Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
I'm trying to build a circuit to split two signal paths apart, process them
differently, and them put them back together. In particular, I have incoming RF signals from ~25MHz-3GHz (they're going to a wideband receiver) and I have some notch filters that I want to be able to selectively engage between 25-500MHz.Due to the topology and parasitics of the filters, they tend to roll off above 500MHz and have significant loss by the time you get to 3GHz. Hence, I'd like to run 25-500MHz though one signal path and 500MHz-3GHz through another (I want to leave the 500MHz-3GHz part untouched). The 'cross over' region doesn't have to be particular 'clean' (i.e., it can vary +/-5dB easily). I tried desgining a 5th order diplexer, and it cleanly splits the two frequency ranges into separate path going to their own terminators. However, if instead of terminating the low pass output and high pass outputs to their own loads I connect the two outputs together, I get something of a mess -- not at all a 'flat line' like I was hoping for. I next tried hooking up two of these diplexers 'end to end,' and while the response is almost flat, it has a very sharp null right at the 500MHz corner frequency, and another very sharp set of nulls a couple hundred MHz above and below this (they're mirror images). Hmm... So... any hints how to do this properly? I thought for certain the end to end diplexers would have done the trick. Thanks, ---Joel Kolstad |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
To split a signal you can use a direction coupler.
I have seen "hybrid" ring models made of transmission line with specific length in UKW-unterlage A4 typed edition 1980's. To inject a signal you can use a direction coupler too.... and them put them back together. Maybe Google for Dubus artikels. I'am just giving a hint. A piece of thick coax, braid a wire for about 1/4 wavelength under the outer layer, remove plastic cover first. Connect one end to a resistor 50 Ohm (same as the transmission line impedance) other end of the resistor to earth. The other end of the wire to get signal from or put signal in. Idea from the book antennenbibel Karl Rothammel. "Joel Kolstad" schreef in bericht ... I'm trying to build a circuit to split two signal paths apart, process them differently, and them put them back together. In particular, I have incoming RF signals from ~25MHz-3GHz (they're going to a wideband receiver) and I have some notch filters that I want to be able to selectively engage between 25-500MHz.Due to the topology and parasitics of the filters, they tend to roll off above 500MHz and have significant loss by the time you get to 3GHz. Hence, I'd like to run 25-500MHz though one signal path and 500MHz-3GHz through another (I want to leave the 500MHz-3GHz part untouched). The 'cross over' region doesn't have to be particular 'clean' (i.e., it can vary +/-5dB easily). I tried desgining a 5th order diplexer, and it cleanly splits the two frequency ranges into separate path going to their own terminators. However, if instead of terminating the low pass output and high pass outputs to their own loads I connect the two outputs together, I get something of a mess -- not at all a 'flat line' like I was hoping for. I next tried hooking up two of these diplexers 'end to end,' and while the response is almost flat, it has a very sharp null right at the 500MHz corner frequency, and another very sharp set of nulls a couple hundred MHz above and below this (they're mirror images). Hmm... So... any hints how to do this properly? I thought for certain the end to end diplexers would have done the trick. Thanks, ---Joel Kolstad |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Joel Kolstad" bravely wrote to "All" (14 Feb 05 16:51:45)
--- on the heady topic of "Something like a diplexer" JK From: "Joel Kolstad" JK Subject: Something like a diplexer JK Xref: aeinews rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:2136 JK I'm trying to build a circuit to split two signal paths apart, process JK them differently, and them put them back together. In particular, I JK have incoming RF signals from ~25MHz-3GHz (they're going to a wideband JK receiver) and I have some notch filters that I want to be able to JK selectively engage between 25-500MHz.Due to the topology and JK parasitics of the filters, they tend to roll off above 500MHz and have JK significant loss by the time you get to 3GHz. JK Hence, I'd like to run 25-500MHz though one signal path and JK 500MHz-3GHz through another (I want to leave the 500MHz-3GHz part JK untouched). The 'cross over' region doesn't have to be particular JK 'clean' (i.e., it can vary +/-5dB easily). JK I tried desgining a 5th order diplexer, and it cleanly splits the two JK frequency ranges into separate path going to their own terminators. JK However, if instead of terminating the low pass output and high pass JK outputs to their own loads I connect the two outputs together, I get JK something of a mess -- not at all a 'flat line' like I was hoping for. JK I next tried hooking up two of these diplexers 'end to end,' and while JK the response is almost flat, it has a very sharp null right at the JK 500MHz corner frequency, and another very sharp set of nulls a couple JK hundred MHz above and below this (they're mirror images). Hmm... JK So... any hints how to do this properly? I thought for certain the JK end to end diplexers would have done the trick. JK Thanks, JK ---Joel Kolstad You missed a step called a directional coupler. It's a sort of transformer with 2 input ports and 1 output port. The 2 inputs don't see one another but their power is combined at the output. A*s*i*m*o*v .... We're young, rich, and full of sugar, what do we do? |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Monday, 14 Feb 2005 23:53:26 -500, "Asimov"
