DSPRelated.com
Forums

Matlab filter simulation group delay

Started by gior...@hotmail.com September 10, 2012
Hello everyone,
I have the measurements of filter’s Group delay and S-parameters.
The S-parameters are of the following form presented in a touchstone file
!Date: Thursday, March 22, 2012 19:50:06
!Correction: S11(Full 2 Port(1,2))
!S21(Full 2 Port(1,2))
!S12(Full 2 Port(1,2))
!S22(Full 2 Port(1,2))
!S2P File: Measurements: S11, S21, S12, S22:
# Hz S dB R 50
1450000000 -0.44925556 132.79056 -43.664959 42.970737 -43.609634 45.291161 -0.41757283 131.60133
1450100050.025 -0.44976574 132.81039 -43.738403 42.790764 -43.597622 44.620411 -0.40801486 131.61304
1450200100.05 -0.45033455 132.82925 -43.531742 44.20499 -43.862129 44.206757 -0.40980196 131.49973
(the former file presents the elements in the following order S11,angle(db), S21,angle(db), S12,angle(db), S22,angle(db))
The filter’s Group delay data are like the demonstrated bellow:
!CSV A.01.01
!Date: Thursday March 22 2012 19:57:00
!Source: Standard
BEGIN CH1_DATA
Freq(Hz) S21 Delay(s)
1.45E+09 -2.02E-08
1.45E+09 -1.32E-08
1.45E+09 -1.77E-08
1.45E+09 -1.70E-08
1.45E+09 -1.56E-08
1.45E+09 -1.36E-08
1.45E+09 -1.20E-08

That i want to do is to simulated the impact that the group delay will have on a particular waveform using MATLAB.
I tried to use the fdesign.arbgrpdelay in order to insert my group delay data and somehow observe how that would impact on a waveform but i am getting the following error:
Error using fdesign.abstracttype/superdesign (line 96)
Design options must be specified as a structure or as parameter-value
pairs.

Error in fdesign.abstracttype/design (line 11)
varargout{1} = superdesign(this, varargin{:});

Error in allpassfilterarbitrarygrpdly (line 413)
Hgd = design(hgd,'iirlpnorm','Weights','MaxPoleRadius',0.95);

I also tried to use fdatool but i couldn't find a way of designing a filter by changing its group delay.The group delay was flat in all the available designs.
Consider that the band of interest in the filter is in the of 1.585E+09 to 1.6E+09.
Could someone provide any possible alternative?