Thanks for the responses...
Yes, I had planned on twisting up the hook-up wire.
I have some $5 torroids that will go in the case. I have reasonable distance between power supply area and MOX boards.
Q1 If I "can" the torroids, should I bond them to power ground with 10R and 100uF?
(Case is plexiglass and looks sharp. Will post pics when the time comes.)
Q2 Do you tin conductor wires when placing in screw down terminals like the Phoenix? Tinning makes a neater package but seems to not tighten down properly.
Yes, I had planned on twisting up the hook-up wire.
I have some $5 torroids that will go in the case. I have reasonable distance between power supply area and MOX boards.
Q1 If I "can" the torroids, should I bond them to power ground with 10R and 100uF?
(Case is plexiglass and looks sharp. Will post pics when the time comes.)
Q2 Do you tin conductor wires when placing in screw down terminals like the Phoenix? Tinning makes a neater package but seems to not tighten down properly.
mwmkravchenko,
What line of enclosures? I was actually motivated by the same desire...I've used the LMB Heeger ones in the past, but you do need small boards if you hope to fit everything in an affordable box.
I don't know if there is any interest, but it wouldn't cost more than MOX ($7) even for a tiny order.
chipco3434,
Did you get the PE toroids? A great deal for preamp type circuits.
Q1 I don't understand, what is being connected to ground, and how?
Q2 If you tin lightly, it should work. Too much solder and it becomes stiff and won't conform to the contacts. I don't think there is a need to tin though unless you will be inserting and removing a lot.
What line of enclosures? I was actually motivated by the same desire...I've used the LMB Heeger ones in the past, but you do need small boards if you hope to fit everything in an affordable box.
I don't know if there is any interest, but it wouldn't cost more than MOX ($7) even for a tiny order.
chipco3434,
Did you get the PE toroids? A great deal for preamp type circuits.
Q1 I don't understand, what is being connected to ground, and how?
Q2 If you tin lightly, it should work. Too much solder and it becomes stiff and won't conform to the contacts. I don't think there is a need to tin though unless you will be inserting and removing a lot.
Tiroth... Yup, I bridge two of the PE's for a +/-15V regulated supply. It was a good deal.
On the other question, I thought about enclosing the toroids in "cans". So the question is regarding what to do with the EMI that gets induced into the cans. It seems to me that without bonding the cans (toroid shields) to ground, they would be just another, slightly larger, radiator. So if you bond them to ground, the question what passive devices go in that bond. 10R and 100uF is what I use on the GC's.
I don't think I'll tin. Seems to work better without.
On the other question, I thought about enclosing the toroids in "cans". So the question is regarding what to do with the EMI that gets induced into the cans. It seems to me that without bonding the cans (toroid shields) to ground, they would be just another, slightly larger, radiator. So if you bond them to ground, the question what passive devices go in that bond. 10R and 100uF is what I use on the GC's.
I don't think I'll tin. Seems to work better without.
I see, you mean as an electrostatic shield. I am not familiar with the best grounding methods for this. I would probably connect it to chassis ground directly, since I would be concerned about injecting noise into power ground. There won't be any ground loop either way.
If you are using a conductive can, make sure you don't create a shorted turn by running a (non-isolated) bolt through it.
If you are using a conductive can, make sure you don't create a shorted turn by running a (non-isolated) bolt through it.
Hi,
Can someone confirm is this is correct? I want to make standard filters, so for:
-1st order filter, I use Q=0.5
-2nd order filter (Linkwirt Riley) I also use Q=0.5
-3rd order filter (Butterworth) I use Q=1 for the first 2 poles, and Q=0.5 for the third pole
-4th order (Linkwitz Riley) I use Q=0.7 for both pair of poles
Right?
Can someone confirm is this is correct? I want to make standard filters, so for:
-1st order filter, I use Q=0.5
-2nd order filter (Linkwirt Riley) I also use Q=0.5
-3rd order filter (Butterworth) I use Q=1 for the first 2 poles, and Q=0.5 for the third pole
-4th order (Linkwitz Riley) I use Q=0.7 for both pair of poles
Right?
Hi Bricolo,
I would like to give you a simple reply but because of my lack of knowledge it would come out kind of complicated.
So instead of directly answering your q
Bessel has a low Q about 0.5 or maybe a little higher.
Butterworth has Q=1/root2
The various HiQ allow sharp cut off out of band (avoid for speaker xover) but maybe notch for taming resonance.
Linkwitz Reilly is two cascaded Butterworth. So L-R must be even order of poles and overall Q = 0.5. I have seen reference to a 3 pole L-R but don't know how to achieve it.
I would like to give you a simple reply but because of my lack of knowledge it would come out kind of complicated.
So instead of directly answering your q
Bessel has a low Q about 0.5 or maybe a little higher.
Butterworth has Q=1/root2
The various HiQ allow sharp cut off out of band (avoid for speaker xover) but maybe notch for taming resonance.
Linkwitz Reilly is two cascaded Butterworth. So L-R must be even order of poles and overall Q = 0.5. I have seen reference to a 3 pole L-R but don't know how to achieve it.
Hi Bricolo,
unless Jens jumps in and proces me wrong...
- for the LR filters, correct, and you set the frequencies to the actual cutoff frequency. Overall Q is 0.5 and at cutoff the response is 6 dB down.
- for the Butterworth overall Q must be 0.707, but you achieve this by a combination of both Q and different frequencies for the partial stages. At cutoff the response is 3 dB down. You chould get the Q and frequency scaling factors from a filter table. Somehow Q of 1 plus Q of 0.5 sound wrong to me.
unless Jens jumps in and proces me wrong...
- for the LR filters, correct, and you set the frequencies to the actual cutoff frequency. Overall Q is 0.5 and at cutoff the response is 6 dB down.
- for the Butterworth overall Q must be 0.707, but you achieve this by a combination of both Q and different frequencies for the partial stages. At cutoff the response is 3 dB down. You chould get the Q and frequency scaling factors from a filter table. Somehow Q of 1 plus Q of 0.5 sound wrong to me.
Andrew
I know what overall Q I must obtain, my question was about the MOX's setup.
Bessel's Q is SQRT(3)/3 so 0.578
LR is 0.5 as you said. So 3rd order would be made of a 1st order and a 2nd order Butterworth (since overall Q= Q1*Q2 and that a 1st order has always Q=0.7)
But I don't see the need for a LR3, since it won't sum flat if you sum the high pass and the low pass together
I know what overall Q I must obtain, my question was about the MOX's setup.
Bessel's Q is SQRT(3)/3 so 0.578
LR is 0.5 as you said. So 3rd order would be made of a 1st order and a 2nd order Butterworth (since overall Q= Q1*Q2 and that a 1st order has always Q=0.7)
But I don't see the need for a LR3, since it won't sum flat if you sum the high pass and the low pass together
MBK said:
A Butterworth filter has all it's poles at the same frequency, so there's no combination of frequencies.
Overall Q must be 0.707, yes. My tables gives 2 poles with Q=1, and a third pole at the same frequency. So, Q1=1 and Q2=0.707
But for a 1st order, the Q setting has no effect, 1st order is always Q=0.707. The Q setting on the mox only changes the gain for a 1st order, so I said 0.5 because this one gives an unity gain
I'm just not 100% sure about that so I asked for confirmation
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.