Under what circumstances does intermodulation become an issue in a filter after LNA setup?How can I calculate the effects of an LNA, antenna gain, etc. on noise performance?How might one realize a first order, two dimensional RF field antenna for HF?Is there a name for the demodulation technique described here using the parallax propeller?How to calculate if low-pass filtering is sufficient?Tuning a SAW filter?How does rpitx generate arbitrary SSB data with a clock peripheral?Cell Phone Filter / Interference?How can I do direct digital synthesis of a 630m WSPR signal?How can I improve my Es'Hail 2 reception?Raspberry Pi rpitx for SSB with filter?
Why are the rain clouds darker?
Isn't any conversation with the US president quid-pro-quo?
Composer requesting help with a perfect translation
Do monthly payments decrease on a mortgage later in the loan?
How do critical hits work with static monster damage?
Getting into new PhD after failing comps
Why is the core ChaCha primitive not good for use in a collision-resistant compression function (crypto hash)?
Arabia and the Middle Ages
Why has no one requested the tape of the Trump/Ukraine call?
Unique magic triplets
Is there any way to get an instant or sorcery on the field as a permanent? What would happen if this occurred?
What events still occur within a transaction that gets rolled back?
Does 5e have a Manual of the Planes?
Outlining the climax made me lose interest in writing the actual story
Why telnet is considered to be a protocol? Isn't it just a simple TCP send/echo program?
Are we sinners because we sin or do we sin because we are sinners?
how can traditional forms of magic compete against demon magic?
What does this docker log entry mean?
Does toddler keep hands around private parts?
In-body neutral density (ND) filters?
Can the treble clef be used instead of the bass clef in piano music?
Can I "read" from English books to my infant, but use words from my native language?
Are there any dishes that can only be cooked with a microwave?
Casual way to say: ''See you tomorrow at (some time)''
Under what circumstances does intermodulation become an issue in a filter after LNA setup?
How can I calculate the effects of an LNA, antenna gain, etc. on noise performance?How might one realize a first order, two dimensional RF field antenna for HF?Is there a name for the demodulation technique described here using the parallax propeller?How to calculate if low-pass filtering is sufficient?Tuning a SAW filter?How does rpitx generate arbitrary SSB data with a clock peripheral?Cell Phone Filter / Interference?How can I do direct digital synthesis of a 630m WSPR signal?How can I improve my Es'Hail 2 reception?Raspberry Pi rpitx for SSB with filter?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;
.everyonelovesstackoverflowposition:absolute;height:1px;width:1px;opacity:0;top:0;left:0;pointer-events:none;
$begingroup$
I'm reading about using software-defined radio for picking up ADS-B signals at 1090MHz. There is this blog which considers (among others) a setup as follows:
Antenna -> coax -> low noise amplifier (LNA) -> filter -> software-defined radio dongle
After that, it mentions swapping the LNA and the filter with the following note:
At some point a very strong "Blockers" signals will push any LNA into the saturation where IMD products will be created spoiling the reception. To avoid that, the filter should be placed in front the LNA protecting the system from the unwanted signals leaving only the targeted signal. Such a filtered signal is then amplified in the chain. Both the LNA and filter are close to the receiver (indoor).
I found that "IMD products" refers to intermodulation, but the blog is not detailed enough to go into the circumstances under which this becomes an issue. Since they mention both options, I assume there is some trade-off going on, possibly based on some of the following factors (these are just factors I can think of, there may be more and these may not be factor after all):
how well out of band signals are filtered out by the filter
how much the LNA amplifies in-band signals
initial signal to noise ratio
signal to noise ratio after the filter
Which of these factors play a role, and what's the theory behind choosing between the one option over the other? I'm aware that one can simply try both and compare the results in any specific setup, but I'm really looking for the theoretical idea behind it.
software-defined-radio amplifier filter
asked Aug 26 at 4:49
JJJJJJ
1234 bronze badges
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
I'm reading about using software-defined radio for picking up ADS-B signals at 1090MHz. There is this blog which considers (among others) a setup as follows:
Antenna -> coax -> low noise amplifier (LNA) -> filter -> software-defined radio dongle
After that, it mentions swapping the LNA and the filter with the following note:
At some point a very strong "Blockers" signals will push any LNA into the saturation where IMD products will be created spoiling the reception. To avoid that, the filter should be placed in front the LNA protecting the system from the unwanted signals leaving only the targeted signal. Such a filtered signal is then amplified in the chain. Both the LNA and filter are close to the receiver (indoor).
I found that "IMD products" refers to intermodulation, but the blog is not detailed enough to go into the circumstances under which this becomes an issue. Since they mention both options, I assume there is some trade-off going on, possibly based on some of the following factors (these are just factors I can think of, there may be more and these may not be factor after all):
how well out of band signals are filtered out by the filter
how much the LNA amplifies in-band signals
initial signal to noise ratio
signal to noise ratio after the filter
Which of these factors play a role, and what's the theory behind choosing between the one option over the other? I'm aware that one can simply try both and compare the results in any specific setup, but I'm really looking for the theoretical idea behind it.
software-defined-radio amplifier filter
asked Aug 26 at 4:49
JJJJJJ
1234 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
For a lot of reasons, mostly blockers, you'd put the filter in front of the LNA, not after, exactly as the text says, and unlike your description of the setup shows.. Also, put both close to the antenna, not after the long coax, for reasons of noise figure.
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
Aug 26 at 8:28
$begingroup$
@MarcusMüller the blog mentions both options, I quoted one. The difference between the two, regardless of coax, is what my question is about.
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 8:54
$begingroup$
If you put the LNA in front of the filter, you will be filtering a relatively high amplitude signal. If you put the filter first, you are only amplifying the portion of the signal you are interested in. For linear parts, the end result is the same. But if there are imperfections ("nonlinearities") it can make a difference. My personal preference is to filter low amplitude signals (electronics is simpler) and amplify only what I want to use (less power needed). This is just my uninformed preference but it is good to see there are other benefits too.
