Intercomparison of In Situ Electric Fields in Human Models Exposed to Spatially Uniform Magnetic Fields

Accuracy Assessment of Numerical Dosimetry for the Evaluation of Human Exposure to Electric Vehicle Inductive Charging Systems

“…Tools for numerical dosimetry have had an extraordinary development over the last decade, by virtue of the potentiality of last generation personal computers, the software development (e.g., [12]- [15]), and the availability of highly sophisticated human body models with associated electrical properties of tissues (e.g., [16]- [18]). Nevertheless, the accuracy of the dosimetric results, including the detection of possible numerical artefacts, remains a topic of great interest, particularly when a comparison with exposure limits is needed [13], [19].…”

Assessment methods for electric and magnetic fields in low and intermediate frequencies related to human exposures and the status of their standardization

“…Human body models composed of cubic cells called voxels are used in numerical calculation of internal electric fields induced by low‐frequency magnetic fields; there are a number of calculation methods such as Scalar Potential Finite Difference (SPFD), a finite difference method to find electric scalar potential at voxel nodes, impedance method (modeling human body as a resistance circuit network and solving circuit network equations), and quasi‐static Finite Difference Time Domain technique, FDTD technique simplified by quasi‐static approximation 24,25 . Many institutions already published calculation examples; moreover, there are attempts to compare results obtained under same conditions of exposure to magnetic fields and same models, and good agreement is obtained 26,27 …”

“…24,25 Many institutions already published calculation examples; moreover, there are attempts to compare results obtained under same conditions of exposure to magnetic fields and same models, and good agreement is obtained. 26,27 Particularly, SPFD calculation of electric field induced in human body is briefly explained below. 28 SPFD method was proposed by Dawson et al 29 to solve finite difference equations with electric scalar potential treated as an unknown, and to calculate internal electric field through gradient of the electric scalar potential.…”

“…Conductivity of human body tissues is set to database values provided by INRC (Italy) 31 based on parametric models proposed by Gabriel et al 32 When deriving magnetic field reference levels from basic restrictions, the ICNIRP guidelines 10 refer to results calculated using a precise human model; on the other hand, the IEEE safety standard 11 models human body parts using analytically solvable elliptical cross sections. This is because the use of precise human models was viewed with caution until recently; however, results calculated by different institutions using precise human models have become more congruent, 27 and adoption of calculations based on precise human models may be considered in future.…”

Exposure of Live-Line Workers to Magnetic Fields: A Dosimetric Analysis

“…In parallel to the evolution of the anatomical models, numerical tools for computational dosimetry have had an extraordinary development, by virtue of the potentiality of last generation processors, the software development and the analysis of the accuracy of the dosimetric results (e.g., [36][37][38][39][40]). The latter includes the detection of possible numerical artefacts, which is also a topic of great interest, particularly when a comparison with exposure limits is needed [41][42][43].…”