Arab J Sci Eng (2014) 39:30953099

DOI 10.1007/s13369-014-0953-6

RESEARCH ARTICLE - ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING

Fuzzy-Based Assessment of Health Hazards of a Reference

Antenna
Selcuk Comlekci Ozlem Coskun Mesud Kahriman

Received: 13 June 2012 / Accepted: 31 December 2012 / Published online: 15 February 2014
King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals 2014

Fuzzy logic Safety standard Health hazard

Abstract This paper discusses briefly a fuzzy-based assessment of health hazard due to electromagnetic radiation. The
RF electromagnetic fields, out of the measurement points,
were calculated by the developed software based on fuzzy
logic. The electric and magnetic field components of RF radiation value at any point can be compared with national/international standards and limits easily using this software. There
is currently a general consensus in the scientific and standards
community that the most significant parameter, in terms of
biologically relevant effects of human exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, specific absorption rate is the
specific energy absorption rate in tissue, a quantity properly
averaged in time and space and expressed in watts per kilogram. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
recognizes that there is public concern regarding the safety of
exposure to the radio frequency and microwave fields from
hand-held, portable, and mobile cellular telephones. International organizations have established guidelines for human
exposure to radio frequency energy. While these guidelines
differ in some respects, their limits in the frequency range
used by wireless communications devices are broadly similar. The consensus of the scientific community, as reflected
in these exposure guidelines, is that exposure to RF energy
within the recommended limits stated in these guidelines is
safe. However, there is a scientific discontinuity in view of
health hazards. In this study, a fuzzification/defuzzification
method of the discontinuity problem makes the soft boundaries between hazardous regions and non-hazardous regions.
In future studies, more sophisticated fuzzy methods should
be tested for more realistic solutions.

Keywords

S. Comlekci O. Coskun (B) M. Kahriman

Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Faculty
of Engineering, Suleyman Demirel University, 32260 Isparta, Turkey
e-mail: ozlemcoskun@sdu.edu.tr

The utilization of electromagnetic (EM) energy has increased

rapidly since the late 1990s. A number of organizations have
established limits for human exposure to EM fields. The standards vary somewhat in their exposure limits and in other

1 Introduction

123

3096

Arab J Sci Eng (2014) 39:30953099

particulars. However, the frequencies used for wireless communications systems are broadly similar for (in) these different guidelines. All of these guidelines include provisions
for different exposure situations. These include limits for
whole-body exposure or partial body exposure that are more
relevant to the users of wireless communications. The standards also require that the exposure be averaged over time
periods ranging 630 min [1].
The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) guidelines [2], and the Institute
of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) standard [1],
specify occupational and general public (ICNIRP)/controlled
environment and uncontrolled environment (IEEE) threshold levels for whole body and local rates of electromagnetic
energy absorption, expressed in terms of the specific absorption rate (SAR), measured in watts per kilogram. For a human
body radiated by a base station antenna, the electromagnetic
energy absorption depends in part on the antenna body distance, so that, for a given exposure threshold level, there
is a corresponding minimum distance required between the
antenna and the body.
International organizations have established guidelines for
human exposure to radio frequency energy. These include
the IEEE C95.1 standard and The ICNIRP guidelines [2].
Despite a considerable amount of speculation in the scientific
literature, no mechanism has established a standard such that
electromagnetic fields at levels below recommended limits
can produce biological damage of clinical consequence [3
8].
Mousa [9] studied the electromagnetic radiation emitting
from some cellular base stations around the city of Nablus.
The study was performed at several sites. The readings obtained were compared to some international standards and guidelines. It has been noticed that the maximum measured value
was only 0.007 % of the ICNIRP and 0.005 % of the FCC
international limits. Furthermore, the values measured represented not only radiation emitted from the mobile base stations, but also that emitted from all other sources of radiation
in the range of 200 kHz to 3 GHz. The signals here can have
either destructive or instructive interference at some specific
points, so it is recommended that the radiation emitting from
the base stations should be investigated together with other
sources such as local TV, FM and WLAN transmitters. This
can be achieved using a suitable spectrum analyzer. Another
important issue is that the radiation exposure to the mobile
station itself should be measured since it may have a much
larger value being very close to the users [9].
In Kaluski and Stasierskis [10] work, a rough numerical
technique for the calculation of the near EM field distribution
in the vicinity of FM and TV antenna systems was presented.
Faraone et al. [11] investigated the character of the average
power density in the close proximity of base-station antennas.
In 2003, a new measurement method for radiation emanating