$endgroup$
– Chris K8NVH
Aug 26 at 14:15
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
I'm reading about using software-defined radio for picking up ADS-B signals at 1090MHz. There is this blog which considers (among others) a setup as follows:
Antenna -> coax -> low noise amplifier (LNA) -> filter -> software-defined radio dongle
After that, it mentions swapping the LNA and the filter with the following note:
At some point a very strong "Blockers" signals will push any LNA into the saturation where IMD products will be created spoiling the reception. To avoid that, the filter should be placed in front the LNA protecting the system from the unwanted signals leaving only the targeted signal. Such a filtered signal is then amplified in the chain. Both the LNA and filter are close to the receiver (indoor).
I found that "IMD products" refers to intermodulation, but the blog is not detailed enough to go into the circumstances under which this becomes an issue. Since they mention both options, I assume there is some trade-off going on, possibly based on some of the following factors (these are just factors I can think of, there may be more and these may not be factor after all):
how well out of band signals are filtered out by the filter
how much the LNA amplifies in-band signals
initial signal to noise ratio
signal to noise ratio after the filter
Which of these factors play a role, and what's the theory behind choosing between the one option over the other? I'm aware that one can simply try both and compare the results in any specific setup, but I'm really looking for the theoretical idea behind it.
software-defined-radio amplifier filter
asked Aug 26 at 4:49
JJJJJJ
1234 bronze badges
$endgroup$
I'm reading about using software-defined radio for picking up ADS-B signals at 1090MHz. There is this blog which considers (among others) a setup as follows:
Antenna -> coax -> low noise amplifier (LNA) -> filter -> software-defined radio dongle
After that, it mentions swapping the LNA and the filter with the following note:
At some point a very strong "Blockers" signals will push any LNA into the saturation where IMD products will be created spoiling the reception. To avoid that, the filter should be placed in front the LNA protecting the system from the unwanted signals leaving only the targeted signal. Such a filtered signal is then amplified in the chain. Both the LNA and filter are close to the receiver (indoor).
I found that "IMD products" refers to intermodulation, but the blog is not detailed enough to go into the circumstances under which this becomes an issue. Since they mention both options, I assume there is some trade-off going on, possibly based on some of the following factors (these are just factors I can think of, there may be more and these may not be factor after all):
how well out of band signals are filtered out by the filter
how much the LNA amplifies in-band signals
initial signal to noise ratio
signal to noise ratio after the filter
Which of these factors play a role, and what's the theory behind choosing between the one option over the other? I'm aware that one can simply try both and compare the results in any specific setup, but I'm really looking for the theoretical idea behind it.
software-defined-radio amplifier filter
software-defined-radio amplifier filter
asked Aug 26 at 4:49
JJJJJJ
1234 bronze badges
asked Aug 26 at 4:49
JJJJJJ
1234 bronze badges
asked Aug 26 at 4:49
JJJJJJ
1234 bronze badges
asked Aug 26 at 4:49
JJJJJJ
1234 bronze badges
asked Aug 26 at 4:49
JJJJJJ
1234 bronze badges
1234 bronze badges
$begingroup$
For a lot of reasons, mostly blockers, you'd put the filter in front of the LNA, not after, exactly as the text says, and unlike your description of the setup shows.. Also, put both close to the antenna, not after the long coax, for reasons of noise figure.
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
Aug 26 at 8:28
$begingroup$
@MarcusMüller the blog mentions both options, I quoted one. The difference between the two, regardless of coax, is what my question is about.
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 8:54
$begingroup$
If you put the LNA in front of the filter, you will be filtering a relatively high amplitude signal. If you put the filter first, you are only amplifying the portion of the signal you are interested in. For linear parts, the end result is the same. But if there are imperfections ("nonlinearities") it can make a difference. My personal preference is to filter low amplitude signals (electronics is simpler) and amplify only what I want to use (less power needed). This is just my uninformed preference but it is good to see there are other benefits too.
$endgroup$
– Chris K8NVH
Aug 26 at 14:15
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
For a lot of reasons, mostly blockers, you'd put the filter in front of the LNA, not after, exactly as the text says, and unlike your description of the setup shows.. Also, put both close to the antenna, not after the long coax, for reasons of noise figure.
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
Aug 26 at 8:28
$begingroup$
@MarcusMüller the blog mentions both options, I quoted one. The difference between the two, regardless of coax, is what my question is about.
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 8:54
$begingroup$
If you put the LNA in front of the filter, you will be filtering a relatively high amplitude signal. If you put the filter first, you are only amplifying the portion of the signal you are interested in. For linear parts, the end result is the same. But if there are imperfections ("nonlinearities") it can make a difference. My personal preference is to filter low amplitude signals (electronics is simpler) and amplify only what I want to use (less power needed). This is just my uninformed preference but it is good to see there are other benefits too.
$endgroup$
– Chris K8NVH
Aug 26 at 14:15
$begingroup$
For a lot of reasons, mostly blockers, you'd put the filter in front of the LNA, not after, exactly as the text says, and unlike your description of the setup shows.. Also, put both close to the antenna, not after the long coax, for reasons of noise figure.
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
Aug 26 at 8:28
$begingroup$
For a lot of reasons, mostly blockers, you'd put the filter in front of the LNA, not after, exactly as the text says, and unlike your description of the setup shows.. Also, put both close to the antenna, not after the long coax, for reasons of noise figure.
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
Aug 26 at 8:28
$begingroup$
@MarcusMüller the blog mentions both options, I quoted one. The difference between the two, regardless of coax, is what my question is about.
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 8:54
$begingroup$
@MarcusMüller the blog mentions both options, I quoted one. The difference between the two, regardless of coax, is what my question is about.
