CHAPTER 5

CHEBYSHEV TYPE II FILTERS

hebyshev Type II filters are closely related to Chebyshev Type I filters, and
are noted for having a flat passband magnitude response, and an equiripple
response in the stopband. As was noted in Chapter 4, the Chebyshev
Type I response is often simply referred to as the Chebyshev response. Similarly, the
Chebyshev Type II response is often referred to as the Inverse Chebyshev response,
for reasons that will become clear as the response is developed below.
In this chapter the Chebyshev Type II response is defined, and it will be
observed that it satisfies the Analog Filter Design Theorem. Explicit formulas for the
design and analysis of Chebyshev Type II filters, such as Filter Selectivity, Shaping
Factor, the minimum required order to meet design specifications, etc., will be
obtained. From the defining
the corresponding H(s) will be determined,
and means for determining the filter poles and zeros are found. To complete the study
of lowpass, prototype Chebyshev Type II filters, the phase response, phase delay,
group delay, and time-domain response characteristics are investigated.

5.1 EQUIRIPPLE STOPBAND MAGNITUDE

Suppose that
is the magnitude-squared frequency response of a
Chebyshev Type I filter according to (4.1):

Let

be obtained from (5.1) as follows:

Finally, the desired magnitude-squared response is obtained by replacing

in (5.2):

by

156

DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF ANALOG FILTERS:

Definition of the magnitude-squared Chebyshev Type II response:

where

and
is a frequency scaling constant, and is a constant that adjusts the influence
of
in the denominator of
Therefore, it is observed that the
hyperbolic cosine is used in (5.4) for low frequencies, and, from (5.3) that this results
in a response near unity; the trigonometric cosine is used for high frequencies beyond
resulting in a rippling response of small magnitude.
In due course it will be shown that (5.4) can be expressed as a polynomial, in
fact very closely related to the Chebyshev polynomials of Section 4.4, and that as such
(5.3) will satisfy the Analog Filter Design Theorem, and therefore the imposed
constraints of Section 2.6 will be satisfied. It will be shown that N is the order of
the Chebyshev polynomial, and in Section 5.5 it will be shown that N is the order of
the filter, i.e., the number of poles of the transfer function H(s). The form shown
for
in (5.4) is very convenient for analytical investigation purposes,
revealing the characteristics of the Chebyshev Type II response, and also yielding
design formulae such as for the minimum required order to meet design specifications.
Note that
for
and
, for
Therefore,
defines the stopband, and
ripples
within the stopband following the cosine function. Within the passband, as can be
seen from (5.3) and (5.4), the magnitude-squared frequency response follows the
hyperbolic cosine function and falls off monotonically for increasing
It is easy to see that
independent of N, and that

In terms of dB,
Chapter 5

Chebyshev Type II Filters

A Signal Processing Perspective

157

and
Note that (5.5) is the minimum attenuation for all
When (5.5) is compared
with the general magnitude specifications for the design of a lowpass filter illustrated
in Figure 2.15 on page 52, setting
equal to the negative of (5.5) results in

Several values of
and corresponding values of are shown in Table 5.1. Note
that
is the minimum attenuation in the stopband. At frequencies where the
numerator of (5.3) is zero, the attenuation is infinity.
Note that the magnitude-squared response of (5.3) is zero in the stopband
when
The frequencies where the response is zero may be found as

follows:
from which

Section 5.1

Equiripple Stopband Magnitude

158

DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF ANALOG FILTERS:

Therefore, the frequencies where the response is zero are as follows:

if N is even. Note that if N

if N is odd, and
where
is odd the highest frequency where the response is zero is infinity: there are only
(N l)/2 finite frequencies where the response is zero. If N is even there are N/2
finite frequencies where the response is zero.
Similarly, the attenuation equals
in the stopband when
The frequencies of these minimum attenuation points may be found as follows:

where
if N is odd, and
if N is even. Note that if N is
even the highest frequency where the attenuation is equal to
is infinity.
The stopband response is denoted as equiripple since all of the stopband
peaks (the points of minimum attenuation) are the same magnitude. It is noted that the
frequency spacing between peaks are not equal: it is the magnitudes of the peaks that
are equal.
The frequency at which the attenuation is equal to a given
may be found
from (5.3):

and then solve for

making use of the hyperbolic form of (5.4):

