Circuit Response
every model has an edge, and the figure carries it
Concept

Component sensitivity — where it appears

How much a response moves per fractional change in one element, whose order in that change is what separates a ladder from a cascade. It is measured here by perturbing one element and fitting the exponent, because the order of the dependence separates two realisations that share a response.

Named by 21 essays across 4 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

One per cent on one component, in two realisations of the same order-5 filter. computed by solving, not by drawing. The two realisations agree to 3e-14 dB before anything is moved. Moving each element in turn by 1%, the worst deviation at the 2 ripple peaks is 0.1621 dB for the cascade and 0.0030 dB for the LC ladder — 54 times smaller. Across the whole passband the two are within 3% of each other, because near the band edge both are dominated by the response's own steepness rather than by the realisation.

A ladder is not a cascade

The same fifth-order Chebyshev, built two ways. A one per cent component moves the buffered cascade's passband by 0.162 dB at the ripple peaks and the doubly terminated LC ladder's by 0.003 dB — fifty-four times less. The number is not the claim: the claim is the exponent. Fitted over two decades of tolerance the cascade's error grows as the 0.99 power and the LC ladder's as the 2.00 power, because at maximum power transfer the response is stationary in every element it contains.

filters · Filter tradeoff How much of the amplifier reaches the answer, at 35° of phase margin. computed by solving, not by drawing by multiplying the forward path's gain by 1 + 10⁻⁵ and solving again. At low frequency 0.0999% of a fractional change in the device reaches the closed-loop gain, which is one over the loop gain of 995.04. It changes sign at 258 Hz — above there a better amplifier gives a smaller gain — and reaches 1.61 at 8.08 kHz, which is worse than having no feedback, and settles at exactly 1 above crossover (5.73 kHz), where there is no loop gain left to spend. The second route, the real part of 1/(1 + T) from the cut loop, agrees to 9.6e-6.

How much of the amplifier gets through

The reason to build an amplifier from a bad amplifier and two resistors is that a change in the device barely reaches the answer — a tenth of a per cent of it at low frequency, measured by making the device better and solving again. Near crossover the same fraction rises above one, so feedback makes the gain more device-dependent than no feedback at all, and below fifty degrees of margin it changes sign on the way.

feedback · Desensitivity A divider of 4 equal 1.0% resistors, solved 3000 times. computed by solving, not by drawing. Every resistor drawn from its tolerance band and the divider solved, 3000 times. The worst case is ±1.000% — the part tolerance itself, and it does not improve when the divider is built from more parts — while the measured spread is 0.2944% and the worst of 3000 draws reached 82% of the bound. The root-sum-square, offered as though it were a standard deviation, is 1.70 of one here: for uniformly distributed parts it is √3 σ, a coverage of about 92%.

The tolerance that is not on any part

Four one per cent resistors in a divider give an answer whose worst case is one per cent, whose measured spread is 0.29 per cent, and whose root-sum-square bound — offered everywhere as though it were a standard deviation — is 1.70 of one. Adding parts does not move the worst case at all and shrinks the spread as one over their root, so the gap between the promise and the fact widens with every resistor. And the same arithmetic draws a boundary in tolerance rather than in frequency: an R–2R ladder is a twelve-bit converter only while its resistors are inside 0.14 per cent.

networks · Component tolerance An order-5 ladder driven from 2× the 1 kΩ it was designed between. computed by solving, not by drawing. A doubly-terminated Butterworth ladder is a two-port designed between two stated resistances, and the resistances are part of the design rather than the environment it happens to be used in. At match it loses 6.021 dB — exactly half the voltage — and its passband has no peak anywhere in it. Driving the same five reactances from 2× that resistance moves the shape by 2.345 dB and the insertion loss to 9.542 dB. The band inside which the shape is right to 0.5 dB runs 0.8857× to 1.1371× — a window of 25 per cent on a quantity usually written down as a round number. And the two sides are not alike: at twenty times the design resistance the departure has settled at 5.33 dB, while at a twentieth of it the passband is 15.51 dB out with 7.21 dB of peaking on it, so driving a ladder from too low an impedance is worse than driving it from too high a one.