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 8:54
$begingroup$
If you put the LNA in front of the filter, you will be filtering a relatively high amplitude signal. If you put the filter first, you are only amplifying the portion of the signal you are interested in. For linear parts, the end result is the same. But if there are imperfections ("nonlinearities") it can make a difference. My personal preference is to filter low amplitude signals (electronics is simpler) and amplify only what I want to use (less power needed). This is just my uninformed preference but it is good to see there are other benefits too.
$endgroup$
– Chris K8NVH
Aug 26 at 14:15
$begingroup$
If you put the LNA in front of the filter, you will be filtering a relatively high amplitude signal. If you put the filter first, you are only amplifying the portion of the signal you are interested in. For linear parts, the end result is the same. But if there are imperfections ("nonlinearities") it can make a difference. My personal preference is to filter low amplitude signals (electronics is simpler) and amplify only what I want to use (less power needed). This is just my uninformed preference but it is good to see there are other benefits too.
$endgroup$
– Chris K8NVH
Aug 26 at 14:15
add a comment
|
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I see two main factors about the options in the blog.
- IMD
- Noise figure
Option 4 is just option 2 but for a considerable cable length along with distortions and recommending to put the filter after the cable. Which is a good point for that case.
Option 1 is the basis as the blog discusses the application of a filter.
From there we have:
- a) Amplifier -> Filter
- Advantage: lower noise figure
- Disadvantage: IMD if there are very strong blockers
- b) Filter -> Amplifier
- Advantage: very strong blockers don't impact the amplifier (if they are present)
- Disadvantage: higher noise figure
In receiving environments blockers usually are low power, that means << 0 dBm (except you are located close to a high power transmitter).
And I would expect most receiver amplifiers 1dB compression point to be >10dBm.
The theory behind the noise figure is The Friis formula for noise factor - Wikipedia, in a nutshell:
- the 1st elements noise figure is the most important one and therefore should be as low as possible
- attenuation, like the insertion loss of a filter, is the same as noise figure
The concern behind considering IMD is most likely third Order Intermodulation - Wikipedia, in a nutshell:
- Intermodulation causes unwanted additional frequencies
- The 3rd order products are more critical than the 2nd order products as they fall close to the intended frequency (e.g $2 * f_1 - f_2$) when they are nearby and therefore can't be filtered as easily as the 2nd order ones (e.g $f_1 + f_2$) .
Concerning your points:
how well out of band signals are filtered out by the filter
- When saturation is not of concern the filter/amplifier position has no impact on that item.
how much the LNA amplifies in-band signals
- In the context of the blog I would say no. Because you can drive any single signal into saturation with enough amplification, but that's general and neither related to filter/amplifier positions nor discussed in the blog.
initial signal to noise ratio
- You can't impact that one, but you can receive lower signals with a lower noise figure in your setup.
signal to noise ratio after the filter
- Yes, to be able to receive low signals (from further away).
In summary:
- a) Amplifier -> Filter
- For best reception of low signals (far away sources) due to the better noise figure
- b) Filter -> Amplifier
- Only if there are very strong blockers
When in doubt I would go with a) as strong blockers that actually drive a common amplifier into compression are rare and also as the applications (receiver behavior) that are very critical to IMD are not very common.
To note an actual case where IMD could be of concern is for example when you transmit at the same time in a nearby frequency, e.g. in a cellphone call, and the isolation is poor.
answered Aug 26 at 18:33
MagnusO_OMagnusO_O
3161 silver badge5 bronze badges
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Simply put, the LNA amplifies everything that comes into it. If you think about it, it's actually kind of amazing. It's dragging its output value up and down in response to nanosecond-by-nanosecond changes in its input, reproducing signals at every frequency up to its bandwidth limit.
A good amplifier is as linear as possible (meaning its output is precisely proportional to its input) but nothing is perfectly linear, and non-linearities result in distortion. For our purposes, distortion means that part of the amplifier's response to an input signal will be on a different frequency from the input signal. Mainly we're interested in harmonic distortion (where output energy is present on multiples of the input frequency) and intermodulation distortion (where two different frequencies combine to make an output frequency that is the sum or difference of the input frequencies, or the sum or difference of multiples of the input frequencies).
Out of all of these distortion products of all of the signals coming into the amplifier, some of them will end up on the same frequency as the signal you're trying to receive. All of that junk constitutes noise, and we say that it's lowered the signal-to-noise ratio, or raised the noise floor.
By filtering out frequencies that you're not interested in before they get to the amplifier, you're denying the amplifier the chance to amplify those signals, which means you're denying it the chance to create those distortion products, which means that most of what the amplifier outputs on your desired frequency will be what it received on that frequency, and you will have an improved signal-to-noise ratio.
Note that the filter can't do anything at all about noise that's actually received by the antenna at 1090MHz; no amount of magic will remove that. What it's doing is decreasing the amount of noise that's added to the system by imperfections in the amplifier. When this noise reduction is greater than the signal reduction, your SNR improves and you get more decoded signals.
answered Aug 26 at 16:47
hobbs - KC2Ghobbs - KC2G
1,7083 silver badges9 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Many LNAs (at least the ones I looked at for ADS-B), including the on in the blog, attenuate out-of band signals (at least those close to the target frequency, but not as much the target frequency itself, of course). That means those are not linear, right? Do those non-linear LNAs have more distortion? Can you elaborate that with a source or some theory on why / how the non-linearity plays a role? My intuition would be that non-linear (i.e. mostly boosting the target frequency and no so much the rest) is better.
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 17:03
3
$begingroup$
@JJJ sounds like a LNA with a filter "permanently attached" to its input to me, no more and no less
$endgroup$
– hobbs - KC2G
Aug 26 at 17:19
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
I believe this blog post is trying to show the evolution of a good setup, rather than present a number of equally appropriate setups.
You might want to first read How can I calculate the effects of an LNA, antenna gain, etc. on noise performance?
Assuming the LNA is good enough to justify using, you want to:
- minimize losses between the LNA and the antenna, and
- keep the LNA as linear as possible.
