Quantifying Hazardous Electromagnetic Fields: Practical Considerations
Ronald R. Bowman · 1970
The study concludes that total energy density is the best parameter for quantifying hazardous electromagnetic fields, though electric energy density alone is often adequate.
Plain English Summary
Power density is only useful for simple, uniform plane-wave fields and is unsuitable for complicated fields with reactive components or multipath interference. The total energy density of the field is the best parameter for quantifying hazardous fields, though electric energy density alone is often adequate. The field parameter approach is considered the most practical for general survey measurements.
Why This Matters
Fields near leaking cracks in microwave ovens are given as an example of important hazardous fields with complicated configurations. Two opposing plane waves can create zero net power density while doubling electric and magnetic field amplitudes. Reactive near-field components within one wavelength of sources can have strong fields without time-averaged energy flow. The dosimetry approach is most accurate but impractical for general surveys due to phantom size and weight.
Finding
It is concluded that the total energy density of the field is the best parameter, but in many instances the electric energy density alone will be adequate.
In their words
“It is concluded that the total energy density of the field is the best parameter, but in many instances the electric energy density alone will be adequate.”
Show BibTeX
@article{quantifying_hazardous_electromagnetic_fields_practical_considerations_g4453,
author = {Ronald R. Bowman},
title = {Quantifying Hazardous Electromagnetic Fields: Practical Considerations},
year = {1970},
}