITT Recommendation G.161 describes echo suppressor requirements. Note that this specification is not included in later CCITT books (G.161 is included in the 1977 Orange book). Additional requirements are detailed in CCITT G.164. Echo Cancellers Echo Cancellers are capable of performing a better job than echo suppressors in either analog or digital networks. Echo Canceller requirements are detailed in CCITT Recommendation G.165. Cancellers are always installed in the far-end of the circuit to cancel local echo. When the far-end canceller detects incoming speech from the local talker, a period known as 'convergence' starts. During convergence, the far-end canceller will 'take a picture' (Echo Model) of the incoming signal from the local talker, stores it, and then outputs the signal to the local circuit. The amount of storage (and indirectly; processing power) required depends upon the End-Path Delay (Echo Tail Length). CCITT G.165 does not specifically recommend any End-Path Delay requirements but, rather, leaves this value up to the manufacturer. If the amount of storage is too small, adequate synthesis cannot be achieved for all echo paths. If the amount of storage is too high, unused locations can result in excessive noise. Additionally, if the impulse response of the echo canceller's path model is largely different from the actual path response, the total returned echo can be higher than that resulting from the echo path itself! Then, the canceller looks for a similar signal coming back in from the reflected energy (echo). THE INCOMING RETURNED ENERGY MUST BE AT LEAST 6 dB LOWER THAN THE OUTPUT ENERGY PER CCITT G.165 (ERL + TLP). THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF TIME REQUIRED TO CONVERGE IS SPECIFIED WITHIN G.165 AS 500 mS (1/2 Second). DURING THIS TIME, THE LOCAL TALKER CAN HEAR ECHO. THE AMOUNT OF INFORMATION LOST OR GARBLED DURING THIS PROCESS IS DEPENDENT UPON THE LANGUAGE CHARACTERISTICS OF BOTH TALKERS. Once convergence has been achieved, the echo canceller begins to subtract the output signal from the incoming signal. This subtraction process will continue until the local talker (at the other end of the 4-wire circuit) ceases to speak. When the local talker resumes speaking, the echo canceller will again re-converge. Note that during doubletalk conditions the perceived quality of echo cancellation does not change significantly, although the echo canceller tends to 'diverge'. The echo cancellation process will typically result in what is referred to as 'residual echo'. This occurs as a result of small signal distortions between the output and input waveforms. These distortions occur as a result of the output Digital to Analog (D/A)

conversion as well as non-linear tail circuit properties that can be present on both the 4-wire and 2-wire loops. THE AMOUNT OF RESIDUAL ECHO IS MEASURED IN TERMS OF 'ECHO RETURN LOSS ENHANCEMENT' (ERLE); the difference in measured ERL between the active and inactive echo cancelation states. To eliminate the residual echo, the echo canceller may optionally employ a 'non-linear processor' function. This is usually referred to as a 'Center Clipper'. The Center Clipper operates by suppressing residual echo using attenuation. During double-talk, the Center Clippers are removed from the circuit. However, this functionality is what truely makes the echo canceller superior to that of the echo suppressor, since during double-talk, there is true echo cancellation, not limited suppression. CCITT Recommendation G.165 also specifies the use of Tone Disabler circuits. The disable tone is specified as 2100 Hz with frequency characteristics as specified in G.164. The 2100 Hz tone is subjected to 180 degree phase reversals, as specified in CCITT V.25. The Tone Disabler circuit must recognize the disable signal at levels between -6 and -31 dBM0. Additionally, the maximum amount of time required to disable the canceller (operate time) is specified to be one second.

Minimizing Delay
Since Talker echo is also a function of circuit delay, the reduction of this delay can prove beneficial in the resolution of SOME echo problems. This is likely to be beneficial when PCM or ADPCM transmission is used. Analog facilities can be reviewed to see if rerouting can reduce the physical trunk length. Many transmission facility equipment (particular digital systems) can be programmed to reduced delays. Low Bit Rate Voice (LBRV) systems employ algorithms that result in high processing delays. In such cases, echo cancellation techniques are almost always required. NOTE THAT MINIMIZING DELAY DOES NOT DIRECTLY ADDRESS LISTENER ECHO PROBLEMS.

