Bioelectromagnetics 33:695^705 (2012)

Exposure of the Human Body to Professional

and Domestic Induction Cooktops Compared to
the Basic Restrictions
Andreas Christ,1* Rene Guldimann,2 Barbara Bhlmann,1 Marcel Zefferer,1 Jurriaan F. Bakker,3
Gerard C. van Rhoon,3 and Niels Kuster1,4
1

Foundation for Research on InformationTechnologies in Society (ITIS), Zurich,

Switzerland
2
State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO), Zurich, Switzerland
3
Erasmus MC-Daniel den Hoed Cancer Center, Department of Radiation Oncology,
Rotterdam,The Netherlands
4
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETHZ), Zurich, Switzerland
We investigated whether domestic and professional induction cooktops comply with the basic
restrictions dened by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection
(ICNIRP). Based on magnetic eld measurements, a generic numerical model of an induction
cooktop was derived in order to model user exposure. The current density induced in the user was
simulated for various models and distances. We also determined the exposure of the fetus and of
young children. While most measured cooktops comply with the public exposure limits at the
distance specied by the International Electrotechnical Commission (standard IEC 62233), the
majority exceeds them at closer distances, some of them even the occupational limits. The maximum current density in the tissue of the user signicantly exceeds the basic restrictions for the
general public, reaching the occupational level. The exposure of the brains of young children
reaches the order of magnitude of the limits for the general public. For a generic worst-case
cooktop compliant with the measurement standards, the current density exceeds the 1998 ICNIRP
basic restrictions by up to 24 dB or a factor of 16. The brain tissue of young children can be
overexposed by 6 dB or a factor of 2. The exposure of the tissue of the central nervous system of
the fetus can exceed the limits for the general public if the mother is exposed at occupational
levels. This demonstrates that the methodology for testing induction cooktops according to IEC
62233 contradicts the basic restrictions. This evaluation will be extended considering the
redened basic restrictions proposed by the ICNIRP in 2010. Bioelectromagnetics 33:695705,
2012. 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Key words: induction cooking; ELF magnetic field exposure; compliance testing; exposure of
the fetus; exposure of adults and children

INTRODUCTION
Induction cooktops have been replacing traditional gas stoves, particularly in professional kitchens. In comparison to traditional electric stoves,
induction cooktops yield better energy efciency and
offer more exible heating control, while avoiding
the open ame and leakage risks from gas stoves.
Initial studies on the exposure of the human body in
the close environment of induction cooktops were
not conclusive [Yamazaki et al., 2004]. However, a
detailed experimental evaluation by Viellard et al.
[2006] demonstrated that the incident B-eld exposure can exceed the reference levels posed by the
International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation
Protection (ICNIRP) [ICNIRP, 1998a] by more than
a factor of 30 at close distances by devices shown to
2012 Wiley Periodicals,Inc.

Additional supporting information may be found in the online

version of this article.
Grant sponsors: Swiss Federal Ofce of Public Health; The
Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development
(ZonMw); Swiss National Fund (National Research Program 57).
*Correspondence to: Andreas Christ, Foundation for Research on
Information Technologies in Society (ITIS), Zeughausstrasse 43,
CH-8004 Zurich, Switzerland. E-mail: [email protected]
Received for review 14 August 2011; Accepted 3 May 2012
DOI 10.1002/bem.21739
Published online 1 June 2012 in Wiley Online Library
(wileyonlinelibrary.com).

696

Christ et al.

