Advanced search
2 files | 3.47 MB

Numerical assessment of EMF exposure of a cow to a wireless power transfer system for dairy cattle

Said Benaissa (UGent) , Mohammed Samoudi (UGent) , David Plets (UGent) , Günter Vermeeren (UGent) , Leen Verloock (UGent) , Ben Minnaert (UGent) , Nobby Stevens, Luc Martens (UGent) , Frank Tuyttens (UGent) , Bart Sonck (UGent) , et al.
Author
Organization
Abstract
In this paper, we assessed the exposure of a cow to the electromagnetic fields (EMFs) induced by a wireless power transfer (WPT) system working at 92 kHz in a dairy barn. Cow exposure to the radiated EMFs was evaluated and compared to safety guidelines. We modeled a realistic WPT system for dairy cows in Sim4Life, a 3D electromagnetic simulation tool. We validated the model with electric field measurements; simulated fields deviated on average 6% from measured fields. We used the proposed WPT model to evaluate the stimulation and thermal effects based on the internal electric field and the specific absorption rate (SAR), respectively. Results showed that the exposure mainly varied with the distance of the transmitter to the body: variation of 5 dB of the induced electric field when the transmitter was set at 20 cm and 10 cm from the body. The distance of the receiver to the body influenced the exposure less (10%). We also compared the exposure with the limits provided by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). The internal electric fields were more conservative than SAR, which showed values far below exposure limits.
Keywords
ELECTROMAGNETIC-FIELDS, SENSORS, BEHAVIOR, Dairy health monitoring, Precision livestock farming (PLF), Wireless, power transfer, Electromagnetic exposure, Induced electric field, Specific absorption rate (SAR), Internet-of-animals

Downloads

  • WICA 778a.pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 1.75 MB
  • (...).pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 1.72 MB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

Chicago
Benaissa, Said, Mohammed Samoudi, David Plets, Günter Vermeeren, Leen Verloock, Ben Minnaert, Nobby Stevens, et al. 2018. “Numerical Assessment of EMF Exposure of a Cow to a Wireless Power Transfer System for Dairy Cattle.” Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 151: 219–225.
APA
Benaissa, S., Samoudi, M., Plets, D., Vermeeren, G., Verloock, L., Minnaert, B., Stevens, N., et al. (2018). Numerical assessment of EMF exposure of a cow to a wireless power transfer system for dairy cattle. COMPUTERS AND ELECTRONICS IN AGRICULTURE, 151, 219–225.
Vancouver
1.
Benaissa S, Samoudi M, Plets D, Vermeeren G, Verloock L, Minnaert B, et al. Numerical assessment of EMF exposure of a cow to a wireless power transfer system for dairy cattle. COMPUTERS AND ELECTRONICS IN AGRICULTURE. Oxford: Elsevier Sci Ltd; 2018;151:219–25.
MLA
Benaissa, Said, Mohammed Samoudi, David Plets, et al. “Numerical Assessment of EMF Exposure of a Cow to a Wireless Power Transfer System for Dairy Cattle.” COMPUTERS AND ELECTRONICS IN AGRICULTURE 151 (2018): 219–225. Print.
@article{8570868,
  abstract     = {In this paper, we assessed the exposure of a cow to the electromagnetic fields (EMFs) induced by a wireless power transfer (WPT) system working at 92 kHz in a dairy barn. Cow exposure to the radiated EMFs was evaluated and compared to safety guidelines. We modeled a realistic WPT system for dairy cows in Sim4Life, a 3D electromagnetic simulation tool. We validated the model with electric field measurements; simulated fields deviated on average 6\% from measured fields. We used the proposed WPT model to evaluate the stimulation and thermal effects based on the internal electric field and the specific absorption rate (SAR), respectively. Results showed that the exposure mainly varied with the distance of the transmitter to the body: variation of 5 dB of the induced electric field when the transmitter was set at 20 cm and 10 cm from the body. The distance of the receiver to the body influenced the exposure less (10\%). We also compared the exposure with the limits provided by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). The internal electric fields were more conservative than SAR, which showed values far below exposure limits.},
  author       = {Benaissa, Said and Samoudi, Mohammed and Plets, David and Vermeeren, G{\"u}nter and Verloock, Leen and Minnaert, Ben and Stevens, Nobby and Martens, Luc and Tuyttens, Frank and Sonck, Bart and Joseph, Wout},
  issn         = {0168-1699},
  journal      = {COMPUTERS AND ELECTRONICS IN AGRICULTURE},
  language     = {eng},
  pages        = {219--225},
  publisher    = {Elsevier Sci Ltd},
  title        = {Numerical assessment of EMF exposure of a cow to a wireless power transfer system for dairy cattle},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2018.06.017},
  volume       = {151},
  year         = {2018},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: