Hi Mike,
way to up the ante! I'm getting nervous now! ;-)
I'll see how much of it I can figure out for the next release.
--
Rune / 5Q5R
On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 15:45, mike watts via Groups.Io <wy6k=
[email protected]> wrote:
Yes, all of those filter measurements would be useful for things I do.
Those functions would elevate you from "hero" to "demi-god" in my world.
:-)
Mike WY6K
"... somewhere in the distance, there's a tower and a light, broadcastin'
the resistance, through the rain and through the night..."
On Thursday, October 3, 2019, 4:20:50 AM CDT, Rune Broberg <
mihtjel@...> wrote:
Hi Norbert,
the application can run calibrations at far more than 401 points - I have
certainly done 5050 points at one point. ;-) But it does this in the
application, and not on the device, due to the hardware limitations.
I agree that a function to find cut-off frequencies for filters etc. would
be interesting, and I've put it on the list of features I would like to
implement for the next version, ie. for next week. I don't make any
promises though :-)
What measurements would be relevant to provide? Cut-off frequency, span for
band-pass, dB/octave and dB/decade fall-off, pass-band ripple?
--
Rune / 5Q5R
On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 11:12, <norbert.kohns@...> wrote:
Hi Rune,
thank you for fixing this issue!
I have a question for you in respect to the required number of data
points
to measure a band pass filter. With 101 points it is most likely not
possible to find the -3 dB points because the sample point is way off
from
-3 dB on both sides of the band pass. With 401 points it would work. An
automatic feature of measuring the bandwidth would be absolutely cool!
The
TAPR software is able to perform a calibration at 401 points or even more
than that, so I am certain that you could do that as well. I have no
glue
on how difficult that would be, but more data points for calibration
would
be a huge improvement.
Kind regards
Norbert, DG1KPN
