Electromagnetic exposure assessment for telecommunication equipements using RF dosimeter

Elmagroud, Bachir; Kwate, Rodrigues Kwate; Taybi, Chakib; Ziyyat, Abdelhak; Picard, D.

doi:10.1109/it4od.2016.7479273

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This extends the results that we presented in [19] and [20] for two measurement points. When the number of measuring points increases, it is possible to get at least one point in the reflection or diffraction zones, and the average of measurements will be closer to the free space value of the field: for chest height and vertical polarization, we have IQR = 30% and Δ = 89% for a single point, IQR = 12% and Δ = 36% for 2 points, IQR = 11% and Δ = 28% for 3 points and IQR = 8% and Δ = 28% for 4 points.…”

Section: Error Mitigation Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%

Measurement Methodologies for Reducing Errors in the Assessment of Emf by Exposimeter

Kwate¹,

Taybi²,

Elmagroud³

et al. 2017

PIER B

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Objective: As well known, using a single body worn sensor exposimeter introduces systematic errors on the measurement of the incident free space electric field strength. This is because the body creates around it high, intermediate and low level field zones, which depend on the direction of arrival of the incident field. The goal of this work is to propose an efficient method for the reduction of these errors. Methods: After classifying the perturbations induced by the body on the measured electric and magnetic fields thanks to realistic numerical simulations, we then propose a two-sensor setup in conjunction with simple semi-empirical correction formulas, in order to compensate these perturbations. Results: At 942 MHz, when the two sensors are placed in any opposite sides of the body at chest height, the worst case, maximum and average errors respectively decrease to 12% and 3% compared to 83% and 22% for measurement techniques using a single sensor, or 32% and 11% when using the average value of the measurements. Conclusion: The error related to the measurement in the presence of the body was significantly reduced by the proposed method making use of two opposite sensors, E-field and H-field at the chest. Significance: The conformity of exposure to EMF in terms of reference values according to the ICNIRP is given in the abscence of the human body. The interest of this work lies in the reduction of the errors made when measuring the field in the presence of the body.

show abstract

Section: Error Mitigation Resultssupporting

confidence: 91%