If you need assistance, please send an email to forum at 4hv dot org. To ensure your email is not marked as spam, please include the phrase "4hv help" in the subject line. You can also find assistance via IRC, at irc.shadowworld.net, room #hvcomm.
Support 4hv.org!
Donate:
4hv.org is hosted on a dedicated server. Unfortunately, this server costs and we rely on the help of site members to keep 4hv.org running. Please consider donating. We will place your name on the thanks list and you'll be helping to keep 4hv.org alive and free for everyone. Members whose names appear in red bold have donated recently. Green bold denotes those who have recently donated to keep the server carbon neutral.
Special Thanks To:
Aaron Holmes
Aaron Wheeler
Adam Horden
Alan Scrimgeour
Andre
Andrew Haynes
Anonymous000
asabase
Austin Weil
barney
Barry
Bert Hickman
Bill Kukowski
Blitzorn
Brandon Paradelas
Bruce Bowling
BubeeMike
Byong Park
Cesiumsponge
Chris F.
Chris Hooper
Corey Worthington
Derek Woodroffe
Dalus
Dan Strother
Daniel Davis
Daniel Uhrenholt
datasheetarchive
Dave Billington
Dave Marshall
David F.
Dennis Rogers
drelectrix
Dr. John Gudenas
Dr. Spark
E.TexasTesla
eastvoltresearch
Eirik Taylor
Erik Dyakov
Erlend^SE
Finn Hammer
Firebug24k
GalliumMan
Gary Peterson
George Slade
GhostNull
Gordon Mcknight
Graham Armitage
Grant
GreySoul
Henry H
IamSmooth
In memory of Leo Powning
Jacob Cash
James Howells
James Pawson
Jeff Greenfield
Jeff Thomas
Jesse Frost
Jim Mitchell
jlr134
Joe Mastroianni
John Forcina
John Oberg
John Willcutt
Jon Newcomb
klugesmith
Leslie Wright
Lutz Hoffman
Mads Barnkob
Martin King
Mats Karlsson
Matt Gibson
Matthew Guidry
mbd
Michael D'Angelo
Mikkel
mileswaldron
mister_rf
Neil Foster
Nick de Smith
Nick Soroka
nicklenorp
Nik
Norman Stanley
Patrick Coleman
Paul Brodie
Paul Jordan
Paul Montgomery
Ped
Peter Krogen
Peter Terren
PhilGood
Richard Feldman
Robert Bush
Royce Bailey
Scott Fusare
Scott Newman
smiffy
Stella
Steven Busic
Steve Conner
Steve Jones
Steve Ward
Sulaiman
Thomas Coyle
Thomas A. Wallace
Thomas W
Timo
Torch
Ulf Jonsson
vasil
Vaxian
vladi mazzilli
wastehl
Weston
William Kim
William N.
William Stehl
Wesley Venis
The aforementioned have contributed financially to the continuing triumph of 4hv.org. They are deserving of my most heartfelt thanks.
Registered Member #61373
Joined: Sat Dec 17 2016, 01:45PM
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 87
1,000,000 watts @ 550 KHZ or 100,000 watts @ 100 MHZ? Lets assume a radio tower tech was working right next to a fully energized antenna on top of the mast.
Does the frequency make much of a difference? What about 10,000,000 watts @ 10 KHZ vs the other 2? I know RF heats the body, but how does the frequency play into it?
Registered Member #57401
Joined: Sat Sept 19 2015, 08:06PM
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 10
The question is not particularly clear. When you refer to power levels are you talking about the TPO, the ERP, the consumed power? The frequency could certainly make all the difference. Firstly, consider that if the frequency is closer to the body's resonance, then much more of the radiated power will be absorbed. Secondly, consider that the frequency coupled with the geometry of all the surroundings will have a huge effect on the local power density. The power radiated by an antenna isn't really the parameter of interest here - it is the power density in the space occupied by the person. Think of it like being in a microwave oven (pretty much the same thing really) where you will have hot spots and cold spots that all depend on the little details and that will change with the frequency. Further, the orientation between the E-field and H-field will be quite complex in the nearfield region and the resulting effective power density field will be quite non-uniform so it's impossible to analyze without a very detailed simulation.
I think the question you are trying to ask is something along the lines of "Is is worse to stand in a 10 W/cm^2 500 kHz 'beam' or a 1 W/cm^2 100MHz 'beam'?"
In that case I think the lower power 100 MHz wave is more damaging. As an antenna, the human body is pretty well tuned to very near 100 MHz. We just aren't tall enough to effectively pick up low frequencies in the kHz or even 100 kHz range. I would expect the SAR of the 100 MHz case to be maybe 5 orders of magnitude higher for a given power density. Plugging in some numbers (assume 0.3 W/kg per mW/cm^2 @ 100MHz and 0.00001 W/kg per mW/cm^2 @ 500 kHz) you get heating of 300 W/kg for the 1W/cm^2 100MHz case and 0.1 W/kg for the 10W/cm^2 500kHz case. Neither one would be good for you, but the former would cook all the meat in your body to well-done temperatures within a matter of minutes.
Registered Member #61373
Joined: Sat Dec 17 2016, 01:45PM
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 87
KrowBar wrote ...
The question is not particularly clear. When you refer to power levels are you talking about the TPO, the ERP, the consumed power? The frequency could certainly make all the difference. Firstly, consider that if the frequency is closer to the body's resonance, then much more of the radiated power will be absorbed. Secondly, consider that the frequency coupled with the geometry of all the surroundings will have a huge effect on the local power density. The power radiated by an antenna isn't really the parameter of interest here - it is the power density in the space occupied by the person. Think of it like being in a microwave oven (pretty much the same thing really) where you will have hot spots and cold spots that all depend on the little details and that will change with the frequency. Further, the orientation between the E-field and H-field will be quite complex in the nearfield region and the resulting effective power density field will be quite non-uniform so it's impossible to analyze without a very detailed simulation.
I think the question you are trying to ask is something along the lines of "Is is worse to stand in a 10 W/cm^2 500 kHz 'beam' or a 1 W/cm^2 100MHz 'beam'?"
In that case I think the lower power 100 MHz wave is more damaging. As an antenna, the human body is pretty well tuned to very near 100 MHz. We just aren't tall enough to effectively pick up low frequencies in the kHz or even 100 kHz range. I would expect the SAR of the 100 MHz case to be maybe 5 orders of magnitude higher for a given power density. Plugging in some numbers (assume 0.3 W/kg per mW/cm^2 @ 100MHz and 0.00001 W/kg per mW/cm^2 @ 500 kHz) you get heating of 300 W/kg for the 1W/cm^2 100MHz case and 0.1 W/kg for the 10W/cm^2 500kHz case. Neither one would be good for you, but the former would cook all the meat in your body to well-done temperatures within a matter of minutes.
In a electromagnetic field, does the electric field and the magnetic field affect the body differently? Does the electric field cook you more or the magnetic component?
Registered Member #57401
Joined: Sat Sept 19 2015, 08:06PM
Location: Huntsville, AL
Posts: 10
Hmmm. I don't have the biology background to know which is more problematic. For planer waves in the far field there is a well defined relationship between the E and H fields - you can't have one without the other, and the combined electromagnetic field transfers energy to the body (receiver antenna) which causes the cooking. Static fields are another story entirely and I'm sure there have been studies on the effects of each. A static electric field makes your hair stand on end, while a static magnetic can make you levitate:
This site is powered by e107, which is released under the GNU GPL License. All work on this site, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 License. By submitting any information to this site, you agree that anything submitted will be so licensed. Please read our Disclaimer and Policies page for information on your rights and responsibilities regarding this site.