be compliant at the measurement distance of

300 mm dened by the International Electrotechnical
Commission (IEC) [IEC, 2005]. A recent publication
by Kos et al. [2011] quanties the user exposure to a
specic induction cooktop. While the authors do not
observe violations of the exposure limits for the evaluated cooktop, they mention that the induced current
density of the ICNIRP 1998 guidelines could
exceed the basic restrictions for induction cooktops
in compliance with the IEC 62233 standard.
Many countries have adopted the safety guidelines issued by the ICNIRP in 1998, as well the 2005
IEC measurement standard (IEC 62233). Besides the
derived reference levels, the ICNIRP guidelines also
dene basic restrictions for the actual exposure of
the human body. In the ICNIRP 1998 guidelines, the
latter were introduced in terms of the induced current
density for the head and the trunk in order to protect
against peripheral nerve stimulation. A clarication
of the guidelines issued shortly after their original
publication, however, reduces the applicability of
these restrictions to tissues of the central nervous
system (CNS), that is, the brain and spinal cord
[ICNIRP, 1998b]. No limits are provided for other
body tissues. Due to this uncertainty, some regulators, for example, Switzerland, require that the basic
restrictions on the current density be met in all
tissues of the trunk and head as originally stated. In
the recently published guidelines on low frequency
exposure, the ICNIRP abandons the assessment of
the averaged current density in favor of restrictions
on the electric eld in the body averaged over a
cubical volume of 2 mm
2 mm
2 mm [ICNIRP,
2010]. Separate limits are dened for the CNS tissues
of the head and for all other tissues of the body for
frequencies up to 1 kHz. Above 1 kHz, the basic
restrictions are identical. Since these limits have not
yet been adopted by regulators, they are not investigated within this article but will be the subject of a
follow-up study.
Although a detailed exposure analysis was not
carried out by Viellard et al. [2006], a simple analytical approximation showed that violations of the basic
restrictions on the induced current density in the
body of a person in the immediate environment of
the stove are likely. This study aims to close the gaps
regarding compliance with the basic restrictions that
are currently imposed in many countries. This will
be done by assessing the current density in the human body using a set of anatomical high-resolution
models of adults of different heights and body mass
indices. In addition, models of a pregnant woman
in different gestational phases and young children
whose heads are at the same height as the cooking
Bioelectromagnetics

zones will be evaluated. The incident elds are modeled using the results of an experimental evaluation
of professional cooktops in different gastronomic
kitchens and of the two domestic cooktops and the
portable cooktop evaluated by Viellard et al. [2006].
In detail, the objectives of this study are to
complement the analysis of the three domestic
devices used in Viellard et al. [2006] by the experimental evaluation of the B-elds of 13 different professional cooktops at different installation sites;
numerically assess the induced current density in
users and bystanders using different anatomical models of adults, children and pregnant women in typical
and worst-case situations and postures; and discuss
the exposure from the specic devices and the consistency of the product standard IEC 62233 with the
ICNIRP 1998 basic restrictions.
METHODS
Experimental Methods
The spatial distribution and the frequency spectra of the B-elds of 13 professional induction cooktops were measured using a low frequency E- and
H-eld probe (EHP-200, Narda Safety Test Solutions, Hauppauge, NY) within a frequency range
from 9 to 400 kHz. The spatial distribution was
sampled in steps of 90 mm
90 mm over a surface
ranging from 625 to 1795 mm above the oor
(z-axis) and 450 to 360 mm from the left to right
(y-axis) with zero as the center of the cooktop. These
measurements were taken at distances of 0 and
300 mm from the front edge of the cabinet that houses the cooktops. The rst distance can be regarded
as the closest a user can stand without bending over
the device, whereas the latter can be regarded as a
distance typical of passers-by while the cooktop is
operational. Additional measurements at distances
of 50, 100, 150, 200, and 250 mm were taken at
the location of the eld maximum observed when
measuring the spatial distribution at 0 mm. Figure 1
shows an overview of the references of the measurement distances used in this study. For the evaluation
of compliance of the B-elds with safety limits, IEC
62233 denes a position 300 mm from the edge of
the cooktop [IEC, 2005]. This position depends on
the dimensions of the cabinet and the mounting position of the cooktop and is therefore different for all
evaluated devices. Supplementary Table I shows an
overview of these distances. The B-elds at the distance of 300 mm are evaluated by interpolating the
elds at the measured distances listed above using a
curve t.

Exposure to Induction Cooktops

697

current density induced in the user. These devices

were measured with an ELT-400 probe (Narda Safety
Test Solutions) positioned using a DASY 4 Dosimetric Assessment System (Schmid & Partner Engineering, Zurich, Switzerland).

Fig. 1. Sketch of an induction cooktop with four integrated circular

cooking zones built into a cabinet. The measurement distances
are 0 and 300 mm from the edge ofthe cabinet.

