Solving the Attenuation Problem with High-Pass 2nd Order

  • Thread starter Thread starter EvLer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Attenuation
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the attenuation characteristics of a high-pass 2nd order Butterworth filter, specifically focusing on the definitions and calculations related to the cutoff frequency (fc), pass-band frequency (fp), and stop-band frequency (fs). Participants are exploring the confusion regarding the attenuation values at these frequencies.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about the attenuation values at fc and fp, noting unexpected results where the passband shows more loss than the stop band.
  • Another participant seeks clarification on the definitions of fc, fp, and fs for a 2nd order Butterworth high-pass filter.
  • Several participants reiterate the definitions: fp as the pass-band frequency, fs as the stop-band frequency, and fc as the -3dB frequency.
  • There is mention of a normalized loss function for the filter, represented as H(s) = 1/{s^2 + sqrt(2)s + 1}, with a note on the challenges of converting high-pass to low-pass filters.
  • One participant raises a point about the potential variability in defining fp and fs, suggesting that these definitions might depend on the context or specific textbook references.
  • Concerns are expressed about needing explicit definitions or guidance from textbooks to determine appropriate values for fp and fs in relation to the filter's polynomial.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the definitions and implications of fp, fs, and fc, indicating that multiple competing views and uncertainties remain regarding their application in the context of the filter's performance.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved questions regarding the definitions of pass-band and stop-band frequencies, as well as the implications of the normalized loss function on the calculations. The discussion highlights the need for clarity on how these terms are defined in different contexts.

EvLer
Messages
454
Reaction score
0
I am going blank here...

I have a high-pass 2nd order (butterworth) that has fc = 5500 kHz, fp = 7kHz and fs = 1kHz and asked for attenuation at fc and fp.

I end up with more loss on passband than on stop band! I am actually not sure how to approach this. Any help is very very much appreciated... :cry:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What are the definitions for fc, fp and fs for a 2nd order Butterworth HP filter?
 
berkeman said:
What are the definitions for fc, fp and fs for a 2nd order Butterworth HP filter?
oh, sorry... H-P i mean is high-pass filter
fp is pass-band frequency
fs is stop-band
fc is the -3db frequency
second order Butterworth has this "normalized loss function":

H(s) = 1/{s^2 + sqrt(2)s + 1} (ps: sorry about the LaTex, where did they move tutorials !?)

basically, there's this thing about converting high-pass to low-pass, but before anything, the problem asks to find attenuation at fp and fs.
I think i get confused why/when i need to frequency scale.
 
Last edited:
EvLer said:
fp is pass-band frequency
fs is stop-band
fc is the -3db frequency
second order Butterworth has this "normalized loss function":

H(s) = 1/{s^2 + sqrt(2)s + 1}

basically, there's this thing about converting high-pass to low-pass, but before anything, the problem asks to find attenuation at fp and fs.
I think i get confused why/when i need to frequency scale.
It seems like fp and fs would be definition-dependent. There's no such thing as a "stop-band" or a "pass-band", it's all up to how you want to define them. Does your textbook offer any insights into what it wants? Are fs and fp defined in any way related to the H(s) polynomial? Butterworth filters are so rounded that you'll need something more explicit from somewhere to figure out what good values for fp and fs are, IMO.
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
9K
Replies
14
Views
3K