wrote: "Joel Kolstad" bravely wrote to "All" (14 Feb 05 16:51:45) --- on the heady topic of "Something like a diplexer" JK From: "Joel Kolstad" JK Subject: Something like a diplexer JK Xref: aeinews rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:2136 JK I'm trying to build a circuit to split two signal paths apart, process JK them differently, and them put them back together. In particular, I JK have incoming RF signals from ~25MHz-3GHz (they're going to a wideband JK receiver) and I have some notch filters that I want to be able to JK selectively engage between 25-500MHz.Due to the topology and JK parasitics of the filters, they tend to roll off above 500MHz and have JK significant loss by the time you get to 3GHz. JK Hence, I'd like to run 25-500MHz though one signal path and JK 500MHz-3GHz through another (I want to leave the 500MHz-3GHz part JK untouched). The 'cross over' region doesn't have to be particular JK 'clean' (i.e., it can vary +/-5dB easily). JK I tried desgining a 5th order diplexer, and it cleanly splits the two JK frequency ranges into separate path going to their own terminators. JK However, if instead of terminating the low pass output and high pass JK outputs to their own loads I connect the two outputs together, I get JK something of a mess -- not at all a 'flat line' like I was hoping for. JK I next tried hooking up two of these diplexers 'end to end,' and while JK the response is almost flat, it has a very sharp null right at the JK 500MHz corner frequency, and another very sharp set of nulls a couple JK hundred MHz above and below this (they're mirror images). Hmm... JK So... any hints how to do this properly? I thought for certain the JK end to end diplexers would have done the trick. JK Thanks, JK ---Joel Kolstad You missed a step called a directional coupler. It's a sort of transformer with 2 input ports and 1 output port. The 2 inputs don't see one another but their power is combined at the output. You don't actually *need* a directional coupler. I have seen window preselectors with five separate sections for sub-bands between 403 and 520 MHz. The configuration is symmetrical (in/out) with simple bandpass filter segments and coaxial split/combine harnesses. Not a DC or hybrid in sight. I am presuming - not having swept one - that at "off" frequencies each parallelled leg presents a high enough impedance to the split junction that the effect is negligible. |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"budgie" bravely wrote to "All" (16 Feb 05 12:52:14)
--- on the heady topic of " Something like a diplexer" bu From: budgie bu Xref: aeinews rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:2181 You missed a step called a directional coupler. It's a sort of transformer with 2 input ports and 1 output port. The 2 inputs don't see one another but their power is combined at the output. bu You don't actually *need* a directional coupler. I have seen window bu preselectors with five separate sections for sub-bands between 403 and bu 520 MHz. The configuration is symmetrical (in/out) with simple bandpass bu filter segments and coaxial split/combine harnesses. Not a DC or bu hybrid in sight. I am presuming - not having swept one - that at "off" bu frequencies each parallelled leg presents a high enough impedance to bu the split junction that the effect is negligible. Yes but it requires some effort and cost to build the 2nd BP filters so I wonder if it's any more difficult to do either? What do you figure? A*s*i*m*o*v .... Always look on the bright side of life...[Monty Python] |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wednesday, 16 Feb 2005 09:42:58 -500, "Asimov"
wrote: "budgie" bravely wrote to "All" (16 Feb 05 12:52:14) --- on the heady topic of " Something like a diplexer" bu From: budgie bu Xref: aeinews rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:2181 You missed a step called a directional coupler. It's a sort of transformer with 2 input ports and 1 output port. The 2 inputs don't see one another but their power is combined at the output. bu You don't actually *need* a directional coupler. I have seen window bu preselectors with five separate sections for sub-bands between 403 and bu 520 MHz. The configuration is symmetrical (in/out) with simple bandpass bu filter segments and coaxial split/combine harnesses. Not a DC or bu hybrid in sight. I am presuming - not having swept one - that at "off" bu frequencies each parallelled leg presents a high enough impedance to bu the split junction that the effect is negligible. Yes but it requires some effort and cost to build the 2nd BP filters so I wonder if it's any more difficult to do either? What do you figure? I'm not sure we are on the same wavelength here (no pun intended). For *non-overlapping* filter sections, the bandsplit through two bandpass sections 25-500 and say 550-3000 should be able to be achieved with T-pieces at the input and output ends (although it appears the O/P didn't achieve this). |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 17:35:11 +0800, budgie wrote:
On Wednesday, 16 Feb 2005 09:42:58 -500, "Asimov" wrote: "budgie" bravely wrote to "All" (16 Feb 05 12:52:14) --- on the heady topic of " Something like a diplexer" bu From: budgie bu Xref: aeinews rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:2181 You missed a step called a directional coupler. It's a sort of transformer with 2 input ports and 1 output port. The 2 inputs don't see one another but their power is combined at the output. bu You don't actually *need* a directional coupler. I have seen window bu preselectors with five separate sections for sub-bands between 403 and bu 520 MHz. The configuration is symmetrical (in/out) with simple bandpass bu filter segments and coaxial split/combine harnesses. Not a DC or bu hybrid in sight. I am presuming - not having swept one - that at "off" bu frequencies each parallelled leg presents a high enough impedance to bu the split junction that the effect is negligible. Yes but it requires some effort and cost to build the 2nd BP filters so I wonder if it's any more difficult to do either? What do you figure? I'm not sure we are on the same wavelength here (no pun intended). For *non-overlapping* filter sections, the bandsplit through two bandpass sections 25-500 and say 550-3000 should be able to be achieved with T-pieces at the input and output ends (although it appears the O/P didn't achieve this). it looks like different wavelength to me, but I believe it is described in ARRL handbook how to build such combiners 73, LA8AK --- J. M. Noeding, LA8AK, N-4623 Kristiansand http://home.online.no/~la8ak/c.htm |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
