Charles W. Rhodes/Digital TV /
11.21.2012 02:00 PM
FCC Auctions: More Potential For DTV Interference
Converter boxes could fail after repack

 
Charles W. Rhodes

The Notice of Proposed Rule Making issued by the FCC on Sept. 28 provides a wealth of information as how the commission will go about repacking broadcast spectrum and auctioning some as yet undetermined portion of the UHF band.

From it, I learned that the present allocation of Ch. 37 (608–614 MHz) to radio astronomy might be changed to allow broadcasters to use Ch. 37, while radio astronomy would be given some other spectrum, possibly near Ch. 37.

This made me think about the double-conversion tuners in some of the NTIA-approved converter boxes. Some, if not all of these have a first IF of 1222 MHz. This is the second harmonic of the center frequency of Ch. 37—611 MHz. This cannot be a coincidence. Ch. 37 is the only TV channel that has never been used for broadcasting. Any strong signal on that channel could generate second-order distortion products (second harmonics) centered on 1222 MHz.

In my laboratory, I have some down-converters, which I believed use a doublec onversion tuner. So my colleague, Linley Gumm, and I generated an ATSC Ch. 37 signal on my Rohde & Schwarz DTV signal generator and fed this, along with a desired signal, to these down-converters.

All four converter boxes were jammed by a strong Ch. 37 signal. The interesting thing is that this happens when the unit is tuned to any TV channel from 2 to 51. It appears that the designers of double-conversion tuners really knew what they were doing in selecting this first IF frequency. There really are few alternatives to 1222 MHz for double-conversion DTV tuners; each has its good and its bad features.

So, what if the FCC allows broadcasters to use Ch. 37? Trouble appears likely for receiving devices with a first IF=1222 MHz, like all the double-conversion tuners in my lab.

But, this is a hypothetical question. Unless the FCC changes the rules, it simply won’t be a problem. Or will it?

Another second-order distortion product is the sum of the frequencies of two signals: F1+F2. Suppose that Ch. 37–X and 37+X (X is an integer) are allocated in the great repacking in the same market. For example, let X=2. We would have an undesired signal on Ch. 35 and another on Ch. 39. Their center frequencies are 599 and 623 MHz. The sum of these is 1222 MHz.

So we tried this experiment and found that, compared to a single UHF signal on Ch. 37, we had more interference from this symmetrical pair of channels. There were no double-conversion tuners used in analog TV receivers, so this problem was unknown until now.

There are many channel pairs that are symmetrical around Ch. 37. How many?

37 – 14 = 13 pairs. (Ch. 37 + Ch. 13 = Ch.50)

But would these far out pairs of UHF channels cause interference?

So we did another experiment with these four double-conversion tuners. We used Channels 17 and 57 (X=20). That required three frequency-agile ATSC signal generators. I used mine and we borrowed two more from Larry Sayer of Rohde & Schwarz. Another was obtained from Bernard Rate, senior engineer of GPA Associates, a local consulting firm.

The interference was slightly less with X=20 than X=2, but yes, any symmetrical pair of signals can cause interference, not just herringbone lines as was the case with analog TV, but complete reception failure!

So it really doesn’t matter much whether or not the FCC allows broadcasters to use Ch. 37. These symmetrical pairs of channels are the killers. And kill is what they can do to any DTV signal to which the viewer may have tuned in if it’s weak enough.

How weak, you must be thinking?

 
Bank of 26 TV monitors feed NTSC signals to 26 NTIA-approved converter boxes under test.
In our experiments, we set the UHF signal(s) to –17 dBm per channel. We changed the desired signal power until the units under test locked to the desired signal and produced stable pictures with audio. Under these conditions the minimum usable ATSC signal was –46 dBm for X=2, and –53 dBm for X=20—quite a ways from its noise-limited value of –85 dBm.

We also found that Dmin varies linearily with the U power. If we increased the power per channel by 10 dB, Dmin followed.

Alas, what can be done about this newly discovered interference mechanism?

The FCC could set up a program for owners of NTIA-approved converter boxes that fail after the spectrum repacking is accomplished. The NTIA issued about 33 million coupons with which people could buy an NTIA-approved converter box for $40, a real bargain. As a guess, there are probably 30 million converters in use. Of these, perhaps 15 percent have a double-conversion tuner, so the number of replacement boxes needed is approximately 5 million.

However, in many communities there may be only a few of these symmetrical channel pairs in operation. Also, some of the converter boxes have by now been replaced by new DTV receivers. In any event, this problem can be solved by the government throwing money at it, and I think that they must. After all, the NTIA approved these converter boxes for its $40 coupon program.

