<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Electrical field and RF meter</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.epanorama.net/blog/2013/02/17/electrical-field-and-rf-meter/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.epanorama.net/blog/2013/02/17/electrical-field-and-rf-meter/</link>
	<description>All about electronics and circuit design</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Apr 2026 21:44:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.14</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tomi Engdahl</title>
		<link>https://www.epanorama.net/blog/2013/02/17/electrical-field-and-rf-meter/comment-page-1/#comment-1457955</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tomi Engdahl]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Dec 2015 12:24:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epanorama.net/blog/?p=16752#comment-1457955</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Some notes on making measurements:
http://www.arrl.org/the-fcc-s-new-rf-exposure-regulations

Routine Station Evaluation

The regulations require amateur operators, whose stations are not categorically excluded, to perform a routine analysis of compliance with the MPE limits. The FCC is relying on the demonstrated technical skill of Amateur Radio operators to evaluate their own stations.

The FCC regulations do not require field-strength measurements. Measurements are one way to perform an analysis, but they&#039;re very tricky. With calibrated equipment and skilled measuring techniques, ±2 dB error is pretty good. In untrained hands, errors exceeding 10 dB are likely. A ham who elects to make measurements will need calibrated equipment (including probes) and knowledge of its use. Many factors can confound measurements in the near field.

Most evaluations will be comparisons against typical charts to be developed by the FCC, relatively straightforward calculations of worst-case scenarios or computer modeling of near-field signal strength. The FCC encourages flexibility in the analysis, and will accept any technically valid approach. Once an Amateur Radio operator determines that a station complies, operation may proceed.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some notes on making measurements:<br />
<a href="http://www.arrl.org/the-fcc-s-new-rf-exposure-regulations" rel="nofollow">http://www.arrl.org/the-fcc-s-new-rf-exposure-regulations</a></p>
<p>Routine Station Evaluation</p>
<p>The regulations require amateur operators, whose stations are not categorically excluded, to perform a routine analysis of compliance with the MPE limits. The FCC is relying on the demonstrated technical skill of Amateur Radio operators to evaluate their own stations.</p>
<p>The FCC regulations do not require field-strength measurements. Measurements are one way to perform an analysis, but they&#8217;re very tricky. With calibrated equipment and skilled measuring techniques, ±2 dB error is pretty good. In untrained hands, errors exceeding 10 dB are likely. A ham who elects to make measurements will need calibrated equipment (including probes) and knowledge of its use. Many factors can confound measurements in the near field.</p>
<p>Most evaluations will be comparisons against typical charts to be developed by the FCC, relatively straightforward calculations of worst-case scenarios or computer modeling of near-field signal strength. The FCC encourages flexibility in the analysis, and will accept any technically valid approach. Once an Amateur Radio operator determines that a station complies, operation may proceed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tomi Engdahl</title>
		<link>https://www.epanorama.net/blog/2013/02/17/electrical-field-and-rf-meter/comment-page-1/#comment-1457954</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tomi Engdahl]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Dec 2015 12:22:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epanorama.net/blog/?p=16752#comment-1457954</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There are limits:

http://sagereports.com/smart-meter-rf/?page_id=216
The FCC adopted limits for Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) are generally based on recommended exposure guidelines published by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) in “Biological Effects and Exposure Criteria for Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields,” (NCRP, 1986).


http://www.slt.co/Education/EMR-ExposureGuidelines.aspx

EMF Exposure Guidelines in Canada are under the jurisdiction of Health Canada who has not independently established guidelines for magnetic field or electric field exposure. When pressed, they will state that Canada follows the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection “ICNIRP” guidelines of 830 mG or 83,000 nT (Magnetic Field) or 5000 V/m (Electric Field) for a 24-hr period. 