See Figure 5.1 for plots of (5.3) for a normalized

of unity
and several values of N. Recall that Butterworth and Chebyshev Type
I filters both have magnitude frequency responses that monotonically decrease with
increasing frequency throughout the transition band and the stopband. However, due
to the rippling in the stopband, this is not the case for Chebyshev Type II filters, as
can be seen in Figure 5.1. Also, as can be seen from (5.3),
is zero
Chapter 5

Chebyshev Type II Filters

A Signal Processing Perspective

159

if N is odd, and is
if N is even. Even though the frequency range
does not go to infinity in Figure 5.1, this phenomenon is observable.
See Figure 5.2 for detailed plots of (5.3) across the passband. Note that the
passband magnitude response is very flat. It is very comparable to the Butterworth
passband magnitude response shown in Figure 3.2. In fact, for a large range of it
is superior: see Sections 5.8 and 5.9. In Figures 5.1 and 5.2, solid lines are for even
orders, and dashed lines are for odd orders.

Section 5.1

Equiripple Stopband Magnitude

160

DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF ANALOG FILTERS:

Example 5.1
Suppose N = 5,
and
then,
from (5.7), the frequencies where the magnitude frequency response is zero are
1051.46 rad/s, 1701.3 rad/s, and infinity. From (5.8) the frequencies where the
attenuation in the stopband ripples to a minimum of
are 1236.07 rad/s and
3236.07 r a d / s . From (5.9),

5.2 FILTER SELECTIVITY AND SHAPING FACTOR

Applying (2.37), the definition of Filter Selectivity, to the square root of (5.3)
results in

If (5.9) is used, with

direct reference to

and therefore
in (5.10) to eliminate any
then (5.10) may be expressed as follows:

It is noted that (5.11) is identical to (4.9).

Let A be an arbitrary attenuation in dB relative to the DC value such that
From (5.3):

For a given A, solving (5.12) for

at that attenuation A:

would be equivalent to solving for the bandwidth

Using (5.13) and applying (2.38), the definition of Shaping Factor, the Chebyshev
Type II filter Shaping Factor may be readily found:

Chapter 5

Chebyshev Type II Filters

A Signal Processing Perspective

161

Example 5.2
Suppose a = 3 dB, b = 80 dB,
and
From (5.11), for N = 1, 2, , 10,
may be computed to be 0.35, 0.71, 1.06,
1.43, 1.84, 2.28, 2.79, 3.35, 3.97 and 4.67 respectively. From (5.14), for N from
1 through 10,
may be computed to be 10000.0, 70.71, 13.59, 5.99, 3.69, 2.70,
2.18, 1.87, 1.67 and 1.53 respectively.

5.3 DETERMINATION OF ORDER

An important step in the design of an analog filter is determining the minimum
required order to meet given specifications. Refer to Figure 2.15 on page 52 in
specifying the desired filter magnitude characteristics. As long as the filter magnitude
frequency response fits within the acceptable corridor indicated in Figure 2.15, it
satisfies the specifications.
Starting with (5.3):

Temporarily let
a real variable, assume the role of N, an integer, as is done in
Chapters 3 and 4. Therefore, from (5.15):

from which, making use of (5.6),

Letting

where
is the smallest integer equal to or larger than
the minimum order required to meet the specifications may be
determined from the following:

Note that (5.16) is identical to (4.14): for the same specifications, the minimum order
required for a Chebyshev Type II filter is the same as that for a Chebyshev Type I
filter.

Section 5.3

Determination of Order

162

DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF ANALOG FILTERS:

Example 5.3
Suppose the following specifications are given:
and
From the right side of (5.16),
Therefore, N = 6.

5.4 INVERSE CHEBYSHEV POLYNOMIALS

A recursion for (5.4) may readily be developed, similar to that which was done
in Section 4.4 for Chebyshev Type I filters. The resultant recursion is similar to
(4.21):

It is important to note that (5.17) applies equally to the cosine and hyperbolic forms
of
If N = 0, and for convenience
is normalized to unity,
and therefore

If N = 1,

and therefore

For N > 1 the recursion (5.17) may be used. For N = 2,

Several Chebyshev polynomials are shown in Table 4.2. Inverse Chebyshev

polynomials may be obtained from Table 4.2 by replacing
with
Note that
if
is not normalized to unity, the inverse Chebyshev polynomial is as shown in
Table 4.2 with replaced by
It can be shown that the square of all inverse Chebyshev polynomials have only
even powers of
and that multiplied by
and added to unity they have no real
roots. If they are not added to unity, as appears in the numerator of (5.3), then they
do have real roots: those roots may be found by (5.7). Therefore, the Analog Filter
Design Theorem is satisfied. For example, see Example 5.4.
Chapter 5

