See, that's what I thought. I still don't have an example of power dissipation being greater in second order filters.
Best,
Erik
I was being super lazy.
I mean, this is an odd use case. A better process would have been to simulate each in a separate file then import the charts. For a real speaker design, where you have separate woofer, tweeter you'd never really need this.
Oh, and thanks for the opportunity to try Bill's simulator.
You are very welcome. I'm glad you took me up on it and posted your charts so we could compare properly.
Best,
Erik
Thanks for all that work.
It looks like my original statement is only partly true.
It seems that the first order filter ONLY has a higher impedance around the crossover frequency region. For the post19 plots with an F-3dB of 1kHz the small range of higher impedance stretches from 600Hz to 5kHz.
Below 600Hz the relative impedances swap over, i.e. the 2nd order has the higher impedance.
Above 5kHz there seems to be no difference.
I wonder what would power dissipation through the 10m test resistor look like for a pink noise signal?
Because there is more lower frequency power in the pink noise signal, there may be more total dissipation in the 10m test resistor for wideband test signals.
It looks like my original statement is only partly true.
It seems that the first order filter ONLY has a higher impedance around the crossover frequency region. For the post19 plots with an F-3dB of 1kHz the small range of higher impedance stretches from 600Hz to 5kHz.
Below 600Hz the relative impedances swap over, i.e. the 2nd order has the higher impedance.
Above 5kHz there seems to be no difference.
I wonder what would power dissipation through the 10m test resistor look like for a pink noise signal?
Because there is more lower frequency power in the pink noise signal, there may be more total dissipation in the 10m test resistor for wideband test signals.
I believe the source acts with constant voltage amplitude across the spectrum. I'm happy to be corrected. I bumped this up almost 2 orders for resolution.
Attachments
Yeah, we are thankful to Bill we can use Xsim for free to get
the results in a quick and user friendly manner. There is a tiny
error in software when you use the Component Current(A)
graph which says it shows RMS amps, but really does peak values.
The manual calculus with complex numbers is a pita and time
consuming, so I appreciate sim software so much more because of it.
the results in a quick and user friendly manner. There is a tiny
error in software when you use the Component Current(A)
graph which says it shows RMS amps, but really does peak values.
The manual calculus with complex numbers is a pita and time
consuming, so I appreciate sim software so much more because of it.
Ooop! You're right. Thanks for pointing that out, something to fix when I get into programming mode again.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.