123

from AM, FM, and TV antennas and mobile phone base stations was proposed by Shay et al. [12]. Cicchetti and Faraone
[13] proposed a prediction formula for estimating the peak
equivalent power density in the near-field of cellular basestation array antennas.
Recently, Larcheveque et al. [14] studied the impact of
small-scale fading on the estimation of local average power
density for radio frequency exposure assessment. Joseph et al.
[15] studied a low-cost measurement method for the extraction of the relative phases of the fields of the base station and
broadcast antennas. In the end, Colak and Kocsalay worked
RF electromagnetic field distribution around a TV broadcast
antenna. They developed artificial neural network based software to estimate RF EMF in a small area around TV broadcast
antennas [16].
2 Fuzzy Model and Study Design
The fuzzy logic method can be used to control processes that
are complex and nonlinear in the traditional control structure.
In fuzzy systems, effective results can be obtained based on
uncertain linguistic knowledge. Therefore, the fuzzy logic
method is convenient for cases where the system is complex,
and the result cannot be found using the traditional methods or cases where the information is infinite or uncertain.
Fuzzy logic is fit for soft computing in engineering problems. In particular, uncertainties on the boundary conditions
can be solved using the soft computing approach of fuzzy
logic [17,18].
A novel model has been used to find a realistic relationship between health hazard (or SAR) and electromagnetic
radiation (measured and calculated). The main objective is
to overcome the problem of uncertainty regarding the evaluation and classification of hazardous regions in the vicinity
of antenna.
SAR is a unit of measurement used in the standard and it
measures the amount of radio frequency energy
 2
E 
(1)
SAR =
m
where is effective incident electric field value, mass density
of tissue, conductivity of tissue. The commercial field probes
operating in the wireless communication bands are sensitive
to and the reading is usually expressed in. These instruments
are referred as isotropic E-field probes [19].
Exposure limits for radio frequency radiation have been
established by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and the International Commission on Non Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). Safety distance (from
antenna to measuring point) can be found as

30 P 10G/10
(2)
d=
E

where is output power of antenna, is antenna gain (25 dBi for

commercial antenna), is maximum permissible electric field
intensity [1].
The main purpose of this paper is to study the use of fuzzy
modeling for the analysis of health hazards due to electromagnetic radiation.

3097

Safety distance (m)

Arab J Sci Eng (2014) 39:30953099

3 Measurements and Modeling

14,0
13,0
12,0
11,0
10,0
9,0
8,0
7,0
6,0
5,0
4,0
0,0

Safety distance vs power

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

30,0

35,0

Output power (W)

In this study, there were a total of 50 measuring points in the

center of City of Isparta, Turkey. The two service providers
had total 5 pylons of 900 MHz reference antennas in this residential area. For system validation, our model was tested in
view of obtained and calculated electric fields. These measurements have been conducted using the spectrum analyzer/
satellite receiver meter unit which was used to investigate the
reflections and background noises in the measuring media.
Repetition time, frequency, and amplitude of spectrum of RF
energy (900 MHz) were also investigated, observed, and verified by the satellite level meter that is PROMAX, MC-877C
(Barcelona/Spain). All the reflection and exposure measurements were carried out by utilizing the Portable RF Survey
System, HOLADAY, HI-4417 (MN/USA) with its standard
probe as well. The probe is able to select and obtain the vector
sum on the X, Y and Z axis. In order to see if they matched,
the measured and calculated results were compared with each
other.
If one measures the field density value using the measured
or calculated electric field intensity in the above equation, the
safety distance can be calculated. The most common values
of parameters can be obtained as shown in Figs. 1 and 2.
The normalized electric field can be expressed as.