Chebyshev Type II Filters

A Signal Processing Perspective

Example 5.4
Suppose N = 3,

163

and

Then

and

A root of the denominator requires that

which has no real solution, i.e., no real roots. The numerator has one real repeated
root, which is 115.47. Therefore, the Analog Filter Design Theorem is satisfied:
there is a corresponding H(s) that meets all of the imposed constraints of Section 2.6.
Therefore a circuit can be implemented with the desired third-order Chebyshev Type
II response.

5.5 LOCATION OF THE POLES AND ZEROS

Starting with (5.3) and following the procedure used in Section 2.7:

The zeros of (5.18) may be found by setting

and solving for the values of

The trigonometric cosine form of (5.4) must be used
since the inverse hyperbolic cosine of zero doesnt exist:

Solving (5.19) for

results in

which, except for the j, is identical with (5.7). Therefore, the zeros of the transfer
function of a Chebyshev Type II filter are as follows:

Section 5.5

Location of the Poles and Zeros

164
where

DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF ANALOG FILTERS:

is given by (5.7).
The poles of (5.18) may be found by setting

Since
then
more appropriate:

and the hyperbolic form of

is perhaps the

As noted in Chapter 4, since

is complex, either form, the cosine or the
hyperbolic, is equally valid. Either approach will yield the same equations for finding
the poles.
Since the approach here is identical to the approach used in Section 4.5, except
that
is replaced by
it follows that the equivalent to (4.32) would

be as follows:

For left-half plane poles:

where

It is interesting to note that the poles of the Chebyshev Type I filter, for a
normalized
may be expressed as follows:

where

Chapter 5

Chebyshev Type II Filters

A Signal Processing Perspective

165

and the poles of the Chebyshev Type II filter, for a normalized

expressed as follows:

may be

and therefore, the

poles are the
poles reflected about a unit circle
in the
plane: the magnitudes are inversely related and the phase angles have
opposite polarity. This inverse relationship between the normalized poles of the
Chebyshev Type I transfer function and those of the Chebyshev Type II is often noted
in the literature, and is implied, as noted above, by contrasting (4.33) and (5.22). It
is possible to find the poles of a Chebyshev Type II transfer function by first finding
the poles of a Chebyshev Type I transfer function and then converting them into
Chebyshev Type II poles. However, this relationship between normalized poles
doesnt seem to yield any practical advantage. Direct use of (5.22) is quite adequate
for finding the poles of a Chebyshev Type II transfer function. Also note, by
comparing Tables 4.1 and 5.1, that practical values for are very different for the
two transfer functions.
Example 5.5
Suppose N = 4,

and

From (5.9),

From (5.22), the poles are

From (5.20), the zeros are

From the poles and zeros, and noting that the DC gain is unity:

or,

Section 5.5

Location of the Poles and Zeros

166

DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF ANALOG FILTERS:

5.6 PHASE RESPONSE, PHASE DELAY, AND GROUP DELAY

A Chebyshev Type II filter, as seen above, is designed to meet given
magnitude response specifications. Once the transfer function is determined, it may
be put in the following form:

which is of the form of (2.39). Given (5.23), the phase response, from (2.79), may
be stated as follows:

where
and
denote the real and imaginary parts of the denominator,
respectively, and
and
denote the real and imaginary parts of the
numerator of (5.23) evaluated with
The phase response of a Chebyshev Type II filter, with a normalized
a somewhat arbitrary, but common value of
and several
values of N, is shown in Figure 5.3. The phase response, from
until the first
phase discontinuity, which occurs at
for the tenth-order response,