Echo Grade-Of-Service Modeling

The AT&T 'Notes on the Network', 'Section 7', include a model that can be used for echo prediction. This model is based upon Echo Path Delay (mS), Acoustic-toAcoustic Echo Path Loss (dB), and the percentage of customers who will rate the configuration as being acceptable. The acoustic-to-acoustic losses include the effects of the handsets (telephone sets) used, as well as the electrical losses in the circuit. The acoustic properties of the handset are based upon Transmit Loudness Objective Rating (TLOR) plus the Receive Loudness Objective Rating (RLOR). These losses typically average about four (4) dB for Type 500 telephone sets. Note that the Type 500 telephone set actually has a mean loss of 9 dB with a deviation of +/- 5 dB. Therefore, the smaller loss value (9 dB -5 dB) has been used to derive the 4 dB value. DIFFERENT PHONE SETS WILL HAVE DIFFERENT VALUES!

The following diagram has been extracted from the previous document (The talker echo path). The loss variables (TLOR, RLOR, L1, L2, L2', RL1) have been added to it:

L1 = 2-Wire loss (Dependent upon the cabling distance from the telephone to the PBX, typically close to 0 or 1 dB). L2 = 4-Wire loss (Towards the remote end) L2'= 4-Wire loss (Towards the local end) RL1= Hybrid return loss

Thusly, the effective acoustic-to-acoustic loss can be determined using the formula TLOR + L1 + L2 + RL1 + L2' + L1 + RLOR; or, for Type 500 handsets, 4 + (2 * L1) + L2 + RL1 + L2'. The Echo Path Delay value includes all roundtrip circuit delays. In general, all transmission equipment processing delays can be obtained and it is possible to predict the local PBX loop delays. However, at time of installation, what is NOT KNOWN are the T1/E1 circuit delays. The T1/E1 circuit delays depend upon Carrier/PTT routing (circuit miles) as well as what equipment the Carrier/PTT has installed in the circuit (DACS, Switch, and Channel Bank frame buffering, etc.). A rough guess of the T1/E1 circuit delays can be achieved based upon circuit miles, but more precise information should be obtained from either the Carrier/PTT or through test efforts. Delay options are available for various test equipments, including the Phoenix 5500A test set, the Tekelec Chameleon 8000, as well as the Sage 930A, to name a few. The following information has been derived from the 'Notes on the Network' and tabulated into the following chart.

Consider the following example: Type 500 telephone set characteristics (TLOR + RLOR = 4) No 2-Wire loss (L1) The 4-Wire loss is 6 dB in each direction (L2 and L2') The ERL is 11 dB (RL1)

Using the formula, 4 + (2 * L1) + L2 + RL1 + L2', the Echo Path Loss is seen to be a value of 27. The Echo Path Delay must be kept to just below 10 mS to achieve a 99% user satisfaction rating, while 99.9% user satisfaction can be achieved by limiting delay to 5 mS. IN GENERAL, THE 11 dB ERL VALUE AND THE 4 dB ACOUSTIC LOSS (TLOR + RLOR) ARE TYPICAL VALUES. ROLM AND NORTHERN TELECOM PBXs TYPICALLY OPERATE WITH ERLs OF ABOUT 11 dB, AS DO PROPERLY ADJUSTED TELLABS 2-WIRE/4-WIRE CONVERTERS. THEREFORE, THESE VALUES SHOULD BE USED FOR ECHO PREDICTION PURPOSES WHERE THE EXACT LOSSES ARE NOT IMMEDIATELY KNOWN. NOTE THAT THE TALKER ECHO PATH DELAY IS DEPENDENT UPON THE LOCATION OF THE REMOTE TELEPHONE. THIS MUST BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IF OFF-NET CALLS, OR TRANSFERED OFF-NET CALLS ARE PLACED.

T1/Datalink Delay Times

There are many test sets that are capable of performing T1 delay measurements. But if you don't have such a test set, the following table provides some useful delay information:

NOTE THAT THESE ARE APPROXIMATE VALUES AND CAN BE USEFUL FOR ECHO PREDICTION PURPOSES. However, due to circuit routing and various other carrier-controlled parameters, it is always best to perform actual tests to determine End-To-End or Round-Trip delays.

