The Reality of RF Testing

[@johnathanman2248]

Hi, I live 100m away from a 5G tower and would like to test around my home and backyard to decide if we need to try to implement shielding of some sort, or move house. Could you recommend the best few devices (less than $400 USD) that would be worth to buy to help measure what exposure we are getting? Thank you!

[@Havanasyndromev2k]

Is there any way to stop electronic harassment or v2k

[@salam9025]

Give us a review of using grounding matt for two years, thanks

[@vaskucom]

Was this in relationship to the EMF-390 in a tray that would pick up shorter bursts than the Safe & Sound Pro Ii? I must admit it peeked my curiosity do look deeper into the EMF-390 to add to my collection. The S&S Pro Ii is with me at all times, I love it. Also just bought the Classic II as a back up (wondering if it will be as sensitive to short bursts as the Pro II? I am concerned about these short bursts as I have noticed that my permanent dectector, the EMField Radaware, often doesn't seem to pick up on the short pulses of iPhones. I believe they transmit a constant 1 sec blip with BLE? Probably for their Find My mesh network. Is this true? I have been caught out a few times, thinking all was good, but when I started to feel nauseous I had to switch on the Pro II and realized I had not been warned by the Radaware of a active iPhone. This is particularly disconcerting because even when the iPhone is on airplane mode the wifi and bluetooth are often still active, but even when you switch those of in the settings it will continue 24/7 to send out those BLE pulses. In fact, even when the iPhone is powered down, it continues. So it is really important to pick up on those short pulses. I also just bought your wrist detector this week, will it pick up on short pulses like the Pro II? I believe the Pro II will do 3msec and the detector 6msec?

[@9ci]

Thanks for your questions Vasku. We have some detailed answers for you! The Classic II has the same performance as the Pro II for short burst response. With the iPhone completely powered down, those pulses are likely from something else. The newer iPhone firmware versions make it more difficult to activate a "true" RF silent mode with having to dig into the settings menu. And regarding the video of the meters in a baking tray... let's dig into it: This is a "neat trick" being played. REMEMBER THE FOLLOWING: 1) All of these other meters have VERY SLOW pulse response. ONLY the Pro II will measure short pulses with any accuracy. 2) The difference in "absolute values" displayed by the meters can vary 3-6 dB between brands. 3) In a metal tray like that, there will be reflection "hot spots" and "cold spots" - could be another 3-6 or 10 dB between each meter. The signal source location, antenna (if not the tray), are unknown. And it's a highly uncontrolled, RF noisy testing environment. So, let's look at how each meter changes relative to itself first, then relative to another meter second. We will compare to the AM-11 for the sake of simplicity. .................... SIGNAL GENERATOR OFF The Pro II shows: PEAK 600-900 uW/m2 Lots of noise in the environment - this is bad test environment. AVG 4-5 uW/m2 No CW transmission is present. The AM-11 shows: PEAK 0.11 V/m = 32 uW/m2 THE AM-11 IS MISSING MOST OF THE HIGH SPEED NOISE IN THE ENVIRONMENT - SO ARE THE OTHER METERS. AVG up 10x from signal generator off The Pro II shows the increase in average power correctly. The signal generator is generating a Continuous Wave (CW) signal where the PEAKS and AVG will be the same value. AM-11 shows: PEAK 890 uW/m2 It does not catch the switch transient; it's just displaying the CW transmission power (note PEAK and AVG are the same on AM-11) AVG 845 uW/m2 The AM-11 is having slow response and MISSING the peaks that are in the environment with the signal generator off, can now catch the peaks of the CW signal - since the PEAKS and AVG are the same for CW. Hence, it shows a big increase in both PEAK and AVG. This highlights that the PEAK function works poorly on this (and the other) meters. ................. This is a really great video that actually shows how poorly these other meters perform. The test setup is a game that uses the "blindness" of the slow meters to make an increase in AVG show up as an increase in PEAK on those meters. The Pro II does not show this increase in PEAK because there is no increase in PEAK. Big PEAK values were already there, the other meters are just too slow to see them. This CW signal shows up perfectly as expected as an increase in the AVG value. In short, all is working well with the Pro II.

[@mislyizgalavy6016]

Купите смартфон на андроиде с кастомной прошивкой ,без фоновой передачи шпионских данных!

[@ronaldgouda]

@@9ci setting the iPhone in airplane mode and disabling the Bluetooth and WiFi will eliminate the rf-exposure, right? Or should there be other steps undertaken?

[@TivadjMedia]

Very educational, thank you. 1) I am concerned about 6 dB accuracy of Pro II: is it small enough for the device to be useful for a user? 6 dB means that actual signal P may differ as much as 4 times the basic signal P0, that is P/P0=4! Example: The Canada's safety limit is 2 W/m². Let say the Pro II shows AVG=0.7 W/m² (which means that actual signal may be as big as 0.7*4=2.8 W/m²). Does such Pro II’s measurement mean that environment is safe, or not? 2) Do you know why Classic II has no 3.5 mm jack for head phones? (Seems like the device will consume less power than when using a loud speaker.) 3) Do you have a demand for a device similar to Pro II, but in a form factor of a sensor providing readings via USB?

[@9ci]

Thanks for your feedback DCMedia. Compared to other available meters at or below this price range, the Pro II's 6dB accuracy is very good. We have done extensive RF lab testing to know this data. Some have an accuracy of 10dB, and the others are 15-20+dB. Also, they do not have any lab test data to back up their claims as I mentioned in the "Reality of RF Meters" video. When we were first designing the Pro II, the performance benchmark we used was the Gigahertz Solutions HF59B and HFW59D that are in the 4dB range and also tested in a real RF lab. Their cost reflects that, and those meters require more background knowledge to use properly. We wanted to create something with similar accuracy if possible, RF lab tested, ease of use and to be more affordable. We provide a frequency response plot in the manual so the user can adjust their readings according to frequency if extremely high accuracy is needed. Gigahertz Solutions refers to this data as Correction Factors on their meters. If you require exteremly accurate measurements, you will need to purchase calibrated antennas and spectrum analyzers that are available at a much higher price, and have the knowledge to operate them properly. We use this kind of equipment in our lab, and have done duplicate testing in many other labs to confirm results. When we designed the Classic II, we did not include a headphone jack for many reasons. One is that the battery life is already very long, and can easily be maximized by turning off the speaker. Nobody has ever asked us to make a USB RF meter sensor before. Best wishes!

[@mislyizgalavy6016]

В Австрии норма 0.1 мквт/ квадратный сантиметр, задумайтесь!

[@mislyizgalavy6016]

В Австрии норма 0.1 мквт/ квадратный сантиметр, задумайтесь!

[@earthcomedy]

no more Tayla?

[@ScienceFan-xt8to]

Did you want to see Kayla make a guest appearance for more testing videos?

[@earthcomedy]

@@ScienceFan-xt8to sure!

[@TRAPMANTV]

Have you heard of an organisation called GEOVITAL based in Austria? kzbin.infoOeuJgkfYvIw They have a HF Probe Meter which is used to measure the air like most but also can measure the amount of absorbed RF through the skin via a touchable probe. I thought you might of heard of them. What is your thoughts on this kind of RF meter/approach? Thanks

[@Havanasyndromev2k]

Is there anyway to block stop electronic harassment or v2k