Chapter 5

Chebyshev Type II Filters

A Signal Processing Perspective

167

is the total phase, in contrast to the principal phase.1 The total phase, as shown for
Butterworth filters in Figure 3.6, and for Chebyshev Type I filters in Figure 4.4, and
and for Chebyshev Type II filters until the first phase discontinuity in Figure 5.3, is
important because phase delay and group delay are directed related to the total phase
response. Each of the phase discontinuities seen in Figure 5.3 are
The phase
response in Figure 5.3 for
beyond, and including, the first phase discontinuity is
not total phase, but rather pseudo-principal phase. That is, the phase shown is the
total phase plus
where m is an integer. This technique allows for a less
congested set of plots that is easier to read. In fact, each of the phase discontinuities,
if total phase was to be preserved, are
The phase discontinuities occur at
transmission zeros, which are on the
as
increases through a zero, the
phase response encounters a
discontinuity. It is interesting to note that while
Butterworth and Chebyshev Type I filters each have a phase response in the limit, as
approaches infinity, of
this is not true for Chebyshev Type II filters.
Due to the finite transmission zeros, the phase response in the limit, as
approaches
infinity, for Chebyshev Type II filters, is zero, for N even, and is
for N
odd.
Taking the initial phase slope as a linear-phase reference, deviations
from linear phase, for a normalized
and for several
values of N, are shown in Figure 5.4. In the figure, solid lines are for even orders,
and dashed lines are for odd orders. The phase deviation is shown in the figure from
until just before the first phase discontinuity occurs. Each phase discontinuity causes
discontinuity in the phase deviation, but if plotted is somewhat misleading,

The principal phase is restricted to the range of

Section 5.6

Phase Response, Phase Delay, and Group Delay

168

DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF ANALOG FILTERS:

since the magnitude response is zero at the same frequency and is, in general, in the
stopband. Over the frequency range of the figure,
phase
discontinuities only effect the plots for orders 8, 9, and 10, as can be seen in the
figure.
The phase delay,
for a filter is defined in (2.80), which is repeated
here for convenience:

The group delay for a filter,

for convenience:

is defined by (2.81) and is repeated here

The phase delay of a Chebyshev Type II filter, with a normalized

and for several values of N, is shown in Figure 5.5. Note that the
phase delay discontinuities occur at the frequencies where there are phase
discontinuities, that is, at the frequencies of transmission zeros. Since each phase
discontinuity is
each phase delay discontinuity is
where
is the
frequency of the discontinuity. The effect, therefore, of the transmission zeros, is that
the phase delay for frequencies well beyond the passband approaches zero much more
rapidly than it does for either Butterworth or Chebyshev Type I filters (see Figures
3.8 and 4.6).
The group delay is shown in Figure 5.6. Note that the group delay values at
DC are very close to the phase delay values at DC, and that for all
the
phase delay and the group delay are comparable. However, as
approaches the 3

Chapter 5

Chebyshev Type II Filters

A Signal Processing Perspective

169

dB corner frequency, in this case unity, the group delay becomes large due to the
nonlinearity of the phase response near the corner frequency (see Figures 5.3 and
5.4). Note the points of discontinuity in the group delay, for example at
for N = 10. As can be seen from (5.26), at each
phase
discontinuity the group delay is theoretically
That is, the group delay is
theoretically an infinite time advance, rather than a delay, at the point of a phase
discontinuity; however, since this occurs only at a point along the frequency axis, and
at a point of a transmission zero, the filter magnitude response at that point is zero;
there is nothing to advance. In Figure 5.6, these points of infinite time advance are
plotted with non-zero width; this is a result of the plotting software and from the fact
that the calculation frequency-sample width is non-zero. Also, for convenience, the
minimum delay value of the figure is zero.

5.7 TIME-DOMAIN RESPONSE

The unit impulse response of a Chebyshev Type II filter, with a normalized
and for several values of N, is shown in Figure 5.7. Note
that for even orders there is an impulse at the origin (not shown in the figure), but the
weight of these impulses is (in this case, since
and
therefore these impulses are insignificant. The unit step response of a Chebyshev
Type II filter, with normalized
and for several values of N,
is shown in Figure 5.8.

Section 5.7

Time-Domain Response

170

DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF ANALOG FILTERS:

5.8 COMPARISON WITH BUTTERWORTH AND CHEBYSHEV

TYPE I FILTERS
There are several ways in which Chebyshev Type II filters may be compared
with Butterworth and Chebyshev Type I filters. The magnitude frequency responses
may be compared, the phase responses, the phase delays, the group delays, the unit
impulse responses, and the unit step responses, for example.

