IEC\/IEEE 62704-4:2020 describes the concepts, techniques, and limitations of the finite element method (FEM) and specifies models and procedures for verification, validation and uncertainty assessment for the FEM when used for determining the peak spatial-average specific absorption rate (psSAR) in phantoms or anatomical models. It recommends and provides guidance on the modelling of wireless communication devices, and provides benchmark data for simulating the SAR in such phantoms or models.This document does not recommend specific SAR limits because these are found elsewhere (e.g. in IEEE Std C95.1 or in the guidelines published by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP)). This publication is published as an IEC\/IEEE Dual Logo standard.<\/p>\n
| PDF Pages<\/th>\n | PDF Title<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2<\/td>\n | undefined <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 4<\/td>\n | English CONTENTS <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 7<\/td>\n | FOREWORD <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 9<\/td>\n | INTRODUCTION <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 10<\/td>\n | 1 Scope 2 Normative references 3 Terms and definitions <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 11<\/td>\n | 4 Abbreviated terms 5 Finite element method \u2013 basic description <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 12<\/td>\n | 6 SAR calculation and averaging 6.1 General <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 13<\/td>\n | 6.2 SAR averaging 6.2.1 General 6.2.2 Evaluation of psSAR with an FEM mesh <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 14<\/td>\n | 6.3 Power scaling 7 Considerations for the uncertainty evaluation 7.1 General <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 15<\/td>\n | 7.2 Uncertainty due to device positioning, mesh density, and simulation parameters 7.2.1 General Tables Table 1 \u2013 Budget of the uncertainty contributions of the numerical algorithm and of the rendering of the test-setup or simulation-setup <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 16<\/td>\n | 7.2.2 Mesh convergence 7.2.3 Open boundary conditions 7.2.4 Power budget 7.2.5 Convergence of psSAR sampling <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 17<\/td>\n | 7.2.6 Dielectric parameters of the phantom or body model 7.3 Uncertainty and validation of the developed numerical model of the DUT 7.3.1 General <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 18<\/td>\n | 7.3.2 Uncertainty of the DUT model (d \u2265 \u03bb\/2 or d \u2265 200 mm) <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 19<\/td>\n | 7.3.3 Uncertainty of the DUT model (d < \u03bb\/2 and d < 200 mm) Table 2 \u2013 Budget of the uncertainty of the developed model of the DUT <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 20<\/td>\n | 7.3.4 Phantom uncertainty (d < \u03bb\/2 and d < 200 mm) <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 21<\/td>\n | 7.3.5 Model validation 7.4 Uncertainty budget <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 22<\/td>\n | 8 Code verification 8.1 General 8.1.1 Rationale Table 3 \u2013 Overall assessment uncertainty budget for the numerical simulation results <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 23<\/td>\n | 8.1.2 Code performance verification 8.1.3 Canonical benchmarks 8.2 Code performance verification 8.2.1 Propagation in a rectangular waveguide <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 26<\/td>\n | Figures Figure 1 \u2013 Waveguide filled half with free-space (green) and half with dielectric (blue) <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 27<\/td>\n | Figure 2 \u2013 Aligned rectangular waveguide and locations of the sample points E01, E10, E11, E12 and E21 at which the Ex components are recorded Table 4 \u2013 Results of the evaluation of the numerical dispersion characteristicsto be reported for each mesh axis and each orientation of the waveguide for at least three increasing numbers of DoF <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 28<\/td>\n | 8.2.2 Planar dielectric boundaries <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 29<\/td>\n | Table 5 \u2013 Results of the evaluation of the numerical reflection coefficientto be reported; frequency range is indicated for each value to be reported <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 30<\/td>\n | 8.2.3 Open boundary conditions 8.3 Weak patch test 8.3.1 General <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 31<\/td>\n | 8.3.2 Free-space weak patch test Figure 3 \u2013 Weak patch test arrangement: a free-space cubewith edge length L illuminated by a plane wave <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 32<\/td>\n | Table 6 \u2013 Guiding parameters for coarse and fine mesh generationfor the weak patch test <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 34<\/td>\n | Table 7 \u2013 Results of the evaluation of the error measures on the control meshfor the weak patch test for the lowest order Table 8 \u2013 Results of the evaluation of the error measures on the control mesh for the weak patch test for the second lowest order <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 35<\/td>\n | 8.3.3 Dielectric-layer weak patch test Figure 4 \u2013 Dielectric-layer weak patch test arrangement Table 9 \u2013 Results of the evaluation of the error measures on the control meshfor the weak patch test for the third lowest order <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 36<\/td>\n | Table 10 \u2013 Guiding parameters for coarse and fine mesh generationfor the dielectric-layered weak patch test <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 37<\/td>\n | Table 11 \u2013 Results of the evaluation of error measures on the control meshfor the dielectric-layered weak patch test for the lowest order Table 12 \u2013 Results of the evaluation of error measures on the control mesh for the dielectric-layered weak patch test for the second lowest order <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 38<\/td>\n | 8.4 Verification of the psSAR calculation 8.5 Canonical benchmarks 8.5.1 Mie sphere Table 13 \u2013 Results of the evaluation of error measures on the control mesh for the dielectric-layered weak patch test for the third lowest order <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 39<\/td>\n | 8.5.2 Generic dipole Table 14 \u2013 Results of the SAR evaluation of the Mie sphere <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 40<\/td>\n | 8.5.3 Microstrip terminated with open boundary conditions Figure 5 \u2013 Geometry of the microstrip line Table 15 \u2013 Results of the dipole evaluation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 41<\/td>\n | 8.5.4 psSAR calculation SAM phantom \/ generic phone 8.5.5 Setup for system performance check Table 16 \u2013 Results of the microstrip evaluation Table 17 \u2013 1 g and 10 g psSAR for the SAM phantom exposed tothe generic phone for 1 W accepted power as specified in [19] <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 42<\/td>\n | Figure 6 \u2013 Geometry of the setup for thesystem performance check according to [21] Table 18 \u2013 Dielectric parameters of the setup (Table 1 of [21]) Table 19 \u2013 Mechanical parameters of the setup (Tables 1 and 2 of [21]) Table 20 \u2013 1 g and 10 g psSAR normalized to 1 W accepted powerand feed-point impedance (Table 3 and Table 4 of [21]) <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 43<\/td>\n | Annex A (informative)Fundamentals of the finite element method A.1 General A.2 Model boundary value problem <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 44<\/td>\n | A.3 Galerkin weak form A.4 Finite element approximation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 45<\/td>\n | A.5 Considerations for using FEM <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 46<\/td>\n | Annex B (informative)File format for field and SAR data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 47<\/td>\n | Annex C (informative)Analytical solution for error calculationin weak patch-test problems C.1 Generation of control mesh and FEM field values C.2 Free-space weak patch test C.3 Dielectric-layer weak patch test <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 50<\/td>\n | Bibliography <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Determining the peak spatial-average specific absorption rate (SAR) in the human body from wireless communication devices, 30 MHz to 6 GHz – General requirements for using the finite element method for SAR calculations<\/b><\/p>\n |