Two the first point, this means putting the LNA at the antenna so you don't have the loss from a long coax run between the antenna and the LNA introducing noise.
Usually the filter would then be between the LNA and the antenna. By reducing the power going into the LNA that isn't even in the band you care about, the LNA can operate in a more linear region. Theoretically it's possible with a really terrible filter and a really good LNA that the filter would introduce more noise than it would eliminate distortion, but in practice if you're using filters and amplifiers of comparable quality it's always better to filter first.
answered Aug 26 at 15:15
Phil Frost - W8IIPhil Frost - W8II
34.5k1 gold badge50 silver badges127 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks, so basically the word 'blockers' in the blog post means noise (strong unwanted signals) which may get into the LNA, possibly amplified with some frequency change so they appear to be wanted signals?
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 17:08
$begingroup$
@JJJ Yes, precisely.
$endgroup$
– Phil Frost - W8II
Aug 26 at 19:14
add a comment
|
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("schematics", function ()
StackExchange.schematics.init();
);
, "cicuitlab");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "520"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fham.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f15192%2funder-what-circumstances-does-intermodulation-become-an-issue-in-a-filter-after%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I see two main factors about the options in the blog.
- IMD
- Noise figure
Option 4 is just option 2 but for a considerable cable length along with distortions and recommending to put the filter after the cable. Which is a good point for that case.
Option 1 is the basis as the blog discusses the application of a filter.
From there we have:
- a) Amplifier -> Filter
- Advantage: lower noise figure
- Disadvantage: IMD if there are very strong blockers
- b) Filter -> Amplifier
- Advantage: very strong blockers don't impact the amplifier (if they are present)
- Disadvantage: higher noise figure
In receiving environments blockers usually are low power, that means << 0 dBm (except you are located close to a high power transmitter).
And I would expect most receiver amplifiers 1dB compression point to be >10dBm.
The theory behind the noise figure is The Friis formula for noise factor - Wikipedia, in a nutshell:
- the 1st elements noise figure is the most important one and therefore should be as low as possible
- attenuation, like the insertion loss of a filter, is the same as noise figure
The concern behind considering IMD is most likely third Order Intermodulation - Wikipedia, in a nutshell:
- Intermodulation causes unwanted additional frequencies
- The 3rd order products are more critical than the 2nd order products as they fall close to the intended frequency (e.g $2 * f_1 - f_2$) when they are nearby and therefore can't be filtered as easily as the 2nd order ones (e.g $f_1 + f_2$) .
Concerning your points:
how well out of band signals are filtered out by the filter
- When saturation is not of concern the filter/amplifier position has no impact on that item.
how much the LNA amplifies in-band signals
- In the context of the blog I would say no. Because you can drive any single signal into saturation with enough amplification, but that's general and neither related to filter/amplifier positions nor discussed in the blog.
initial signal to noise ratio
- You can't impact that one, but you can receive lower signals with a lower noise figure in your setup.
signal to noise ratio after the filter
- Yes, to be able to receive low signals (from further away).
In summary:
- a) Amplifier -> Filter
- For best reception of low signals (far away sources) due to the better noise figure
- b) Filter -> Amplifier
- Only if there are very strong blockers
When in doubt I would go with a) as strong blockers that actually drive a common amplifier into compression are rare and also as the applications (receiver behavior) that are very critical to IMD are not very common.
To note an actual case where IMD could be of concern is for example when you transmit at the same time in a nearby frequency, e.g. in a cellphone call, and the isolation is poor.
answered Aug 26 at 18:33
MagnusO_OMagnusO_O
3161 silver badge5 bronze badges
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
I see two main factors about the options in the blog.
- IMD
- Noise figure
Option 4 is just option 2 but for a considerable cable length along with distortions and recommending to put the filter after the cable. Which is a good point for that case.
Option 1 is the basis as the blog discusses the application of a filter.
From there we have:
- a) Amplifier -> Filter
- Advantage: lower noise figure
- Disadvantage: IMD if there are very strong blockers
- b) Filter -> Amplifier
- Advantage: very strong blockers don't impact the amplifier (if they are present)
- Disadvantage: higher noise figure
In receiving environments blockers usually are low power, that means << 0 dBm (except you are located close to a high power transmitter).
And I would expect most receiver amplifiers 1dB compression point to be >10dBm.
The theory behind the noise figure is The Friis formula for noise factor - Wikipedia, in a nutshell:
- the 1st elements noise figure is the most important one and therefore should be as low as possible
- attenuation, like the insertion loss of a filter, is the same as noise figure
The concern behind considering IMD is most likely third Order Intermodulation - Wikipedia, in a nutshell:
- Intermodulation causes unwanted additional frequencies
- The 3rd order products are more critical than the 2nd order products as they fall close to the intended frequency (e.g $2 * f_1 - f_2$) when they are nearby and therefore can't be filtered as easily as the 2nd order ones (e.g $f_1 + f_2$) .
Concerning your points:
how well out of band signals are filtered out by the filter
- When saturation is not of concern the filter/amplifier position has no impact on that item.
how much the LNA amplifies in-band signals
- In the context of the blog I would say no. Because you can drive any single signal into saturation with enough amplification, but that's general and neither related to filter/amplifier positions nor discussed in the blog.
initial signal to noise ratio
- You can't impact that one, but you can receive lower signals with a lower noise figure in your setup.
signal to noise ratio after the filter
- Yes, to be able to receive low signals (from further away).
In summary:
- a) Amplifier -> Filter
- For best reception of low signals (far away sources) due to the better noise figure
- b) Filter -> Amplifier
- Only if there are very strong blockers
When in doubt I would go with a) as strong blockers that actually drive a common amplifier into compression are rare and also as the applications (receiver behavior) that are very critical to IMD are not very common.