For the accurate positioning of the probe, a

foam plastic wall with mounting holes was used
(Fig. 1 in the Online Supplementary Material). The
mechanical stability of the wall was considered when
determining the number and the spatial density of the
holes. The orthogonal current loops of the EHP-200
probe, which pick up the vector components of the
B-eld, are not concentric. They have a diameter of
approximately 31 mm. The center of the loop of the
z-component of the B-eld, which is the dominant
component for all the cases investigated here, has an
offset of approximately 42 mm from the frontal surface of the probe case. This offset was considered
when normalizing the eld distribution of the numerical model to the measured cases.
Only elds in the front of the cooktops were
evaluated. During the measurements, the active cooking zones were loaded with a reference vessel
(270 mm diameter, 145 mm height) that was lled
with 3 L of water. The water that evaporated during
the measurements was relled. The cooking zones
were operated at maximum power. Only the maximum values of the power control cycles of the cooking zones were considered. The decay of the B-elds
with distance was assessed at the location of the
maximum of each device. Additional measurements
were carried out with different vessels and off-center
positions on the cooking zone. The impact of the
loading on the B-eld strength used for the dosimetric evaluations was added as an offset in the dosimetric evaluation. Eleven of the 13 cooktops (#1#11)
were xed installations. Cooktop #12 was a portable
device with a single cooking zone, and Cooktop #13
was a wok installed in a xed housing.
In addition to the professional cooktops, the
three domestic devices referred to as cooktops #14
#16, originally evaluated in Viellard et al. [2006],
were also used for the dosimetric assessment of the

Numerical Exposure Modeling

In the low frequency range, where the relevant
dimensions of the computational domain are signicantly smaller than the free space wavelength, the
magnetic vector potential A can be assumed to
be decoupled from the electric eld E. As a consequence, A can be calculated using BiotSavarts law,
and since the divergence of the current density vanishes and conduction currents are dominant in the human body for the application in this article, E can be
calculated from the scalar potential F, which is given
by: r  srF jvr  sA with s as the tissue
conductivity and v as the angular frequency of the
elds of the induction cooktop. A is calculated using
a BiotSavart solver, and the nite element method
is used to solve for F. The BiotSavart solver and
the nite element algorithm are implemented in
SEMCAD
14.2 (Schmid & Partner Engineering).
Unlike typical nite element methods, the implementation used here operates on rectilinear meshes like
the nite-difference time-domain method [Taove
and Hagness, 2000]. In this way, complex anatomical
models can easily be rendered by adapting the mesh
resolution. A description of the low frequency solver
and its validation can be found in Capstick et al.
[2008].
Alternative methods for the calculation of the
exposure of the human body were proposed in the
past, which evaluated the scalar potential F using
nite-difference approximations [Dawson et al., 1997;
Liu et al., 2003], frequency-scaling [Gandhi and
Chen, 1992], or modeling the human body as an
impedance network [Orcutt and Gandhi, 1988]. The
recent study by Kos et al. [2011] applies the nite
element method used here.
The dosimetric results were assessed in terms
of the current density maximum (peak current density) in different body tissues. The ICNIRP 1998
guidelines dene the basic restrictions for the current
density as the average over a cross section of 1 cm2.
The orientation of the cross section is perpendicular
to the currents owing through it. An algorithm to
calculate this average current density was implemented for the post-processing of the simulation
results. The algorithm determines the direction of the
current density vector on each grid node. The current
density is then integrated on a circular surface that
is perpendicular to this vector and has the required
Bioelectromagnetics

698

Christ et al.

dimensions of 1 cm2. The maximum of the values of

all grid nodes is reported as the peak average current
density. The numerical uncertainty with respect to
grid resolution and size of the averaging surface
is shown in Tables V and VI of the Online Supplementary Material.
The evaluation of the average current density
can be restricted to particular body tissues. This is
used to quantify the exposure of the brain and spinal
cord, for example. In the following sections of this
article, the brain and the spinal cord will be referred
to as the CNS. In a recent publication by Dimbylow
[2008], problems were reported for the evaluation of
the average current density in the spinal cord because
the cross sectional area of the spinal cord can be less
than 1 cm2 for signicant parts along its length.
If the evaluation of the current density is restricted
to particular tissues (e.g., the CNS) such that the
required cross section cannot be reached, only the
contributions of current densities from those tissues
are considered for the averaging.
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
The spatial distribution of the B-eld at the cabinet edge of one of the measured cooktops is shown
in Figure 2 as an example, together with its spectral
content. For all measured cooktops the dominant
spectral component lies at approximately 20 kHz.
Most cooktops show even and odd harmonics
throughout the entire measurement range (up to
400 kHz). Their amplitudes are always a factor of
10 or more below the amplitude of the fundamental
frequency. Therefore, the higher harmonics are not

