EMF Protection Cellphone Radiation Mobile Phone SAR Electromagnetic Prevention EMF Qlink Protect EMF Cell Phone Radiation

cell phone radiation research, hyperelectrosensitivity from cell phone radiation
   
 

FEATURED PRODUCT

Facts About the EarthCalm® Home Protection System:

home radiation protection

Only $298.00

Read the Earthcalm® FAQ to learn more

 

 

Specialty Air Tube Headset

 

$36.99

airtube headset, bluetube headset, anit-radiation headset for driving

RF3-212S

Airtube Headset info

 
 

 

 

Dueling with Microwave Ovens Part 2

Airtube Headsets, Bluetube headsets

Cell Tower

Life Bluetube Headsets

Cell Phone Towers Health Effects

 EM Field Meter

Cell Phone Sensitivity

Real world testing uncovers some issues
Recently, I ran some tests to see how much impact a typical microwave oven has on WLAN operation. I did this within offices inside the building of my company, Wireless-Nets, Ltd., a three-story facility with typical wood and drywall construction for inside walls. A single access point doesnt have any problems covering the entire facility.
The access point was a Cisco Aironet 350 Series, which was initially set to its maximum transmit power of 100mW. As a wireless client, I used a laptop with AirMagnet monitoring software. AirMagnet is able to continually transmit packets of a specified size for a period of time while measuring signal strength, noise levels, packet retransmission rates, and throughput.

The microwave included in the testing is made by GoldStar and resides in a break room. The label on the back of the microwave indicates that it consumes 1,200 watts of power and operates at 2,450 MHz, which is close to 802.11b channel 9.
Before turning on the microwave, I set the access point to channel 9 (a worst case situation), and took some measurements within the break room to use as a baseline. The access point signal level resulting from the beacons within the break room was -63dBm, sufficient for solid 11Mbps associations. Throughput tests indicated 667 packets per second (pps) while sending 1,532 byte frames.

While holding the wireless client within one foot of the microwave, I recorded some measurements with AirMagnet while the microwave was set to high and heating up a large bowel of water. The throughput fell to 90pps, a drop of more than 85 percent.
This is a substantial reduction in performance, but its the worst-case situation. The access point was set to the same frequency of the microwave, and its unlikely that someone would use a wireless client so close to the microwave.

A more realistic distance from the microwave is from one of the break tables, which is about eight feet away from the microwave. At this range, I reran the throughput tests, resulting in 178pps. This still equates to around a 75 percent decrease, something that would likely make users unhappy.

In order to see what a 75 percent decrease in throughput feels like, I tried surfing to a web site having a few graphics. With the microwave running, the pictures would come in painfully slow. I also surfed around a bit to other pages, and sometimes the pages would freeze.

After turning off the microwave, I cleared the browser cache, and found no problems surfing the same pages. The pages loaded lightening fast.
I also repeated the tests down the hall about 20 feet away with the microwave running and still experienced fairly sluggish responses. In fact, throughput from there was still only 260pps. Obviously, the microwave was making the WLAN crawl at surprisingly great distances from the microwave.

Something to consider is that these tests were run with only one active wireless client. The results would have been much worse if there were more users on the network.
Curious to know what channels the microwave would affect the most, I ran the throughput tests again with the access point set to different channels. On channels 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11, the throughput was 660pps, 658pps, 655pps, 651pps, 643pps, 574pps, 434pps, 258pps, 178pps, 191pps, and 210pps, respectively. Based on these numbers, the microwave was most critically impacting channels 8, 9, 10, and 11.
I also found that the impact is more severe near edges of the range boundary of the access point where signal levels are lower. To test this, I lowered the transmit power of the access point to 1mW, which caused the signal power to decrease to -77dBm. This level is close to the range boundary of the WLAN.

As one would expect, the hit on throughput was even more with the weaker signals. The resulting throughput was about 10 percent lower than the case where the signal levels from the access point were higher at -63dBm.

Dueling with Microwave Ovens Part 1

Moldova Chisinau
Austria Vienna
Athens Georgia USA
Spain, Madrid,
Peru, Lima, City,
Austria, Vienna,
Poland, Warsaw,
Toowoomba, Queensland,
Egypt, Cairo: city limits,
Comoros, Moroni (on Grande Comoro)

 

http://www.emfnews.org/store


"Revolutionary New Technologiess
Protect You from the Harmful Effects of Cell Phone Radiation,

Computers, Bluetooth Headsets, Microwave Ovens,

Cordless Phones, and other Wireless Technologies."

 

Click on any of the pictures below to learn more

 
 
 
Contact:
Research Center For Wireless Technology

1-888-470-9886

support@emfnews.org

Copyright 2006-2015 All rights reserved

| Privacy | Disclaimer | Returns

 
Try any Q-Link or cell chip for 3 months, absolutely  RISK-FREE If you do not feel Q-Link improves your focus, energy, or well-being, simply return it for a full refund. Airtube headsets have 30  a day refund.

Contact:
Research Center For Wireless Technology

1-888-470-9886

201-484-7652
Copyright ©2006-2015 All rights reserved
| Privacy | Disclaimer |
 
 


Other Language Tools