Freeview: Aerial group performance | Rigger's zone
Site settings
For an enhanced Freeview reception
prediction please enter your
full postcode, a national grid reference or
a UK latitude and longitude pair.
 
Most popular 08:23
Live updates 08:23

Aerial group performance

How different aerial groups work

How different aerial groups work
Published on by on UK Free TV

Whilst developing the new reception prediction system, I went looking for the reference material relating to the UK Aerial Groups system.

On page 39 of a document entitled www.ofcom.org.uk link icon "CH61 & 62 Re-Farming Study by Arqiva Final Report 27 October 2008" I found the answers.

To assess the loss of coverage as a result of moving outside of the receive aerial group, account needs to be taken of the performance of receive aerials.

For planning purposes the UKPM assumes that the gain of a receive aerial system is 7dB. This is a somewhat idealised figure based on a good aerial and feeder and no pre-amplifier. The performance of actual receive installations is known to vary considerably from this ideal. Two studies, one for the Virgin consortium that bid for the Channel 5 licence in 1995 and the other for the ITC in 2004 investigated the actual received level for a large sample of domestic installations. This study considered aerial group but not the performance of actual receive installations.

In addition to variability in receive aerial system gain, most aerials are banded and their performance falls away outside their design operating band. The ITC as part of the documentation for the original DTT plan, Notes for applicants on coverage of Digital Television, October 1996, listed the out of group response of representative receive aerials.


I have reproduced the information from the table as a graph. The values are the attenuation (in dB):



It is interesting to note that in group A, C37 is -2dB and "in group", group B, C35 is -3dB and C36 is -2dB and "in group", group C/D has C48 on -1dB and "in group" and group E has C37 or -2dB and C38 and C39 on -1dB and be "in group".







Your comments: most recent posts are at the bottom


Your comments are always welcome. Please use the form below to add your thoughts or questions to this page. We will get back to you as soon as we can.

L
lucidsounds
Thursday 20 August 2009 10:59AM
This site www.aerialsandtv.com link icon ATV Stock Aerial Tests has some interesting comparisons between different aerial types. What is especially interesting, and this ties in with your data Brian, is how the gain of an antenna falls away rapidly out of band. This is especially true of Band A and Band C/D types.

Also I wasn't aware of what Band E and Band K are - it appears that Band E aerials are semi wideband optimised for the top of the band, and K are semi-wideband optimised for the lower end of the band.

Furthermore, wideband aerials have surprisingly poor gain figures at the low end compared to a true Band A type. Indeed the site concludes:

"There is no wideband aerial which will give ā€œhigh gainā€ at the bottom of the band. If you must have a wideband, and you`re sure you require more gain at the bottom end, you`re best option is to diplex an A group with an E group, or even an A group with another (high gain) wideband if you already have one of those. Remember that most people don`t need a ā€œhigh gainā€ aerial though !"




Briantist
Thursday 20 August 2009 11:02AM
lucidsounds: You would rather expect the " gain of an antenna falls away rapidly out of band", there would be very little point in having the groups otherwise...
A
Andy Ripley
Thursday 20 August 2009 1:50PM
This graph is usually shown with the vertical axis the other way round - it shows where the signal falls away. Where antennas have high gain it's usually at the expense of bandwidth, the "out of band" performance will be worse than one with a lower gain. Wideband ones are more of a compromise, but you'll notice that there performance is down on the specifically grouped ones of the same no of elements, configuration etc.
Briantist
Thursday 20 August 2009 9:54PM
Andy Ripley: Yeah, true enough, but that would show "gain" and this one shows "attenuation".

Interesting the Arqiva/Ofcom document I referenced didn't mention widebands.
J
Jordy
Thursday 20 August 2009 10:46PM
Brian - Cheers, one of the best graphs i've seen on the subject... Amazing the difference between in group A how channels 37-40 just jump off the diving board... Any ideas why K peaks at channel 52, must be were the gain curve falls away...