considered for the numerical assessment of the

induced current density. Only a harmonic signal of
20 kHz is used.
As the probe reference point has an offset with
respect to the center of the loop for the z-component,
the correction for the offset and its uncertainty have
been determined as follows. The B-eld of a generic
cooking zone model was integrated over the loop
diameter and compared to the B-eld at the probe
reference point as a function of the distance to the
cooking zone. The ratio of the integrated B-eld
and the B-eld at the reference point changes as a
function of the eld gradient and therefore depends
on the distance to the cooking zone. The mean
value for the offset correction is 1.1 (averaging over
all measured positions along the z-axis). The maximum deviation from this average is 1.1 and is considered in the uncertainty evaluation (Supplementary
Table IV) as a rectangular distribution.
Figure 3 shows the maximum B-eld amplitudes of the 13 professional induction cooktops evaluated directly at the cabinet edge and at a distance of
300 mm from the cooktop edge at their operational
frequency of 20 kHz. The positions (y  z coordinates as specied in Figs. 1 and 2) of the maxima in
the plane at the cabinet edge and in the plane at a
distance of 300 mm coincide within the spacing of
the probe mounting positions in the measurement
wall (Fig. 1 in the Online Supplementary Material).
At 300 mm, most devices were found to be
compliant with the ICNIRP 1998 reference level of
6.25 mT for the general public, although their eld
strengths vary by more than a factor of 30. Immediately in front of the cabinet (0 mm), all but two

Fig. 2. Measured B-field of one of the cooktops normalized to the occupational ICNIRP limit
(30.7 mT). Left: frontal plane at the cabinet edge; right: spectrum of the signal at different
distances.
Bioelectromagnetics

Exposure to Induction Cooktops

699

Fig. 3. Measured maxima of the B-field of 16 induction cooktops (professional and domestic) at
the cabinet edge and 300 mm from the edge of the cooktop at their operational frequency of
20 kHz (not considering harmonics). Error bars indicate the measurement uncertainty (k 1) of
16% (1.3 dB, devices #1^#13) and 9% (0.8 dB, devices #14^#16) as given in Supplementary
Table IV, excluding the contribution of the numericalrepresentation of the measured devices.

devices are within the more relaxed occupational

limits of 30.7 mT; signicant differences between
the professional (#1#13) and domestic devices
(#14#16) could not be observed. Also, the maximum B-eld amplitudes could not be correlated with
the nominal power of the different devices. The power consumption was not monitored during the measurements because the primary source of exposure is
the magnetic eld. The magnetic eld amplitude
does not only depend on the power but also on the
complex impedance of the loaded coil.
In addition, the impact on the B-eld was evaluated for loading conditions with different vessels,
which were also positioned off the center of the
cooking zone. Vessels that are not particularly specied for use with induction cooktops were included as
well. For almost all devices, increased eld strengths
could be observed with respect to the standard conguration specied in IEC 62233. Supplementary
Table II summarizes the results. In the worst case, an
increase of more than a factor of 4.5 was found (#14).
NUMERICAL EXPOSURE EVALUATION
Exposure Configurations
For the assessment of the current density induced in the body, six non-pregnant and three pregnant anatomical whole-body models were selected
for the dosimetric analysis by considering the body
mass range of people working in professional kitchens. Models of young children were also included.
All models are based on the computer-aided design
representation of the organ surfaces and up to 80 different tissue types are represented (up to 17 in

the fetus models1). The non-pregnant models were

developed from magnetic resonance (MR) images
of volunteers [Christ et al., 2009, 2010]. Their
details are: Fats: male, 37 years, 1.78 m, 120 kg;
Duke: male, 34 years, 1.74 m, 70 kg; Ella:
female, 26 years, 1.60 m, 58 kg; Louis: male,
14 years, 1.65 m, 50 kg; Thelonious: male,
6 years, 1.17 m, 20 kg; Roberta: female, 5 years,
1.08 m, 18 kg.
The models of the pregnant woman are based
on the model Ella. For the development of the
fetus and womb during the different gestational
phases, images from various sources were used. The
fetus models represent the 3rd, 7th, and 9th gestational month. Their masses are 15, 1700, and 2700 g,
respectively. For the model in the 3rd month, a
generic model based on images in the available
scientic literature, for example, Levine [2005], was
integrated into the womb of the model Ella, which
was scaled in order to accommodate the fetus. The
outer shape of the model was not changed. For the
development of the model in the 7th month, MR
images of the torso of a pregnant woman were segmented and integrated into the model. The model of
the 9th month is based on that of the 7th month, but
the fetus model was replaced by a model of a scaled
newborn [Petoussi-Henss et al., 2002]. The dimensions of the abdominal region of the mother model
were increased in order to accommodate the larger

