Africa 
China 
Japan 
MENA 
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Preprocessing of Signals
Published in Nihal Kularatna, Electronic Circuit Design, 2017
There are many active filter configurations; some of the common ones are Butterworth (or maximally flat), Chebyshev (or equal ripple), Bessel, and Cauer (or elliptical). In the Butterworth type, response is nearly flat in the pass band and rolls off smoothly and monotonically; it has no ripple in either the pass band or stop band. This type is considered the best compromise between attenuation and phase response. In contrast, the Chebyshev filter has ripple in the pass band, although one can design this ripple to be as small as possible, but at a cost. It has faster roll-off near the cutoff value for the same number of poles than a Butterworth filter. The transient performance of the Chebyshev filter is also inferior. The Bessel or Thompson filter has good linear phase response in the pass band and thus appears as a low-pass delay line. Although the pass band and roll-off region characteristics are smooth (similar to the Butterworth filter), the rate of roll-off is slower. The elliptical filter has ripple in both the pass and stop bands, nonlinear phase response, and the fastest roll-off from pass band to stop band.
Transfer Functions of Filters
Published in Richard C. Dorf, Circuits, Signals, and Speech and Image Processing, 2018
The magnitude function of the n-pole Butterworth filter has a monotone characteristic in both the passband and stopband of the filter. Here monotonemeans that the magnitude curve is gradually decreasing over the passband and stopband. In contrast to the Butterworth filter, the magnitude function of a type 1 Chebyshev filter has ripple in the passband and is monotone decreasing in the stopband (a type 2 Chebyshev filter has the opposite characteristic). By allowing ripple in the passband or stopband, we are able to achieve a sharper transition between the passband and stopband in comparison with the Butterworth filter.
Signal Processing
Published in Stephen Horan, Introduction to PCM Telemetering Systems, 2017
The first choice that the filter designer needs to make is the filter family. If the design specification calls for maximally flat pass band or permits very little amplitude ripple, then the designer chooses a Butterworth filter. If the specification permits some degree of pass band ripple or a rapid transition between the pass band and the stop band is required, then the designer may choose a Chebyshev filter. If the filter phase needs to be as close to linear as possible, then the designer chooses a Bessel filter.
Optimum Chebyshev filter with an equalised group delay response
Published in International Journal of Electronics, 2022
Dragana Živaljević, Negovan Stamenković, Nikola Stojanović
Second, the steady-state response in the passband of LSM (staircase) and Scaled C (Chebyshev) filters was compared for sensitivity. The Chebyshev filter was shown to be the optimum option for low passband distortions, good selectivity, and low sensitivity to element changes. This was demonstrated using an example in which Monte Carlo simulation was used to compare the two LC ladder networks in terms of element value dispersion. This conclusion was further supported by the fact that what element tolerance is required to provide acceptable passband distortion.
Frequency and time domain comparison of selective polynomial filters with corrected phase characteristics
Published in International Journal of Electronics, 2019
Miona Andrejević Stošović, Dragan Topisirović, Vančo Litovski
Now, based on all comparisons in the frequency domain, we can conclude that the only advantage of the Chebyshev filter is that it is realized with a smaller number of components when the design requirements refer exclusively to stopband attenuation. Adding any other project requirement in the frequency domain will highlight the benefits for CMAC filters, especially LSM filters.