Wideband isn't that hard to plot stick your finger at ch 68 and slowly curve upwards until you see the piss poor gain from 34 on down...
Briantist
Thursday 20 August 2009 10:55PM
Jordy: That odd value at C52 for group K is in the original document. I'm thought it was a typo, it doesn't look like the kind of curve you would expect.

J
Jordy
Thursday 20 August 2009 11:14PM
Brian - Are you sure that's right... K snuff's it at channel 65 but that looks very specific to a pattern rather than generic like that. I've argued with people K group aerials are no good for RTE from Clermont but going by that i'm wrong?
J
Jordy
Thursday 20 August 2009 11:28PM
If...
channels 21 to 25: K = -20dB
channels 26 to 33: K = -21dB
channels 34 to 41: K = -22dB
channels 42 to 51: K = -23dB
channels 52 to 62: K = -24dB
channels 63 to 68: K = -25dB
5dB difference between channels 21 to 25 and channels 63 to 68. The gain rises from 10dBd on the lowest channels to 15dBd on or near the highest channels, which compensates for the frequency effect and the dipole factor...
So V = E + K + Ga + Gb - L
This of course wholly depends on the wavelength of your aerial and the size of it's dipole so how they can come to the conclusion it's a generic value is beyond me. And hence you get you blip...
Briantist
Friday 21 August 2009 7:36AM
Jordy: The figures are listed in the PDF document linked in the article.
J
Justin Smith
Friday 21 August 2009 10:15AM
With reference to the graph at the top of this page, there are a few points to bear in mind.
When talking about aerial gain one MUST remember that an aerial giving 0dBd gain does not mean it would not give any signal. It just means that the amount of signal it produces is the same as just the dipole on its own, i.e. with no reflector or any directors. If the site is in a particularly strong signal area even a C/D group could still give a reasonable picture at CH21 !

I feel the arqiva (SPX) report is too pessimistic. In our experience at ATV all the (post 1995) A group aerials we tested worked fine up to about CH40.
All the B group aerials I tested worked fine up to the mid/high CH50s and down to the mid 20s. Many will still give a decent signal down to CH21, especially the X Beams which are really B/Ks anyway.
All the C/D group aerials I tested worked fine down to the high 30s, or lower in the case of the X Beams, which are really CD/Es anyway.
All the Ks, of which there aren`t many anyway, worked fine up to the mid CH50s.
All the Es still work reasonably well even down at CH21, as you`d expect because they really are semi widebands anyway.
Briantist
Friday 21 August 2009 12:49PM
Justin Smith: Yes, just in case anyone has forgotten, a value in decibels is the amount you have to raise the value to the power of ten to get.

This 1.3dB is just less than 20, because 10^1.3=13. In the same way 0dB = 10^0 = 1.

People often get confused as most letters that are stuck on the end of numbers turn them into measurements, like "20m" for twenty meters. Decibels are unusual in this respect.

The values from the Arqiva document are the reference values the ITC used when it implemented the Broacasting Act 1996.

J
Jordy
Saturday 22 August 2009 7:45PM

I've just got back from a trip over to Scotland and i've noticed driving back through parts of Galloway huge aerials appearing in areas very recently. Being quite sad i notice these things! Unix 100's, some of which are vertical?? Has someone figured out the old Belfast trick by changing the polarisation they can attenuate Caldbeck's power signal? There's other rigs cropping up like those in the west of Ireland, those grids with the huge reflectors and tiny 5 element yagi's cable tied to the front of them. What that does to help signal i have no idea as they were sh8te for RTE. Worryingly these sort of things are cropping up in villages - A small village near Glenluce has 5 properties with these on the rooftop.



That is a VHF corner reflector and they're used in the states but never here as far as i'm aware. Some of those things are just vhf butchered logs with a yagi stuck to the front of them. Whoever is putting these things up must be aware that antiference double 8 & 13 logs are for band 3... Strange but i suspect dangerous knowledge being passed around by rogues.


