Cutoff frequency of Bessel response S&K.

Thread Starter

simo_x

Joined Dec 23, 2010
200
Hi dears,

I am studying the Bessel - Thompson frequency response and I have a doubt about the Sallen & Key realization.

The textbook I use is "Analog Filter Design" by M. E. Van Valkenburg and the Bessel response is covered in chapter 10 "Delay Filter".

There is a design example for a low pass active filter in this chapter (example 10.1), and I do not understand how to determine the cutoff frequency from the denormalization formula exposed:

\({D \over k_\text{r}k_\text{f}}\)

The filter is designed to provide a delay

\(D = 100\,\mu s\)

(while the cutoff frequency is not mentioned).
The order of the filter is \(n = 4\) and the complex conjugate poles pairs are:

\(
\begin{align}
&& p_p = a \pm \text{j}b\\
&& p_p1 = -2.1038 \pm \text{j}2.6574\\
&& p_p2 = -2.8962 \pm \text{j}0.8672\\
\end{align}
\)

And

\(
\begin{align}
&& \omega_0 = \sqrt(a^2 + b^2)\\
&& Q = {1 \over 2a}\omega_0\\
\end{align}
\)

For a Sallen & Key configuration:



The components for each cell are denormalizated from a scaling factor \(k_\text{r}\):

\(
\begin{align}
&& k_\text{r} = 10000\\
&& k_\text{f} = \omega_0\\
&& D = 100\,\mu s \\
\\
&& R_1 = R_2 = k_\text{r} \,(\Omega)\\
&& C_1 = 2Q \left ( {D \over k_\text{r}k_\text{f}} \right ) \,(\text{F})\\
&& C_2 = \left ( {1 \over 2Q}\right ) \left ({D \over k_\text{r}k_\text{f}} \right ) \,(\text{F})\\
\end{align}
\)

And the final circuits is:



Of course I tried to simulate it in LTspice:

Rich (BB code):
Version 4
SHEET 1 1444 928
WIRE 128 336 64 336
WIRE 320 336 192 336
WIRE 512 352 448 352
WIRE 704 352 576 352
WIRE 64 416 64 336
WIRE 64 416 48 416
WIRE 80 416 64 416
WIRE 176 416 160 416
WIRE 240 416 176 416
WIRE 320 432 320 336
WIRE 320 432 304 432
WIRE 352 432 320 432
WIRE 448 432 448 352
WIRE 448 432 432 432
WIRE 464 432 448 432
WIRE 560 432 544 432
WIRE 624 432 560 432
WIRE 240 448 224 448
WIRE 704 448 704 352
WIRE 704 448 688 448
WIRE 736 448 704 448
WIRE 624 464 608 464
WIRE 224 496 224 448
WIRE 320 496 320 432
WIRE 320 496 224 496
WIRE 608 512 608 464
WIRE 704 512 704 448
WIRE 704 512 608 512
FLAG -240 368 0
FLAG -384 528 vdd
FLAG -384 608 0
FLAG 272 400 0
FLAG 176 480 0
FLAG 272 464 vdd
FLAG 656 416 0
FLAG 560 496 0
FLAG 656 480 vdd
FLAG 736 448 Out
IOPIN 736 448 Out
FLAG -32 416 Vin
IOPIN -32 416 In
FLAG -240 288 Vin
SYMBOL voltage -240 272 M0
WINDOW 123 24 124 Left 2
WINDOW 39 24 152 Left 2
SYMATTR Value2 AC 1 0
SYMATTR SpiceLine Rser=0 Cpar=0
SYMATTR InstName V1
SYMATTR Value 1
SYMBOL Opamps\\UniversalOpamp2 272 432 M180
SYMATTR InstName U1
SYMBOL cap 192 352 M270
WINDOW 0 32 32 VTop 2
WINDOW 3 0 32 VBottom 2
SYMATTR InstName C1
SYMATTR Value 3.45n
SYMBOL cap 160 416 R0
SYMATTR InstName C2
SYMATTR Value 3.17n
SYMBOL Opamps\\UniversalOpamp2 656 448 M180
SYMATTR InstName U2
SYMBOL cap 576 368 M270
WINDOW 0 32 32 VTop 2
WINDOW 3 0 32 VBottom 2
SYMATTR InstName C3
SYMATTR Value 4.76n
SYMBOL cap 544 432 R0
SYMATTR InstName C4
SYMATTR Value 1.83n
SYMBOL res 64 432 M270
WINDOW 0 32 56 VTop 2
WINDOW 3 0 56 VBottom 2
SYMATTR InstName R1
SYMATTR Value 1k
SYMATTR SpiceLine tol=1 pwr=0.25
SYMBOL voltage -384 512 R0
WINDOW 123 0 0 Left 2
WINDOW 39 24 124 Left 2
SYMATTR SpiceLine Rser=1
SYMATTR InstName V2
SYMATTR Value 10
SYMBOL res 176 432 M270
WINDOW 0 32 56 VTop 2
WINDOW 3 0 56 VBottom 2
SYMATTR InstName R2
SYMATTR Value 1k
SYMATTR SpiceLine tol=1 pwr=0.25
SYMBOL res 448 448 M270
WINDOW 0 32 56 VTop 2
WINDOW 3 0 56 VBottom 2
SYMATTR InstName R3
SYMATTR Value 1k
SYMATTR SpiceLine tol=1 pwr=0.25
SYMBOL res 560 448 M270
WINDOW 0 32 56 VTop 2
WINDOW 3 0 56 VBottom 2
SYMATTR InstName R4
SYMATTR Value 1k
SYMATTR SpiceLine tol=1 pwr=0.25
TEXT -360 696 Left 2 !.ac oct 100000 1 300k
And I can see through AC analysis that the cutoff frequency \(f_c\) at -3 dB is \(\approx 3,25\,\text{kHz}\)