VF Cable Delay Times

A device in a two-way telephone circuit that is designed to eliminate echo signals in one direction caused by signals in the other direction. Most mobile phone networks include echo suppressors throughout the network. Phones and/or certain audio accessories may include additional echo-suppression features.

Echo cancellation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (January 2011)
The term echo cancellation is used in telephony to describe the process of removing echo from a voice communication in order to improve voice quality on a telephone call. In addition to improving subjective quality, this process increases the capacity achieved through silence suppression by preventing echo from traveling across a network. Two sources of echo have primary relevance in telephony: acoustic echo and hybrid echo. Echo cancellation involves first recognizing the originally transmitted signal that re-appears, with some delay, in the transmitted or received signal. Once the echo is recognized, it can be removed by 'subtracting' it from the transmitted or received signal. This technique is generally implemented using a digital signal processor (DSP), but can also be implemented in software. Echo cancellation is done using either echo suppressors or echo cancellers, or in some cases both.
Contents
[hide]

1 History 2 Acoustic echo

2.1 Acoustic echo cancellation

3 Hybrid echo 4 Retaining echo suppressors 5 Modems 6 See also 7 References 8 External links

[edit]History
In telephony, "echo" is very much like what one would experience yelling in a canyon. Echo is the reflected copy of the voice heard some time later and a delayed version of the original. On a telephone, if the delay is fairly significant (more than a few hundred milliseconds), it is considered annoying. If the delay is very small

(10's of milliseconds or less), the phenomenon is called sidetone and while not objectionable to humans, can interfere with the communication between data modems.[citation needed] In the earlier days of telecommunications, echo suppression was used to reduce the objectionable nature of echos to human users. In essence these devices rely upon the fact that most telephone conversations are halfduplex. That is one person speaks while the other listens. An echo suppressor attempts to determine which is the primary direction and allows that channel to go forward. In the reverse channel, it places attenuation to block or "suppress" any signal on the assumption that the signal is echo. Naturally, such a device is not perfect. There are cases where both ends are active, and other cases where one end replies faster than an echo suppressor can switch directions to keep the echo attenuated but allow the remote talker to reply without attenuation. Echo cancellers are the replacement for earlier echo suppressors that were initially developed in the 1950s to control echo caused by the long delay on satellite telecommunications circuits. Initial echo canceller theory was developed at AT&T Bell Labs in the 1960s,[1] but the first commercial echo cancellers were not deployed until the late 1970s owing to the limited capability of the electronics of the era. The concept of an echo canceller is to synthesize an estimate of the echo from the talker's signal, and subtract that synthesis from the return path instead of switching attenuation into/out of the path. This technique requires adaptive signal processing to generate a signal accurate enough to effectively cancel the echo, where the echo can differ from the original due to various kinds of degradation along the way. Rapid advances in the implementation of digital signal processing allowed echo cancellers to be made smaller and more cost-effective. In the 1990s, echo cancellers were implemented within voice switches for the first time (in the Northern Telecom DMS-250) rather than as standalone devices. The integration of echo cancellation directly into the switch meant that echo cancellers could be reliably turned on or off on a call-by-call basis, removing the need for separate trunk groups for voice and data calls. Today's telephony technology often employs echo cancellers in small or handheld communications devices via a software voice engine, which provides cancellation of either acoustic echo or the residual echo introduced by a far-end PSTN gateway system; such systems typically cancel echo reflections with up to 64 milliseconds delay. Voice messaging and voice response systems which accept speech for caller input use echo cancellation while speech prompts are played to prevent the systems own speech recognition from falsely recognizing the echoed prompts.

