Generator

A section whose zero sits 1.30× above its pole

computed by solving, not by drawing. The series arm is an inductor and 5.92 nF in parallel, so it is an open circuit at 1300 Hz and nothing gets through — that is the transmission zero, and it belongs to the arm alone. The pole pair belongs to the total shunt capacitance of 10.0 nF, so it sits at 1000 Hz, always below. Far above both, the response settles at -4.6 dB, which is exactly the fraction of the capacitance in the series arm — the stopband floor and the zero placement are one choice, not two.
A section whose zero sits 1.30× above its polecomputed by solving, not by drawing. The series arm is an inductor and 5.92 nF in parallel, so it is an open circuit at 1300 Hz and nothing gets through — that is the transmission zero, and it belongs to the arm alone. The pole pair belongs to the total shunt capacitance of 10.0 nF, so it sits at 1000 Hz, always below. Far above both, the response settles at -4.6 dB, which is exactly the fraction of the capacitance in the series arm — the stopband floor and the zero placement are one choice, not two.100-10-20-30-401001k10k100kfrequency (hertz)magnitude (decibels)pole at 1000 Hzzero at 1300 Hzfloor -4.6 dB = Cp/CtotalL ∥ Cp, then R ∥ C,,,,,,,,,solved, then checked — one capacitance split in twozero 1.30× the pole, floor -4.6 dB

Drawn above at its default parameters, which is almost never how an essay calls it. A placement states the numbers that essay is arguing about, so the figure a reader meets is about that argument rather than about the generator — 98% of the placements on this site pass one, and the phase that raised that number from 12% found eight captions describing a figure the page was not showing.

At those defaults the edge it states is zero 1.30× the pole, floor -4.6 dB — the right-hand slot of the caption strip, which on this site is never used for anything else, and which is read back out of the drawing above rather than out of the code that wrote it. It belongs to Filters, measured not tabulated, which is to say a change to it is a change to lib/figures/filters.js. It takes a slider on zero ÷ pole frequency with 5 settings, and every one of them has passed the same assertions as the frame above — a figure whose circuit stops doing what its caption says at any setting stops the build.

Called by 8 essays

which is the blast radius of changing it

What actually fills a null

A ten per cent error in the two components of a notch's arm leaves the null three hundred decibels deep — it moves it rather than filling it. What fills it is loss, at twenty decibels per decade of arm resistance exactly. And the depth at the frequency the notch was designed for splits into two orders depending on which way the two errors go: one per cent parts leave 79 decibels one way and 33 the other.

Filters, measured not tabulated

The order of the null, not the number of them

A mean rejects the mains exactly and rejects it one per cent off frequency by forty decibels, whatever the window length. Two means in cascade of the same total length settle in the same time, cost a third more noise bandwidth and hold that forty decibels over ten times the band — the factor being ten raised to minus the depth in decibels over forty, because a first-order null rises linearly through a target and a second-order one quadratically. Splitting the two lengths to straddle the frequency buys a further factor of exactly root two, for no noise at all, and puts the design two parts in ten thousand from a cliff.

The floor, which bounds from below

The null that is stationary in nothing

An LC notch has two mechanisms and they do different things: a tolerance moves its null rather than filling it, because the resonance depends on a product two errors can leave alone, and loss fills it at twenty decibels per decade of arm resistance. A twin-T has no resonance and no arm. Measured, everything fills it at twenty decibels a decade and nothing moves it — one ohm in series with its capacitors gives 88 decibels where a hundredth of a per cent of tolerance gives 92, because a series resistance in a capacitor branch is a fractional error of r over R and nothing else.

Filters, measured not tabulated

The sign the null leaves behind

Put a twin-T in the feedback path of an amplifier of gain A and its null becomes a peak with a quality factor of (A + 1)/4. A filled null is not a small phasor of any phase. It is a real number, minus a quarter of the error in the shunt elements, and once the loop multiplies it by A its sign decides everything. At a gain of a thousand a 0.1 per cent error lowers the Q from 250 to 200 one way and raises it to 334 the other, and at 0.4 per cent the second direction oscillates. Every gain falls on one curve, the exact-null Q divided by 1 − A·t/4. So a Q is set to ten per cent only by a null deeper than 20 log(44·Q): one per cent parts allow a Q of 9.6.

Filters, measured not tabulated

The peak the amplifier moves

A twin-T around a stage of gain A makes a peak of quality factor (A + 1)/4, and a real stage has a bandwidth of its own, so its gain at the null is complex. The expectation is that the lag turns the loop's gain and the Q rises by 1/cos φ, doubling at 60°. It does not: a single pole that turns the gain by φ also shrinks it by cos φ, and the two cancel in the width of the peak — the Q holds to about one part in the gain up to 60°, and the loop still oscillates at the same shunt error, 4.1% at a gain of 100, to three per cent. What the stage's bandwidth moves is the peak itself: 2·f₀/GBW below the null, with the gain nowhere in it. At 45° of lag the frequency the circuit was built to select sits on its own −3 dB edge.

Filters, measured not tabulated

The residue that has only one sign

A bridged-T puts its minimum where a twin-T puts its null, with one fewer part, and its residue there is exactly 2R₂/(2R₂ + R₁): real, like the twin-T's, but positive for any values the parts can take. In a loop of gain A the two networks follow one law — the Q falls by 1 + A·ρ — and they sit on opposite sides of it. The twin-T's residue is zero with exact parts and either sign with real ones, so its loop's Q can be anything, up to oscillation. The bridged-T's loop is always damped: it rises with the gain and stops at a ceiling near √(R₁/R₂)/2, 5.00 for a ratio of 100, with no gain up to a million able to make it oscillate. What the ceiling buys is steadiness: at a Q of five, ±1% parts move the twin-T's loop by 9.1% and the bridged-T's by 2.0%.

Filters, measured not tabulated

The dual that is the same function

Swap a bridged-T's resistors for capacitors and its capacitors for resistors and the transfer does not change: two 10 kΩ resistors bridged by 1 nF with 100 nF to ground are the RC network's 100 kΩ and 1 kΩ around two 10 nF capacitors, to 5.7×10⁻⁸, which is the solver's own conditioning. The residue is 2/(2 + n) for both and the loop's ceiling √n/2 for both. So the choice between them is not about the response; it is about which components carry the ratio. Near the ceiling the Q moves by half the ratio's error, and a ratio of two capacitors at ±5% spreads the Q by 10.0% where two resistors at ±1% spread it by 2.1% — and drifts 2.0% over a hundred kelvin where the resistors drift 0.25.

Filters, measured not tabulated

The residue that falls with its slope

A bridged-T's residue at its null is 2/(2 + n), and a loop around it stops at a Q near √n/2. Returning its shunt resistor to −15 times the output instead of to ground divides the residue by sixteen, to 0.00125 — and the loop's ceiling stays at 5.00, because the slope through the null falls with the residue. It has to: at a transmission zero the output is zero, so a trim that acts through the output leaves the zeros where they were, and the ceiling of a loop with unlimited gain is the zeros' own Q. What the trim does change is the gain the ceiling needs — nine-tenths of it at A = 9/ρ, 449 earthed and 14,400 at k = −31. No return gain below one takes the residue through zero, and a non-inverting one lowers the ceiling.

Filters, measured not tabulated

Every generator