Measurement and Evaluation of Electromagnetic Pollution in Ondokuz Mayıs University Kurupelit Campus in Samsun, Turkey

Abstract

In line with technological developments and increasing demand in mobile communications, external electromagnetic radiation (EMR) sources and exposure levels are going up day by day. Therefore measuring and evaluating the exposed EMR levels have become more substantial for human health. It is especially important to determine the EMR levels in campuses where cellular systems used densely. Thus, in this study, EMR levels were measured in Samsun Ondokuz Mayıs University Kurupelit Campus between years 2013-2015 and evaluated. Approximately 400 measurements were performed using PMM 8053 and SRM 3006 at 23 different location in the Campus. The results show that the measured EMR levels (the max. is 2,68 V/m) are far below the limits which are determined by ICNIRP. Additional analyses demonstrate that 55% of total electromagnetic pollution is caused by UMTS2100, 32% is produced by GSM900, 7% by GSM1800 and 6% is aroused from the devices that use the remaining frequency bands.

Full text

80
Proc. of the Third Intl. Conf. on Advances in Information Processing and Communication Technology - IPCT 2015
Copyright © Institute of Research Engineers and Doctors, USA .All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-63248-077-4 doi: 10.15224/ 978-1-63248-077-4-23
Measurement and Evaluation of Electromagnetic
Pollution in Ondokuz Mayıs University Kurupelit
Campus in Samsun, Turkey
[ Burak Kürşat Gül, Çetin Kurnaz, Begüm Korunur Engiz ]
Abstract—In line with technological developments and
increasing demand in mobile communications, external
electromagnetic radiation (EMR) sources and exposure levels
are going up day by day. Therefore measuring and evaluating
the exposed EMR levels have become more substantial for
human health. It is especially important to determine the EMR
levels in campuses where cellular systems used densely. Thus,
in this study, EMR levels were measured in Samsun Ondokuz
Mayıs University Kurupelit Campus between years 2013-2015
and evaluated. Approximately 400 measurements were
performed using PMM 8053 and SRM 3006 at 23 different
location in the Campus. The results show that the measured
EMR levels (the max. is 2,68 V/m) are far below the limits
which are determined by ICNIRP. Additional analyses
demonstrate that 55% of total electromagnetic pollution is
caused by UMTS2100, 32% is produced by GSM900, 7% by
GSM1800 and 6% is aroused from the devices that use the
remaining frequency bands.
Keywords—electromagnetic radiation, electromagnetic
pollution, field measurements, PMM 8053, SRM 3006.
I. Introduction
The growth of technological developments leads to an
increase in the demand for wireless system. The equipment
that use wireless systems emit electromagnetic waves like
any other electronic device, and common use of them cause
an increase in electromagnetic radiation (EMR). Demand for
communicating from any place, for cellular system operators
to install more base stations. Since each base station works
within a limited geographical region and for limited number
of users, new base stations requested to widen the coverage
area [1, 2]. Beside this often use of multimedia services
leads additional base station installation. Because each base
station is an EMR source, the increases in number of them
give rise to an increase in exposed EMR level.
Burak Kürşat Gül
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering,
Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun, Turkey
Çetin Kurnaz
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering,
Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun, Turkey
Begüm Korunur Engiz
Faculty of Marine Science,
Ordu University, Ordu, Turkey
Signals used in cellular systems are categorized as non-
ionizing waves since their frequency is less than 300 GHz.
Although these signals have not enough energy to snatch
electrons from atoms, they may have detrimental effects on
human health [3]. There are many independent organization
that research the potential effects of EMR on human health.
The most important of these organizations is International
Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection
(ICNIRP) and recommends the limits of exposure [4]. In
Turkey, regulations on EMR limits are made by Information
and Communication Technologies Authority (ICTA), and it
is based on ICINRP guideline [5].
There are many reasons of variety in EMR levels such as
geographical structure of area inside of base station’s
coverage area, number of users, distance from base station,
line of sight (LOS). Measuring and evaluating the levels of
EMR is at great importance for human health especially in
regions where cellular systems are densely used. Therefore,
there are many researches and studies in literature [6-14]
that focused on measurement and assessment of EMR
emitted from base stations.
Campuses are the places where the cellular systems are
used densely. The demand for these systems increases
significantly especially at certain times of a day. In order to
determine the effects of electromagnetic pollution emitted
by cellular system base stations on students and personnel
health, it is essential to measure and evaluate levels of EMR
during day time (e.g. rush hour). Therefore, in this study,
EMR measurements were done at 23 different locations in
Samsun Ondokuz Mayıs University Kurupelit Campus
during over two years and at different times of a day. The
obtained measurement levels were checked if these are
compatible with the international standards. Beside this,
main EMR sources in the Campus were determined and
statistical analysis of recorded values was made.
II. Measurement of EM Pollution
There are international standards and limits on effects of
EMR on human health. The limits are recommended by an
international commission ICNIRP which is recognized by
World Health Organization (WHO). The limits of electrical
field are shown in Fig.1 based on ICNIRP guidelines on
exposure limits [4].