RF Exposure Guidelines
Radio Frequency “RF” Exposure Guidelines in Canada, are under the jurisdiction of Health Canada who has developed and established Safety Code 6 to offer federal guidelines for safe Radio Frequency Wave exposure levels. These limits are in the range of 2,000,000 to 10,000,000 microwatts per square meter and are based solely on the short term thermal effects or the heating of body tissue.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are limits:</p>
<p><a href="http://sagereports.com/smart-meter-rf/?page_id=216" rel="nofollow">http://sagereports.com/smart-meter-rf/?page_id=216</a><br />
The FCC adopted limits for Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) are generally based on recommended exposure guidelines published by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) in “Biological Effects and Exposure Criteria for Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields,” (NCRP, 1986).</p>
<p><a href="http://www.slt.co/Education/EMR-ExposureGuidelines.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://www.slt.co/Education/EMR-ExposureGuidelines.aspx</a></p>
<p>EMF Exposure Guidelines in Canada are under the jurisdiction of Health Canada who has not independently established guidelines for magnetic field or electric field exposure. When pressed, they will state that Canada follows the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection “ICNIRP” guidelines of 830 mG or 83,000 nT (Magnetic Field) or 5000 V/m (Electric Field) for a 24-hr period. </p>
<p>RF Exposure Guidelines<br />
Radio Frequency “RF” Exposure Guidelines in Canada, are under the jurisdiction of Health Canada who has developed and established Safety Code 6 to offer federal guidelines for safe Radio Frequency Wave exposure levels. These limits are in the range of 2,000,000 to 10,000,000 microwatts per square meter and are based solely on the short term thermal effects or the heating of body tissue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert E Sterenberg</title>
		<link>https://www.epanorama.net/blog/2013/02/17/electrical-field-and-rf-meter/comment-page-1/#comment-1457860</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert E Sterenberg]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Dec 2015 04:33:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epanorama.net/blog/?p=16752#comment-1457860</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have the DT-1180 meter as I use it it gives me all these different numbers. Now I see low numbers and high but there is no chart to say what is a good number or a bad number. Or for what I&#039;m getting a reading say on a microwave. What number is or level number is good or bad. Like for a tower is there a number that relavent for those levels. So there must be a numbered chart that shows the levels for each use. Thank you]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have the DT-1180 meter as I use it it gives me all these different numbers. Now I see low numbers and high but there is no chart to say what is a good number or a bad number. Or for what I&#8217;m getting a reading say on a microwave. What number is or level number is good or bad. Like for a tower is there a number that relavent for those levels. So there must be a numbered chart that shows the levels for each use. Thank you</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tomi Engdahl</title>
		<link>https://www.epanorama.net/blog/2013/02/17/electrical-field-and-rf-meter/comment-page-1/#comment-1312587</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tomi Engdahl]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2014 12:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epanorama.net/blog/?p=16752#comment-1312587</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Power Week: EM Fields From Power Lines, Cellphones Not Harmful, Says Study
http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1324948&amp;

The electromagnetic fields from power lines and mobile phones are not, in fact, likely to be harmful to humans, according to new research from scientists at the University of Manchester. While prior studies have never proven any link between the radiated emissions from power lines and cellphones and any effects on human health, they could not entirely rule out the possibility. 

Now, the new study is claiming to have ruled out one of the prime candidates that had been speculated as a possible cause of any such association: the effect of weak magnetic fields on key human flavoproteins, which transfer electrons from one place to another and are essential to maintaining human health. In their research, the scientists were unable to find any detectable impact on such proteins from magnetic fields. See the full paper at &quot;Magnetic field effects as a result of the radical pair mechanism are unlikely in redox enzymes.&quot;

http://rsif.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/12/103/20141155]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Power Week: EM Fields From Power Lines, Cellphones Not Harmful, Says Study<br />
<a href="http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1324948&#038;amp" rel="nofollow">http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1324948&#038;amp</a>;</p>
<p>The electromagnetic fields from power lines and mobile phones are not, in fact, likely to be harmful to humans, according to new research from scientists at the University of Manchester. While prior studies have never proven any link between the radiated emissions from power lines and cellphones and any effects on human health, they could not entirely rule out the possibility. </p>
<p>Now, the new study is claiming to have ruled out one of the prime candidates that had been speculated as a possible cause of any such association: the effect of weak magnetic fields on key human flavoproteins, which transfer electrons from one place to another and are essential to maintaining human health. In their research, the scientists were unable to find any detectable impact on such proteins from magnetic fields. See the full paper at &#8220;Magnetic field effects as a result of the radical pair mechanism are unlikely in redox enzymes.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://rsif.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/12/103/20141155" rel="nofollow">http://rsif.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/12/103/20141155</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Microsoft Pro</title>
		<link>https://www.epanorama.net/blog/2013/02/17/electrical-field-and-rf-meter/comment-page-1/#comment-33255</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Microsoft Pro]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Aug 2013 10:02:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epanorama.net/blog/?p=16752#comment-33255</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Czule zapraszamy na ekskluzywną witrynę zadedykowaną kwestii Informatyki. Odnajdziesz na niej najnowsze komentarze z zagranicy. Ta ogromna witryna zszokuje Twoją rodzinę płynnością tekstów. Pisarze codziennie walczą o jakość wypowiedzi. Blog już w tym momencie raduje się przeogromną używalnością w gronie  dorosłych.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Czule zapraszamy na ekskluzywną witrynę zadedykowaną kwestii Informatyki. Odnajdziesz na niej najnowsze komentarze z zagranicy. Ta ogromna witryna zszokuje Twoją rodzinę płynnością tekstów. Pisarze codziennie walczą o jakość wypowiedzi. Blog już w tym momencie raduje się przeogromną używalnością w gronie  dorosłych.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tomi Engdahl</title>
		<link>https://www.epanorama.net/blog/2013/02/17/electrical-field-and-rf-meter/comment-page-1/#comment-33254</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tomi Engdahl]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2013 09:04:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.epanorama.net/blog/?p=16752#comment-33254</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The DT-1180 meter RF signal measurement range is said to be in specifications to be 30MHz~2000MHz.
I found out that it reacts also to 2.4 GHz signal microwave oven leakage signal. I don&#039;t know how accurate the meter is at that frequency.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The DT-1180 meter RF signal measurement range is said to be in specifications to be 30MHz~2000MHz.<br />
I found out that it reacts also to 2.4 GHz signal microwave oven leakage signal. I don&#8217;t know how accurate the meter is at that frequency.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