Chapter 5

Chebyshev Type II Filters

A Signal Processing Perspective

171

It is noted that, for a given set of filter specifications, the minimum order
required for a Chebyshev Type II response will never be greater than that required for
a Butterworth response: it will frequently be less. It is not always less, since the
orders are restricted to integers. As noted in Section 5.3, the minimum order required
for a Chebyshev Type II filter is identical with that for a Chebyshev Type I filter.
Although the passband of a Chebyshev Type II response was not designed to
be maximally flat in any sense, yet, as can be seen by comparing Figures 5.2 and 3.2,
the passband magnitude response of a Chebyshev Type II filter is comparable with that
of a Butterworth. In fact, over a wide range of filter specifications, the passband
magnitude response of a Chebyshev Type II filter, with the same order and same
3 dB corner frequency, is more flat than that of a Butterworth filter. One way of
demonstrating this is by comparing Filter Selectivity for the two filters. Let (5.11) be
denoted
and (3.7) be denoted
It can be shown that

for all
N, and
Equality in (5.27) is achieved only for N = 1 or for very
small values of
For example, for
N = 10, and
then

It can be shown that, for all practical values of

that the Shaping Factor of
a Chebyshev Type II filter is always less than that for a Butterworth filter of the same
order. To illustrate this, compare the results of Example 5.2 to that of Example 3.1;
in both cases a = 3 dB and b = 80 dB. For example, for N = 8,
for the
Butterworth filter is 3.16, whereas it is only 1.87 for the Chebyshev Type II filter,
which indicates that the attenuation in the transition band increases more rapidly as a
function of
for the Chebyshev Type II filter than it does for the Butterworth. This,
of course, can readily be observed by comparing Figures 3.1 and 5.1.
The above may imply that a Chebyshev Type II filter is superior to a
Butterworth filter of the same order. However, the phase response of a Butterworth
filter is more nearly linear than is that of a Chebyshev Type II filter of the same order.
The differences, however, are not great. The phase deviation from linear for a
Chebyshev Type II filter, as shown in Figure 5.4, is greater than it is for a
Butterworth filter, as shown in Figure 3.7. This is, of course, reflected in the phase
delay and the group delay, but comparing Figure 5.5 with 3.8, and 5.6 with 3.9,
shows that the differences are not great. Comparing plots of the unit impulse response
and the unit step response of the two filters also shows that the differences are not
great.
The comparison between Chebyshev Type II filters and Chebyshev Type I
filters is more objective and straight-forward, especially since the minimum required
Section 5.8

Comparison with Butterworth and Chebyshev Type I Filters

172

DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF ANALOG FILTERS:

order to meet design specifications is identical for both filters. A Chebyshev Type II
filter, of the same order, has a more constant magnitude response in the passband, a
more nearly linear phase response, a more nearly constant phase delay and group
delay, and less ringing in the impulse and step responses, than does a Chebyshev Type
I filter: compare Figures 5.2 and 4.2, 5.4 and 4.5, 5.5 and 4.6, 5.6 and 4.7, 5.7 and
4.8, and 5.8 and 4.9. However, while (5.11) and (4.9), equations for Filter
Selectivity, are the same, the numerical values for differ significantly for the two
filters. For all practical filters,
for the Chebyshev Type II filter will be
significantly smaller than that for the comparable Chebyshev Type I filter. To
illustrate this, compare Table 5.1 to Table 4.1. The result is that, for all practical
filters,
for the Chebyshev Type I filter will be significantly larger than for the
comparable Chebyshev Type II filter: compare Figures 5.2 and 4.2. However, the
comparison of Shaping Factor values is not consistent. It is possible for a Chebyshev
Type II filter to have a smaller
than a corresponding Chebyshev Type I filter. To
illustrate this, compare 10th-order responses in Figures 5.1 and 4.1 with a = 3 dB
and b = 80 dB.

5.9 CHAPTER 5 PROBLEMS

5.1

Given the defining equations for a Chebyshev Type II response, (5.3) and
(5.4), and given that
and N = 3 :
(a)
Determine the value of
(b)
Determine the value of
(c)
Determine the frequencies where the response is zero.
(d)
Determine the frequencies in the stopband where the attenuation is
(e)
Accurately sketch the magnitude frequency response. Use only a
calculator for the necessary calculations. Use a vertical scale in dB (0
to -60dB), and a linear radian frequency scale from 0 to 5000 rad/s.
(f)
Accurately sketch the magnitude frequency response. Use only a
calculator for the necessary calculations. Use a linear vertical scale
from 0 to 1, and a linear radian frequency scale from 0 to 2000 rad/s.