The two resistors a ladder was designed between

A passive ladder filter is not a transfer function with some resistors attached; it is a two-port designed between two stated resistances, and the resistances are as much part of the design as the inductors. Driving an order-five Butterworth from anything outside 0.886 to 1.137 times its design resistance puts more than half a decibel of error on the passband — a tolerance tighter than the resistor is usually specified to — and the two sides of that window are not alike.

filters · Filter termination A difference quotient is best at a step of 1e-5, and is 1e+6 times worse at 10⁻¹¹. computed by solving, not by drawing. The worst disagreement between the adjoint network's derivatives and a central difference quotient of the same quantities, against the fractional step the quotient is taken with, on a 7-element LC ladder filter at 1000 Hz. The curve has a minimum because two errors pull opposite ways: the curvature the quotient neglects falls as the square of the step, and the digits its subtraction destroys rise as one over the step. The best it reaches is 1.4e-9, against the 2.3e-11 that the two-thirds power of the machine epsilon predicts. The exact route costs 2 solves against 15, and has neither error term.

Every derivative, and the one that is zero

How much does this response move if that capacitor is one per cent out? A difference quotient answers it one component at a time, in two solves each, and its best possible accuracy is four parts in a hundred million. Transposing the matrix and solving once more answers it for every component at once, exactly. Pointed at a claim the essays on ladder filters have made from the start and never tested directly — that a doubly terminated ladder filter's response is stationary in every element at its passband maxima — it returns two parts in ten billion, where the cascade realising the identical response returns 0.72.

networks · Sensitivity At the order a cascade runs out, a ladder still has 4.2 decades of level. computed by solving, not by drawing. How many decades of impedance level each structure can be built at while staying inside 0.1 dB of its own design, against order. Both carry two picofarads of stray at every node. The cascade also carries fifty ohms of amplifier output resistance, a fixed resistance, which binds it from below; its floor rises 8.5× over the four orders drawn, to 0.114 dB at order eight. The ladder's inductors carry a fixed resistance per henry instead — a fixed quality factor, which scales with the design and bounds nothing — so what limits it from below is a few milliohms of track, and at order nine it still has 4.20 decades with a floor of 0.0337 dB, 3.3× its own floor at order three against the cascade's 8.5×.

The band that does not close

A cascade of active sections can be built at three decades of impedance level at second order, one at sixth, and none at all at eighth — the band shuts by half a decade per order because two fixed quantities bind it from opposite ends. A doubly terminated ladder has only one of those quantities, because an inductor's loss is a fixed quality factor rather than a fixed resistance and therefore scales with the design. At order nine it still has four decades.

filters · Impedance scaling Where one pole goes when each component is 5% high. computed by solving, not by drawing. A series R–L–C, its poles recovered by rooting the determinant, and the derivative of the upper one with respect to each element taken exactly from the two null vectors at the pole. The dashed lines are the first-order prediction for a 5 per cent change; the filled circles are where the root actually goes when the element is changed and the determinant re-rooted. The three directions are the argument: the resistance moves the pole along a circle of constant radius, because the natural frequency does not contain it — its normalised sensitivity has a real part of 3.1e-16. The inductance and the capacitance each carry exactly −½ of the radius, and imaginary parts that are exact negatives. At 5 per cent the prediction is out by 0.122 per cent of the pole's own magnitude.

