Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Exposure Risk(s)  (Read 827 times)
KB1TJY
Member

Posts: 257




Ignore
« on: January 10, 2013, 06:40:17 PM »

Greetings All,

I've found a wealth of information on this subject but unfortunately it appears that very few individuals and entities agree what the risks are.

The short of it is that I'm concerned about putting out 1kW from a Vertical (Hustler 6BTV) with that antenna perhaps fifty feet away. I grow concerned when I see one of the outside security cameras going crazy when transmitting, leaving me to wonder how much potentially dangerous exposure is finding it's way into the home.

Any input greatly appreciated.

KB1TJY
« Last Edit: January 10, 2013, 06:45:08 PM by KB1TJY » Logged
K8AXW
Member

Posts: 3816




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: January 10, 2013, 08:52:23 PM »

TJY:  Every answer you get to this question is going to be an opinion.  There will be some who quote numbers proving that RF exposure is detrimental.  These numbers are provided by some government hack who was provided the numbers by someone else.  If you chase it down to the bottom you will no doubt find it's the result of a person getting his 15 minutes of fame. OK?

With that being said, MY opinion FWIW, is that this RF exposure is a crock of s...t!
I always reflect back to the millions of employees who work at high powered radio and TV stations who hasn't reflected a higher than normal cancer rate, heart disease or hemorrhoids. 

Then we get to the hams who operate intermittently and suddenly find themselves being required to monitor RF exposures not only to themselves but the neighbors.

This gives a whole new meaning to the previously mentioned crock of s..t!  My opinion of course.

If you feel uneasy, Google the charts/formulas, do the calculations and deal with the results.
Logged
KB4QAA
Member

Posts: 2367




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: January 11, 2013, 12:34:35 AM »

The primary risk from RF is heating of tissues.   Essentially being cooked like a microwave oven.  The effect varies tremendously depending on frequency and target area of the body. 
The cornea of the eyes are susceptible to high UHF/SHF developing cataracts.  This was first noticed around radars in the 1950's.
Logged
G3RZP
Member

Posts: 4526




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: January 11, 2013, 01:45:27 AM »

I agree with AXW.

Having said that, note that the ICNIRP limit at HF is 30v/m for the general public, 60v/m for workers, with a 6 minute exposure. On CW, you must take into account the duty cycle, similarly with SSB, which increases the time.

Security camera goes mad? Probably because the design is cr*p - it's unlikely to have been designed or tested to even meet 3v/m, the IEC requirement for domestic and light industrial applications. Almost certainly needs ferrite on power and signal leads.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!