5.2

Given the defining equations for a Chebyshev Type II response, (5.3) and
(5.4), and given that
and N = 6 :
(a)
Determine the value of
(b)
Determine the value of
(c)
Determine the frequencies where the response is zero.
(d)
Determine the frequencies in the stopband where the attenuation is
(e)
Accurately sketch the magnitude frequency response. Use only a
calculator for the necessary calculations. Use a vertical scale in dB (0

Chapter 5

Chebyshev Type II Filters

A Signal Processing Perspective

(f)

173

to -80dB), and a linear radian frequency scale from 0 to 5000 rad/s.

Accurately sketch the magnitude frequency response. Use only a
calculator for the necessary calculations. Use a linear vertical scale
from 0 to 1, and a linear radian frequency scale from 0 to 1200 rad/s.

5.3

Starting with (2.37) and the square root of (5.3), derive (5.11).

5.4

On page 159 it is mentioned that for a large range of the passband magnitude
response for a Chebyshev Type II filter is more flat than that of a Butterworth
filter of the same order. On page 171 this concept is expanded upon. Since
both responses are relatively flat in the passband, if they both have the same
then the one with the larger Filter Selectivity implies that the magnitude
frequency response remains closer to unity as
approaches
then does the
other one. Verify that, for the same order and the same
Filter Selectivity
for a Chebyshev Type II filter is greater than or equal to Filter Selectivity for
a Butterworth filter, and that they are equal only for N = 1 or for very small
values of
That is, verify (5.27).

5.5

Determine the value of Filter Selectivity for the Chebyshev Type II filter
specified in Problem 5.2. Compare this value with the Filter Selectivity for
a Butterworth filter with similar specifications:
and
N = 6. Compare this value with the Filter Selectivity for a Chebyshev Type
I filter with similar specifications:
and
N = 6.

5.6

Determine the value of the Shaping Factor for the Chebyshev Type II filter
specified in Problem 5.2, for a = 3 dB and b = 60 dB. Compare this value
with the Shaping Factor for a Butterworth filter with similar specifications:
and N = 6. Compare this value with the Shaping Factor
for a Chebyshev Type I filter with similar specifications:
and N = 6.

5.7

Estimate the Shaping Factor for a Chebyshev Type II filter with N = 5,

and
from Figure 5.1. Compare your results with that
obtained from (5.14).

5.8

Suppose filter specifications are stated as follows:

Determine the required filter order to meet the given
specifications:
(a)
For a Chebyshev Type II filter with
(b)
For a Chebyshev Type II filter with
(c)
For a Chebyshev Type II filter with

Section 5.9

Chapter 5 Problems

174

DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF ANALOG FILTERS:

(d)
(e)

For a Chebyshev Type II filter with

For comparison purposes, repeat parts (a) through (d) for a Butterworth
filter.

(f)
(g)
(h)

For comparison purposes, repeat parts (a) through (d) for a Chebyshev
Type I filter with 0.1 dB of ripple.
For comparison purposes, repeat parts (a) through (d) for a Chebyshev
Type I filter with 0.5 dB of ripple.
For comparison purposes, repeat parts (a) through (d) for a Chebyshev
Type I filter with 1.5 dB of ripple.

5.9

Given that N = 4,
and
express
in polynomial form similar to Example 5.4, and demonstrate that it satisfies the
Analog Filter Design Theorem.

5.10

Prove that the magnitude-squared frequency response of Problem 5.1 satisfies

the Analog Filter Design Theorem.

5.11

Prove that the magnitude-squared frequency response of Problem 5.2 satisfies

the Analog Filter Design Theorem.

5.12

Determine the 9-th and 10-th order inverse Chebyshev polynomials.

5.13

Sketch the square of the 4-th order inverse Chebyshev polynomial for
from 0 to 1.1 rad/s. Compute the square of (5.4) over this same radian
frequency range for
and verify that it is numerically the same as the
inverse Chebyshev polynomial.

5.14

Determine the poles and zeros of the filter specified in Problem 5.8 (a).

5.15

Determine the poles and zeros of the filter specified in Problem 5.8 (d).

5.16

Determine the poles and zeros of the filter specified in Problem 5.9.

5.17

Suppose N = 4,
and
Determine the transfer
function H(s). That is, verify the results of Example 5.5.