1
The fetal tissues include bladder, bone, brain, eyes, fat, gall bladder, heart, intestines, kidney, liver, lung, muscle, subcutaneous
adipose tissue, skin, spinal cord, spleen, and stomach. It should
be noted that not all three fetus models distinguish all tissues.

Bioelectromagnetics

700

Christ et al.

fetus. Figure 2 of the Online Supplementary Material

shows an overview of all anatomical models used in
this study. The tissue conductivities for the simulations at 20 kHz are based on Gabriel et al. [1996].
The current densities in the bodies of the anatomical models were simulated using a generic cooking zone model that could be adapted to the incident
elds of the measured devices. For the four nonpregnant models, the cooking zone was placed at
distances of 10310 mm from the body in steps of
100 mm (measured horizontally from the rim of the
cooking zone to the closest point of the skin). It was
placed both in front of and behind the models. The
default height of the cooking zone model was
850 mm above ground. For the assessment of the uncertainty of the results with respect to the body
height and position of the user, the height of the
cooking zone was also varied in steps of 100 mm
and moved to the left in steps of 100 mm. The
results of these evaluations are considered only in the
uncertainty budget (Tables IVVI in the Online Supplementary Material) and not reported individually.
For the evaluation of the exposure of the two models
of young children, the same congurations as for
the adults were used but the height of the coils
was adjusted to their foreheads. This corresponds to
body heights of approximately 1.0 m and to an age
range of 34.5 years for boys and girls [KromeyerHauschild et al., 2001]. Figure 3 in the Online
Supplementary Material shows the different congurations. They were used for the evaluation of the
uncertainty and variability of the exposure (Tables
IVVI in the Online Supplementary Material).
Additional scenarios were analyzed in order to
assess the effect of the posture of the body when operating the induction cooktop. The models Duke
and Ella were bent over the hob at angles of 22.58
and 458. For these congurations, the closest distance
from the rim of the cooking zone to the skin of the
model was also 10 mm. Again, these evaluations
were considered only in the uncertainty budget. For
the assessment of the current density induced in the
fetus and in the womb of the pregnant women models, the cooking zone was placed at three different
heights in the center of the abdomen. Again, the minimum distance to the skin was 10 mm. The distance
increased in steps of 100 mm, and the height
changed by 100 mm. The changes in exposure for
these positions were considered in the evaluation
of the uncertainty and variability (Tables IVVI in
the Online Supplementary Material). In addition, the
hands of the model Duke were positioned above
the center and above the rim of the cooking zone.
The vertical distances of the hand to the cooking
Bioelectromagnetics

zone were 50, 100, and 150 mm. Two horizontal

positions were analyzed (above the center and above
the rim). The results of the evaluation of the exposure of the hands are discussed below.
Modeling of the Incident B-Fields
In the experimental evaluation of the B-elds,
a number of cooktops were evaluated both under
the loading conditions dened by IEC 62233 [IEC,
2005] and with a large series of different vessels replicating several realistic exposure scenarios. Differences in the eld distribution in the measurement
planes were observed due to different cooking zone
congurations or loading with different vessels, for
example (Supplementary Table II). These differences
would not permit the accurate evaluation of a particular cooktop without signicant modeling and validation efforts under a number of representative loading
congurations. Because it is not the objective of this
article to evaluate the compliance of particular induction cooktops, the most generic approach has been
chosen to model the spatial characteristics of the
magnetic eld distribution. Thus, the amplitude range
of the induced current density can be quantied for
realistic exposure scenarios. The applied cooking
zone model consists of ten concentric loops with a
constant current. The distance between the loops is
10 mm. In the radial direction (r), the B-eld amplitude decays approximately with 1/r3 [Yamazaki
et al., 2004].
In order to assess the exposure of the anatomical models for the B-eld amplitudes of the different
measured devices (Fig. 3), the current density, which
was evaluated using the generic cooking zone at distances from 10 to 310 mm in the x-direction from
the coil (Fig. 1), was scaled to match the B-eld
amplitudes of the measured devices at different measurement distances and the actual distance between
the coil of the cooking zone and the measurement
location. For each measured device, a scale factor
was derived. Figure 4 shows the B-elds for each of
the devices tted to the B-eld of the generic cooking zone at the different locations of the measurements.2 Considering the distances to the rim of the
cooking zone, the agreement of the measured values
at all evaluated distances in the x-direction is generally satisfactory using a single scale factor for each
device. The uncertainty of the representation of the
amplitudes and eld decay of the measured cooktops

