Peculiarities of the radiated field in the vicinity of a mobile terminal connected to 4G versus 5G networks during various applications usage

Simona Miclaus; Delia-Bianca Deaconescu; David Vatamanu; Andreea Maria Buda; Annamaria Sarbu; Bogdan Pindaru; Simona Miclaus; Delia-Bianca Deaconescu; David Vatamanu; Andreea Maria Buda; Annamaria Sarbu; Bogdan Pindaru

doi:10.3934/electreng.2022010

AIMS Electronics and Electrical Engineering

2022, Volume 6, Issue 2: 161-177. doi: 10.3934/electreng.2022010

Previous Article Next Article

Research article

Peculiarities of the radiated field in the vicinity of a mobile terminal connected to 4G versus 5G networks during various applications usage

1.
Department of Communications, IT & Cyber Defense, "Nicolae Balcescu" Land Forces Academy, Sibiu, Romania
2.
Doctoral School of Electrical Engineering, Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
3.
Faculty of Electronics and Telecommunication, Politehnica University, Bucharest, Romania

Received: 26 December 2021 Revised: 11 April 2022 Accepted: 18 April 2022 Published: 20 April 2022

Realistic human exposures to radiation emitted by a mobile terminal connected to either a 5G network (sub-6 GHz) or to a 4G network have been scarcely assessed till now. Present experimental work aimed at comparing the radiated field in air, in a single point situated at 10 cm from a mobile phone when running a set of 5 mobile applications in the two communication standards. The time-evolution of the electric field strength in air near the terminal during 25 s of use was recorded by an original method, together with the data rate of transmission. The emitted power density dynamics, its statistics, its slope of accumulation after the usage period and its average value per transmitted bit are analyzed and compared between all the situations. The peculiarities are emphasized and they are proved to depend on the communication standard and on the mobile application.
- 5G mobile phone,
- human exposure,
- microwaves,
- mobile applications,
- sub-6GHz networks
Citation: Simona Miclaus, Delia-Bianca Deaconescu, David Vatamanu, Andreea Maria Buda, Annamaria Sarbu, Bogdan Pindaru. Peculiarities of the radiated field in the vicinity of a mobile terminal connected to 4G versus 5G networks during various applications usage[J]. AIMS Electronics and Electrical Engineering, 2022, 6(2): 161-177. doi: 10.3934/electreng.2022010

Related Papers:

Abstract

Realistic human exposures to radiation emitted by a mobile terminal connected to either a 5G network (sub-6 GHz) or to a 4G network have been scarcely assessed till now. Present experimental work aimed at comparing the radiated field in air, in a single point situated at 10 cm from a mobile phone when running a set of 5 mobile applications in the two communication standards. The time-evolution of the electric field strength in air near the terminal during 25 s of use was recorded by an original method, together with the data rate of transmission. The emitted power density dynamics, its statistics, its slope of accumulation after the usage period and its average value per transmitted bit are analyzed and compared between all the situations. The peculiarities are emphasized and they are proved to depend on the communication standard and on the mobile application.

References

[1]	TS 38-101.1: NR. User Equipment (UE) radio transmission and reception. Part 1: Range 1 Standalone, (17.2.0 ed.), 3GPP, 2021-07-09.
[2]	TS 38-101.2: NR. User Equipment (UE) radio transmission and reception. Part 2: Range 2 Standalone, (17.2.0 ed.), 3GPP, 2021-07-07.
[3]	3GPP specification series: 38series. Retrieved August 5, 2021. Available from: https://www.3gpp.org/DynaReport/38-series.html
[4]	Miclaus S, Bechet P, Helbet R, et al. (2021) Towards 5G exposimetry: instantaneous and average energy density accumulation rate in air near wireless devices transmitting data as sub-millisecond frames. 2021 12th International Symposium on Advanced Topics in Electrical Engineering (ATEE), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1109/ATEE52255.2021.9425087
[5]	Miclaus S, Sarbu A, Bechet P (2021) Using Poincare plots for feature extraction of the dynamics of electromagnetic field exposures when using different protocols of WiFi communications. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference of Wireless Communication and Sensor Networks, 32-38. https://doi.org/10.1145/3461717.3461723 doi: 10.1145/3461717.3461723
[6]	Sarbu A, Miclaus S, Digulescu A, Bechet P (2020) Comparative analysis of user exposure to the electromagnetic radiation emitted by the 4th and 5th generations of Wi-Fi communication devices. Int J Env Res Pub He 17: 1-21. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17238837 doi: 10.3390/ijerph17238837
[7]	Miclaus S, Bechet P (2020) Non-stationary statistics with amplitude probability density function for exposure and energy density reporting nearby a mobile phone running 4G applications. PIER M 89: 151-159. https://doi.org/10.2528/PIERM19110706 doi: 10.2528/PIERM19110706
[8]	ICNIRP (2020) Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric, magnetic, and electromagnetic fields (up to 300 GHz). Health Phys 118: 483-524.
[9]	IEEE-C95.1. (2019) IEEE standard for safety levels with respect to human exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields, 3 kHz to 300 GHz. Ed. NY, USA: IEEE.
[10]	IEC TR 63170: 2018. Measurement procedure for the evaluation of power density related to human exposure to radio frequency fields from wireless communication devices operating between 6 GHz and 100 GHz.
[11]	Franci D, Coltellaci S, Grillo E, et al. (2020) Experimental procedure for fifth generation (5G) electromagnetic field (EMF) measurement and maximum power extrapolation for human exposure assessment. Environments 7: 22. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments7030022 doi: 10.3390/environments7030022
[12]	Migliore MD, Franci D, Pavoncello S, et al. (2021) A new paradigm in 5G maximum power extrapolation for human exposure assessment: forcing gNB traffic toward the measurement equipment. IEEE Access 9: 101946-101958. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3092704 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3092704
[13]	Velghe M, Aerts S, Martens L, et al. (2021) Protocol for personal RF-EMF exposure measurement studies in 5th generation telecommunication networks. Environ Health 20: 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-021-00719-w doi: 10.1186/s12940-021-00719-w
[14]	Chitra S, Ramesh S, Jackson B, et al. (2020) Performance enhancement of generalized frequency division multiplexing with RF impairments compensation for efficient 5G wireless access. AEU - International Journal of Electronics and Communications 127: 153467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aeue.2020.153467 doi: 10.1016/j.aeue.2020.153467
[15]	Velghe M, Shikhantsov S, Tanghe E, et al. (2020) Field enhancement and size of radio-frequency hotspots induced by maximum ratio field combining in fifth generation network. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 16: 400-411. https://doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncaa118 doi: 10.1093/rpd/ncaa118
[16]	Wang H, Xu B, Yao Y, et al. (2020) Implications of incident power density limits on power and EIRP levels of 5G millimeter-wave user equipment. IEEE Access 8: 148214-148225. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3015231 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3015231
[17]	Joshi P, Ghasemifard F, Colombi D, et al. (2020) Actual output power levels of user equipment in 5G commercial networks and implications on realistic RF EMF exposure assessment. IEEE Access 8: 204068-204075. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3036977 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3036977
[18]	Chiaraviglio L, Di Paolo C, Blefari Melazzi N (2021) 5G Network planning under service and EMF constraints: formulation and solutions. IEEE Trans Mobile Comp. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMC.2021.3054482 doi: 10.1109/TMC.2021.3054482
[19]	Lundgren J, Helander J, Gustafsson M, et al. (2019) Near-field measurement and calibration technique for RF EMF exposure assessment of mm-wave 5G devices. IEEE Antennas Propag Mag.
[20]	Lundgren J, Helander J, Gustafsson M, et al. (2021) A near-field measurement and calibration technique: radio-frequency electromagnetic field exposure assessment of millimeter-wave 5G devices. IEEE Antennas Propag Mag 63: 77-88. https://doi.org/10.1109/MAP.2020.2988517 doi: 10.1109/MAP.2020.2988517
[21]	He W, Scialacqua L, Scannavini A, et al. (2020) Incident power density assessment study for 5G millimeter-wave handset based on equivalent currents method. Proceedings of 14th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EuCAP), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.23919/EuCAP48036.2020.9135622 doi: 10.23919/EuCAP48036.2020.9135622