The derivative of a root

An earlier essay turned one transposed solve into the derivative of a response with respect to every element, and found a doubly terminated ladder filter stationary at its ripple peaks to a part in ten to the eighth. A pole is a different object — a value of s at which the matrix loses rank — and its derivative comes from two null vectors and a division. Pointed at the same two realisations, the ladder filter's advantage is a factor of 2.17, not eight orders of magnitude: what is stationary is the magnitude at one frequency, and it says nothing about where the poles are.

networks · Sensitivity The floor rises as the 1.06 power of the order, and the arithmetic gives out first. computed by solving, not by drawing. The least departure a doubly terminated ladder can achieve at any impedance level, against order — the floor, which is what is left when the tolerance the band is drawn at is taken away. It rises from 0.0087 dB at order three to 0.0389 dB at order 13, as the 1.06 power of the order, so the order at which it reaches the 0.1 dB the band is drawn at is near 32. Drawn over it are the same networks with one imperfection removed at a time, and they do not add: the winding loss alone leaves a larger departure than the complete realisation does, because the track resistance is in series with the load and lifts the passband exactly where the winding loss droops it. The stray capacitance contributes nothing at all, since the level that minimises the departure is a few ohms. What ends the sweep is neither: the continued-fraction synthesis loses its leading coefficients to cancellation and stalls at order 9 for a Butterworth and 14 for a Chebyshev.

The floor that outlives the arithmetic

A band of impedance levels is what a tolerance allows; a floor is what a structure has. Measured at six orders, a doubly terminated ladder's floor rises as the 1.06 power of the order and would not reach a tenth of a decibel until order thirty-two — an order nobody builds. What stops the sweep is neither the structure nor the parasitics: the continued fraction that turns a reflection polynomial into element values loses its leading coefficients to cancellation and stalls at order nine for a Butterworth and fourteen for a Chebyshev.

filters · Impedance scaling At a stationary point a tolerance has a mean, not a spread. computed by solving, not by drawing. Six hundred ladder filters with every reactance drawn independently from ±1 per cent, measured at the ripple peak and at a frequency between the peaks. Away from the peak the distribution is centred on nominal and 325 of 600 are above it. At the peak none is: the whole distribution lies below, with a mean of -0.0030 per cent and a worst case of -0.0140. A yield calculation that assumes a symmetric spread at a frequency that has a stationary point is wrong in both directions at once — it allows parts above a limit that cannot exist, and it misses that the whole batch has moved.

The tolerance that can only take away

At a doubly terminated ladder filter's ripple peak the first derivative of the magnitude with respect to every reactance is zero to ten digits, which an earlier essay measured and which says nothing about how much the response moves. This says how: every second derivative is negative, so of six hundred ladder filters built from one per cent components not one is above nominal, the mean has shifted rather than the spread having grown, and doubling the tolerance quadruples the damage instead of doubling it.

networks · Sensitivity Five tolerances, and the response moves in two directions. computed by solving, not by drawing. The eigenvalues of the relative second-derivative matrix of a fifth-order 0.5 dB Chebyshev ladder's magnitude at its lower ripple peak, over its five reactances. Two are of order one — -0.9473 and -0.8051, both negative — and the other three are 3.9e-9, which is zero at the precision the arithmetic has. So the quadratic form is negative semi-definite of rank two, and there is a three-dimensional subspace of component errors that the peak cannot see. The open circles are the same matrix computed by four re-solves per pair, sharing no adjoint arithmetic with the filled ones: they agree to parts in ten thousand on the two that are there and place the three zeros about two decades higher, which is the price of differencing a difference.

The three tolerances that do nothing

An earlier essay computed every second derivative of a ladder filter's magnitude at a ripple peak, found them all negative, and built six hundred ladder filters to argue that no combination of tolerances could raise the response. The whole matrix says so outright — and says something six hundred samples could not have found, because a sample of a five-dimensional box never lands on a three-dimensional subspace: two of the five eigenvalues are of order one and the other three are nine decades down.

networks · Sensitivity One component of a gyrator moves the response by 0.50; the passive ladder's inductor moves it by 3e-8. computed by solving, not by drawing. The magnitude sensitivity at the passband maximum of a gyrator ladder, against the resistance scale the gyrators are built at, for a single component and for the combination of both halves that actually changes the synthesised inductance. The passive ladder realising the identical response is at 3.2e-8. A single component sits at about a half whatever the resistance scale is, and the combination falls as one over it — the 0.97 power over 3 decades. So the stationarity has not been destroyed, it has become a statement about a combination of components rather than about a component, and independent parts do not come in combinations.

