10.3 Filter implementation structures

FIR and IIR filters can be implemented using various structures, each with unique pros and cons. Direct form is simple but can be unstable for high-order filters. Cascade and parallel structures offer better stability by breaking filters into smaller sections.

Lattice structures excel in stability and are great for adaptive filtering. When choosing a structure, consider computational complexity, memory needs, and numerical properties. Optimizing implementations involves hardware-specific tweaks and software techniques like vectorization and multi-threading.

FIR Filter Implementation Structures

Implement FIR filters using direct form, cascade, and lattice structures

Top images from around the web for Implement FIR filters using direct form, cascade, and lattice structures

• 

  Finite impulse response - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  FIR Filter - SnesLab View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  2.2 Finite impulse response (FIR) filter design methods | Digital Filter Design View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Finite impulse response - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  FIR Filter - SnesLab View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Implement FIR filters using direct form, cascade, and lattice structures

• 

  Finite impulse response - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  FIR Filter - SnesLab View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  2.2 Finite impulse response (FIR) filter design methods | Digital Filter Design View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Finite impulse response - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  FIR Filter - SnesLab View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Direct form structure
  • Implements difference equation directly
  • Requires $N$ multiplications and $N-1$ additions per output sample ($N$ = filter order)
  • Delay elements connected in series
  • Suitable for low-order filters (10th order or less)
• Cascade structure
  • Decomposes transfer function into product of second-order sections (SOS)
  • Each SOS implemented using direct form structure
  • Requires $2M$ multiplications and $2M$ additions per output sample ($M$ = number of SOS)
  • Improved numerical stability compared to direct form
  • Suitable for high-order filters (greater than 10th order)
• Lattice structure
  • Based on lattice filter theory
  • Requires $N$ multiplications and $2N-1$ additions per output sample
  • Highly modular and parallel structure enables efficient hardware implementation
  • Excellent numerical stability due to inherent properties of lattice filters
  • Suitable for adaptive filtering applications (noise cancellation, echo cancellation)

IIR filter implementation structures

• Direct form I structure
  • Implements difference equation directly
  • Requires $N+M$ multiplications and $N+M-1$ additions per output sample ($N$ = feedforward order, $M$ = feedback order)
  • Delay elements connected in series
  • Prone to numerical instability for high-order filters (greater than 10th order)
• Direct form II structure
  • Canonical form of direct form I
  • Requires $N+M$ multiplications and $N+M-1$ additions per output sample
  • Minimizes number of delay elements to $\max(N,M)$
  • Improved numerical stability compared to direct form I
• Cascade structure
  • Decomposes transfer function into product of second-order sections (SOS)
  • Each SOS implemented using direct form II structure
  • Requires $2M$ multiplications and $2M$ additions per output sample ($M$ = number of SOS)
  • Improved numerical stability compared to direct form structures
• Parallel structure
  • Decomposes transfer function into sum of first-order and second-order sections
  • Each section implemented using direct form II structure
  • Requires $2M+N$ multiplications and $2M+N-1$ additions per output sample ($M$ = number of second-order sections, $N$ = number of first-order sections)
  • Improved numerical stability compared to direct form structures

Comparison of filter structures

• Computational complexity
  1. Direct form structures: $N+M$ multiplications and $N+M-1$ additions per output sample
  2. Cascade and parallel structures: $2M$ multiplications and $2M$ additions per output sample for second-order sections
  3. Lattice structure: $N$ multiplications and $2N-1$ additions per output sample
• Memory requirements
  1. Direct form I: $N+M$ delay elements
  2. Direct form II: $\max(N,M)$ delay elements
  3. Cascade and parallel structures: $2M$ delay elements for second-order sections
  4. Lattice structure: $N$ delay elements
• Numerical properties
  • Direct form structures prone to numerical instability for high-order filters
  • Cascade and parallel structures have improved numerical stability due to second-order sections
  • Lattice structure has excellent numerical stability due to inherent properties of lattice filters

Optimization of filter implementations

• Hardware optimization
  • Minimize number of multiplications and additions to reduce hardware complexity
  • Use fixed-point arithmetic instead of floating-point for resource-constrained systems (embedded systems)
  • Exploit parallelism in filter structure (lattice, parallel) for efficient hardware implementation
  • Utilize hardware-specific features (DSP slices, dedicated multipliers) for improved performance
• Software optimization
  • Leverage vectorization and SIMD instructions for parallel processing (AVX, SSE)
  • Optimize memory access patterns to minimize cache misses and improve data locality
  • Use lookup tables for computationally expensive operations (trigonometric functions, exponentials)
  • Employ multi-threading for concurrent execution of filter sections on multi-core processors
  • Consider target platform's architecture and compiler optimizations for best performance