Briantist
Sunday 23 August 2009 10:18AM
Jordy: Seems odd that you would want to have Freeview, satellite TV and satellite radio and still want an FM aerial.
J
Jordy
Sunday 23 August 2009 4:42PM
Brian - You'd be amazed what the demands of customers are these days...
J
Jordy
Sunday 23 August 2009 4:46PM
On a personal note i walked up Ben Nevis and was completely bollocked after doing it... You get to see some of the service areas more clearly, especially Cow Hill...
Briantist
Sunday 23 August 2009 4:48PM
Jordy: I'm glad it's not just me that goes around taking photos like that.

Personally I would prefer a rotor on a dish, rather than a yagi. Unless I could flip it from H to V...
Briantist
Sunday 23 August 2009 5:01PM

Jordy: I was up the top of a large hill near Wolverhampton and you could see four main transmitters from there Sutton Coldfield, The Wrekin, Brierley Hill and in the far distance Ridge Hill.

As for the picture that I took from a car on the A38 of Sutton Coldfield...


J
Jordy
Sunday 23 August 2009 9:05PM
Brian - Is that new vhf aperture on the new mast?
Briantist
Sunday 23 August 2009 9:16PM
Jordy: I'm not sure, and you can't even tell from my picture which is which mast!
J
Jordy
Sunday 23 August 2009 9:38PM
Brian - The original band 3 array is between the apex and the 3rd tier gantry. The new mast on the left has a vhf/ band 3 array, Just like Wenvoe? That's a weird one which is which...
J
Jordy
Sunday 23 August 2009 9:50PM
That answers the question... TheBigTower Sutton Coldfield Transmitter
Ian Porter
Monday 24 August 2009 12:21AM
I worked for ONdigital Technical Dept in Plymouth in 2000. I lived 10 minutes walk away from "Ballard House"? on West Hoe Road. I had several close encounters with lamp posts to and from work whilst studying the aerials serving "houses in multiple occupation". I'm glad I left before ITV cut their power off.
S
steven egerton
Monday 24 August 2009 10:00AM Aberdeen
This 1.3dB is just less than 20, because 10^1.3=13. In the same way 0dB = 10^0 = 1.

I am complete newbie to this..sorry! why is 1.3dB just less than 20 and not a little more than 10, and why is 0dB equal to 1. Perhaps if someone could explain the difference between ^ and x...then maybe it will become clear?? would a negative number eg -5dB mean a signal gain of 50%? as you can see I need guidance!

steve
S
steven egerton
Monday 24 August 2009 10:07AM Aberdeen
ps sorry to be so ignorant, if the answer cannot be straightforward could someone point me in the right direction for 'dB's for Dummies'!!

thanks Steve
Briantist
Monday 24 August 2009 11:01AM
Ian Porter: Did you? I was a "consultant from BT Broadcast" there... The lack of their interest in technical support there was why I created UK Free TV.
Briantist
Monday 24 August 2009 11:02AM
Jordy: A better picture than mine.
A
Andy Ripley
Monday 24 August 2009 11:34AM
I think the simple dB for dummies is -3dB is half the signal, -5dB is a third and -10dB is a tenth. Shouldn't have fallen asleep in the C&G class. Possible reason for crossing the polarisation and using a bigger than required antenna is to get rid of multipath (the killer for digital reception - possibly another topic to discuss Brian). Good attenuator or just a 30 year old piece of coax has the same effect. If you start with too much signal it's easier to reduce it rather than the other way round.
L
lucidsounds
Monday 24 August 2009 3:14PM
And don't forget dB is a relative value.

How well I remember the ridiculous claims for CB radio antennas: "11dB gain!"