One inductor, and ten components

The rung below built an inductor out of an amplifier and ended with a boundary that is not a frequency: one end of it is soldered to ground. A ladder's series inductors are floating, so making one takes four amplifiers rather than two — and the four-amplifier version is exactly floating, to five figures, and reproduces the ladder's response to a hundredth of a decibel. It does not reproduce its stationarity. Each of a gyrator's ten components moves the response by exactly a half, where the inductor it replaced moved it by ten to the minus eight.

filters · Gyrator The most sensitive direction at one ripple peak is not the one at the next. computed by solving, not by drawing. The eigenvector of the largest eigenvalue of the relative curvature matrix, at each of the 2 ripple peaks of a 5th-order 0.5 dB Chebyshev ladder, drawn as its components over the reactances in order along the ladder filter. Every one is symmetric under the filter's own reversal and no two of them are the same direction: the largest overlap between any pair is 0.0603, which is 86.5 degrees apart. The eigenvalue that belongs to them grows from -0.9473 at 554.9 Hz to -12.005 at 897.9 Hz, a factor of 12.7, so the peak nearest the band edge is both the most sensitive place in the passband and sensitive to a different combination of parts. Each direction is confirmed by a second computation of the whole matrix — four re-solves per pair, sharing no adjoint arithmetic — which returns the same direction to 7.6e-7 radians.

The direction a response is most sensitive to

An earlier essay diagonalised a ladder filter's curvature at one ripple peak and read only the eigenvalues: rank two of five, three directions of nothing. The eigenvectors say what the two directions are, and doing it at every peak rather than one changes the conclusion. The most sensitive combination at 554.9 Hz and the one at 897.9 Hz are 86.5 degrees apart, the curvature that belongs to them grows from −0.556 to −75.4 across a ninth-order passband, and exactly one combination survives the whole band at every order — which turns out to be the ripple depth.

networks · Sensitivity At Q = 2 and a hundred times the corner, one arrangement is 1.97% out and the other 2.83%. computed by solving, not by drawing. The same second-order section designed twice — a follower with a capacitance ratio, and equal passives with the Q supplied by a closed-loop gain of 2.5000 — built with the same one-pole amplifier and swept over its gain-bandwidth, with both pole pairs recovered by rooting the determinant. The unity-gain arrangement's error is Q over the ratio: 2.00 per cent at a hundred times the corner. The equal-component arrangement's is K²/2 over the ratio, 3.13 per cent, because its amplifier is a gain-of-K stage and therefore has K times less bandwidth to spend. Below about thirty times the corner both laws fail, and the second one changes sign.

Where the Q comes from

Two second-order sections with no component value in common have the same transfer function to 1.8×10⁻¹⁰ of a decibel, and are not the same circuit. Against a slow amplifier the follower's Q error is Q over the gain-bandwidth ratio and the gain stage's is K²/2 over it — so the second is worse below Q = 3.08 and better above it. Against component tolerance the follower's worst element carries ½ and the gain stage's carries 2Q − ½, nineteen times as much at Q = 5. Neither oscillates at any gain-bandwidth at all.

filters · Q enhancement The load alternates with parity between 1 and 1.9841, at every order. computed by solving, not by drawing. The last quotient of the continued fraction that turns a reflection polynomial into element values, which is the load resistance the design demands, drawn against order. A Butterworth returns exactly one at every order. A Chebyshev alternates: one at every odd order and 1.984056 at every even one, the same number each time, and it is the closed form (√(1+ε²)+ε)² to a part in 10¹⁵. The mechanism is in the last two rows of the panel. A lossless ladder filter is two resistances at direct current, so it must deliver the maximum available power there, which requires that zero be one of the frequencies the design reflects nothing at — and an even-order Chebyshev's reflection zeros are the roots of an even Chebyshev polynomial, none of which is zero. The synthesis stalls at order 9 for a Butterworth, which is why that series stops at eight.