As we can see from the attached Bode plot image.

At this point it is not clear to me how to relate the cutoff frequency \(f_c\) with the denormalization formula:

\({D \over k_\text{r}k_\text{f}}\)

Could please someone help me to understand it?
Thank you in advance.

simo_x
 

Attachments

Last edited:

shteii01

Joined Feb 19, 2010
4,644
I was googling, the second order has a formula for cutoff frequency=1/sqrt(R1*R2*C1*C2).

I forgot to include the 2pi. Sorry.
 
Last edited:

Thread Starter

simo_x

Joined Dec 23, 2010
200
Hi Jony130,

Thank you for reporting this mistake.

This is because the I did not save the .asc file before posting it here and the resistors value was 1k instead of 10k.

This is the correct .asc file:

Rich (BB code):
Version 4
SHEET 1 1444 928
WIRE 128 336 64 336
WIRE 320 336 192 336
WIRE 512 352 448 352
WIRE 704 352 576 352
WIRE 64 416 64 336
WIRE 64 416 48 416
WIRE 80 416 64 416
WIRE 176 416 160 416
WIRE 240 416 176 416
WIRE 320 432 320 336
WIRE 320 432 304 432
WIRE 352 432 320 432
WIRE 448 432 448 352
WIRE 448 432 432 432
WIRE 464 432 448 432
WIRE 560 432 544 432
WIRE 624 432 560 432
WIRE 240 448 224 448
WIRE 704 448 704 352
WIRE 704 448 688 448
WIRE 736 448 704 448
WIRE 624 464 608 464
WIRE 224 496 224 448
WIRE 320 496 320 432
WIRE 320 496 224 496
WIRE 608 512 608 464
WIRE 704 512 704 448
WIRE 704 512 608 512
FLAG -240 368 0
FLAG -384 528 vdd
FLAG -384 608 0
FLAG 272 400 0
FLAG 176 480 0
FLAG 272 464 vdd
FLAG 656 416 0
FLAG 560 496 0
FLAG 656 480 vdd
FLAG 736 448 Out
IOPIN 736 448 Out
FLAG -32 416 Vin
IOPIN -32 416 In
FLAG -240 288 Vin
SYMBOL voltage -240 272 M0
WINDOW 123 24 124 Left 2
WINDOW 39 24 152 Left 2
SYMATTR Value2 AC 1 0
SYMATTR SpiceLine Rser=0 Cpar=0
SYMATTR InstName V1
SYMATTR Value 1
SYMBOL Opamps\\UniversalOpamp2 272 432 M180
SYMATTR InstName U1
SYMBOL cap 192 352 M270
WINDOW 0 32 32 VTop 2
WINDOW 3 0 32 VBottom 2
SYMATTR InstName C1
SYMATTR Value 3.45n
SYMBOL cap 160 416 R0
SYMATTR InstName C2
SYMATTR Value 3.17n
SYMBOL Opamps\\UniversalOpamp2 656 448 M180
SYMATTR InstName U2
SYMBOL cap 576 368 M270
WINDOW 0 32 32 VTop 2
WINDOW 3 0 32 VBottom 2
SYMATTR InstName C3
SYMATTR Value 4.76n
SYMBOL cap 544 432 R0
SYMATTR InstName C4