Between two and eight points in the x-direction were evaluated

depending on the different devices. Up to four measurement points
per device are shown in Figure 4.
2

Exposure to Induction Cooktops

Fig. 4. Simulated B-field in front of the model of the generic

cooking zone normalized to a B-field amplitude of 6.25 mT at a
distance of 300 mm from the cooktop edge (50 mm from the rim
of the generic cooking zone). Measured results are scaled to
match amplitude and slope.

by the generic model was assessed as 17% (1.4 dB;

Supplementary Table IV).
DOSIMETRIC RESULTS
Induced Current Density for the Generic Cooking
Zone Model
Figure 5 shows the normalized peak average
current density for the six non-pregnant models as a
function of the distance from the generic cooking

Fig. 5. Peak average current densities of allnon-pregnant models

in all body tissues normalized to the B-field of 6.25 mT at a distance of 300 mm from the cooktop edge (50 mm from the rim of
the generic cooking zone). Symbols represent the simulation
results at the different positions and the lines show exponential
curve fits. Closest distance at which the current densities were
evaluated is 10 mm from the rim of the cooking zone. This
result has been included in the exponential curve fit but is
outside the scope of the x-axis (50 mm) of this figure and
Figures 6^8.

701

zone model. For the denition of the distance reference, a spacing of 50 mm between the rim of the
cooking zone and the front edge of the cooktop is
assumed. No additional space between the cooktop
edge and the cabinet edge is added, which is a valid
assumption for typical stand-alone devices. The current of the cooking zone was normalized to a B-eld
strength of 6.25 mT at a distance of 300 mm from
the cooktop edge (i.e., 450 mm from the center point
of the cooking zone). Like this, the generic cooking
zone corresponds to a worst-case device that is compliant with the exposure limits for the general public
when tested according to IEC 62233.
At the operational frequency of 20 kHz, the
limit for the induced current averaged over 1 cm2 is
40 mA/m2 for the general public and 200 mA/m2 for
occupational exposure. When considering the currents in all body tissues, the exposure limits for the
general public are reached at distances between 200
and 250 mm for the adult models, and the abdominal
region is the most exposed. For very close distances
(<50 mm), even the occupational limits can be
exceeded. The current density maxima typically occur in tissues with comparatively high conductivity
such as muscle, the penis, or walls of the gall bladder
or small intestine. The maxima are not necessarily
located at the closest location to the cooking zone
model. For the two models of the children whose
heads directly face the cooking zone model, the current density maximum can also occur in the vitreous
humor. The current density of the two child models
is about a factor of 2 below the values observed for
the adults in their abdominal regions. Supplementary
Table III lists those tissues in which the current density maxima are typically observed, together with
their conductivities at 20 kHz.
The current density in the CNS of the adult and
adolescent models is approximately a factor of 10
below the current density averaged over all tissues
for all observed cases (Fig. 6). Even when standing
directly at the cabinet edge the basic restrictions are
not reached. For these exposure conditions, the current density maximum is located in the lower part
of the spinal cord, which is at a comparatively large
distance from the coil. For young children whose
heads are at the same height as the cooktop, the basic
restrictions for the general public are violated at
distances below 60 mm, with the current density
maximum located in the brain. When standing immediately at the cooktop, the current densities in the
CNS can exceed the basic restrictions by approximately a factor of 2. For the models of the pregnant
woman and fetus, the averaged current density is
shown in Figure 7. Among the investigated cases,
Bioelectromagnetics

702

Christ et al.

