基于车载移动的区域射频电磁辐射监测方法比较研究

辐射防护 ›› 2017, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (5): 374-379.

基于车载移动的区域射频电磁辐射监测方法比较研究

武攀峰^1,2, 王国旗³, 陆炜^1,2, 姚颖^1,2, 王悦¹, 黄昕³

1.南通市辐射环境监测站,江苏南通 226002;
2.南通市环境监测中心站,江苏南通 226002;
3.江苏省核安全局,南京 210000

收稿日期:2017-01-05 出版日期:2017-09-20 发布日期:2021-11-11
作者简介:武攀峰(1979—),男,2005年毕业于南京农业大学环境工程专业,硕士学位,高级工程师。E-mail:wuda81@163.com
基金资助:
江苏省环保科研项目(2014030);南通市科技计划项目(HS2014022);南通市第四期“226工程”项目(2013007)。

Comparative study on monitoring methods for regional radio-frequency electromagnetic radiation based on vehicle-mounted mobile

Wu Panfeng^1,2, Wang Guoqi³, Lu Wei^1,2, Yao Yin^1,2, Wang Yue^1,2, Huang Xin³

1. Nantong Radiation Environmental Monitoring Station, Jiangsu Nantong 226002;
2. Nantong Environmental Monitoring Centre, Jiangsu Nantong 226002;
3. Jiangsu Nuclear Safety Administration, Jiangsu Nanjing 210019

Received:2017-01-05 Online:2017-09-20 Published:2021-11-11

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 本文以江苏省南通市为例,分别采用车载移动法和国标法对城区射频电磁环境进行现场实测,共获取有效测试数据20 250个,其中移动法20 060个,国标法190个。比较分析结果表明:(1)两种方法单点比对监测结果相对偏差小于±10%;(2)两种方法所监测的南通城区环境射频电磁辐射平均综合电场强度分别为(0.58±0.28) V/m和(0.52±0.32) V/m,无明显差别,但在典型性和代表性表征上车载移动法明显优于国标法;(3)研究发现港闸区域50 Hz极低频高压输电线路沿路密集架设是车载移动法测值偏高的主要原因,可通过优化行驶路线避开高压线和后期数据处理等方法消除此类影响。本研究结果将有助于推动车载移动法国家监测技术规范的出台,并为在全国范围内推广应用提供了示范借鉴。

关键词: 车载移动监测法, 国标法, 城市射频电磁辐射, 方法比较, 适用范围, 50 Hz极低频高压输电线路

Abstract: Compared with the national standard method, the drive-test method is new and more convenient with more representative results and wider applicability in radio-frequency electromagnetic radiation monitoring. In this study, tests on urban radio-frequency electromagnetic radiation were carried out in Nantong, Jiangsu by both the vehicle-mounted mobile monitoring method and the national standard method. Among 20 250 valid test data obtained, 20 060 were by the drive-test method and 190 by the national standard method. The relative deviation of the monitoring results for the two methods ranged from 1.64%—7.77%, less than 10%. The average broad band electric fields for the two methods were 0.58±0.28 V/m and 0.52±0.32 V/m, respectively, with no obvious difference between the two methods. Whereas in the respect of the typical characteristics and representativeness, the drive-test method was significantly better than the national standard method. The study also found that the dense distribution of 50 Hz extremely-low-frequency high voltage transmission lines along the streets was the main reason for the higher values in the drive-test method. This influence could be eliminated by optimizing the driving route to avoid high voltage transmission lines and by data processing. The results of this study could facilitate the establishment of the national regulation concerning the drive-test method and provide a model for its national promotion and application.

Key words: drive-test method, national standard method, urban radio-frequency electromagnetic radiation, extremely-low-frequency high voltage transmission line

中图分类号:

X837

武攀峰, 王国旗, 陆炜, 姚颖, 王悦, 黄昕. 基于车载移动的区域射频电磁辐射监测方法比较研究[J]. 辐射防护, 2017, 37(5): 374-379.