5.18

Determine the transfer function H(s) for the Chebyshev Type II filter
specified in Problem 5.1. Express the denominator of H(s) in two ways: (1)
As a polynomial in s. (2) As the product of a second-order polynomial in s,
the roots of which being complex conjugates, and a first-order term. State the
numerical values of the three poles and the finite-value zeros. Sketch the six
poles and the zeros of H(-s)H(s) on an s plane.

Chapter 5

Chebyshev Type II Filters

A Signal Processing Perspective

175

5.19

Determine the transfer function H(s) for the Chebyshev Type II filter
specified in Problem 5.2. Express the denominator of H(s) in two ways: (1)
As a polynomial in s. (2) As the product of three second-order polynomials
in s, the roots of each second-order polynomial being complex conjugates.
Express the numerator of H(s) in two ways: (1) As a polynomial in s. (2) As
the product of three second-order polynomials in s, the roots of each secondorder polynomial being complex conjugates. State the numerical values of the
six poles and six zeros. Sketch the twelve poles and zeros of H(-s) H(s) on
an s plane.

5.20

Suppose a Chebyshev Type II filter is be used that has a minimum attenuation

of 60 dB at 4000 Hz
(a)
If
and
what is the minimum order
required?
(b)
If
and N = 10, what is the maximum value of ?
(c)
If
and N = 10, what is the minimum value of
?

5.21

Under the conditions of part (c) of Problem 5.20, determine the transfer
function H(s), and give numerical values for all the poles and zeros.

5.22

Sketch the step response of a 10-th order Chebyshev Type II filter with
and
Refer to Figure 5.8 and make use of the
scaling property of Fourier transforms. What would the maximum group delay
be for this filter, and at what frequency would it occur? At what time would
the peak of the unit impulse response of this filter be, and what would be the
value of that peak?

5.23

Using the MATLAB functions cheb2ap, impulse and step:

Determine the transfer function in polynomial form, and also factored
to indicate the poles and zeros, of a Chebyshev Type II filter with
and N = 6.
(b)
Determine the impulse response and the step response for the filter of
part (a).
(c)
By multiplying the pole vector and the zero vector found in part (a)
by
determine the transfer function of a Chebyshev Type II
filter with
and N = 6.
(d)
Determine and plot the magnitude frequency response of the filter of
part (c) by using the MATLAB function freqs. Use a vertical scale in
dB and a linear horizontal scale from 0 to 5000 Hz. Also determine and
plot the phase response over this same frequency range. Use the
MATLAB function unwrap rather than plotting the principle phase.
(e)
By appropriately scaling the impulse response and the step response of

(a)

Section 5.9

Chapter 5 Problems

176

DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF ANALOG FILTERS:

part (b), determine and plot the impulse response and the step response
of the filter of part (c). That is, the time axis for the step response
needs to scaled by
and the unit impulse response needs
the same time-axis scaling and requires an amplitude scaling of
(f)
(g)

Determine and plot the phase delay of the filter of part (c). Note that
this is easily obtained from the phase response of part (d).
Determine and plot the group delay of the filter of part (c). Note that
this also is easily obtained from the phase response of part (d):
where
is the phase in radians
at step n, and
is the step size in rad/s.

5.24

To demonstrate the critical nature of a filter design, this problem experiments

some with the filter of Problem 5.23 (c). Multiply the highest-frequency polepair of the filter of Problem 5.23 (c) by 1.1, leaving all other poles and zeros
unchanged. Determine and plot the magnitude frequency response of the filter
by using the MATLAB function freqs. Use a vertical scale in dB and a linear
horizontal scale from 0 to 5000 Hz. Also determine and plot the phase
response over this same frequency range. Use the MATLAB function unwrap
rather than plotting the principle phase. Compare these results with that
obtained for Problem 5.23 (d).

5.25

This problem continues to demonstrate the critical nature of a filter design, and
is a continuation of Problem 5.24. Multiply the lowest-frequency zero-pair
of the filter of Problem 5.23 (c) by 1.1, leaving all other poles and zeros
unchanged. Determine and plot the magnitude frequency response of the filter
by using the MATLAB function freqs. Use a vertical scale in dB and a linear
horizontal scale from 0 to 5000 Hz. Also determine and plot the phase
response over this same frequency range. Use the MATLAB function unwrap
rather than plotting the principle phase. Compare these results with that
obtained for Problem 5.23 (d).

Chapter 5

Chebyshev Type II Filters