EMF Exposure Level for Uplink and Downlink of 5G Network Using Ray Tracing Approach

2022 · Unclear · Low evidence

← Research stream

UnclearLow evidencePaper 1265

Study snapshot

Publicationmanual · 2022

Study typeexposure_assessment

Reported directionUnclear

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

EMF Exposure Level for Uplink and Downlink of 5G Network Using Ray Tracing Approach Salem, M.A., Lim, H.S., Chua, M.Y., Chien, S.F., Zarakovitis, C.C., Ng , C.Y., Rahman, N.Z.A., 2022. Investigation of EMF Exposure Level for Uplink and Downlink of 5G Network Using Ray Tracing Approach. International Journal of Technology. Volume 13(6), pp. 1298-1307. Abstract To provide enhanced mobile services, the 5G system is expected to further densify its network infrastructure and scale up the deployment of massive antenna arrays that emit high-energy beams using the millimeter wave spectrum. These radically new features will significantly impact the EMF exposure level in the 5G networks. In this paper, EMF exposure for 5G mobile networks in a dense urban environment is investigated using a raytracing approach for the uplink (UL) and downlink (DL). A massive multi-input multi-output antenna with multiuser beamforming capability is considered for the 5G base station. For DL, the maximum rate transmission (MRT) technique is used to direct the beams toward all the active users, and total power density (PD) is used to evaluate the EMF exposure level. On the other hand, EMF exposure due to UL is investigated using electric field strength and specific absorption rate (SAR). The proposed ray-tracing based EMF evaluation framework exploits detailed information of the scenarios, including 3D building geometry, EM characteristics, multipath propagation, user locations and beamforming radiation pattern, to effectively evaluate the EMF’s spatial variation levels. Following this evaluation procedure, the impact of different user densities and distributions is analyzed in terms of PD and SAR. Results show that for DL, the peak PD increases from 6.65 to 24.92 dBm/m2 when the number of active users in the area increases from a single user to 100%. Considering the worst-case scenario, the PD exposure reaches 62% of the ICNIRP’s limit. Saturation of the spatial EMF distribution occurs when the number of active DL beams is above 25%. For UL, within 5m radius of the user’s location, the average E-field may increase from 2.40 to 3.98 V/m. (increment of 66%) if the number of active users in the area increases from 25% to 100%. Moreover, when 100% of the users are actively transmitting, there is only a 10% probability that the SAR may exceed 0.06 W/kg (or 3% of the ICNIRP’s limit). Open access paper: ijtech.eng.ui.ac.id

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typeexposure_assessment

Effect directionunclear

PopulationNot supplied

Sample sizeNot supplied

ExposuremmWave · 0.06 W/kg

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Using a ray-tracing framework in a dense urban scenario, downlink peak power density increased from 6.65 to 24.92 dBm/m2 as active users increased from a single user to 100%, with a worst-case PD reaching 62% of the ICNIRP limit and spatial distribution saturation when active downlink beams exceeded 25%. For uplink, within a 5 m radius of the user location, average E-field increased from 2.40 to 3.98 V/m as active users increased from 25% to 100%. When 100% of users were actively transmitting, there was a 10% probability that SAR exceeded 0.06 W/kg (stated as 3% of the ICNIRP limit).

Outcomes measured

Power density (PD)
Electric field strength (V/m)
Specific absorption rate (SAR)
Spatial distribution/saturation of EMF exposure
Comparison to ICNIRP limits

Limitations

Frequency not specified in the abstract (only described as millimeter wave spectrum).
Study is simulation/model-based (ray tracing) in a dense urban environment; real-world measurement/validation not described in the abstract.
Population characteristics and sample size not stated.

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "exposure_assessment",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "mmWave",
    "source": "5G network (base station downlink; user equipment uplink)",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": 0.06,
    "duration": null
  },
  "population": null,
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "Power density (PD)",
    "Electric field strength (V/m)",
    "Specific absorption rate (SAR)",
    "Spatial distribution/saturation of EMF exposure",
    "Comparison to ICNIRP limits"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Using a ray-tracing framework in a dense urban scenario, downlink peak power density increased from 6.65 to 24.92 dBm/m2 as active users increased from a single user to 100%, with a worst-case PD reaching 62% of the ICNIRP limit and spatial distribution saturation when active downlink beams exceeded 25%. For uplink, within a 5 m radius of the user location, average E-field increased from 2.40 to 3.98 V/m as active users increased from 25% to 100%. When 100% of users were actively transmitting, there was a 10% probability that SAR exceeded 0.06 W/kg (stated as 3% of the ICNIRP limit).",
  "effect_direction": "unclear",
  "limitations": [
    "Frequency not specified in the abstract (only described as millimeter wave spectrum).",
    "Study is simulation/model-based (ray tracing) in a dense urban environment; real-world measurement/validation not described in the abstract.",
    "Population characteristics and sample size not stated."
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "5G",
    "millimeter wave",
    "ray tracing",
    "dense urban",
    "uplink",
    "downlink",
    "massive MIMO",
    "beamforming",
    "power density",
    "electric field",
    "SAR",
    "ICNIRP"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "5g-policy",
      "weight": 0.62,
      "reason": "Assesses 5G (mmWave) exposure metrics and compares to ICNIRP limits."
    },
    {
      "slug": "who-icnirp",
      "weight": 0.7,
      "reason": "Reports exposure levels as percentages of ICNIRP limits for PD and SAR."
    }
  ]
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: Not supplied
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library