Having put a few SCFs into production, most use those leap frog designs you don't like. The inversions come for free in SCF using clock phasing tricks, so you don't need the op amps in inverting configuration as shown in the continuous time designs. For SCF, you have one op amp per pole, nothing like SK filtering.
I have no experience in poorly designed active filters. ;-)
Didn't find your answer? Ask the community — no account required.
P
Phil Hobbs
My stuff usually has extreme dynamic range requirements. Offset tweaking is a help, but it doesn't fix the weird bumpy noise floors caused by op amp filters in general. Any time you use feedback to change the frequency response of a circuit, you do things to the noise floor. That becomes a problem when you're applying a lot of gain in some frequency band, e.g. to turn a limp RC rolloff into a sharp filter. The noise gain can be pretty bad sometimes.
LC filters don't do this, and neither do good digital filters. So usually, analogue filters are for preserving dynamic range before digitizing.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal
ElectroOptical Innovations
55 Orchard Rd
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
845-480-2058
email: hobbs (atsign) electrooptical (period) net
http://electrooptical.net
P
Phil Hobbs
capacitors.
I specifically said, "for moderate dynamic range jobs". It's horses for courses.
It isn't the topology I don't like, it's the idea of using 10 op amps in a built-up filter, with the usual issues. In an IC, where you have good matching and can do current-mode things and auto-zeroing to preserve dynamic range, I'm sure the limitations are quite different. My low frequency electronics design work to date has been exclusively applications circuits,(*) so that's where I'm coming from.
Back in the palmy days, I used your DC-accurate SC lowpass filter a few times, and liked it a lot. But even well-designed active filters have fairly serious dynamic range problems if you're trying anything very fancy. It's just a limitation of using feedback to turn an RC rolloff into something nice and sharp--it costs you noise gain.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
(*) (Though I also do circuits in the infrared, which are much more like ICs.)
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal
ElectroOptical Innovations
55 Orchard Rd
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
845-480-2058
email: hobbs (atsign) electrooptical (period) net
http://electrooptical.net
J
John Larkin
capacitors.
SC filters tend to be noisy. Switching spikes, PSRR, PSRR aliasing, and just generally bad noise levels.
John
M
miso
e:
ote:
:
apacitors.
them in
r would
es on
aps in
ctros in a
series
nodes
fix it?
There
by
hen
be
ilt the
filter
if
ting
of
d
ow
is
an
nal
.
p
onal
ss
four
rsus
an
gher
sign
n
e to
the
of
as
lume
u
t I see
s
and
ed
SNR
bly
lso
ork
l.net
or
od
Oversampled converters and DSP pretty much killed the SCF market.
M
miso
:
te:
pacitors.
hem in
would
s on
ps in
tros in a
eries
odes
fix it?
There
y
en
be
lt the
filter
if
ing
of
w
is
n
al
nal
s
our
sus
n
her
ign
to
the
of
s
ume
I see
nd
d
SNR
ly
so
rk
.net
r
d
t
The matching in ICs is only really relevant for the caps. Charge injection pretty much makes op amp offset moot. SCF was technology that really had to go.
Incidentally, SK filters aren't really DC accurate. The op amp is still in the picture. There is a Fluke circuit done years ago that makes a truly DC accurate filter. LTC and Maxim did SCFs based on that scheme, though I don't know why Fluke never sued either company over patent infringements.
formatting link
Note the LTC parts do not meet any classical filter shape as they state in their datasheets. I did analysis on the parts. It wasn't particularly hard to make them fit classical filter shapes (Bessel & Butterworth), but it took a root solver and root locus to design them optimally. Clearly something a LTC employee should have been able to do. I've often wondered how a company as good as LTC screwed this up, but could never get the inside story.
M
Michael A. Terrell
These were used in mission critical telemetry applications.
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a Band-Aid? on it, because it's
Teflon coated.
G
Grant
capacitors.
in
in a
it?