While I haven’t seen any of these in stores for several years, a government program would create a market for possibly 4 million boxes. Single-conversion converters from the NTIA-approved list would reenter the marketplace. The FCC knows which converter boxes have a double-conversion tuner. So, no problem!

Charles Rhodes is a consultant in the field of television broadcast technologies and planning. He can be reached via email at cwr@bootit.com.



Comments
Post New Comment
If you are already a member, or would like to receive email alerts as new comments are
made, please login or register.

Enter the code shown above:

(Note: If you cannot read the numbers in the above
image, reload the page to generate a new one.)

1.
Posted by: Deborah McAdams
Wed, 08-28-2012 03:08 PM Report Comment
Charlie replies: To answer your question, one undesired signal on Ch. 37 received at – 29 dBm would desensitize DTV receivers with a Double Conversion Tuner by about 30 dB. What this means is that any desired signal above – 85 dBm should be received, absent interference, but with one Channel 37 undesired signal DTV reception would fail at – 85 dBm + 30 dBm = - 55 dBm. But wait, this is only for receivers with a double conversion tuner, but this interference probably kills reception of all ASTC signals channels 2-51 if not stronger than- 55 dBm at the input to a double conversion tuner. So how strong is a -29 dBm signal, it is considered strong by the ATSC, but the ATSC also considers that a DTV signal at a receiver can be up to – 5 dBm, 23 dB stronger than strong. What is 23 dB, well 20 dB is a hundred time stronger and 3 dB is twice as strong so the strongest signal at a DTV receiver is 200 times stronger than what it takes to kill reception if there is a -29 dBm signal on channel 37. That is the good news, the bad news is that a pair of DTV signals on channels 35 and 39 do even more damage and they are out there right now. But again, the damage only occurs with double conversion tuners. How many double conversion tuners are out there in ATSC receivers or Converter Boxes? No one knows. For what it is worth, of the 26 NTIA approved converter boxes in my laboratory, 4 are known to have a double conversion tuner with a first IF of 1222 MHz. I doubt that any double conversion tuners have any other than 1222 MHz as their 1st IF. This is crucial because 1222 MHz is the second harmonic of the center frequency of channel 37. That relationship is why a signal on channel 37 or two signals on channels 37 +/- X where X is an integer between 1 and 23 causes this unique interference to all weak signals. How can you identify receiving devices with a Double Conversion Tuner? There is no physical indication of the kind of tuner is inside any consumer TV receiving device to my knowledge. It wouldn’t be understood by the public. In a well equipped RF laboratory, we can measure the Local Oscillator frequency signal leaking out the antenna “F” connector or we can set up an experiment where we have a desired signal on any channel and we add a channel 37 ATSC signal at say -29 dBm and see if that kills reception. That is how we proved these double conversion tuners are double conversion tuners. I hope that I’ve answered your questions. If not, let me know what is still not clear.
2.
Posted by: Anonymous
Mon, 24-26-2012 04:24 PM Report Comment
Charlie, this is a very interesting mechanism, and an interesting study. But did I miss the part where you define what a "strong" Ch. 37 signal is? How strong does the Ch. 37 signal need to be before inducing failure?
3.
Posted by: Anonymous
Mon, 28-26-2012 04:28 PM Report Comment
Additionally, I think the days when the FCC is going to change it's spectrum policy to accomodate crappy DTV designs are dead, gone and over. Several years ago. New silicon tuner architectures come out just about every year now. The days of a "standard" can tuner design are over. Realistically, the FCC can't change it's spectrum policy to accomodate the tuner design fad of the moment. It's just not like that anymore.
4.
Posted by: Anonymous
Thu, 23-29-2012 05:23 PM Report Comment
Charlie - Thanks for the info. A -29dBm signal is definitely common in the field, so that sounds like a very real interference mechanism. This is good info. The CATV guys have been using a first IF in the 1200MHz region for many years. My belief is that they chose this value simply because it was above the CATV channel plan. Perhaps there was some consideration wrt. OTA TV reception as well, and the Ch. 37 mechanism you described. But I would be surprised if it was the primary consideration. While I do appreciate your work on this issue, and I think this is a very interesting study, I think you go too far when you expect the FCC, or the US Gov't generally, to "do something" about this in their spectrum policy. They didn't create this problem. They don't need to fix it. (Actually...more precisely....I the taxpayer do not wish to pay to fix this *engineering deficiency* which was not caused by me). Bottom line is that tuner designers need to be more far DEFENSIVE and stop making ASSumptions.




Thursday 10:05 AM
NAB Requests Expedited Review of Spectrum Auction Lawsuit
“Broadcasters assigned to new channels following the auction could be forced to accept reductions in their coverage area and population served, with no practical remedy.” ~NAB


 
Featured Articles
News Technology
News Technology
Discover TV Technology