Fig. 6. Peak average current densities of allnon-pregnant models

in the CNS tissues normalized to the B-field of 6.25 mT at a distance of 300 mm from the cooktop edge (50 mm from the rim of
the generic cooking zone). Symbols represent the simulation
results at the different positions and the lines show exponential
curve fits.

mother and fetus suffer the highest exposure in the

9th gestational month. The current density maximum
typically occurs in the tissue of the uterus because
of its high conductivity (Supplementary Table III).
Current densities in the tissue of the mother model,
immediately at the edge of the cooktop, are approximately a factor of 16 above the ICNIRP limit for the

Fig. 7. Peak average current density of the pregnant models in

the three gestationalphases and the fetuses overall body tissues,
normalized to the B-field of 6.25 mTat a distance of 300 mm from
the cooktop edge (50 mm from the rim of the generic cooking
zone). Symbols represent the simulation results and the lines
show exponential curve fits.
Bioelectromagnetics

general public when considering all tissues. With the

exception of the fetus in the 3rd gestational month,
the current densities in the fetal tissue reach limits
for the general public at 100170 mm when averaging over the entire body and exceed them by up to a
factor of 6 at the cooktop edge. If only the CNS tissue is considered, the limits are a factor of 2.5 below
the basic restrictions for the general public (Fig. 8).
Considering the exposure of pregnant women in
working environments, it is debatable whether the occupational limits or the limits for the general public
should be applied to protect the fetus. Scaling the
results of Figure 8 to a device that is only compliant
with the occupational B-eld limits (30.7 mT at
300 mm distance), shows that the exposure of the
CNS tissue of the fetus can exceed the exposure limits for the general public if the mother is exposed in
an occupational environment. It should, however, be
noted that the brains of the fetus models are not oriented toward the cooking zone (Fig. 2 in the Online
Supplementary Material). The exposure of the hand
above the cooking zone almost reaches the occupational limit at distances from 50 mm above the cooking zone (Fig. 9), both for centered position and
above the rim.
Normalization to the B-Field Amplitudes of the
Measured Devices
In order to assess the exposure in persons in
the close environment at the B-eld levels of the
different induction cooktops discussed above and in

Fig. 8. Peak average current density in the CNS tissues of the

fetuses normalized to the B-field of 6.25 mT at a distance of
300 mm from the cooktop edge (50 mm from the rim of the generic cooking zone). Symbols represent the simulation results and
the lines show exponential curve fits.

Exposure to Induction Cooktops

703

Fig. 9. Peak average current density in the hand of the modelDukeat different distances and positions above the hobs normalized to the B-field of 6.25 mTat 300 mm from the edge of the generic
cooktop.

Viellard et al. [2006], the exponential t shown in

Figures 58 was used to correlate the averaged current density maximum with the measurement results.
The eld strengths at the particular distances to the
rims of the cooking zones were derived by normalizing these current densities with the scaling factors
derived above. In addition, the increase in eld
strength for worst-case loading conditions was applied (Supplementary Table II). Figure 10 shows the
exposure average of the anatomical models for which
the maximum current density was observed for the
generic cooking zone (Figs. 58), normalized to the

incident B-elds of the measured devices at three different distances. At 30 mm from the cabinet edge,
parts of the users body are assumed to protrude
above the cabinet; at the cabinet edge, the user is
assumed to touch the cabinet without any protruding
regions of his body; and 300 mm from the cabinet
edge is the maximum distance at which the elds
were measured (this distance is regarded as typical
for bystanders).
Figure 5 shows that the exposure of the nonpregnant models at the largest distance (300 mm
from the cabinet) is always compliant with the basic

Fig. 10. Peak average current density in the CNS and all tissues of the anatomical models (most
relevant cases of this figure and Figs. 8 and 9), normalized to the average of the measured devices
at 30, 0, and 300 mm from the edge of the device. Hatched bars indicate the range from the bestto the worst-case device.Expanded uncertainty (k 2) ofthe measurement and simulation results
is 6.0 dB for the models of the adults and children (SupplementaryTableV), and 6.4 dB for the fetus
models (SupplementaryTableVI).
Bioelectromagnetics

704

Christ et al.