81
Proc. of the Third Intl. Conf. on Advances in Information Processing and Communication Technology - IPCT 2015
Copyright © Institute of Research Engineers and Doctors, USA .All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-63248-077-4 doi: 10.15224/ 978-1-63248-077-4-23
Figure 1. The ICNIRP guideline for public exposures as a function of
carrier frequency
According to guideline [5] prepared by Information and
Communication Technologies Authority of Turkey, based
on ICNIRP, the limits are 41 (V/m) for 900 MHz base
station, 57 (V/m) for 1800 MHz base station, 61 (V/m) for
3G systems which is 2100 MHz, and also 61 (V/m) for Wi-
Fi (WLAN) equipment operating at 2,45 GHz. These values
are the total limit values for a medium, the 1/4 of the limit
values for a single device for injunctive relief taking
environment and human health into account. The limits are
given for exposure averaged over a 6 minute interval. Each
country has its own limits determined. USA and some
European countries use the limits determined by ICNIRP,
while some European countries like Switzerland, Italy use
1/10 of ICNIRP values as a limit.
Fig. 2.a shows the city where Ondokuz Mayıs University
(OMU) is located. OMU is a state university founded in
1975 in Samsun, Turkey. OMU is an extensive institution
with 50.089 students and 1800 international students from
86 different countries, 1.294 academic personnel and 2.145
employees in total. Kurupelit Campus which consist of
mainly academic and administrative units is established on
8.800 acre field.
Figure 2. a) Location of Samsun, Turkey,
b) Kurupelit Campus, measurement locations and base stations
Fig. 2.b shows an aerial photo of the Kurupelit campus.
In figure dashed line indicates Campus boundaries, each
measurement location is marked with circle while base
stations (BS) are marked with star. All base stations in
and/or out of Campus are belong to three cellular system
operators which operating in Turkey. Among these operators
Turkcell and Vodafone use 900 MHz (GSM900) and
2100MHz (UMTS2100) frequency bands, while Avea uses
1800MHz (GSM1800) and 2100MHz. Measurements were
conducted between years 2013-2015 on 23 different location
using PMM 8053 and Narda SRM 3006 EMR meter. Figure
3 illustrates a picture of these devices. The devices can be
set to display the instantaneous value, the maximum value,
the minimum value, and the average value (averaging period
can be set as required). The six-minute average specified by
many of standards corresponds to the human thermal time-
constant [4, 5]. Total EMR in the band between 100 kHz -
3GHz is measured with PMM–8053 while band selectives
are done with SRM–3006. An example of a measurement in
the band between 100 kHz-3 GHz is shown in Fig.4. In
figure all services within the band are specified.
Figure 3. A picture of a) PMM 8053, b) SRM 3006
Figure 4. Detailed examination of the signal in the frequency domain
between 100 kHz-3 GHz
III. Measurement Results
In this study, PMM 8053 and Narda SRM 3006 set to
display the maximum value, and the average value
(averaging period is 6 minutes) during measurements. Fig5.a
illustrates the maximum E-field strength that obtained
through the EMR measurements between years 2013-2015
Turkey
Samsun
(a)
(b)
Wi-Fi
UMTS2100
GSM1800
TV
GSM900
Frequency [MHz]
FM
E-field strength [mV/m]
Max
Mean