To note an actual case where IMD could be of concern is for example when you transmit at the same time in a nearby frequency, e.g. in a cellphone call, and the isolation is poor.
answered Aug 26 at 18:33
MagnusO_OMagnusO_O
3161 silver badge5 bronze badges
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
I see two main factors about the options in the blog.
- IMD
- Noise figure
Option 4 is just option 2 but for a considerable cable length along with distortions and recommending to put the filter after the cable. Which is a good point for that case.
Option 1 is the basis as the blog discusses the application of a filter.
From there we have:
- a) Amplifier -> Filter
- Advantage: lower noise figure
- Disadvantage: IMD if there are very strong blockers
- b) Filter -> Amplifier
- Advantage: very strong blockers don't impact the amplifier (if they are present)
- Disadvantage: higher noise figure
In receiving environments blockers usually are low power, that means << 0 dBm (except you are located close to a high power transmitter).
And I would expect most receiver amplifiers 1dB compression point to be >10dBm.
The theory behind the noise figure is The Friis formula for noise factor - Wikipedia, in a nutshell:
- the 1st elements noise figure is the most important one and therefore should be as low as possible
- attenuation, like the insertion loss of a filter, is the same as noise figure
The concern behind considering IMD is most likely third Order Intermodulation - Wikipedia, in a nutshell:
- Intermodulation causes unwanted additional frequencies
- The 3rd order products are more critical than the 2nd order products as they fall close to the intended frequency (e.g $2 * f_1 - f_2$) when they are nearby and therefore can't be filtered as easily as the 2nd order ones (e.g $f_1 + f_2$) .
Concerning your points:
how well out of band signals are filtered out by the filter
- When saturation is not of concern the filter/amplifier position has no impact on that item.
how much the LNA amplifies in-band signals
- In the context of the blog I would say no. Because you can drive any single signal into saturation with enough amplification, but that's general and neither related to filter/amplifier positions nor discussed in the blog.
initial signal to noise ratio
- You can't impact that one, but you can receive lower signals with a lower noise figure in your setup.
signal to noise ratio after the filter
- Yes, to be able to receive low signals (from further away).
In summary:
- a) Amplifier -> Filter
- For best reception of low signals (far away sources) due to the better noise figure
- b) Filter -> Amplifier
- Only if there are very strong blockers
When in doubt I would go with a) as strong blockers that actually drive a common amplifier into compression are rare and also as the applications (receiver behavior) that are very critical to IMD are not very common.
To note an actual case where IMD could be of concern is for example when you transmit at the same time in a nearby frequency, e.g. in a cellphone call, and the isolation is poor.
answered Aug 26 at 18:33
MagnusO_OMagnusO_O
3161 silver badge5 bronze badges
$endgroup$
I see two main factors about the options in the blog.
- IMD
- Noise figure
Option 4 is just option 2 but for a considerable cable length along with distortions and recommending to put the filter after the cable. Which is a good point for that case.
Option 1 is the basis as the blog discusses the application of a filter.
From there we have:
- a) Amplifier -> Filter
- Advantage: lower noise figure
- Disadvantage: IMD if there are very strong blockers
- b) Filter -> Amplifier
- Advantage: very strong blockers don't impact the amplifier (if they are present)
- Disadvantage: higher noise figure
In receiving environments blockers usually are low power, that means << 0 dBm (except you are located close to a high power transmitter).
And I would expect most receiver amplifiers 1dB compression point to be >10dBm.
The theory behind the noise figure is The Friis formula for noise factor - Wikipedia, in a nutshell:
- the 1st elements noise figure is the most important one and therefore should be as low as possible
- attenuation, like the insertion loss of a filter, is the same as noise figure
The concern behind considering IMD is most likely third Order Intermodulation - Wikipedia, in a nutshell:
- Intermodulation causes unwanted additional frequencies
- The 3rd order products are more critical than the 2nd order products as they fall close to the intended frequency (e.g $2 * f_1 - f_2$) when they are nearby and therefore can't be filtered as easily as the 2nd order ones (e.g $f_1 + f_2$) .
Concerning your points:
how well out of band signals are filtered out by the filter
- When saturation is not of concern the filter/amplifier position has no impact on that item.
how much the LNA amplifies in-band signals
- In the context of the blog I would say no. Because you can drive any single signal into saturation with enough amplification, but that's general and neither related to filter/amplifier positions nor discussed in the blog.
initial signal to noise ratio
- You can't impact that one, but you can receive lower signals with a lower noise figure in your setup.
signal to noise ratio after the filter
- Yes, to be able to receive low signals (from further away).
In summary:
- a) Amplifier -> Filter
- For best reception of low signals (far away sources) due to the better noise figure
- b) Filter -> Amplifier
- Only if there are very strong blockers
When in doubt I would go with a) as strong blockers that actually drive a common amplifier into compression are rare and also as the applications (receiver behavior) that are very critical to IMD are not very common.
To note an actual case where IMD could be of concern is for example when you transmit at the same time in a nearby frequency, e.g. in a cellphone call, and the isolation is poor.
answered Aug 26 at 18:33
MagnusO_OMagnusO_O
3161 silver badge5 bronze badges
answered Aug 26 at 18:33
MagnusO_OMagnusO_O
3161 silver badge5 bronze badges
answered Aug 26 at 18:33
MagnusO_OMagnusO_O
3161 silver badge5 bronze badges
answered Aug 26 at 18:33
MagnusO_OMagnusO_O
3161 silver badge5 bronze badges
3161 silver badge5 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Simply put, the LNA amplifies everything that comes into it. If you think about it, it's actually kind of amazing. It's dragging its output value up and down in response to nanosecond-by-nanosecond changes in its input, reproducing signals at every frequency up to its bandwidth limit.
A good amplifier is as linear as possible (meaning its output is precisely proportional to its input) but nothing is perfectly linear, and non-linearities result in distortion. For our purposes, distortion means that part of the amplifier's response to an input signal will be on a different frequency from the input signal. Mainly we're interested in harmonic distortion (where output energy is present on multiples of the input frequency) and intermodulation distortion (where two different frequencies combine to make an output frequency that is the sum or difference of the input frequencies, or the sum or difference of multiples of the input frequencies).
Out of all of these distortion products of all of the signals coming into the amplifier, some of them will end up on the same frequency as the signal you're trying to receive. All of that junk constitutes noise, and we say that it's lowered the signal-to-noise ratio, or raised the noise floor.
By filtering out frequencies that you're not interested in before they get to the amplifier, you're denying the amplifier the chance to amplify those signals, which means you're denying it the chance to create those distortion products, which means that most of what the amplifier outputs on your desired frequency will be what it received on that frequency, and you will have an improved signal-to-noise ratio.
Note that the filter can't do anything at all about noise that's actually received by the antenna at 1090MHz; no amount of magic will remove that. What it's doing is decreasing the amount of noise that's added to the system by imperfections in the amplifier. When this noise reduction is greater than the signal reduction, your SNR improves and you get more decoded signals.
answered Aug 26 at 16:47
hobbs - KC2Ghobbs - KC2G
1,7083 silver badges9 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Many LNAs (at least the ones I looked at for ADS-B), including the on in the blog, attenuate out-of band signals (at least those close to the target frequency, but not as much the target frequency itself, of course). That means those are not linear, right? Do those non-linear LNAs have more distortion? Can you elaborate that with a source or some theory on why / how the non-linearity plays a role? My intuition would be that non-linear (i.e. mostly boosting the target frequency and no so much the rest) is better.
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 17:03
3
$begingroup$
@JJJ sounds like a LNA with a filter "permanently attached" to its input to me, no more and no less
$endgroup$
– hobbs - KC2G
Aug 26 at 17:19
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Simply put, the LNA amplifies everything that comes into it. If you think about it, it's actually kind of amazing. It's dragging its output value up and down in response to nanosecond-by-nanosecond changes in its input, reproducing signals at every frequency up to its bandwidth limit.
A good amplifier is as linear as possible (meaning its output is precisely proportional to its input) but nothing is perfectly linear, and non-linearities result in distortion. For our purposes, distortion means that part of the amplifier's response to an input signal will be on a different frequency from the input signal. Mainly we're interested in harmonic distortion (where output energy is present on multiples of the input frequency) and intermodulation distortion (where two different frequencies combine to make an output frequency that is the sum or difference of the input frequencies, or the sum or difference of multiples of the input frequencies).
Out of all of these distortion products of all of the signals coming into the amplifier, some of them will end up on the same frequency as the signal you're trying to receive. All of that junk constitutes noise, and we say that it's lowered the signal-to-noise ratio, or raised the noise floor.
By filtering out frequencies that you're not interested in before they get to the amplifier, you're denying the amplifier the chance to amplify those signals, which means you're denying it the chance to create those distortion products, which means that most of what the amplifier outputs on your desired frequency will be what it received on that frequency, and you will have an improved signal-to-noise ratio.
Note that the filter can't do anything at all about noise that's actually received by the antenna at 1090MHz; no amount of magic will remove that. What it's doing is decreasing the amount of noise that's added to the system by imperfections in the amplifier. When this noise reduction is greater than the signal reduction, your SNR improves and you get more decoded signals.
answered Aug 26 at 16:47
hobbs - KC2Ghobbs - KC2G
1,7083 silver badges9 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Many LNAs (at least the ones I looked at for ADS-B), including the on in the blog, attenuate out-of band signals (at least those close to the target frequency, but not as much the target frequency itself, of course). That means those are not linear, right? Do those non-linear LNAs have more distortion? Can you elaborate that with a source or some theory on why / how the non-linearity plays a role? My intuition would be that non-linear (i.e. mostly boosting the target frequency and no so much the rest) is better.
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 17:03
3
$begingroup$
@JJJ sounds like a LNA with a filter "permanently attached" to its input to me, no more and no less
$endgroup$
– hobbs - KC2G
Aug 26 at 17:19
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Simply put, the LNA amplifies everything that comes into it. If you think about it, it's actually kind of amazing. It's dragging its output value up and down in response to nanosecond-by-nanosecond changes in its input, reproducing signals at every frequency up to its bandwidth limit.
A good amplifier is as linear as possible (meaning its output is precisely proportional to its input) but nothing is perfectly linear, and non-linearities result in distortion. For our purposes, distortion means that part of the amplifier's response to an input signal will be on a different frequency from the input signal. Mainly we're interested in harmonic distortion (where output energy is present on multiples of the input frequency) and intermodulation distortion (where two different frequencies combine to make an output frequency that is the sum or difference of the input frequencies, or the sum or difference of multiples of the input frequencies).
Out of all of these distortion products of all of the signals coming into the amplifier, some of them will end up on the same frequency as the signal you're trying to receive. All of that junk constitutes noise, and we say that it's lowered the signal-to-noise ratio, or raised the noise floor.
By filtering out frequencies that you're not interested in before they get to the amplifier, you're denying the amplifier the chance to amplify those signals, which means you're denying it the chance to create those distortion products, which means that most of what the amplifier outputs on your desired frequency will be what it received on that frequency, and you will have an improved signal-to-noise ratio.
Note that the filter can't do anything at all about noise that's actually received by the antenna at 1090MHz; no amount of magic will remove that. What it's doing is decreasing the amount of noise that's added to the system by imperfections in the amplifier. When this noise reduction is greater than the signal reduction, your SNR improves and you get more decoded signals.
answered Aug 26 at 16:47
hobbs - KC2Ghobbs - KC2G
1,7083 silver badges9 bronze badges
$endgroup$
Simply put, the LNA amplifies everything that comes into it. If you think about it, it's actually kind of amazing. It's dragging its output value up and down in response to nanosecond-by-nanosecond changes in its input, reproducing signals at every frequency up to its bandwidth limit.
