Jerry, Yes, the term has become corrupted and misunderstood over the years.
That *is* exactly what the K3 filters do (protect the downstream circuits from strong out of passband signals), but is done using a much more narrow bandwidth at the 1st IF.
If the operator never encounters signal levels in excess of S-9+30, there is no need for the roofing filter, but signals stronger than that are encountered commonly in contests and tuning through a DX pileup.
If it were not for the Hardware AGC, they would overload the A-D converter causing the entire output to become garbage. With the Hardware AGC present, that is not going to happen, but strong signals within the 1st IF bandpass will cause "pumping" of the Hardware AGC as those signals come and go. In the K3, *that* condition is what the roofing filters will prevent.
Bottom line, if you hear that "pumping" (and subsequent desensing of the receiver), you would benefit from a more narrow filter.
73, Don W3FPR On 5/12/2014 12:33 PM, Jerome Sodus wrote:
Hello Bill, The term "roofing-filter" made sense back in the 1980's when I designed roofing-filters at 70 MHz. Bandwidths would be in tens of KHz. The purpose then was to protect downstream circuitry by rejecting very strong out-of-band signals that could cause overload; selectivity was not the purpose. Selectivity was done further downstream. So the term has become corrupted over the years.
______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[email protected] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [email protected]
