[Elecraft] [K3] Elecraft roofing filters

[Guy Olinger, K2AV]

That's a wish for 10 Hz shift/width below, not 50 :)
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Guy Olinger, K2AV 
  To: ni0c ; elecraft at mailman.qth.net 
  Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 10:14 PM
  Subject: Re: [Elecraft] [K3] Elecraft roofing filters


  Having used three different K3's equipped with 4 different sets of 250 & 400 hz 8 poles in overload city major contests, the usefulness of these filters is belied by the apparent closeness of numbers.

  In practice we have found that associating the 400 with a DSP width of 450, and the "250" with a DSP width of 350 has been extremely useful, however "too close by the numbers" that may look on paper. 

  We use 450 for running for as long as it may last, and when the inevitable 30 over 9 crowder squeezes down on us, I reduce to 350 and if that isn't enough, *ADDITIONALLY* shift the center away 50 hz more. This combination plus the noise blanker for key clicks has worked extremely well. (Having 50 Hz granularity on the CW shift/widths would be *SO* useful here...) 

  I have measured the combined (roofing+DSP) drop on the steepest part of the skirts at ~12 db per 10 Hz with these two 8 pole filters. So bringing in the skirt "only" 30 or 40 Hz is enough to push down the crowder quite a bit, usually well out of hardware AGC, without narrowing the listening window to the point of missing QSO points and multipliers from all the inevitable off-frequency callers. 

  Anyone who asks us what filters to buy for CW contesting, we tell them 400/250 8 pole set to 450/350.  Tried and true, not theory. 

  W4TV and I will just have to agree to disagree. 

  73, Guy.
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: ni0c 
    To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net 
    Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 4:47 PM
    Subject: [Elecraft] [K3] Elecraft roofing filters


    W4TV wrote:
    "The difference between the 250 and 400 Hz filters is not 
    enough to be worthwhile (approximately 375 Hz vs. 430 Hz). "

    Joe, what is your source for these numbers?  I've seen numbers 
    like this mentioned previously on the reflector.

    I recently tested my K3 CW roofing filters using the XG-2 generator 
    at 7040 KHz (50 microvolts input) and KS7D's nice software package, 
    "K3 Filter Tools."  

    Here's what I came up with, with AGC off and with the DSP 
    bandwidth set at least as wide as 900 Hz for all tests (to isolate 
    the effects of just the crystal roofing filter):

    200 Hz, 5-pole: -6 dB BW = 210 Hz; -30 dB BW = 430 Hz

    250 Hz, 8-pole: -6 dB BW = 260 Hz; -30 dB BW = 500 Hz

    400 Hz, 8-pole: -6 dB BW = 380 Hz; -30 dB BW = 580 Hz

    Note the uncertainty in each of the bandwidths above is 
    plus or minus 20 Hz, because I ran these sweeps in 10 Hz 
    increments to save time. (I'll repeat these tests using a 
    1 or 2 Hz increment, when I have some spare time.) 

    These tests on my filters (as well as my experience by ear) 
    indicate there is an appreciable difference in the 250 and 
    400 Hz 8-pole filters.  I've always wondered, too, about 
    manufacturing tolerances on narrow crystal filters.  

    73, 
    Chuck Guenther  NI0C


       




----------------------------------------------------------------------------


    ______________________________________________________________
    Elecraft mailing list
    Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
    Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
    Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net

    This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
    Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  ______________________________________________________________
  Elecraft mailing list
  Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
  Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
  Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net

  This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
  Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/elecraft/attachments/20090206/57b548c5/attachment.html