A good amplifier is as linear as possible (meaning its output is precisely proportional to its input) but nothing is perfectly linear, and non-linearities result in distortion. For our purposes, distortion means that part of the amplifier's response to an input signal will be on a different frequency from the input signal. Mainly we're interested in harmonic distortion (where output energy is present on multiples of the input frequency) and intermodulation distortion (where two different frequencies combine to make an output frequency that is the sum or difference of the input frequencies, or the sum or difference of multiples of the input frequencies).
Out of all of these distortion products of all of the signals coming into the amplifier, some of them will end up on the same frequency as the signal you're trying to receive. All of that junk constitutes noise, and we say that it's lowered the signal-to-noise ratio, or raised the noise floor.
By filtering out frequencies that you're not interested in before they get to the amplifier, you're denying the amplifier the chance to amplify those signals, which means you're denying it the chance to create those distortion products, which means that most of what the amplifier outputs on your desired frequency will be what it received on that frequency, and you will have an improved signal-to-noise ratio.
Note that the filter can't do anything at all about noise that's actually received by the antenna at 1090MHz; no amount of magic will remove that. What it's doing is decreasing the amount of noise that's added to the system by imperfections in the amplifier. When this noise reduction is greater than the signal reduction, your SNR improves and you get more decoded signals.
answered Aug 26 at 16:47
hobbs - KC2Ghobbs - KC2G
1,7083 silver badges9 bronze badges
edited Aug 26 at 20:44
answered Aug 26 at 16:47
hobbs - KC2Ghobbs - KC2G
1,7083 silver badges9 bronze badges
answered Aug 26 at 16:47
hobbs - KC2Ghobbs - KC2G
1,7083 silver badges9 bronze badges
answered Aug 26 at 16:47
hobbs - KC2Ghobbs - KC2G
1,7083 silver badges9 bronze badges
1,7083 silver badges9 bronze badges
$begingroup$
Many LNAs (at least the ones I looked at for ADS-B), including the on in the blog, attenuate out-of band signals (at least those close to the target frequency, but not as much the target frequency itself, of course). That means those are not linear, right? Do those non-linear LNAs have more distortion? Can you elaborate that with a source or some theory on why / how the non-linearity plays a role? My intuition would be that non-linear (i.e. mostly boosting the target frequency and no so much the rest) is better.
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 17:03
3
$begingroup$
@JJJ sounds like a LNA with a filter "permanently attached" to its input to me, no more and no less
$endgroup$
– hobbs - KC2G
Aug 26 at 17:19
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Many LNAs (at least the ones I looked at for ADS-B), including the on in the blog, attenuate out-of band signals (at least those close to the target frequency, but not as much the target frequency itself, of course). That means those are not linear, right? Do those non-linear LNAs have more distortion? Can you elaborate that with a source or some theory on why / how the non-linearity plays a role? My intuition would be that non-linear (i.e. mostly boosting the target frequency and no so much the rest) is better.
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 17:03
3
$begingroup$
@JJJ sounds like a LNA with a filter "permanently attached" to its input to me, no more and no less
$endgroup$
– hobbs - KC2G
Aug 26 at 17:19
$begingroup$
Many LNAs (at least the ones I looked at for ADS-B), including the on in the blog, attenuate out-of band signals (at least those close to the target frequency, but not as much the target frequency itself, of course). That means those are not linear, right? Do those non-linear LNAs have more distortion? Can you elaborate that with a source or some theory on why / how the non-linearity plays a role? My intuition would be that non-linear (i.e. mostly boosting the target frequency and no so much the rest) is better.
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 17:03
$begingroup$
Many LNAs (at least the ones I looked at for ADS-B), including the on in the blog, attenuate out-of band signals (at least those close to the target frequency, but not as much the target frequency itself, of course). That means those are not linear, right? Do those non-linear LNAs have more distortion? Can you elaborate that with a source or some theory on why / how the non-linearity plays a role? My intuition would be that non-linear (i.e. mostly boosting the target frequency and no so much the rest) is better.
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 17:03
3
3
$begingroup$
@JJJ sounds like a LNA with a filter "permanently attached" to its input to me, no more and no less
$endgroup$
– hobbs - KC2G
Aug 26 at 17:19
$begingroup$
@JJJ sounds like a LNA with a filter "permanently attached" to its input to me, no more and no less
$endgroup$
– hobbs - KC2G
Aug 26 at 17:19
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
I believe this blog post is trying to show the evolution of a good setup, rather than present a number of equally appropriate setups.
You might want to first read How can I calculate the effects of an LNA, antenna gain, etc. on noise performance?
Assuming the LNA is good enough to justify using, you want to:
- minimize losses between the LNA and the antenna, and
- keep the LNA as linear as possible.
Two the first point, this means putting the LNA at the antenna so you don't have the loss from a long coax run between the antenna and the LNA introducing noise.
Usually the filter would then be between the LNA and the antenna. By reducing the power going into the LNA that isn't even in the band you care about, the LNA can operate in a more linear region. Theoretically it's possible with a really terrible filter and a really good LNA that the filter would introduce more noise than it would eliminate distortion, but in practice if you're using filters and amplifiers of comparable quality it's always better to filter first.
answered Aug 26 at 15:15
Phil Frost - W8IIPhil Frost - W8II
34.5k1 gold badge50 silver badges127 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks, so basically the word 'blockers' in the blog post means noise (strong unwanted signals) which may get into the LNA, possibly amplified with some frequency change so they appear to be wanted signals?
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 17:08
$begingroup$
@JJJ Yes, precisely.
$endgroup$
– Phil Frost - W8II
Aug 26 at 19:14
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
I believe this blog post is trying to show the evolution of a good setup, rather than present a number of equally appropriate setups.
You might want to first read How can I calculate the effects of an LNA, antenna gain, etc. on noise performance?