The termination an even order cannot have

Every even-order Chebyshev ladder terminates in 1.984056 times its source resistance at half a decibel of ripple, the same number at orders two, four, six and eight, and it is (√(1+ε²)+ε)² to a part in 10¹⁵. Building one between equal terminations instead — which is what a table of g-values and a matched pair gives — turns 0.5000 dB of ripple into 1.8123 at order four, deletes one of the passband maxima outright, and moves the worst tolerance corner from the 2.000 power of the component tolerance to the 1.109 power: a factor of 95 at one per cent parts.

filters · Filter termination The gain's sensitivity to the device and to the divider add to one at every frequency, and at crossover each is exactly one half (34.9° of margin). computed by solving, not by drawing, three times at each of 241 frequencies: nominal, with the amplifier's gain raised by one part in 10⁵, and with the feedback fraction raised by one part in 10⁵. The fraction of the device's change reaching the closed-loop magnitude is 9.97 × 10⁻⁴ at 10.0 Hz and 1.60 at its peak near 7.94 kHz; the fraction of the divider's change is 0.99899 at 10.0 Hz and falls to −0.60 at 7.94 kHz. They add to one within 1.16 × 10⁻⁵ everywhere, and at the loop's crossover, 5.73 kHz, they are 0.5000 and 0.5000: the real parts of 1/(1 + T) and T/(1 + T), which are one half at |T| = 1 for any phase. The cut loop, a second route, agrees to 9.55 × 10⁻⁶.

Half to the amplifier, half to the resistors

A feedback amplifier is supposed to hand its accuracy to the resistors, and at low frequency it does — 99.9 per cent of a change in the divider reaches the gain and 0.1 per cent of a change in the device. The two fractions are measured here by nudging each and solving again, and they add to one at every frequency, to five parts in a hundred thousand. At the loop's crossover each is exactly one half, whatever the margin: the gain's magnitude answers the amplifier and the resistors equally. As complex numbers both are 1/(2 sin(φ/2)) there, above one for any margin under sixty degrees, and around the crossover lies a band where the gain is more sensitive to both than it would be with no feedback at all.

feedback · Desensitivity Four 1% parts spread evenly across their band: the divider's error has a spread of 0.289%, and 8.6% of builds are beyond ±0.5%. computed by solving, not by drawing: a divider of four equal 10 kΩ resistors tapped at the middle, built 6000 times from seeded parts uniform across ±1%, each copy's output error taken from the ratio in closed form and the first four hundred also solved on the netlist, agreeing to 7e-16. The inset is the parts' own distribution; the histogram is the divider's error. Its standard deviation is 0.2894%, half the parts' 0.5780%, because each part moves the output by a quarter of its own error and four quarters add in quadrature to a half. 8.60% of builds fall beyond ±0.5%, which is half the worst case the printed tolerance allows.

The shape a tolerance does not print

A resistor marked 1% promises only that its value lies within one per cent. How the values fill that band is not printed, and it decides almost everything a design does with the part. Four populations that all honour ±1% — spread evenly, Gaussian with the band at three standard deviations, screened from a wider population, and sorted with the best parts removed — give a four-resistor divider spreads of 0.289, 0.168, 0.267 and 0.378 per cent, a factor of 2.26 under one label. Specify the divider at ±0.5 per cent and the yield is 91.4, 99.8, 93.7 and 85.3 per cent. The shape's signature fades as one over the number of parts, so it bites hardest in the circuits with fewest.

networks · Component tolerance One per cent more C moves the Q = 5 pair straight down, parallel to the axis, and the response by up to 3.20% at 1.093 ω₀. computed by solving, not by drawing. The upper pole of the Q = 5 series RLC low-pass before and after a 1% increase in C, solved from both netlists (upper panel: the displacement, magnified to a fixed length, beside the tangent to the circle |s| = ω₀ and the direction parallel to the axis), and the fractional change in the response's magnitude against frequency (lower panel): solved as the ratio of the two responses (solid) and predicted as the displacement projected onto the two legs (dashed, on top of it), agreeing to 3.9% of the largest change. The pole moves 0.00 × 10⁻⁴ ω₀ towards the axis and 49.88 × 10⁻⁴ ω₀ down. The largest change in the response is −3.198% at 1.093 ω₀: beside the peak, where the short leg is at forty-five degrees.