Er, compared to what exactly? Aerial gain measurements often use dBi, which is relative to an isotropic radiator. Even the lowly dipole has a gain figure of 2.15dBi.
Ian Porter
Monday 24 August 2009 5:16PM
Briantist. What a coincidence! Most of our tech support problems were of course aerial related. Other problems we had were boxes freezing on the BBC channels, locked remotes, Sony IDTVs, box swaps etc. Customers rarely believed their aerials weren't up to the job. The senior techs thought of themselves as gurus and rarely spoke to anybody, either customers or fellow workmates. We did our best in what was of course a brand new service. I for one couldn't wait to leave. Non stop calls for eight hours was really a horrible way to earn a living. My pet hate was customers, usually well spoken Women, who knew nothing else to say other than, "it's not good enough".
Briantist
Tuesday 25 August 2009 9:43AM
lucidsounds: I think you mean that dB addition is a logarithmic multiplier. Thus, the Slide Rule!

I often laugh when I see things in dB when they are no such thing. People often misquote sounds levels as being "dB".
Briantist
Tuesday 25 August 2009 9:44AM
Andy Ripley: I like the final sentence of your post, very good advice.
Briantist
Tuesday 25 August 2009 9:49AM
steven egerton: Right.

"^" means "raise to the power of". 3^2 = "three squared", 2^4 = "two cubed".

"*" is used for multiply, rather than "x".

So, 3^4 = 3*3*3*3 = 81
Briantist
Tuesday 25 August 2009 9:51AM
steven egerton: This might help - Decibel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
S
Steven Egerton
Tuesday 25 August 2009 10:07AM
Briantist: Right. OK.

looks like I'll have to wake up (no C&G)and do some proper structured thinking. ie. 'do my head in' Relatively speaking!

thanks..Steve
Briantist
Tuesday 25 August 2009 10:14AM
Steven Egerton: It is certainly worth the effort to get your head around it. I once had a maths teacher who went to the History department (or somewhere) and got out a slide-rule and it all became so very clear...
Briantist
Tuesday 25 August 2009 1:16PM
Ian Porter: I personally recall having to let ONdigital's technical support people use the BT Broadcast gateway, so they could be given access to the Internet.

Carton/Granada didn't want ONdigital staff going on the net and being able to find things out.

There certainly were some big egos around down there in that office. The problem was that everyone was pulling in different directions.

Perhaps the worst thing was that ITV1 didn't - and this was a company run by two ITV companies - appear on 3, and you have to select a different channels for GMTV!

But yes, then as now, no one wants to believe their rusty, bent coat-hanger on the roof could be wrong. Everyone blames the transmitter.
Briantist
Tuesday 25 August 2009 1:17PM
Jordy: I can see in the other photos. I'm ashamed of mine...
M
michael scott
Tuesday 1 September 2009 9:08AM
Hello,
The article on Aerial group performance by Arquiva for Ofcom also contains in section 3,about page 8,a very graphic,and full numbered and coloured,easy to understand chart showing the new reduced DVB-T broadcast TV channels and the reception by all groups of aerials.
Usually some details are shown but not ALL as in this example. Very useful.
Thanks,
michael scott G1ZVO.
Briantist
Tuesday 1 September 2009 4:36PM
michael scott: Sorry, I'm not quite sure what you are getting at here.
J
Justin Smith
Wednesday 30 December 2009 2:37PM
Since my earlier post on aerial response outside the the designed for band I have done some more research.
Up until recently I have only ever tested decent quality aerials because we only stock the best stuff so testing anything else is wasted time. Thus my previous advice applies for all good quality antennas.

Recently sense of curiosity persuaded me to spend some time testing Contact aerials. I chose B groups because there was drop off both above and below the designed for band to research.

My conclusions are that Contract aerials, particularly those without a balun have very inconsistent performance especially outside the designed for group. The graph of their response is here :
www.aerialsandtv.com link icon Gain (curves), Again

Note the gain of the old Contract 18B was dropping off from channel 48, which is well WITHIN the B group !
updates
Automatic update every 1 minute
Please post a question, answer or commentUK Free TV is here to help people. If you are rude or disrespectful all of your posts will be deleted and you will be banned.







Privacy policy: UK Free Privacy policy.