Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-ma04.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 1E572380000A8; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 18:08:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1SkjLi-00044V-MO for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 23:07:34 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1SkjLh-00044M-KL for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 23:07:33 +0100 Received: from nm9-vm0.bullet.mail.ird.yahoo.com ([77.238.189.197]) by relay1.thorcom.net with smtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1SkjLf-0000u3-0P for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 23:07:32 +0100 Received: from [77.238.189.234] by nm9.bullet.mail.ird.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Jun 2012 22:07:30 -0000 Received: from [212.82.108.226] by tm15.bullet.mail.ird.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Jun 2012 22:07:29 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1003.bt.mail.ird.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 29 Jun 2012 22:07:29 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 937323.57003.bm@omp1003.bt.mail.ird.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 14038 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2012 22:07:29 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=btinternet.com; h=DKIM-Signature:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-Antivirus:X-Antivirus-Status; b=e7Gnd5KTxCwSE/CmWbtPElixVI0MPA804X/l8a3Pb4XBUCLvn77+wiKEPA/TFV3UmdObykqrom5ULBADGrCRspSx1K1IXrmjRmeLlPhoeG87i0ZRsCeUjCFxtkvEIi6//HbUcM9PovxkkGVd0GrbB6+GLkeMrIy6IMwkj2/PO9E= ; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=btinternet.com; s=s1024; t=1341007649; bh=eJIhjDF2UxReKgRu8NaIuD617YQeNlVNLLl0gxGH5Og=; h=X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-Antivirus:X-Antivirus-Status; b=Obn9wv/QOhJsCINF8nmpY3vrJgGgZD12dIue3qPwTlCsWOwhhmi5HSkP1D9+Bq+wt6IDvUTRL1Vg03zy2EYC6K1Q6V6SWmr66hqu0p/ICoJPuE4GFGuqDGR7hpBD+f6sD6/NioXUF/VA2lGzTLt+9KakCw82kI6PbustH12DXqE= X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: NqWFmMQVM1lW4ERGLzCdcqGb7aCtFpKjYvOx4InLSL_cvZT UVbBUrs8YovNAhuekQ4TR8HcmQDnozoo_OBquBc39AhAwbdRrgHNjbhl5fq0 EAelmde7X4hZe33N3f4BNtNTNcCLUta.bg_nLXAV3QNXEMC3Aq1lJSxpMRRB nr.oLnSabcIYpVd7sMbwc8HTW3EuLBzo3VT28f0U_Ua6kzMtZUrvZPtRX_U8 A_79_ruB2cAgZe_tulNq5PclztMLPOXvBYpCvMNacErkED7DwT8cYyO_GWVe swanHJ0PFwkncvggsKK9UVbnlT_mQPACpdzW.vPKO_CXqJVng8Z7EqbS9k3s XTKvsKhLgmK3W8X0p95HHFqGorQ6kyJ8j7i1Ip6C0.aLGwzbAbX2J9Cv4h9r A3.PpvLVIY2OfsiInQ_McmzYG5beW.Y3yD.6maJ.4KNCAHGvhlL5tn45Xdcx VwhcfgX8ll3M89i4WsszHZ8MCYjHVSZreOZPmUc4COCObZlAYlJAM6BEvLGf VH9CcgUUwxzg5UhCKgv1h2P3Matt_JoaUeCW_fy0Iyx52nO.4cDfq8Aepl8I GDwegkKXjwZxhx828vxgh9Q2Ei3HXjpqDXhHo8LlOM8pclZhCDQdCHCCkOIk ZqSt3FxRYN_8aDN.e.zWrt9x7vQQmXLO_f.9ovhzvjM1cd9936eszET.npa_ 0JX657tf7UNTHiUWhXHuM6rww8fqbLVFgTQdQthb7Npa.fwOhHdpySZ6sRpv hWP8DJDI72smQHaDhTq6Muo4Mjvvq X-Yahoo-SMTP: fpz.2VeswBBs59bVshRPmMN51lcO2lgFRIvE4XTqE8dRwOxd70E- Received: from gnat (alan.melia@109.145.215.32 with login) by smtp818.mail.ukl.yahoo.com with SMTP; 29 Jun 2012 15:07:29 -0700 PDT Message-ID: <0F87F4C0AE524B1E9EA631C81D579573@gnat> From: "Alan Melia" To: References: <4FEE0F7E.2090109@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 23:08:08 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 120629-2, 29/06/2012), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Stefan if they are really that old then they mar be deterioration of the elements. I remember the Kokusai fikters used in KW TX and RX designs (much bigger profile) degraded over the years. I have a few of those type of filters, my measurements suggest that ripple was not an important aspect (perticularly if they were for NBFM. However they look more like AM filters .....Mikes idea is good I found that the best shape is not always with the specified termination. PMR makers are more interested in adjacent channel suppression than in-band linearity. A lower termination impedance will flatten the response but also reduce the out-of-band attenuation, and probably the slope, and increase the insertion loss. They can be cascaded .....gain is cheap at those frequencies. [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [77.238.189.197 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid 0.0 UNPARSEABLE_RELAY Informational: message has unparseable relay lines X-Scan-Signature: f82786fce13a7bdfc3036eb41b44b924 Subject: LF: Re: Fwd: Help needed, mechanical filters Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_005E_01CD564C.0C1FDB50" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_MUA_OUTLOOK,HTML_20_30, HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_TAG_EXISTS_TBODY autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false x-aol-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:500076864:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: mail_rly_antispam_dkim-d297.2 ; domain : btinternet.com DKIM : fail x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d600c4fee27782f21 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_005E_01CD564C.0C1FDB50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Stefan if they are really that old then they mar be deterioration of the = elements. I remember the Kokusai fikters used in KW TX and RX designs = (much bigger profile) degraded over the years. I have a few of those = type of filters, my measurements suggest that ripple was not an = important aspect (perticularly if they were for NBFM. However they look = more like AM filters .....Mikes idea is good I found that the best shape = is not always with the specified termination. PMR makers are more = interested in adjacent channel suppression than in-band linearity. A = lower termination impedance will flatten the response but also reduce = the out-of-band attenuation, and probably the slope, and increase the = insertion loss. They can be cascaded .....gain is cheap at those = frequencies. Alan G3NYK ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Stefan Sch=E4fer=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Friday, June 29, 2012 9:26 PM Subject: LF: Fwd: Help needed, mechanical filters 4th try...=20 -------- Original-Nachricht -------- Betreff: Help needed, mechanical = filters=20 Datum: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 20:58:41 +0200=20 Von: Stefan Sch=E4fer =20 An: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 MF, I have bought a mechanical filter which has a center frequency of 473=20 kHz. It is available at=20 http://www.oppermann-electronic.de/html/body_hf-spezialbauteile.html=20 (scroll down to FZ 01 / FZ 02). I have both types and just measured the=20 frequency response. There is a data sheet as well which states the=20 impedances to be connected to the wires. There is even a datasheet at=20 http://www.oppermann-electronic.de/assets/applets/FZ_01.pdf All in all it looks very interesting and the slopes are really very=20 sharp. However there is a passband ripple of 10 dB which is very very=20 high. See the image:=20 https://dl.dropbox.com/u/19882028/MF/Mechanisches%20Filter%20473%20kHz.pn= g So what have i done wrong? Or is it that bad? The input signal is connected on the left side between the red and green = wire. The output signal is taken from the right side on the red and=20 green wire too. It looks as if each side has a coil on the green and red = wire, with a tap at the yellow wire. Helpful was this image from the web=20 http://www.amateurfunkmuseum.de/AFM_321b-Dateien/image006.jpg which=20 shows a similar filter. I have connected a resistor of 18 kOhm to the=20 output and a 500 Ohm resistor in series to the signal generator, as=20 stated in the datasheet. But the ripple does not change. Any ideas or suggestions? Guess for what i will need the filter! :-) 73, Stefan/DK7FC ------=_NextPart_000_005E_01CD564C.0C1FDB50 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Stefan if they are really that old then = they mar be=20 deterioration of the elements. I remember the Kokusai fikters used in KW = TX and=20 RX designs (much bigger profile) degraded over the years. I have a few = of those=20 type of filters, my measurements suggest that ripple was not an = important aspect=20 (perticularly if they were for NBFM. However they look more like AM = filters=20 .....Mikes idea is good I found that the best shape is not always with = the=20 specified termination. PMR makers are more interested in adjacent = channel=20 suppression than in-band linearity. A lower termination impedance will = flatten=20 the response but also reduce the out-of-band attenuation, and probably = the=20 slope, and increase the insertion loss. They can be cascaded .....gain = is cheap=20 at those frequencies.
 
