A few questions about Butterworth Filter

  • Thread starter Thread starter jesterahs
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Filter
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on designing a 10th order Butterworth filter using passive elements, specifically through the Insertion Loss Method. The user initially planned to cascade two 5th order Butterworth filters but was advised that this approach does not yield a true 10th order filter and may result in a flawed transfer function. Instead, the discussion suggests using an active buffer or a highly efficient attenuator to ensure proper impedance matching, and recommends considering elliptic filters or Inverse Chebychev filters for better performance. Additionally, resources like Zverev's filter tables and Filtercad software are highlighted as essential tools for accurate filter design.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Butterworth filter design principles
  • Knowledge of impedance matching techniques
  • Familiarity with passive and active filter components
  • Experience with filter design software, specifically Filtercad
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the design and advantages of elliptic filters
  • Learn about Inverse Chebychev filter characteristics
  • Explore the use of active buffers in filter design
  • Study Zverev's filter design tables for practical applications
USEFUL FOR

Electronics engineers, audio engineers, and anyone involved in RF design or filter optimization will benefit from this discussion.

jesterahs
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone! Thank you for looking at this thread.

I am trying to design a 10th order Butterworth filter using passive elements (i am using the Insertion Loss Method, and using prototype numbers). So far, I have designed a 5th order Butterworth filter, and I am planning to cascade two of them together. My questions about this are:

1. Do I need a matched attenuator in between them? If so,
2. Should I design the matched attentuator to have a Zin = Zout = 50 Ohms (since the source and load resistance of my filters are 50 Ohms)
3. And if looking into the matched attenuator gives an impedance of 50 Ohms, can I remove the 50 Ohm load resistor from my first filter?

If this is confusing, and you are willing to help [ please! :) ], please let me know and I can email you a MS Word document of my work so far. Thanks to all for your time!
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Mamma mia!

Cascading two 5th Butterworth doesn't make a 10th Butterworth. It makes a poor filter. This could sometimes be advantageous with biquad active filters, not with LC filters.

You would need an active buffer, or a very efficient attenuator, so each 5th order section sees a pure resistive load or source. If not, the transfer function is flawed.

In passive filters, odd orders are preferred. Fewer inductors, unity gain at center frequency (what frequency is it? This changes the technology a lot! I guess VHF and above, as you choose 50 ohm), simpler calculations.

Butterworth is a bad transfer function. For an LC filter, use one with zeroes, especially an elliptic one. For the same selectivity, they have fewer components and a better time and phase response as well. Don't believe what people go on repeating, it's just false. Inverse Chebychev would also be good.

I think Insertion Loss Method dates back to hand calculations... For LC filters, the one very best method is not to compute by yourself. LC filters are tabulated in books. Take the one by Zverev (old but this didn't change). Elektor also published an excellent series of articles about filters will all the tables you need. And I suggest to get Filtercad, free here
http://www.linear.com/designtools/software
it has built-in transfer functions, computes step responses (compare them) and gives component values.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
9K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K