[edit]Acoustic

echo

Acoustic echo arises when sound from a loudspeakerfor example, the earpiece of a telephone handsetis picked up by the microphone in the same roomfor example, the mic in the very same handset. The problem

exists in any communications scenario where there is a speaker and a microphone. Examples of acoustic echo are found in everyday surroundings such as: Hands-free car phone systems A standard telephone or cellphone in speakerphone or hands-free mode Dedicated standalone "conference phones" Installed room systems which use ceiling speakers and microphones on the table Physical coupling (vibrations of the loudspeaker transfer to the microphone via the handset casing)

In most of these cases, direct sound from the loudspeaker (not the person at the far end, otherwise referred to as the Talker) enters the microphone almost unaltered. This is called direct acoustic path echo. The difficulties in cancelling acoustic echo stem from the alteration of the original sound by the ambient space. This colours the sound that re-enters the microphone. These changes can include certain frequencies being absorbed by soft furnishings, and reflection of different frequencies at varying strength. These secondary reflections are not strictly referred to as echo, but rather are "reverb". Acoustic echo is heard by the far end talkers in a conversation. So if a person in Room A talks, they will hear their voice bounce around in Room B. This sound needs to be cancelled, or it will get sent back to its origin. Due to the slight round-trip transmission delay, this acoustic echo is very distracting.

[edit]Acoustic

echo cancellation

Since invention at AT&T Bell Labs[1] echo cancellation algorithms have been improved and honed. Like all echo cancelling processes, these first algorithms were designed to anticipate the signal which would inevitably reenter the transmission path, and cancel it out. The acoustic echo cancellation (AEC) process works as follows: 1. 2. 3. A far-end signal is delivered to the system. The far-end signal is reproduced by the speaker in the room. A microphone also in the room picks up the resulting direct path sound, and consequent reverberant sound as a near-end signal. 4. 5. 6. The far-end signal is filtered and delayed to resemble the near-end signal. The filtered far-end signal is subtracted from the near-end signal. The resultant signal represents sounds present in the room excluding any direct or reverberated sound produced by the speaker.

The primary challenge for an echo canceller is determining the nature of the filtering to be applied to the far-end signal such that it resembles the resultant near-end signal. The filter is essentially a model of the speaker, microphone and the room's acoustical attributes. To configure the filter, early echo cancellation systems required training with impulse or pink noise, and some used this as the only model of the acoustic space. Later systems used this training only as a basis to start from, and the canceller then adapted from that point on. By using the far-end signal as the stimulus, modern systems use an adaptive filter and can 'converge' from nothing to 55 dB of cancellation in around 200 ms.[citation needed] Until recently echo cancellation only needed to apply to the voice bandwidth of telephone circuits. PSTN calls transmit frequencies between 300 Hz and 3 kHz, the range required for human speech intelligibility. Videoconferencing is one area where full bandwidth audio is transceived. In this case, specialised products are employed to perform echo cancellation.

[edit]Hybrid

echo

Hybrid echo is generated by the public switched telephone network (PSTN) through the reflection of electrical energy by a device called a hybrid (hence the term hybrid echo). Most telephone local loops are two-wire circuits while transmission facilities are four-wire circuits. Each hybrid produces echoes in both directions, though the far end echo is usually a greater problem for voiceband.

[edit]Retaining

echo suppressors

Echo suppression may have the side-effect of removing valid signals from the transmission. This can cause audible signal loss that is called "clipping" in telephony, but the effect is more like a "squelch" than amplitude clipping. In an ideal situation then, echo cancellation alone will be used. However this is insufficient in many applications, notably software phones on networks with long delay and meager throughput. Here, echo cancellation and suppression can work in conjunction to achieve acceptable performance.

[edit]Modems
Echo control on voice-frequency data calls that use dial-up modems may cause data corruption. Some telephone devices disable echo suppression or echo cancellation when they detect the 2100 or 2225 Hz "answer" tones associated with such calls, in accordance with ITU-T recommendation G.164 or G.165. In the 1990s most echo cancellation was done inside modems of type v.32 and later. In voiceband modems this allowed using the same frequencies in both directions simultaneously, greatly increasing the data rate. As part of connection negotiation, each modem sent line probe signals, measured the echoes, and set up its delay lines. Echoes in this case did not include long echoes caused by acoustic coupling, but did include short echoes caused by impedance mismatches in the 2-wire local loop to the telephone exchange.

After the turn of the century, DSL modems also made extensive use of automated echo cancellation. Though they used separate incoming and outgoing frequencies, these frequencies were beyond the voiceband for which the cables were designed, and often suffered attenuation distortion due to bridge taps and incomplete impedance matching. Deep, narrow frequency gaps often resulted, that could not be made usable by echo cancellation. These were detected and mapped out during connection negotiation.