Comparison of numerical and experimental methods for determination of SAR and radiation patterns of handheld wireless telephones.
Gandhi OP, Lazzi G, Tinniswood A, Yu QS, · 1999
View Original AbstractCell phone SAR levels varied 40-fold in this study, with some devices exceeding current safety limits unless antennas were positioned away from the head.
Plain English Summary
Researchers compared computer calculations with actual measurements to determine how much radiofrequency energy cell phones deposit in human tissue (called SAR). They tested phones operating at cellular frequencies and found SAR levels ranged dramatically from 0.13 to 5.41 watts per kilogram, with some older-technology phones exceeding current safety limits of 1.6 W/kg unless antennas were carefully designed and positioned away from the head.
Why This Matters
This technical validation study reveals a critical finding often overlooked in EMF safety discussions: cell phone SAR levels can vary by more than 40-fold depending on antenna design and placement. The reality is that some devices in this 1999 study exceeded the current 1.6 W/kg safety limit, particularly older AMPS technology phones operating at maximum power. What this means for you is that device design matters enormously for your exposure level. The science demonstrates that antenna placement and engineering can make the difference between minimal exposure and levels that exceed safety standards. This research validates the importance of choosing devices with lower SAR ratings and maintaining distance from your body during use.
Exposure Details
- SAR
- 0.13 to 5.41, W/kg
- Source/Device
- 835 and 1900 MHz
Where This Falls on the Concern Scale
Study Details
The aim of this study is to investigate Comparison of numerical and experimental methods for determination of SAR and radiation patterns of handheld wireless telephones.
we used the expanding grid formulation of the finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) method for finer-...
Even though widely different peak 1-g SARs were obtained, ranging from 0.13 to 5.41 W/kg, agreement ...
Show BibTeX
@article{op_1999_comparison_of_numerical_and_986,
author = {Gandhi OP and Lazzi G and Tinniswood A and Yu QS and},
title = {Comparison of numerical and experimental methods for determination of SAR and radiation patterns of handheld wireless telephones.},
year = {1999},
url = {https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10334718/},
}Cited By (32 papers)
- Empirical validation of SAR values predicted by FDTD modeling * †Influential
P. Gajšek et al. (2002) - 42 citations
- Biological applications of large electric fields: some history and fundamentalsInfluential
C. Polk (2000) - 26 citations
- Mechanisms of Electromagnetic Field Coupling into Biological Systems at ELF and RF FrequenciesInfluential
James C. Lin (2000) - 3 citations
- Epidemiology of Health Effects of Radiofrequency Exposure
A. Ahlbom et al. (2004) - 374 citations
- Non-ionizing radiation, Part 2: Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields.
Iarc Monographs (2013) - 309 citations
- Analysis of the influence of the power control and discontinuous transmission on RF exposure with GSM mobile phones
J. Wiart et al. (2000) - 113 citations
- Some present problems and a proposed experimental phantom for SAR compliance testing of cellular telephones at 835 and 1900 MHz.
O. Gandhi, G. Kang (2002) - 96 citations
- Suitability of FDTD-based TCAD tools RF design of mobile phones
N. Chavannes et al. (2003) - 84 citations
- Electromagnetic fields: human safety issues.
O. Gandhi (2002) - 79 citations
- SAR generated by commercial cellular phones-phone modeling, head modeling, and measurements
A. Schiavoni et al. (2000) - 56 citations