If it was supposed to be for the same wavelength is another
interesting construction shown at http://my.athenet.net/~multiplx/cgi-bin/wilk.main.cgi --- J. M. Noeding, LA8AK, N-4623 Kristiansand http://home.online.no/~la8ak/c.htm |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 17:35:11 +0800, budgie wrote:
On Wednesday, 16 Feb 2005 09:42:58 -500, "Asimov" wrote: "budgie" bravely wrote to "All" (16 Feb 05 12:52:14) --- on the heady topic of " Something like a diplexer" bu From: budgie bu Xref: aeinews rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:2181 You missed a step called a directional coupler. It's a sort of transformer with 2 input ports and 1 output port. The 2 inputs don't see one another but their power is combined at the output. bu You don't actually *need* a directional coupler. I have seen window bu preselectors with five separate sections for sub-bands between 403 and bu 520 MHz. The configuration is symmetrical (in/out) with simple bandpass bu filter segments and coaxial split/combine harnesses. Not a DC or bu hybrid in sight. I am presuming - not having swept one - that at "off" bu frequencies each parallelled leg presents a high enough impedance to bu the split junction that the effect is negligible. Yes but it requires some effort and cost to build the 2nd BP filters so I wonder if it's any more difficult to do either? What do you figure? I'm not sure we are on the same wavelength here (no pun intended). For *non-overlapping* filter sections, the bandsplit through two bandpass sections 25-500 and say 550-3000 should be able to be achieved with T-pieces at the input and output ends (although it appears the O/P didn't achieve this). I am not sure exactly what is trying to be accomplished here but if it is to combine two different bandpass filters then yes a T. The cable from the low pass filter to the T should be a quarter wave length at the frequency of the high pass filter. The cable from the high pass filter to the T should then be a quarter wave length of the low pass filter. The low pass filter will look like a short circuit at the high pass frequency. With the quarter wave length cable that short circuit will then be transformed to a very high impedance to the hi pass circuit. That effectively isolates one from the other. Do the another T and cable setup at the input and output. 73 Gary K4FMX |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 21:36:05 -0500, Gary Schafer wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 17:35:11 +0800, budgie wrote: On Wednesday, 16 Feb 2005 09:42:58 -500, "Asimov" wrote: "budgie" bravely wrote to "All" (16 Feb 05 12:52:14) --- on the heady topic of " Something like a diplexer" bu From: budgie bu Xref: aeinews rec.radio.amateur.homebrew:2181 You missed a step called a directional coupler. It's a sort of transformer with 2 input ports and 1 output port. The 2 inputs don't see one another but their power is combined at the output. bu You don't actually *need* a directional coupler. I have seen window bu preselectors with five separate sections for sub-bands between 403 and bu 520 MHz. The configuration is symmetrical (in/out) with simple bandpass bu filter segments and coaxial split/combine harnesses. Not a DC or bu hybrid in sight. I am presuming - not having swept one - that at "off" bu frequencies each parallelled leg presents a high enough impedance to bu the split junction that the effect is negligible. Yes but it requires some effort and cost to build the 2nd BP filters so I wonder if it's any more difficult to do either? What do you figure? I'm not sure we are on the same wavelength here (no pun intended). For *non-overlapping* filter sections, the bandsplit through two bandpass sections 25-500 and say 550-3000 should be able to be achieved with T-pieces at the input and output ends (although it appears the O/P didn't achieve this). I am not sure exactly what is trying to be accomplished here but if it is to combine two different bandpass filters then yes a T. The cable from the low pass filter to the T should be a quarter wave length at the frequency of the high pass filter. The cable from the high pass filter to the T should then be a quarter wave length of the low pass filter. The low pass filter will look like a short circuit at the high pass frequency. With the quarter wave length cable that short circuit will then be transformed to a very high impedance to the hi pass circuit. That effectively isolates one from the other. Do the another T and cable setup at the input and output. If I understood the O/P he was trying to split and then recombine the 25-3000 band with a split ("crossover") at 500 MHz. Assuming a 50R in/out impedance across the passband, the fiter sections presumably present a substantially different (usually much higher) port impedance out of band. A simple T combiner therefore presents a minimal impedance mismatch except near the split frequency. Also I'm still thinking about how to make a quarter-wavelength line at 25-500 MHz or at 500-3000 MHz.. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Link to tutorial on diplexer design | Homebrew | |||
Link to tutorial on diplexer design | Homebrew | |||
T2DF + diplexer = HF + LF coverage, AM BC rejection | Antenna | |||
FS: Diamond MX-72N Diplexer | Swap | |||
FS: Diamond MX-72N Diplexer | Swap |