  
E 
1 100
(3)
%E =
|E|
|E  |: Obtained electric field value analytically,

Fig. 1 Electric field versus distance from antenna with limit value
in 900 MHz communication system. This limit is recommended by
ICNIRP as the safety distance [20]

Fig. 2 Safety distance (m) from antenna can vary by means power
Table 1 Measured and calculated electric field values versus distance
Distance from
antenna (m)

Calculated
electric field
(V/m)

Measured
electric field
(V/m)

SAR related
hazard grade
(%) 1,000

435.4

400

1,600

87

90

8.1

10

43.5

45

10.6

41

40

1.6

50

8.7

10

0.1

100

4.4

500

0.9

1.4

Measured electric field determines health hazard dealing with SAR

Pt(Watt)
18 Rules
Mamdani

Percentage(%)

Distance(m)

Fig. 3 Proposed fuzzy model to the system

|E|: Permissible electric field value to provide safety (42

V/m). So, the normalized percentage can be used as a hazard
grade.
The electric field results obtained from these measurements were used to establish a fuzzy model. This model
requires some results obtained from open area measurements.
The model was used for the prediction of E field values. So
one needs only a validated model without any measurement
process. The SAR defines the local E field and the energy
absorbed into tissue. Our model predicts the E field value in
tissue, or SAR. The predicted values from the model were
tested and validated. According to the basic electromagnetics, we had to use some rules. These electric field measurements are tabulated in Table 1.
The Fuzzy Logic Toolbox of MATLABv6 was utilized
to establish our model at the Suleyman Demirel University

123

3098

Arab J Sci Eng (2014) 39:30953099

Table 2 FAM table and rule

base of the system

Pt (W)

Distance (m)
Very very near

Very near

Near

Mid

Far

Very far

Low

Very harmful

Mid

Harmless

Harmless

Very harmless

Very harmless

Mid

Very very harmful

Low harmful

Mid

Harmless

Harmless

Harmless

High

Very very harmful

Harmful

Low harmful

Mid

Harmless

Harmless

Fig. 4 Comparison of fuzzified

harm zones between directional
and omni directional antennas.
Fuzzified zones. Bold zones
represent more hazards

Fig. 5 Evaluation of harmful can be obtained analytically. SAR is

known directly proportional to electric field. Health hazard is defined
as dealing with SAR

Engineering Faculty Lab. The fuzzy model consists of two

inputs (transmitter power of base station antenna, distance
between base station antenna and measuring point) and one
output as a percentage for the expected health hazard. This
fuzzy inference system (FIS) model is shown in Fig. 3 and
the fuzzy associative memory (FAM) table is provided in
Table 2.

123

Fig. 6 Outputs of the model. Fuzzified zones can be classified as soft

transition among the areas

4 Conclusion
After the defuzzification of the system, the crisp values are
utilized to compare the analytical results for the calculated

Arab J Sci Eng (2014) 39:30953099

safety distance results. Graphical representations are provided in the form of graphs in Figs. 4 and 5. Figure 6 represents the fuzzified solutions to the regional health hazards
using the fuzzy model presented. There have been a sufficient number of matches, between our results from the model
and our measurements that were mentioned in the Sect. 5.
Figure 5 shows a close agreement between the measured and
calculated fields, especially in the near field.

5 Discussion
In this study, a new approach to obtain a risk assessment for
the energy radiated by a reference antenna is presented. For
instance, the output power of the antenna varied between 5
and 20 W in 900 MHz. According to the basic electromagnetic, electric field intensity decreases by distance in steps so
that the most effective criterion is a field at a certain point. In
this respect, it is not easy to establish certain limits or boundaries among harmful or harmless regions. Using the proposed method, one can classify (in view of hazards) some
points in the vicinity of an antenna. It can be seen in Figs.
4, 5; Table 1 that the relative risk calculated from the fuzzy
method and from the analytical solution matches each other.
MATLAB-FIS gives acceptable linguistic outputs. Due to the
variable traffic condition, adaptive or proper models should
be created. Moreover, 3D solutions are always an essential
requirement for real-time geographic conditions. In the future
studies, more agreeable fuzzy models will be developed for
more reliable risk assessment mapping of directional antennas.

