W4TV:
>However, the 250 Hz filter is actually 370 Hz at the - 6dB
points according to previous e-mail here.

>With the K3, the point of diminishing returns for IMD (and
close in rejection) is perhaps - 30dB instead of -60dB or
more in a conventional crystal filter only radio.

>If we use a straight line (linear slope) from the -6dB to
-60dB points the 200 and 250 Hz filters look like this:

              200           250
  -------------------------------------------------
   - 6dB      224 Hz        370 Hz
   -60dB      896 Hz        777 Hz
    slope     6.22 Hz/dB    3.77 Hz/dB  (one side)

   -10dB      274 Hz        400 Hz
   -20dB      398 Hz        475 Hz
   -30dB      522 Hz        550 Hz
   -40dB      647 Hz        626 Hz
   -50dB      771 Hz        702 Hz

>By this simple calculation (or by plotting on graph paper) one
can see that the 200 Hz filter should do a BETTER job as the
most "narrow" filter.  It remains "tighter" to about -35 dB
and the five pole design should result in less pulse stretching
(ringing in the presence of static) than the 250 (really 350 Hz)
filter.

        Excellent post Joe (as usual).  Another reason one
might want the 200 versus the 250 is the relative difference
between the 400 and 500 filters.  From the published data:

Filter  BW(-6dB)     Shape Factor
 200     224             4.0
 250     370             2.1
 400     435             2.1
 500     565             3.1

Practically there is little BW difference in the 250 and
400 8-pole filters.  If one wanted both a very narrow
and moderately narrow filter, I would choose the 500
and 200 5-pole filters.  They have at least an octave
difference in total bandwidth...plus the group delay
issues you cited in your last paragraph above.

        BTW I see very little insertion loss in either of
the 200 Hz or 500 Hz filters.  Using an XG1 source, I find
1 dB compensation is all that is needed for both.

                                        73,  Bill  W4ZV

P.S.  I retract my engineers vs marketeers statement.
The marketeers won in naming the filters, especially
calling the 370 Hz filter above a "250 Hz"!  :-)

_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Reply via email to