All-Digital AM? Check the Math

The author is a recently retired broadcast engineer in Terre Haute, Ind.

   Credit: iStockphoto/art12321
Regarding the article “All-Digital AM Signal Called ‘Solid’ in Testing” (May 8):

When IBOC was just a fancy laboratory test, I stated that I saw a day when the digital-at-all-cost boys would make an attempt to force this digi-disaster on AM broadcasters.

They were successful in getting the FCC to allow broadcasters to use IBOC voluntarily at night. We saw what an utter failure it was, due to skywave interference and other reasons, so much so that many large-city AM powerhouses refused to use it at night or abandoned it altogether, such as Chicago’s WLS did.

Instead of admitting it was a failure, what did the folks at iBiquity and their financial partners CBS do? They claimed it was due to “not enough injection.” This, after assuring us that this was the fix-all to every problem AM broadcasters had!

One letter went as far as scolding those of us who had solid engineering reasons why IBOC wouldn’t work, especially at night, that “any AMer who had a 100-watt nighttime authorization ought to be all over IBOC.”

I made an editorial reply to this statement, using (dare I say?) engineering mathematics to prove my point using the writer’s own 100 watts of carrier power. Due to the “sort of” forward error correction format that IBOC employs from the lower to the upper sideband, the amount of IBOC transmitted with their then-standard injection amounted to a few milliwatts, which even in a laboratory environment would not give reliable coverage more than a few hundred yards from the antenna.

So now I learn that the boys are giddy about allegedly having a “solid” all-digital signal from a 10 kW transmitter on daytime at a distance of 13 miles — approximately 21 kilometers. Maybe I am again missing something, but assuming a quarter-wave antenna over average soil, 1 kW would produce a field intensity of 305.768 mV/m at 1 kilometer — 10 kW (the power given in the article) would therefore produce in the same antenna a field intensity of 966.023 mV/m.

I took the liberty of rounding the 20.9 kilometers (13 miles) referenced in the article to 20 kilometers, about a 4 percent change in their favor.

Using a frequency of 1 MHz, and assuming a good ground conductivity of 6 mS/m over the 20 kilometers, the resultant field intensity would be a robust 19.338 mV/m.

Why all the math?

Well, even the poorest quality Radio Shack transistor radio you can buy will clearly receive a 2 mV/m signal. What all this means is the digi boys are once again whooping it up for a modulation scheme that still requires 19.7 dB more signal to provide intelligible audio at the same distance.

And this with a 100 percent digital signal — no 5 kHz AM bandwidth left to “blame” for IBOC’s dismal showing. To put it another way: Without changing AM power levels, each station forced to go to an all-digital modulation will substantially lose coverage.

Was I prophetic when I predicted that there would be some who would begin to demand the FCC mandate this? Perhaps. Perhaps not. All I know is that the term “AM sunset” is particularly applicable if an all-digital modulation is mandated.

Comment on this or any story. Post below or email

Want to read more stories like this? Sign up for your free Radio World NewsBytes newsletter here.

Rating People: 10   Average Rating:     
Comment List:

It's true, there is certainly a money angle to all this, just like with cell phones, DTV, and the like. Most people buy a new product because it has all the cool gadgets. Technology can be a good friend. It can also be ugly as well. As far as test results are concerned, I would expect a 10kw or 50kw to do well; but what about those that are at 1kw or 5kw? Time will tell the outcome.
By Michael Payne on 7/24/2013
If you're going to do the math, then start with the right data. The WBCN daytime 10 kW digital coverage was in fact solid out to 40 miles. Read the NAB's test report, it's impressive.
By John Schneider on 7/24/2013
OK, reality check Jerry.... **"This, after assuring us that this was the fix-all to every problem AM broadcasters had! " Where did they say that? I don't recall IBOC proponents saying that this would solve all of AM problem. Please cite your source. **"those of us who had solid engineering reasons why IBOC wouldn’t work" It works fine. I listen to AM IBOC every day, and it works fine.
By Lou on 7/20/2013
Oh gee, there you go using common sense, logic, and math to show what a flop IBOC is. Silly, silly boy. Don't you know that the true determinant of what happens is money, money, money. We'll have the best all-digital AM band that money can buy. IBiquity will make out like bandits, and therefore everyone (who matters) will be happy.
By Philly B on 7/20/2013

Post your comment

Your Name:  Required
Your Mail:       Your email will not be published.
Your Site:    

max. 800 characters

Posts are reviewed before publication, typically the next business morning. Radio World encourages multiple viewpoints, though a post will be blocked if it contains abusive language, or is repetitive or spam. Thank you for commenting!