Wu Panfeng, Wang Guoqi, Lu Wei, Yao Yin, Wang Yue, Huang Xin. Comparative study on monitoring methods for regional radio-frequency electromagnetic radiation based on vehicle-mounted mobile[J]. RADIATION PROTECTION, 2017, 37(5): 374-379.

参考文献

[1] 邱秋. 我国电磁辐射污染的法律对策初探[J].辐射防护, 2007,27(1):47-52.
[2] Lerchl A. Electromagnetic pollution: another risk factor for infertility, or a red herring? [J]. Asian Journal of Anthology, 2013, 15:201-203.
[3] 徐培基,蒋忠涌. HJ/T 10.2—1996辐射环境保护管理导则电磁辐射监测仪器和方法[S].北京:中国环境科学出版社,1996:442-453.
[4] 国家环保局开展电磁辐射污染调查[J].中国肿瘤, 1998,7(7): 28.
[5] 殷建华,张健.北京市局部地区电磁辐射监测结果分析[J].地球物理学进展, 2006,21(4): 1 346-1 351.
[6] 张邦俊,张莉,翟国庆,等.移动基站近距离区域电磁辐射污染分布特征[J].中国环境科学,2002,22(6):565-568.
[7] 尚玲琦, 滕世长.哈尔滨市电磁辐射环境容量分析及对策[J].环境科学导刊,2008,27(3): 26-27.
[8] Manassas A, Boursianis A,Samaras T, et al. Continuous electromagnetic radiation monitoring in the environment analysis of the results in Greece [J]. Radiation Protection Dosimetry,2012,151(3):437-442.
[9] Bolte J, Van der Zande G, Kamer J. Calibration and uncertainties in personal exposure measurements of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields [J]. Bioelectromagnetics, 2011, 32(8):652-663.
[10] Joseph W, Frei P, RÖsli M, et al. Comparison of personal radio frequency electromagnetic field exposure in different urban areas across Europe[J]. Environ Res 2010: 110(7): 658-663.
[11] 姚颖,武攀峰,陆炜. 移动通信基站架设方式对地面电磁辐射分布的影响[J].环境监测管理与技术,2016, 28(6): 64-67.
[12] 周睿东,杨旭富,孔令丰.基于GIS的车载环境电磁辐射监测系统的设计与应用[J].移动通信,2009,24: 19-21.
[13] 于水涛. 鞍山市区电磁辐射污染特征分析[J].北方环境, 2013,25(11): 47-51.
[14] 南通市统计局,国家统计局南通调查队.南通统计年鉴——2015[M].北京:中国统计出版社,2015:26-82.
[15] 南通市政府.南通市信息基础设施建设三年行动计划(2013—2015)[EB/Z].http://www.nantong.gov.cn/art/2013/8/30/art_41739_1509510.html
[16] 武攀峰,蔡佳辰,於香湘,等.电磁辐射环境信访分析与应对措施探讨[J].环境监测管理与技术,2014,26(3):5-34.
[17] Bornkessel C, Schubert M, Wuschek M, et al. Determination of the general public exposure around GSM and UMTS base stations[J]. Radiation Protection Dosimetry, 2007:124(1):40-47.
[18] Abdullah N, Roffeei S H M, Kamarulzaman Y, et al. Evaluating the performance of electromagnetic fields (EMF) research work (2003—2013) [J]. Scientometrics, 2015, 105(1):261-278.
[19] 环境保护部辐射环境监测技术中心.电磁环境控制限值:GB 8702—2014[S]. 北京:中国环境科学出版社,2014:2-3.
[20] 陆利通,刘芳君,邹亚玲,等.珠海市电磁辐射污染现况调查与对策探讨[J].实用预防医学,2012,19(6):817-819.
[21] Tomitsch J, Dechant E.Trends in residential exposure to electromagnetic fields from 2006 to 2009[J]. Radiation Protection Dosimetry,2012,149(4):384-391.
[22] Joseph W, Verloock L, Goeminne F, et al. Assessment of population exposures to RF from emerging wireless communication technologies in different environments [J].Health Physics, 2012:102(2):161-172.