SYMATTR Value 1.83n
SYMBOL res 64 432 M270
WINDOW 0 32 56 VTop 2
WINDOW 3 0 56 VBottom 2
SYMATTR InstName R1
SYMATTR Value 10k
SYMATTR SpiceLine tol=1 pwr=0.25
SYMBOL voltage -384 512 R0
WINDOW 123 0 0 Left 2
WINDOW 39 24 124 Left 2
SYMATTR SpiceLine Rser=1
SYMATTR InstName V2
SYMATTR Value 10
SYMBOL res 176 432 M270
WINDOW 0 32 56 VTop 2
WINDOW 3 0 56 VBottom 2
SYMATTR InstName R2
SYMATTR Value 10k
SYMATTR SpiceLine tol=1 pwr=0.25
SYMBOL res 448 448 M270
WINDOW 0 32 56 VTop 2
WINDOW 3 0 56 VBottom 2
SYMATTR InstName R3
SYMATTR Value 10k
SYMATTR SpiceLine tol=1 pwr=0.25
SYMBOL res 560 448 M270
WINDOW 0 32 56 VTop 2
WINDOW 3 0 56 VBottom 2
SYMATTR InstName R4
SYMATTR Value 10k
SYMATTR SpiceLine tol=1 pwr=0.25
TEXT -456 656 Left 2 !.ac oct 10000 1 300000
However, from the Sallen and Key configuration:

\(f_{\text{c}} = {1 \over 2\pi\sqrt{ R{_1}R{_2}C_1C_2}} = {1 \over 2\pi\sqrt{10\,\text{k}\Omega \times 10\,\text{k}\Omega \times 3.45\,\text{nF} \times 3.17\,\text{nF}}} \approx 4,813\,\text{kHz}\)

And the result is not as shown on the Bode plot.

I think you take fc of U2 and subtract fc of U1 from it.
:eek::eek::eek:

However thanks for the link for the 4th order Bessel with \(f_c \approx 1\,\text{kHz}\).

It reports:

\(R_1, R_2 = {a_1C_2 \pm \sqrt{a_1^2C_2^2 - 4b_1C_1C_2} \over 2\omega_0C_1C_2}\)

I saw this formula on many books including Texas Instruments "Op Amp for Everyone" Chapter 16 page 16.
But my question is related to the denormalization formula:

\({D \over k_\text{r}k_\text{f}}\)

However I think that maybe the best thing to do is to relate the two formulas:

\(\begin{align}
&& C_{\text{old}} \left ( {D \over k_\text{r}k_\text{f}} \right ) = C_{\text{new}}
&& \omega_{\text{c}} = {1 \over \sqrt{R{_1}R{_2}C_1C_2}}
\end{align}
\)

I need to rest now, it is very late here.
Tomorrow I will care about it.

Thanks ;)
Simo
 
Last edited:

WBahn

Joined Mar 31, 2012
30,060
I was googling, the second order has a formula for cutoff frequency=1/sqrt(R1*R2*C1*C2).

So your U1 stage has fc=30.2 kHz, your U2 stage has fc=33.8 kHz.

I think you take fc of U2 and subtract fc of U1 from it. I got overall fc of 3.643 kHz. Your Bode plot shows -3 dB at 3.36 kHz. Seems close enough.