82
Proc. of the Third Intl. Conf. on Advances in Information Processing and Communication Technology - IPCT 2015
Copyright © Institute of Research Engineers and Doctors, USA .All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-63248-077-4 doi: 10.15224/ 978-1-63248-077-4-23
for 23 different locations. Measurements were performed on
different days and hours twice in 2013, three times in 2014
and 2015 using PMM 8053. During measurements PMM
EP330 E-field probe was used. It is sensitivity is 0,3 V/m,
and “low” sign appears on screen when E of medium below
0,3 V/m. In this case “0” is assigned to corresponding
locations as shown in Fig. 5.a.
Measurements show that in case of LOS e.g. Location 1
(L1) and location 22 (L22) E value is relatively high. The
maximum E strength is 2,68 V/m that was measured on L22
in year of 2015. E levels were relatively low in 2014, there
is a general increase in E strength for 2015.
Fig.5.b depicts average E strength of six minutes
measurement period in accordance with guideline
established by ICTA. The highest average E strength is
obtained as expected at locations where the maximum E
strength was measured. The highest average E level is
1,36V/m at L22. In case of LOS and being close to base
station (L1, L3, L5, L22) give rise to higher E levels as
expected.
Figure 5. a) Maximum, b) Average E-field strength versus Locations
Table I indicates the maximum E (for maximum E-field
strength, and average E-field strength) and mean E (for
maximum E-field strength, and average E-field strength) for
measurements of two years. As seen from Table I, the
maximum E-field strength is 1,96 V/m in 2013, it becomes
to 2,68 V/m with significant increase in 2015. The mean of
the maximum E-field strengths is 1,23 V/m and 1,36 V/m
for the years of 2013 and 2015 respectively. Mean values of
the maximum E-field is 0,69 V/m in 2013 and 0,77 V/m in
2015. Mean of the average E-field values is 0,32 V/m in
2013 and 0,39 V/m with slight increase in 2015.
TABLE I. The change in E-field strength by year
Considering two years of measurements collected using
PMM 8053 in 8 different periods, identifying the main
source of E-field strength is the must. Therefore, to
determine which transmitter that use different frequency
band cause E field, band selective measurements were
performed in 2015 by using Narda SRM 3006.
Fig. 6 shows spectrum of E-field at L22 that has the
maximum E strength due to line of sight and closeness to the
base stations. A picture of the base stations at L22 is given
in Fig.7, and detailed information for BS1, BS2 are
indicated in Table II.
Figure 6. Frequency spectrum of L22
PMM 8053
Measurements
Maximum
E-field
[V/m]
(Fig 5.a)
Average
E-field
[V/m]
(Fig 5.b)
Years
Maximum
value of
E-field
strengths
2013
1,96
1,23
2014
1,67
1,18
2015
2,68
1,36
Overall
2,68
1,36
Mean value of
E-field
strengths
2013
0,69
0,32
2014
0,42
0,30
2015
0,77
0,39
Overall
0,62
0,34
SRM 3006 Measurements
Measurements
Maximum value of E-field strengths
1,249
Mean value of E-field strengths
0,45

83
Proc. of the Third Intl. Conf. on Advances in Information Processing and Communication Technology - IPCT 2015
Copyright © Institute of Research Engineers and Doctors, USA .All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-63248-077-4 doi: 10.15224/ 978-1-63248-077-4-23
Figure 7. A picture of Base Stations at L22
TABLE II. Technical information for BS1, BS2
TABLE III. Frequency selective EMR field values for L22
Table III illustrates the change in E strength by
frequency. It is seen from Table III that main sources of E
are GSM900, GSM1800 and UMTS2100 bands. When total
E is 1,249 V/m, 860,2 mV/m of this value is arise from
GSM900 while 480,1 mV/m and 757,2 mV/m are from
GSM1800 and UMTS2100 respectively. The total E strength
of medium is calculated as follows:
 
18 2
total i
i1
EE


(1)
where Ei is the electric field for i.th band. E18 is the
electric field caused by the other transmitters excluding 17
bands.
Fig. 8 depicts the change in average E strength by
locations. In figure blue line represents the E-strength
caused by GSM900, red and green lines show E-strength
produced by GSM1800 and UMTS2100 respectively. It is
seen from the figure that UMTS2100 has the highest share
in total EMR. Considering all measurement locations, 55%
of total EMR in Kurupelit Campus is emitted from
UMTS2100. This percentage is 32% for GSM900 and 7%
for GSM1800. The share of the rest of all sources is only 6%
(Fig. 9).
Figure 8. Band selective EMR measurements in the Campus
Figure 9. The pie chart of EMR for Kurupelit Campus
Operator
Frequency
[MHz]
Antenna
Height
[m]
Antenna
Gain
[dB]
Max.
Power
[W]
Turkcell
900
58,7
15
8,32
2100
55
18
25,24
Vodafone
900
48,5
14,4
20
2100
48,5
17,5
20
Avea
1800
46
17,5
40
Index
Service
fmin
fmax
Average
(mV/m)
1
Low Band
30 MHz
87,4 MHz
61,63
2
FM Band
87,5 MHz
108 MHz
40,34
3
Air Band
108,1 MHz
136 MHz
18,66
4
Land Band-I
136,1 MHz
173 MHz
18,61
5
TV VHF Band
173,1 MHz
230 MHz
20,01
6
Land Band-II
230,1 MHz
400 MHz
24,22
7
Land Band-III
400,1 MHz
470 MHz
13,40
8
TV UHF Band
470,1 MHz
861 MHz
54,46
9
ETC1
861,1 MHz
889,9 MHz
6,393
10
GSM 900
890 MHz
960 MHz
860,2
11
ETC2
960,1 MHz
1,7 GHz
32,17
12
GSM 1800
1,701 GHZ
1,88 GHz
480,1
13
DECT
1,881 GHz
1,899 GHz
5,690
14
UMTS 2100
1,9 GHz
2,17 GHz
757,2
15
ETC4
2,171 GHz
2,399 GHz
32,70
16
WLAN
2,400 GHz
2,483 GHz
22,55
17
ETC5
2,484 GHz
3,000 GHz
59,57
18
Others
5,163
Total
1249

