Safety concerning ERP of transmitter

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around safety concerns related to the operation of a transmitter, specifically regarding its HERP (Hazards of Electromagnetic Radiation to Personnel). Participants explore the implications of using a transmitter with low and high output capabilities of 2W and 10W, respectively, and an antenna with an 11dB gain operating around 2000 MHz. The focus includes potential risks when approaching the transmitter to switch between power settings and the necessary precautions to ensure safety.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express concern about the safety of approaching the transmitter when switching from low to high power, questioning the minimum safe distance to maintain.
  • There is a discussion about the directional nature of the antenna, with some participants noting its omni-directional characteristics and questioning how an 11dB gain is achieved.
  • One participant suggests that using a high vertical aperture and stacked dipoles can yield significant gain, similar to commercial TV stations.
  • Another participant raises the need for an RF Hazard Meter to assess exposure levels, emphasizing the importance of health and safety in commercial setups.
  • Participants inquire about the specifics of the antenna setup and suggest that visual documentation could clarify the situation.
  • Concerns are raised about potential RF surface burns and microwave heating, particularly regarding prolonged exposure to the beam of the transmitter.
  • Some participants share personal experiences with amateur radio setups, discussing the effectiveness of their equipment and the distances they have achieved.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying opinions on the safety of operating the transmitter and the technical aspects of the antenna. There is no consensus on the minimum safe distance or the specifics of the antenna's gain characteristics, indicating multiple competing views remain.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention the need for additional information about the transmitter and antenna setup to provide more accurate advice. There are unresolved questions regarding the specifics of the antenna design and the implications of operating at different power levels.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for individuals involved in amateur radio, RF engineering, or those concerned with electromagnetic safety in transmitter operations.

  • #31
davenn said:
he definitely needs some direct on-hand/on-site guidance
Are you after some plane tickets? :wink:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davenn
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #32
VivaLaFisica said:
I'm curious to figure out if I'm operating a transmitter with safety compliance regarding its HERP (Hazards of Electromagnetic Radiation to Personnel).

Put simply, the transmitter has a low and high output capability of 2w and 10w. The antenna it operates on has an 11db gain. Radiating around 2000 MHz is usual here.

Things to consider, if the transmitter is on low power, but I need to physically go near it to flip the switch to the high option, am I (as the operator) in danger? What is the minimum distance I can safely be away?

Any advice on the subject is appreciated. Please let me know if other info may be required.
The maximum intensity near the antenna is easily found approximately by dividing the power by the area of the antenna aperture.
For an antenna with a gain of 11dBi we expect an aperture of A = lambda^2 x G / 4 x pi = 15^2 x 12.5 / 4 x pi = 225 cm^2
So the intensity is 10 / 225 W/cm^2 = 0.04 W/cm^2 = 40mW/cm^2
The international recommendations for exposure to non ionising radiation are published by the ICNIRP (http://www.icnirp.org/cms/upload/publications/ICNIRPemfgdl.pdf).
At 2 GHz the Reference Exposure Level is 5mW/cm^2. This is the calculated level above which actual measurements are recommended.
In the UK , and I expect in the USA something similar, there is a legal requirement to make a Risk Assessment and to have a Safe System of Work.
It is apparent that the initial; rough calculation shows your exposure level is 40/5 = 8 times above the NCIRP Reference Level, so further work is required before exposing anyone to this radiation.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davenn, sophiecentaur and berkeman
  • #33
tech99 said:
The maximum intensity near the antenna is easily found approximately by dividing the power by the area of the antenna aperture.
That could be a very good start but there would be a variation in local E field on the way up the column with maxima at the dipole feed points.
tech99 said:
8 times above the NCIRP Reference Level
I think that implies PF should not be involved any further as the safety aspect is now significant.
 
  • #34
sophiecentaur said:
think that implies PF should not be involved any further as the safety aspect is now significant.
I think it's okay for now, with good safety information being the theme here. It may depend on how the OP responds next. "Can I wear a tinfoil hat for protection?" would probably not be a good response by him... :wink:

EDIT/ADD -- I do think that the OP should change to Yagi antennas, for the directional reasons mentioned for this application, and to make it easier to approach the antenna when it is transmitting (from the side). The legal issues of unlicensed high power Tx may be more of a problem for the OP in the end...
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sophiecentaur and davenn
  • #35
berkeman said:
I do think that the OP should change to Yagi antennas, for the directional reasons mentioned for this application,
If an omni is not actually required, an omni is not good value. The same gain for a Yagi would mean that the VRP could be much wider and would mean that pointing would be less critical. And, of course, it is not neighbourly to spread signals in directions where they are not needed.
berkeman said:
The legal issues of unlicensed high power Tx
If this project is not totally kosher then there is more chance of getting caught if an omni is being used. But we have to assume the OP is legit or we shouldn't be having this conversation. :smile:
 
  • #36
sophiecentaur said:
But we have to assume the OP is legit or we shouldn't be having this conversation. :smile:

probably a really bad assumption :wink::wink:
don't think I have ever seen one of these styles of posts where the OP was operating in a legit way :rolleyes:
 
  • #37
VivaLaFisica said:
The cables used are RG59.
As well as the high losses mentioned by davenn, RG-59 cable has a characteristic impedance of 75 ohms whilst the antenna you proposed is 50 ohm (from its data sheet). You need to use a low-loss cable with the same impedance as your chosen antenna to reduce matching losses and ghosting on analogue video (at least on long feeder runs).

Antennas used for broadcast reception tend to be 75 ohm whilst antennas used for transmit/receive systems are usually 50 ohm. You should check the specification for the antennas you choose then get matching cable and connectors.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davenn, berkeman and sophiecentaur

Similar threads

Is my fictional Solar System stable and realistic?
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
Kerbal Space Program - Rocket Design Basics
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
10K
News Bush Administration: My Indictment
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Do Movies Teach Us Realistic Life Skills?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
10K