Cargando…

The Role of the Location of Personal Exposimeters on the Human Body in Their Use for Assessing Exposure to the Electromagnetic Field in the Radiofrequency Range 98–2450 MHz and Compliance Analysis: Evaluation by Virtual Measurements

The use of radiofrequency (98–2450 MHz range) personal exposimeters to measure the electric field (E-field) in far-field exposure conditions was modelled numerically using human body model Gustav and finite integration technique software. Calculations with 256 models of exposure scenarios show that...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gryz, Krzysztof, Zradziński, Patryk, Karpowicz, Jolanta
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4387911/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25879021
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/272460
Descripción
Sumario:The use of radiofrequency (98–2450 MHz range) personal exposimeters to measure the electric field (E-field) in far-field exposure conditions was modelled numerically using human body model Gustav and finite integration technique software. Calculations with 256 models of exposure scenarios show that the human body has a significant influence on the results of measurements using a single body-worn exposimeter in various locations near the body ((from −96 to +133)%, measurement errors with respect to the unperturbed E-field value). When an exposure assessment involves the exposure limitations provided for the strength of an unperturbed E-field. To improve the application of exposimeters in compliance tests, such discrepancies in the results of measurements by a body-worn exposimeter may be compensated by using of a correction factor applied to the measurement results or alternatively to the exposure limit values. The location of a single exposimeter on the waist to the back side of the human body or on the front of the chest reduces the range of exposure assessments uncertainty (covering various exposure conditions). However, still the uncertainty of exposure assessments using a single exposimeter remains significantly higher than the assessment of the unperturbed E-field using spot measurements.