Yeah right... Remove the caps and it's a unity gain buffer, offset null that and jam in the resistor for input bias, what's that? DC inaccurate?
Grant.
M
miso
ote:
e:
te:
capacitors.
e them in
ter would
odes on
caps in
lectros in a
n series
e nodes
ll fix it?
g. There
m
g by
then
an be
built the
e
my filter
e
se if
eating
ue of
o
s.
add
Now
do is
r an
ignal
lf.
top
tional
less
f four
versus
can
er
higher
design
on
one to
of the
de of
was
volume
you
ilt I see
e
kes
, and
owed
in SNR
bably
'd
e
also
work
cal.net
for
in
good
w
ve
ff
ke
.net
l
e?
Across the resistor, it is DC accurate.
M
miso
nd
the unit
put
t
Input referred noise is the name of the game. Apply gain first, then filter, and the filter noise is reduced by the front end gain.
J
John Larkin
capacitors.
in
in
in a
series
it?
There
Use zero-offset chopamps.
ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/Filter1.jpg
ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/Filter2.jpg
ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/FilterBoard.jpg
These mostly anti-alias for the real digital filters, in an FPGA.
John
P
Phil Hobbs
But dynamic range is unchanged. All that happens then is that you clip sooner.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal
ElectroOptical Innovations
55 Orchard Rd
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
845-480-2058
email: hobbs (atsign) electrooptical (period) net
http://electrooptical.net
M
miso
and
ince the unit
utput
r.
.net
t
Unless the filter is passive, you will always have the trade off of noise versus filtering. This is a given. But for a vast number of communications applications, the input is bounded, so you can select front end gain sufficient to cover the noise floor. I counter that unless your passive filter is tuned, the filter is basically not much of a filter. You simply can't get accurate enough passive components to produce a manufacturable product. Yeah some small production lot is possible by hand selection, but not a volume product.
P
Phil Hobbs
Dynamic range is very precious, especially in optical measurements.
Usually you can maintain dynamic range without hand tweaking by using a gentle S-K filter (or, better, an LC) and doing the fancy stuff digitally.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal
ElectroOptical Innovations
55 Orchard Rd
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
845-480-2058
email: hobbs (atsign) electrooptical (period) net
http://electrooptical.net
G
Grant
...
Grrr, I don't care that much for DC accurate here, just as long as it saves some coupling caps. But I dislike some people's black/white view of the field, claiming they have the one and only true path, topology or method.
So pretty :)
Hey I've seen that circuit before! That's what my filters are, plus the other way too ;)
Yeah well I'm only making an active crossover, so surprised by the commentary a silly question raised, which is better fun the total abuse threads elsewhere on the group.
Anything I do upfront is going to be better than the passive Xover that's in my speakers now. Since I write that, some no doubt will jump onto the audiophoolary bandwagon. me? There's a question in my mind for decades I can answer, if I build this silly thing and see for myself.
Looking at some of the LTC opamps, they're quite cheap and very low offset voltage, much less than what I expected for non-chopper amps.
But I started this project when I bought couple tubes of opamps for half the single opamp price. Sourcing the caps was the hard part.
I think I'll be happy with a few mV overall offset, maybe trim out the DC on one of the opamp nulls in the signal chain. If it's not stable, block it with a cap. So many options... Interesting topics visited this thread, thanks to all contributors.
Grant.
J
John Larkin
Not me! My only claim is that S-K filters are sometimes useful. Others have stated that only amateurs use them.
We select parts and lay out boards for pretty!
John
K
krw
Why are the edges of the daughterboards so rough?
M
Michael A. Terrell
Bad girls, bad girls, what you gon'a do?
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a Band-Aid? on it, because it's
Teflon coated.
J
John Larkin
Beats me. It doesn't seen to affect the frequency response.
John
K
krw
I doubt that it would. I'd just like to know so I don't do that.
Join the Discussion
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Didn't find your answer?
Ask the community — no account required
Report Content
You are reporting this content to the moderators. They will look at it
ASAP.