[22]	He W, Xu B, Scialacqua L, et al. (2021) Fast power density assessment of 5G mobile handset using equivalent currents method. IEEE T Antenn Propag 69: 6857-6869. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAP.2021.3070725 doi: 10.1109/TAP.2021.3070725
[23]	Yazdandoost KY, Laakso I (2018) Numerical modeling of electromagnetic field exposure from 5G mobile communications at 10 GHz. Progress in Electromagnetics Research M 72: 61-67. https://doi.org/10.2528/PIERM18070503 doi: 10.2528/PIERM18070503
[24]	Morelli MS, Gallucci S, Siervo B, et al. (2021) Numerical analysis of electromagnetic field exposure from 5G mobile communications at 28 GHZ in adults and children users for real-world exposure scenarios. Int J Env Res Pub He 18: 1073. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18031073 doi: 10.3390/ijerph18031073
[25]	Li K, Honda K (2021) A novel estimation method of local peak SAR for 5G sub-6GHz antennas using MIMO-OTA. Proceedings of 15th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EuCAP), 1-3. https://doi.org/10.23919/EuCAP51087.2021.9411412 doi: 10.23919/EuCAP51087.2021.9411412
[26]	Zhekov SS, Zhao K, Franek O, et al. (2021) Test reduction for power density emitted by handset mmwave antenna arrays. IEEE Access 9: 23127-23138. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3055420 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3055420
[27]	Cano R, Zhang S, Zhao K, et al. (2019) User body interaction of 5G switchable antenna system for mobile terminals at 28 GHz. Proceedings of the European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EuCAP).
[28]	Scialacqua L, Mioc F, Scannavini A, et al. (2020) Simulated and measured power density using equivalent currents for 5G applications. IEEE International Symposium on Antennas and Propagation and North American Radio Science Meeting, 1827-1828. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEECONF35879.2020.9329619 doi: 10.1109/IEEECONF35879.2020.9329619
[29]	Teniou M, Jawad O, Pannetrat S, et al. (2020) A fast and rigorous assessment of the specific absorption rate (SAR) for MIMO cellular equipment based on vector near-field measurements. Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EuCAP), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.23919/EuCAP48036.2020.9135506 doi: 10.23919/EuCAP48036.2020.9135506
[30]	Zhao K, Zhang S, Ho Z, et al. (2018) Spherical coverage characterization of 5G millimeter wave user equipment with 3GPP specifications. IEEE Access 7: 4442-4452. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2888981 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2888981
[31]	Vanitha M, Ramesh S, Chitra S (2019) Wearable antennas for remote healthcare monitoring system using 5G wireless technologies. Telecommunications and Radio Engineering 78: 1275-1285. https://doi.org/10.1615/TelecomRadEng.v78.i14.50 doi: 10.1615/TelecomRadEng.v78.i14.50
[32]	Islam S, Zada M, Yoo H (2021) Low-pass filter based integrated 5G smartphone antenna for sub-6-GHz and mm-wave bands. IEEE T Antenn Propag 69: 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAP.2021.3061012 doi: 10.1109/TAP.2021.3061012
[33]	Bridges M, Khalily M, Abedian M, et al. (2020) High isolation 8⨯8 MIMO antenna design for 5G sub-6 GHz smartphone applications. In International Conference on UK-China Emerging Technologies (UCET), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1109/UCET51115.2020.9205450
[34]	Ramachandran T, Faruque MRI, Siddiky AM, et al. (2021) Reduction of 5G cellular network radiation in wireless mobile phone using an asymmetric square shaped passive metamaterial design. Sci Rep 11: 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-82105-7 doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-82105-7
[35]	Gultekin DH, Siegel PH (2020) Absorption of 5G radiation in brain tissue as a function of frequency, power and time. IEEE Access 8: 115593-115612. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3002183 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3002183
[36]	Foster KR, Ziskin MC, Balzano Q, et al. (2021) Transient thermal responses of skin to pulsed millimeter waves. IEEE Access 8: 130239-130251. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3008322 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3008322
[37]	Chiaraviglio L, Rossetti S, Saida S, et al. (2021) Pencil beamforming increases human exposure to electromagnetic fields: true or false? IEEE Access 9: 25158-25171. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3057237 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3057237
[38]	Buda A, Sarbu A (2021) Development of an Android application for user exposure assessment to electromagnetic fields emitted by an IEEE 802.11ax client. Proceedings of the IEEE International Black Sea Conference on Communications and Networking. https://doi.org/10.1109/BlackSeaCom52164.2021.9527788 doi: 10.1109/BlackSeaCom52164.2021.9527788
[39]	Bechet P, Miclaus S, Bechet AC (2015) An analysis of the dependence of the electromagnetic exposure level in indoor environment on traffic direction, instantaneous data rate and position of the devices in a WLAN network. Measurement, 67: 34-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2015.02.035 doi: 10.1016/j.measurement.2015.02.035

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2022 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)