Alan G3NYK
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Stefan = Sch=E4fer
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2012 = 9:26 PM
Subject: LF: Fwd: Help needed, = mechanical=20 filters

4th try...

-------- Original-Nachricht -------- =
Betreff: Help needed, mechanical filters
Datum: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 20:58:41 +0200
Von: Stefan Sch=E4fer "><schaefer@iup.uni-heid= elberg.de>
An: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=


MF,

I have bought a mechanical filter which has a center frequency of 473=20
kHz. It is available at=20
http://www.oppermann-electronic.de/html/body_hf-spezialbauteile.html=
=20
(scroll down to FZ 01 / FZ 02). I have both types and just measured the=20
frequency response. There is a data sheet as well which states the=20
impedances to be connected to the wires.
There is even a datasheet at=20
http=
://www.oppermann-electronic.de/assets/applets/FZ_01.pdf

All in all it looks very interesting and the slopes are really very=20
sharp. However there is a passband ripple of 10 dB which is very very=20
high. See the image:=20
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/19882028/MF/Mechanisches%20Filter%204=
73%20kHz.png

So what have i done wrong?  Or is it that bad?

The input signal is connected on the left side between the red and green =

wire. The output signal is taken from the right side on the red and=20
green wire too. It looks as if each side has a coil on the green and red =

wire, with a tap at the yellow wire.
Helpful was this image from the web=20
ht=
tp://www.amateurfunkmuseum.de/AFM_321b-Dateien/image006.jpg which=20
shows a similar filter. I have connected a resistor of 18 kOhm to the=20
output and a 500 Ohm resistor in series to the signal generator, as=20
stated in the datasheet. But the ripple does not change.

Any ideas or suggestions?

Guess for what i will need the filter! :-)

73, Stefan/DK7FC
------=_NextPart_000_005E_01CD564C.0C1FDB50--