I also found this: http://analogelectronix.blogspot.com/2010/08/sallen-key-bessel-filter-2nd-4th-order.html
They do not show how they found cutoff frequency. But they do say that it is 1 kHz. If you follow the procedure I outline above, you get just a little over 1 kHz. So finding the difference of the two stages seems the way to do it.
This doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

The circuit shown by the OP is simply two cascaded second-order low pass filters. The opamp, configured as a voltage follower, should pretty effectively decouple the two stages. The cutoff frequency should be primarily dictated by whichever stage has the lowest cutoff frequency. At that frequency and below the other stage should be within its passband. So I don't see any mechanism whereby the cutoff frequency would somehow be the difference of the two, thus placing it well below the cutoff frequency of either stage.
 

shteii01

Joined Feb 19, 2010
4,644
This doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

The circuit shown by the OP is simply two cascaded second-order low pass filters. The opamp, configured as a voltage follower, should pretty effectively decouple the two stages. The cutoff frequency should be primarily dictated by whichever stage has the lowest cutoff frequency. At that frequency and below the other stage should be within its passband. So I don't see any mechanism whereby the cutoff frequency would somehow be the difference of the two, thus placing it well below the cutoff frequency of either stage.
I forgot to include 2pi again.
 
Last edited:

WBahn

Joined Mar 31, 2012
30,060
How are you getting your cutoff frequencies?

If you are just multiplying the two resistances and the two capacitances together and then taking 1/sqrt(that) then you aren't finding the cutoff frequency. For lack of a better term that is the center frequency.

Also, since you aren't tracking your units, you are off by a factor of 6.28.

1/sqrt(R1R2C1C2) has units of 1/sec, not cycles/sec. You need to multiply by 1cycle/2∏radians to get Hz.

Of course, no one believes me that tracking units has any value whatsoever.
 

Jony130

Joined Feb 17, 2009
5,488
The active filter form this blog
http://analogelectronix.blogspot.com/2010/08/sallen-key-bessel-filter-2nd-4th-order.html

\(f_{\text{c}1} = {1 \over 2\pi\sqrt{ R{_1}R{_2}C_1C_2}} {\approx 1.4307\.\text{kHz}\)

And Fc for U4 stage

\(f_{\text{c}2} = {1 \over 2\pi\sqrt{ R{_3}R{_4}C_3C_4}} {\approx 1.603\.\text{kHz}\)

And combine and the net frequency is equal to

\(\Large f_{\text{c}t}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\frac{1}{Fc1^2}+\frac{1}{Fc2^2}}} = 1.067KHz\)

Also in the art of electronics we can find a table in which we can find Fc for a given filter stage.
Or we can use this site
http://www.analog.com/designtools/en/filterwizard/#/type
 

Attachments

LvW

Joined Jun 13, 2013
1,759
Simo, I was absent for 2 days - therefore, my late response.
May I repeat some fundamentals?

In case you want to design a 4th order Bessel filter as a cascade of two second-order filters, the filter theory tells you that none of both stages has a Bessel characteristic.
(As another example: Two 2nd order Butterworth filters do NOT result in a 4th order Butterworth filter).
Instead, particular pole parameters for both stages have to be found by a rather time comsuming calculation. It is not true, that both pole frequencies are to be subtracted (as mentioned in a post before). And it is also not correct that the lowest cut-off would determine the overall cut-off frequency.
Instead, because the derivation of the characteristic values for each stage is rather complicated you should use filter tables which are given in each relevant textbook or in appropriate articles. These tables give normalized pole data for each stage which are used to design each stage separately.
In the following, I give you the values for a 4th order Bessel filter:

*Stage 1: Wp=3.023 ; Qp=0.5219
*Stage 2: Wp=3.389 : Qp=0.8055

(As can be seen by inspecting the Qp values, one stage is "below" Bessel and the other one is "above" Bessel, because a 2nd order Bessel response has a pole quality factor Qp=0.5773)
* Please note that Wp is the normalized angular pole frequeny - normalized to the desired angular cut-off frequency wo of the whole filter.
Thus, Wp=wp/wo.
* That means: All you have to do is to use denormalization wp=Wp*wo and to design both 2nd oder stages for the respective wp and Qp values.
I suppose, all formulas relating parts values to the mentioned pole parameters for 2nd order stages are known to you.
* Please give notice, if you need further information.
 