84
Proc. of the Third Intl. Conf. on Advances in Information Processing and Communication Technology - IPCT 2015
Copyright © Institute of Research Engineers and Doctors, USA .All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-63248-077-4 doi: 10.15224/ 978-1-63248-077-4-23
IV. Conclusion
In this study, EMR levels in Samsun Ondokuz Mayıs
University Kurupelit Campus were measured between years
2013 and 2015, and the values were compared with limits
determined by ICTA and ICNIRP. The maximum measured
E value was 2,68 V/m for all medium. Comparing this value
with the limit shows that there is not a significant
electromagnetic pollution in Kurupelit Campus. The results
also shows that the main reason of EM pollution in
Kurupelit Campus is UMTS2100 base stations.
Acknowledgment
The authors would like to thank L. Namık Aşıla and
Mustafa Semerci from ICTA Samsun Regional Office for
their support and assistance during measurements.
References
[1] A.Mousa, “Electromagnetic radiation measurements and safety issues
of same cellular base stations in nablus”, Journal of Engineering
Science and Technology Review, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 35-42, 2011.
[2] O. Genç, M. Bayrak, and E. Yaldız, “Analysis of the effects of GSM
bands to the electromagnetic pollution in the RF spectrum”, Prog.
Electromagn. Res. PIER, vol. 101, pp. 17-32, 2010.
[3] R. W. Y. Habash, “Bioeffects and Therapeutic Applications of
Electromagnetic Energy”, CRC Press, 2008.
[4] ICNIRP Guidelines, “Guidelines for Limiting Exposure to Time-
Varying Electric, Magnetic, and Electromagnetic Fields (up to
300GHz)”, International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation
Protection, Health Physics 74 (4), pp.494-522, 1998.
[5] Information and Communication Technologies Authority of Turkey,
“By-Law on Determination, Control and Inspection of the Limit
Values of Electromagnetic Field Force from The Electronic
Communication Devices According to International Standards”, Law
no.27912, 21 April 2011.
[6] S. Miclaus, P. Bechet, “Estimated and Measured values of the
Radiofrequency Radiation Power Density around Cellular Base
Stations”, Environment Physics, vol. 52, no. 3–4, pp. 429–440, 2007.
[7] R. Hamid, M. Cetintas, H. Karacadag, A. Gedik, M. Yoğun, M.
Celik, A. Firlarer, “Measurement of Electromagnetic Radiation from
GSM Base Stations, IEEE International Symposium on
Electromagnetic Compatibility, vol.2, pp.1211 – 1214, 2003.
[8] O. Çerezci, S. Şeker., “Determining of Electromagnetic Pollution in
Bursa Nilüfer District and Recommending a Sample Model to
Decrease Exposure Levels”, 2010 National Conference on Electrical,
Electronics and Computer Engineering (ELECO), pp.1-5, 2010.
[9] B. Özgümüş, K. S. Görmüş, Z. Saraç, M. Özer, “Investigation of
Electromagnetic Pollution at Frequency Band of the 100kHz -3GHz
of Center of Zonguldak”, 2010 National Conference on Electrical,
Electronics and Computer Engineering (ELECO), pp.454-458, 2010.
[10] S. S. Durduran, L. Seyfi, C. Avcı, A. M. Ozan, “Measurement of
Electromagnetic Signal Strengths of four GSM Base Stations at 900
MHz in a Pilot Region” Proceedings of the World Congress on
Engineering, vol II, 3 - 5 July, London, U.K, 2013.
[11] L. Seyfi, “Measurement of electromagnetic radiation with respect to
the hours and days of a week at 100kHz–3GHz frequency band in a
Turkish dwelling”, Measurement, vol.46, pp.3002-3009, 2013.
[12] B. B. Levitt and H. Lai, “Biological effects from exposure to
electromagnetic radiation emitted by cell tower base stations and other
antenna arrays”, Environ. Rev., vol. 18, pp. 369-395, 2010.
[13] N. As, B. Dilek, M. E. Şahin, and Y. Karan, “Electromagnetic
pollution measurement in the RTE university campus area”, Global
Journal on Advances in Pure & Applied Sciences, vol.03, pp 65-72,
2014.
[14] L. Seyfi, “Assesment of electromagnetic radiation with respect to base
station types”, International Journal of Information and Electronics
Engineering, vol.5, no.3, 2015.