A tolerance is an arrow

Change one part of a series RLC low-pass by one per cent and its pole pair moves by a few ten-thousandths of ω₀ — and the response moves by the displacement projected onto the two distances that make it, to within four per cent of the solve. The direction is set by the part. A resistor moves the pair round its circle, away from the axis, and is felt at the peak: 0.99 per cent at Q = 5. A capacitor moves it straight down, parallel to the axis, and is felt beside the peak: +1.78 and −3.20 per cent at the half-power points and almost nothing at the peak itself. Because the short leg is ω₀/2Q long, the capacitor's effect grows by half a per cent for every unit of Q, to 10.1 per cent at Q = 20. Two hundred builds from 1% parts spread by ±2.5 per cent at the band edge.

frequency · Frequency response Parts sharing 90% of their error: the divider's ratio spreads 0.091% and the chain's total resistance 0.559% — one from the same four parts, cancelling, and one adding. computed by solving, not by drawing, over 20,000 seeded builds: four 1% resistors whose errors share a fraction ρ = 0.9 of their variance — as parts from one reel, one wafer or one temperature do — built into a divider tapped at the middle. The ratio's error (solid bars) has a standard deviation of 0.0912%, half the parts' 0.577% times √(1 − ρ); the total resistance of the same four in series (outline bars) has 0.5587%, the parts' spread times √(ρ + (1 − ρ)/4). Correlation that makes a ratio better makes a sum worse, by the same arithmetic.

What a ratio does not see

Parts from one reel, one wafer or one temperature share part of their error, and a circuit that uses them as a ratio cancels exactly the part they share. Four 1% resistors sharing ninety per cent of their error make a divider whose ratio spreads 0.091 per cent and a series chain whose total spreads 0.559 — the same four parts, one answer six times better than independent parts would give and one nearly twice as bad. The ratio's spread falls as √(1 − ρ), the total's rises as √(ρ + (1 − ρ)/4). From −40 to 85 °C the chain moves by up to 0.76 per cent and the ratio by 0.135, inside the ±25 ppm/K the coefficients differ by. And a resistor array whose parts share 99.5 per cent of their error puts a divider inside ±0.1 per cent every time that four discrete parts manage it one time in four.

networks · Component tolerance With the capacitor tracking the inductor, one per cent of drift moves the Q = 5 response by at most 1.00%, at the peak — against −2.73% beside it with the capacitor held. computed by solving, not by drawing, from two netlists. The Q = 5 series RLC low-pass with its inductor raised by 1% and its capacitor changed by (1.01)^(−t) − 1, so that at t = 1 their product is unchanged; here t = 1. The fractional change in the response against frequency (solid), against the inductor alone with the capacitor held (dashed). The upper pole moves 9.90 × 10⁻⁴ ω₀ towards the axis and 0.99 × 10⁻⁴ ω₀ up it, and ω₀ by 0.00%. The largest change is 1.00% at 1.000 ω₀; with the capacitor held it is −2.73% at 1.115 ω₀. The slider is the tracking.

Two parts that drift together

A one per cent change in the inductor of a Q = 5 resonant low-pass moves its pole pair mostly downwards, and the response by 2.73% beside the peak. Let the capacitor fall by the same fraction as the inductor rises and their product is fixed, so ω₀ is: the pair can only go round its circle, sideways near the top, and the response changes by 1.00% at the peak and nowhere else — the change a resistor makes. The difference grows with Q: at Q = 20 one per cent of drift moves the band edge 10.2% with the capacitor held, 20.7% with it drifting the same way, and 1.00% with it tracking. Over −40 to 85 °C an inductor of +150 ppm/K moves a Q = 20 band edge 9.1% with a zero-coefficient capacitor and 0.57% with a −150 ppm/K one. Correlation between two parts' errors is itself a tolerance.

