By Topic

Energy Deposition in a Model of Man: Frequency Effects

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

4 Author(s)
Stuchly, S.S. ; Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Ottawa ; Stuchly, M.A. ; Kraszewski, A. ; Hartsgrove, George

A computer-controlled scanning system and implantable, nonperturbing electric field probes were used to measure spatial distributions of the electric field in a full scale homogeneous model of a human body. The measurements were performed at three frequencies (160, 350, and 915 MHz) in the far-field and in the near-field of resonant dipoles. The specific absorption rate (SAR) distributions and the averages for body parts and the whole body are analyzed as functions of frequency. In the far-field, the SAR decreases exponentially in the direction of wave propagation in the torso at all frequencies, and large gradients of the SAR are observed along the body main axis, particularly for the E polarization. At 160 and 350 MHz high local SAR's are produced in the neck. It appears that for plane wave exposures the ratio of the peak SAR to the whole-body average SAR does not exceed 20. In the near-field, large SAR gradients are also produced, and the ratios of the peak spatial SAR to the whole-body average SAR vary from about 30 to 250 depending on the frequency and polarization. It is suggested that for near-field exposures the whole-body average SAR is not a proper dosimetric measure, and the SAR averaged over any 0.1 of the tissue volume is recommended instead.

Published in:

Biomedical Engineering, IEEE Transactions on  (Volume:BME-33 ,  Issue: 7 )