Last edited:

shteii01

Joined Feb 19, 2010
4,644
How are you getting your cutoff frequencies?

If you are just multiplying the two resistances and the two capacitances together and then taking 1/sqrt(that) then you aren't finding the cutoff frequency. For lack of a better term that is the center frequency.

Also, since you aren't tracking your units, you are off by a factor of 6.28.

1/sqrt(R1R2C1C2) has units of 1/sec, not cycles/sec. You need to multiply by 1cycle/2∏radians to get Hz.

Of course, no one believes me that tracking units has any value whatsoever.
Ah. Thank you. Yes, I lost 2pi while calculating cutoff frequencies.
 

shteii01

Joined Feb 19, 2010
4,644
The active filter form this blog
http://analogelectronix.blogspot.com/2010/08/sallen-key-bessel-filter-2nd-4th-order.html

\(f_{\text{c}1} = {1 \over 2\pi\sqrt{ R{_1}R{_2}C_1C_2}} {\approx 1.4307\.\text{kHz}\)

And Fc for U4 stage

\(f_{\text{c}2} = {1 \over 2\pi\sqrt{ R{_3}R{_4}C_3C_4}} {\approx 1.603\.\text{kHz}\)

And combine and the net frequency is equal to

\(\Large f_{\text{c}t}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\frac{1}{Fc1^2}+\frac{1}{Fc2^2}}} = 1.067KHz\)

Also in the art of electronics we can find a table in which we can find Fc for a given filter stage.
Or we can use this site
http://www.analog.com/designtools/en/filterwizard/#/type
Thank you.
 

WBahn

Joined Mar 31, 2012
30,060
Note that I didn't say that the lowest cutoff frequency determines the overall cutoff frequency, but rather that it is primarily determined by the lowest cutoff frequency. This is along the same lines as saying that the equivalent resistance of two parallel resistors is primarily determined by the smaller of the two resistors. That's not to say that the larger resistor plays no role, but the overall resistance is bounded by 50%*Rs and Rs where Rs is the smaller of the two resistors.

A similar thing applies here. If Fcs is the lower of the two cutoff frequencies, then the overall cutoff frequency is bounded by and 70.7%Fcs and Fcs, so the lower cutoff frequency of either stage creates an even tighter bound than the smaller of two parallel resistors does.
 

WBahn

Joined Mar 31, 2012
30,060
Ah. Thank you. Yes, I lost 2pi while calculating cutoff frequencies.
We all make mistakes -- and this one is a pretty easy one to make. But the takeaway is that if you track your units religiously, then you will almost never make this mistake and not catch it.
 

LvW

Joined Jun 13, 2013
1,759
Note that I didn't say that the lowest cutoff frequency determines the overall cutoff frequency, but rather that it is primarily determined by the lowest cutoff frequency. .......
My only intention was to make clear that the particular (separate) cut-off frequencies of the two stages plays no role at all !!
They are meaningless. They cannot be combined - neither as a difference nor by a square root. That is the outcome of filter theory.

I repeat the simple example of two identical 2nd order Bessel stages connected in series:
When each 3dB-cut-off is at f=fo, the 4th order filter (cascade of both stages) will have at f=fo an attenuation of -6 dB.
And most important: The response will not be Thomson-Bessel anymore.
 

LvW

Joined Jun 13, 2013
1,759
Jony130, are you sure that the square root formulas you have mentioned really can be applied with sufficient accuracy for 2nd oder circuits ?
Can you give a reference?
 

WBahn

Joined Mar 31, 2012
30,060
I don't agree that the particular cut-off frequences are meaningless and play no role at all. For example, I have two second-order low pass filters that are cascaded. One has a 3dB cutoff frequency of 10kHz and the other has a 3dB cutoff frequency of 20kHz. Which of the following is a possible cutoff frequency for the combined cascaded filter?

A) 1kHz
B) 9kHz
C) 15kHz
D) 40kHz

If what you are saying is true, then all of the above choices are possible cutoff frequencies for the combined filter since the individual cutoff frequencies are meaningless and play no role. Yet I would argue that three of the four options can be eliminated based on the assertion that the individual cutoff frequencies DO play a role and DO convey meaning.
 

