Login
Don’t Cha Know What June Is? Band Pass Filter Season!
With ARRL Field Day around the corner, it is the time of year where amateur radio operators far and wide wonder if they are going to be stuck having their QSOs wiped out every time their neighbor keys up the microphone. Interference between stations in a multi-transmitter field day operation can be the norm if you didn’t think to use band pass filters.
So out my stash of little gray metal boxes came, and I began checking their VSWRs for a down-‘n’-dirty pre-Field Day check-a-roo…
I don’t love the VSWR trace of this 6M filter, but it will probably suffice for Field Day, where I plan on setting up a 6M 4-element beam, and operating largely on FT8 to try to intercept the “Alpha” stations that are trying to rack up the “Free VHF station” points. That, and when else do I get to put up my 6M yagi???? FT8 is operated on 50.313 MHz which should have a VSWR under 1.2.
These Array Solutions elliptic filters have a beautiful looking VSWR. I really wish I had spent my ham bucks acquiring a full set of these. Apparently Array Solutions is not making them anymore, but a company called Hamation is? Oh, and for anyone not familiar with the RigExpert Antenna Analyzer (1-port VNA), the blue portion of the display indicates the ham band with frequency along the horizontal access and VSWR on the vertical access. Keep in mind that the VSWR we want is as close to 1 as possible!
Now 12M is a WARC band of course, meaning you cannot use it for contesting. In general, it is second only to 60M as my least used band. But, boy, that band pass filter looks great!
I expect 15M to be hopping on Field Day. I am glad this filter looks good.
Another WARC band, i.e. Field Day no-go… But a good looking filter!
Now 20M. Let’s just say I am not at all happy with this filter. Granted, it has probably been heavily abused over its several years now with me. Dunestar has gone out of business since August of 2023. Their original owner became a silent key right around the time that I purchased this set. I decided to try out Morgan Systems Surestop bandpass filters for 20M and 40M for this year’s Field Day. You’ll notice the 40M filter looks reasonable, but when actually under use, the VSWR seen at the transceiver is often high. And we can’t be without a highly functional 20M and 40M stations when it comes to Field Day operations. We will see how the Surestop filters behave…
The 30M filter looks superb! Of course, there is no operating 30M on Field Day.
The 40M filter looks a bit janky. Technically, it should function okay. But like I mentioned, this filter often creates a high SWR at the transceiver. I have a replacement here for it now.
Ugghh. The 80M filter is downright scary looking. I probably should have replaced it when I had a chance.
The top band filter isn’t great. What else can I say? I am not sure I ever even used this filter on 160M. I do think I will slowly start replacing my filters with one of the other manufacturers with time. Although I am grateful to have been able to get a set of Dunestar filters, especially since they provided a boatload of good multi-operator experiences over the years, the older and wiser me wishes I had put my money elsewhere.
Here are the “guts” of one of the Array Solutions 3rd order elliptic filters. Note the interesting use of a hot glue like substance to hold the windings in place, the beefy size of the enameled wire, and the use of ceramic capacitors. Silver-Mica capacitors are often recommended for use in band pass filters
…and a representative schematic from this excellent LC Filter Design calculator by Marki Microwave…
Now we can contrast the design and construction of the Array Solutions band pass filter with the 2nd order Dunestar bandpass filter (below). This design consists of two airwound coils and capacitors mirroring and shielded from each other on the input and output side.
Every time I get around to thinking about, testing, and opening up my band pass filters, I can’t help but think: It would be so much better to make these myself. For some reason, this does not seem to be an area that has been overly tackled by hams. In fact, there is really only one prevailing design by Lew Gordon K4VX, a 3rd order Butterworth filter, that is well-described and seems easy-ish to reproduce by the average everyday ham (i.e., one that does not design RF products for a living). The W3NQN band pass filter design article is a much more complex document to follow.
I have dabbled in making band pass filters before, but have found myself hindered by the testing process. I since learned to use the “low Z” setting of my oscilloscope. So, once I again, I found myself constructing an ugly little device, this time a low-power 160M version of K4VX’s Butterworth filter. The schematic, construction, and component values are all documented in the article. This is nothing more than a capacitor (~4000 pF) and inductor (~2.2 µH) connected in parallel on the left hand side as well as a capacitor (~4000 pF) and inductor (~2.2 µH) connected in parallel on the right hand side, with another capacitor (~400 pF) and inductor (22 µH) in series in the middle connecting the two sides. I just soldered everything together and attached it across VHF connectors.
And although the Marki Microwave design tool proposes different capacitor and inductor values for its version of the 160M 3rd order Butterworth band pass filter, you can still get an idea of what the schematic, and scatter plot parameters (insertion loss and return loss) of the filter should look like.
The first test I performed with the band pass filter was pass a sine wave through it from below the 160M band (which spans from 1.8 MHz to 2 MHz). I started with 500 kHz and passed the signal into my oscilloscope, making sure to turn on the low impedance (50 ohm) setting.
I did indeed have a fairly weak signal.
When I increased the signal generator frequency so that the waveform outputted was within the pass band of the filter (1.8 MHz), the oscilloscope showed a much larger voltage. Keep in mind that it is Channel 2 (“CH2”, the bottom box!), that you want to be looking at on the signal generator if you are following along with the pictures.
There is no change to the oscilloscope settings between the 1.8 MHz input (below) and the 500 kHz input (earlier). Clearly the voltage recovered at the 1.8 MHz setting is much larger.
Now to take a look at the NanoVNA results. The filter was simply placed between port 0 and port 1 of the NanoVNA. The vertical gray bar represents the frequency range of the 160M ham band. The filter I constructed did not use components of the exact values recommended in the K4VX article, thus the reason the filter performs at a lower frequency than expected.
Regardless, you can see below that the shape of the S11 (return loss) and S21 (insertion loss) parameters are very similar to that predicted by the Marki calculator. My filter is below:
And, again, the S11 and S21 parameters as predicted by the Marki calculator:
Well, there you have it. Band pass filter season! Field Day is almost here, and we are going to go with what we have. However, my mind has been spinning around the idea of constructing my own band pass filters so that I can more easily fix and replace the rather fragile devices as needed. And although this was a tiny little experiment, I think it shows that these band pass filter designs are indeed reproducible with accuracy. Will a KM1NDY band pass filter design show up here in the near future?! The Magic 8 Ball says “Reply Hazy. Try Again Later”!
Catchya on the flippity flip!
KM1NDY