Assuming the LNA is good enough to justify using, you want to:
- minimize losses between the LNA and the antenna, and
- keep the LNA as linear as possible.
Two the first point, this means putting the LNA at the antenna so you don't have the loss from a long coax run between the antenna and the LNA introducing noise.
Usually the filter would then be between the LNA and the antenna. By reducing the power going into the LNA that isn't even in the band you care about, the LNA can operate in a more linear region. Theoretically it's possible with a really terrible filter and a really good LNA that the filter would introduce more noise than it would eliminate distortion, but in practice if you're using filters and amplifiers of comparable quality it's always better to filter first.
answered Aug 26 at 15:15
Phil Frost - W8IIPhil Frost - W8II
34.5k1 gold badge50 silver badges127 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks, so basically the word 'blockers' in the blog post means noise (strong unwanted signals) which may get into the LNA, possibly amplified with some frequency change so they appear to be wanted signals?
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 17:08
$begingroup$
@JJJ Yes, precisely.
$endgroup$
– Phil Frost - W8II
Aug 26 at 19:14
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
I believe this blog post is trying to show the evolution of a good setup, rather than present a number of equally appropriate setups.
You might want to first read How can I calculate the effects of an LNA, antenna gain, etc. on noise performance?
Assuming the LNA is good enough to justify using, you want to:
- minimize losses between the LNA and the antenna, and
- keep the LNA as linear as possible.
Two the first point, this means putting the LNA at the antenna so you don't have the loss from a long coax run between the antenna and the LNA introducing noise.
Usually the filter would then be between the LNA and the antenna. By reducing the power going into the LNA that isn't even in the band you care about, the LNA can operate in a more linear region. Theoretically it's possible with a really terrible filter and a really good LNA that the filter would introduce more noise than it would eliminate distortion, but in practice if you're using filters and amplifiers of comparable quality it's always better to filter first.
answered Aug 26 at 15:15
Phil Frost - W8IIPhil Frost - W8II
34.5k1 gold badge50 silver badges127 bronze badges
$endgroup$
I believe this blog post is trying to show the evolution of a good setup, rather than present a number of equally appropriate setups.
You might want to first read How can I calculate the effects of an LNA, antenna gain, etc. on noise performance?
Assuming the LNA is good enough to justify using, you want to:
- minimize losses between the LNA and the antenna, and
- keep the LNA as linear as possible.
Two the first point, this means putting the LNA at the antenna so you don't have the loss from a long coax run between the antenna and the LNA introducing noise.
Usually the filter would then be between the LNA and the antenna. By reducing the power going into the LNA that isn't even in the band you care about, the LNA can operate in a more linear region. Theoretically it's possible with a really terrible filter and a really good LNA that the filter would introduce more noise than it would eliminate distortion, but in practice if you're using filters and amplifiers of comparable quality it's always better to filter first.
answered Aug 26 at 15:15
Phil Frost - W8IIPhil Frost - W8II
34.5k1 gold badge50 silver badges127 bronze badges
answered Aug 26 at 15:15
Phil Frost - W8IIPhil Frost - W8II
34.5k1 gold badge50 silver badges127 bronze badges
answered Aug 26 at 15:15
Phil Frost - W8IIPhil Frost - W8II
34.5k1 gold badge50 silver badges127 bronze badges
answered Aug 26 at 15:15
Phil Frost - W8IIPhil Frost - W8II
34.5k1 gold badge50 silver badges127 bronze badges
34.5k1 gold badge50 silver badges127 bronze badges
$begingroup$
Thanks, so basically the word 'blockers' in the blog post means noise (strong unwanted signals) which may get into the LNA, possibly amplified with some frequency change so they appear to be wanted signals?
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 17:08
$begingroup$
@JJJ Yes, precisely.
$endgroup$
– Phil Frost - W8II
Aug 26 at 19:14
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Thanks, so basically the word 'blockers' in the blog post means noise (strong unwanted signals) which may get into the LNA, possibly amplified with some frequency change so they appear to be wanted signals?
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 17:08
$begingroup$
@JJJ Yes, precisely.
$endgroup$
– Phil Frost - W8II
Aug 26 at 19:14
$begingroup$
Thanks, so basically the word 'blockers' in the blog post means noise (strong unwanted signals) which may get into the LNA, possibly amplified with some frequency change so they appear to be wanted signals?
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 17:08
$begingroup$
Thanks, so basically the word 'blockers' in the blog post means noise (strong unwanted signals) which may get into the LNA, possibly amplified with some frequency change so they appear to be wanted signals?
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 17:08
$begingroup$
@JJJ Yes, precisely.
$endgroup$
– Phil Frost - W8II
Aug 26 at 19:14
$begingroup$
@JJJ Yes, precisely.
$endgroup$
– Phil Frost - W8II
Aug 26 at 19:14
add a comment
|
Thanks for contributing an answer to Amateur Radio Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fham.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f15192%2funder-what-circumstances-does-intermodulation-become-an-issue-in-a-filter-after%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
For a lot of reasons, mostly blockers, you'd put the filter in front of the LNA, not after, exactly as the text says, and unlike your description of the setup shows.. Also, put both close to the antenna, not after the long coax, for reasons of noise figure.
$endgroup$
– Marcus Müller
Aug 26 at 8:28
$begingroup$
@MarcusMüller the blog mentions both options, I quoted one. The difference between the two, regardless of coax, is what my question is about.
$endgroup$
– JJJ
Aug 26 at 8:54
$begingroup$
If you put the LNA in front of the filter, you will be filtering a relatively high amplitude signal. If you put the filter first, you are only amplifying the portion of the signal you are interested in. For linear parts, the end result is the same. But if there are imperfections ("nonlinearities") it can make a difference. My personal preference is to filter low amplitude signals (electronics is simpler) and amplify only what I want to use (less power needed). This is just my uninformed preference but it is good to see there are other benefits too.
$endgroup$
– Chris K8NVH
Aug 26 at 14:15