frequency · Frequency response Two 1% parts sharing 90% of their error: the divider's output spreads 0.129% at a half, 0.236% at ten to one and 0.258% at a hundred to one. computed by solving, not by drawing, over 20,000 seeded builds at each of seven ratios, every ratio computed exactly: a divider of two 1% parts, each with a uniform part's 0.577% spread and sharing a fraction ρ = 0.9 of it, with the top resistor N times the bottom. The output ratio's standard deviation (dots) against N, beside N/(N + 1)·√2·σ·√(1 − ρ) (line) and the same law for the other shared fractions (faint). N 1: 0.1286%; N 2: 0.1712%; N 5: 0.2145%; N 10: 0.2356%; N 20: 0.2477%; N 50: 0.2536%; N 100: 0.2581%. What is shared cancels at every ratio; what is not reaches the output with a leverage of N/(N + 1), which is a half for a halving divider and nearly one for a large ratio — so the same two parts make a ten-to-one divider 1.83 times worse.

The small leg of a large ratio

A divider of two 1% parts sharing ninety per cent of their error spreads 0.129 per cent at a half and 0.236 at ten to one — the same two parts, nearly twice as bad, because what they do not share reaches the output with a leverage of N/(N + 1) rather than one half. Correlation cancels at every ratio; the leverage does not. Built from equal units of one array, a divider of N to one spreads as σᵤ·√(N/M), so at any one area a ten-to-one ratio costs √10 against a half and needs ten times the units to match it, and the units it needs are the bottom leg's. And a ratio far from a half heats its own parts unequally: at 50 V across 11 kΩ the top of a two-part ten-to-one divider runs 46 K hotter than the bottom and the ratio moves 1,055 ppm with perfectly matched coefficients, where a chain of eleven equal units moves at most 29.

networks · Component tolerance A fifth-order Chebyshev ladder built from parts of Q = 100: its passband sags by 0.94 dB near the edge and 0.38 dB at low frequency — 8.686·δ·τg, the group delay times the dissipation. computed by solving, not by drawing. A doubly terminated 0.5 dB Chebyshev ladder, fifth order, 1 kHz edge, 1 kΩ terminations, lossless (dashed) and with every inductor given a series resistance and every capacitor a shunt conductance for a uniform dissipation δ = ωc/Q = 62.8 s⁻¹ (solid), and the lossless response plus 8.686·δ·τg(f), with τg read off the lossless filter's phase (dots). The prediction holds to 3.6% of the extra loss across the passband. The extra is smallest where the delay is smallest, 0.383 dB at 38 Hz, and largest at 953 Hz near the edge, 0.943 dB, where the delay peaks at 1.79 ms: the ripple the design specified is rounded off where it was steepest.

The derivative that is a delay

A doubly terminated ladder filter is stationary in every element's value at its ripple peaks, and that insensitivity says nothing about the parts' losses. Give every reactance the same dissipation δ — a series resistance δL in each inductor, a shunt conductance δC across each capacitor — and every reactance has the impedance it had at s + δ, so the lossy ladder is exactly H(s + δ). By the Cauchy–Riemann equations the loss then rises by 8.686 times δ times the group delay, in decibels: the derivative of a ladder filter's response with respect to its parts' dissipation is its group delay. Solved with the resistors in, a fifth-order 0.5 dB Chebyshev of Q = 100 parts sags 0.383 dB at low frequency and 0.943 dB near its edge, where the delay peaks at 1.79 ms, the law holding to 3.6%. The sag falls as one over Q, grows with the order — 0.37 dB at third order, 2.74 at ninth — and is set by the mean of the inductors' and capacitors' dissipations.

networks · Sensitivity

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Component toleranceQuality factorMonte carloDesign tradeoffDoubly terminated ladder filterRealisationAdjoint networkModel rangeVoltage dividerFilter orderLadder filterMaximum power transfer

All concepts