References
1. IEEE C95.1-2005 IEEE standard for safety levels with respect to
human exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields, 3 kHz
to 300 GHz (2006). doi:10.1109/IEEESTD.2006.99501
2. Cooper, J.; Marx, B.; Buhl, J.; Hombach, V.: Determination of
safety distance limits for a human near a cellular base station
antenna, adopting the IEEE standard or ICNIRP guidelines. Bioelectromagnetics 23, 429443 (2002)
3. Bernardi, P.; Cavagnaro, M.; Pisa, S.; Piuzzi, E.: Human exposure
to radio base-station antennas in urban environment. IEEE Trans.
Microw. Theory Tech. 48, 19962002 (2000)
4. Gosselin, M.C.; Christ, A.; Kuhn, S.; Kuster, N.: Dependence of the
occupational exposure to mobile phone base stations on the properties of the antenna and the human body. IEEE Trans. Electromagn.
Compat. 51, 227235 (2009)

3099
5. Meyer, F.J.C.; Davidson, D.B.; Jakobus, U.; Stuchly, M.A.: Human
exposure assessment in the near field of GSM base-station antennas
using a hybrid finite element/method of moments technique. IEEE
Trans. Biomed. Eng 50, 224233 (2003)
6. Hardell, L.; Sage, C.: Biological effects from electromagnetic field
exposure and public exposure standards1. Biomed. Pharmacother.
62, 104109 (2008)
7. Markov, M.: Nonthermal mechanism of interactions between electromagnetic fields and biological systems: a calmodulin example.
Environmentalist 31, 114120 (2011)
8. Yalin, S.; Erdem, G.: Biological effects of electromagnetic fields.
Afr. J. Biotechnol. 11, 39333941 (2012)
9. Mousa, A.: Electromagnetic radiation measurements and safety
issues of some cellular base stations in Nablus. JESTR 4(1), 3542
(2011)
10. Kaluski, M.; Stasierski, L.: Electromagnetic field estimation in the
vicinity of panel antenna system for FM and TV broadcasting.
IEEE Trans. Broadcast. 41, 136142 (1995)
11. Faraone, A.; Tay, R.Y.S.; Joyner, K.H.; Balzano, Q.: Estimation of
the average power density in the vicinity of cellular base-station
collinear array antennas. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 49, 984996
(2000)
12. Shay, W.T.; Lao, R.R.; Liang, W.: Practical measurement procedure
for EM radiation from base stations in Taiwan. Asia-Pac. Conf.
Environ. Electromagn. CEEM-2003 605608 (2003)
13. Cicchetti, R.; Faraone, A.: Estimation of the peak power density in
the vicinity of cellular and radio base station antennas. IEEE Trans.
Electromagn. Compat. 46, 275290 (2004)
14. Larchveque, E.; Dale, C.; Wong, M.F.; Wiart, J.: Analysis of electric field averaging for in situ radiofrequency exposure assessment.
IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 54, 12451250 (2005)
15. Joseph, W.; Verloock, L.; Martens, L.: Reconstruction of the polarization ellipse of the EM field of telecommunication and broadcast
antennas by a fast and low-cost measurement method. IEEE Trans.
Electromagn. Compat. 48, 385396 (2006)
16. Colak, I.; Kosalay, I.: Neural network estimation of RF electromagnetic pollution near TV broadcast transmitters. Microw. Opt.
Technol. Lett. 50, 10041010 (2008)
17. Zadeh, L.A.: Fuzzy logic = computing with words. IEEE Trans.
Fuzzy Syst. 4, 103111 (1996)
18. Zadeh, L.A.: The roles of soft computing and fuzzy logic in the
conception, design and deployment of intelligent system. IEEE
Asia Pac. Conf. Circuits Syst 34 (1996)
19. Blanch, S.; Romeu, J.; Cardama, A.: Near field in the vicinity of
wireless base-station antennas: an exposure compliance approach.
IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. 50, 685692 (2002)
20. Ahlbom, A.; Bergqvist, U.; Bernhardt, J.; Cesarini, J.; Grandolfo,
M.; Hietanen, M.; Mckinlay, A.; Repacholi, M.; Sliney, D.; Stolwijk, J.: Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric,
magnetic, and electromagnetic fields (up to 300 GHz). International
Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. Health Phys.
74, 494522 (1998)

123