Thread Starter

simo_x

Joined Dec 23, 2010
200
Hello LvW and first of all thank you for your reply.

Yes, you are absolutely right about the normalized values for \(\omega{_0}\) and \(Q\), and in fact, the values for capacitors are obtained from that.

****************************************************************

I reprise for a moment my doubt about relating

\(D \over k{_\text{r}}\omega{_0}\)

and

\(\omega{_c}\)

As reported in the textbook. Following that solving process, with \(R_1 = R_2\) we have:

\(
\begin{align}
&C_1 = 2Q \left ({D \over k{_\text{r}}\omega{_0}} \right )\\
&C1 = {1 \over 2Q} \left ({D \over k{_\text{r}}\omega{_0}} \right )\\
&f_c = {1 \over 2\pi R \sqrt{C{_1}C{_2}}}\\
\\
&C{_1}C{_2} = \left ({D \over k{_\text{r}}\omega{_0}} \right )^2\\
\\
&f_c = \frac{1}{2\pi R\,\frac{D}{k{_\text{r}} \omega{_0}}} = {\omega_0 \over 2\pi D}\qquad(**)
\end{align}
\)

Where \(\omega{_0}\) is the normalized pole frequency given by

\(\sqrt(a^2 + b^2)\)

As mentioned in the post #1, while the overall cutoff frequency is given by the formula:

\(f_{\text{c}t}=\frac{1}{ \sqrt{ \frac{1}{Fc1^2} + \frac{1}{Fc2^2} + \frac{1}{Fcn^2}}}\)

As said earlier..

So, for the equation marked as (**), we just need to solve for

\(D = {\omega{_0} \over 2\pi f{_c}} = {\omega{_0} \over \omega{_c}}\)

And then solve for the capacitors..
But the delay have to be the same for each 2nd order cell and does not have to change.. Maybe it is better to solve some more math..

****************************************************************

LvW, if I am not wrong, you suggest to solve the circuit for the cutoff frequency and not for the delay, right? Do I am correct?

Again, thank to you all for your interest. :)
Simo
 
Last edited:

WBahn

Joined Mar 31, 2012
30,060
If D is a delay with units of time, then it cannot also be equal to the ratio of two frequencies, as that is dimensionless. Are you sure that D isn't some normalized delay parameter?
 

Thread Starter

simo_x

Joined Dec 23, 2010
200
If D is a delay with units of time, then it cannot also be equal to the ratio of two frequencies, as that is dimensionless.
Ouch. You are right.

Are you sure that D isn't some normalized delay parameter?
Thinking it better, the scaling factor:

\(k_\text{r} = 10000\)

Then, if in the example \(D = 100\,\mu s = 1e-4 s\) is a normalized delay,

\(k_\text{r} = {\text{required delay} \over \text{normalized delay}} = {1 \over 1e-4} = 10000\)

Following this, the scaling factor (so the components value) is straight related to the delay D.
Do am I right?

But again, what about the overall 3 dB frequency?
 
Last edited:

LvW

Joined Jun 13, 2013
1,759
I don't agree that the particular cut-off frequences are meaningless and play no role at all. For example, I have two second-order low pass filters that are cascaded. One has a 3dB cutoff frequency of 10kHz and the other has a 3dB cutoff frequency of 20kHz. Which of the following is a possible cutoff frequency for the combined cascaded filter?

A) 1kHz
B) 9kHz
C) 15kHz
D) 40kHz
.........
.

I have the feeling that these examples are not very realistic.
It is self-evident that two lowpass filters in series with cut-offs at 10 kHz and 20 kHz, respectively, result in an overall cut-off below 10 kHz. But such an estimate does not help for designing a 4th order Bessel filter, which needs only a 10 % difference between the pole frequencies of both stages. More than that, you shouldn`t forget that such a series connection changes the characteristic of the magnitude response.
In contrast, both pole frequencies and both pole quality factors must be chosen so that the RESULT has a Thomson-Bessel characteristic.
 
Last edited:
Top