restrictions for the general public even when including all body tissues for the current averaging. At
close distances, the exposure limits for the general
public can be exceeded by more than a factor of 5
(distance < 50 mm; Fig. 5). When considering CNS
tissues only, the basic restrictions for the general
public can be reached for the child models (Thelonious and Roberta) at close distances from the cabinet
edge when allowing for the overall uncertainty of
this evaluation. The combined numerical and experimental uncertainty was assessed as 6.0 dB (k 2;
Supplementary Table V) or as 0.502.0 of the provided exposure with a condence interval of 95%.
The exposure of the mother and fetus models
exceeds the basic restrictions for the general public
by a factor of 6 for the mother and 3.5 for the fetus
when standing at the cabinet edge, if considering all
body tissues. Given the numerical and experimental
uncertainty, the violation of the occupational limits
can be regarded as likely for the devices with high
B-elds. For CNS tissues of the fetus, the induced
current density can reach the order of magnitude of
the basic restrictions when taking into account the
uncertainty. The combined numerical and experimental uncertainty for the exposure of the fetus was
assessed as 6.4 dB (k 2; Supplementary Table VI)
or as 0.482.1 of the provided exposure with a condence interval of 95%. In general, the current density
reported by Kos et al. [2011] lies in the order of
magnitude of the results shown in Figure 10. However, a direct comparison is difcult because the cooktops analyzed by Kos et al. [2011] operate at 35 kHz
whereas the nominal frequency of all cooktops considered in this study is 20 kHz.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
The measured B-elds of 13 professional induction cooktops and the three domestic devices
evaluated in Viellard et al. [2006] were evaluated experimentally. The eld strengths are compliant with
exposure limits for the general public when measured
at 300 mm from the cooktops as specied by IEC
62233 [IEC, 2005]. Due to the high eld gradients,
the measured B-elds reachor violatethe occupational exposure limits at short distances from the
cooking zone. The current densities induced in the
human body were modeled using a generic worstcase cooking zone model and different anatomical
models including adults, pregnant women, and children. The current densities reached the exposure limits according to the ICNIRP 1998 guidelines for the
general public at 300 mm from the cooktop. The
results were then scaled to the measured B-eld
Bioelectromagnetics

levels of the professional and domestic cooktops.

The ndings can be summarized as follows: Most of
the measured cooktops are compliant with the eld
limits for public exposure at a distance of 300 mm
from the cooktop. Due to the high eld gradients in
the close environment of the cooking zone, most
devices exceed these limits at closer distances. When
considering the entire body of the exposed user for
the current density averaging, the basic restrictions of
the current density for the general public can be signicantly exceeded and reach occupational levels. A
generic worst-case cooktop which is compliant at the
measurement distance specied by IEC 62233 can
lead to current densities that exceed the basic restrictions for the general public by a factor of 16. The
brain tissue of young children can be overexposed by
a factor of 2 with respect to the basic restrictions for
the general public if they come close to the cooktop.
If exposure limits of the general public apply to the
fetus of a mother in a working environment, the current density in the CNS tissue of the fetus can exceed
the basic restrictions while they are still fullled for
the mother.
To summarize, the IEC 62233 standard does not
sufciently protect exposed persons according to the
basic restrictions dened by the ICNIRP 1998 guidelines, which are enforced in many countries. The
high eld gradients in the close environment of induction cooktops need be considered very carefully.
It should be noted that a recent ICNIRP statement
denes different basic restrictions in terms of the
electric eld in the entire body and proposes higher
reference levels for the incident B-eld [ICNIRP,
2010]. Electric eld limits have already been established by the IEEE [2002]. Because of the large differences in the dielectric properties of body tissues,
the maxima of the current density and the electric
eld strength are not directly correlated.
REFERENCES
Capstick M, McRobbie D, Hand J, Christ A, Kuhn S, Hansson
Mild K, Cabot E, Li Y, Melzer A, Papadaki A, Prussmann
K, Quest R, Rea M, Ryf S, Oberle M, Kuster N.
2008. An Investigation into Occupational Exposure to
Electromagnetic Fields for Personnel Working With and
Around Medical Magnetic Resonance Imaging Equipment.
EU Commission Study on MRI (Project VT/2007/017).
ITIS Foundation: Zurich, Switzerland. http://www.
itis.ethz.ch/assets/Downloads/Papers-Reports/Reports/
VT2007017FinalReportv04.pdf (Last accessed 14 March
2012).
berbacher R, Cecil S,
Christ A, Schmid G, Djafarzadeh R, U
Zefferer M, Neufeld E, Lichtsteiner M, Bouterfas M,
Kuster N. 2009. Numerische Bestimmung der Spezischen
Absorptionsrate bei Ganzkorperexposition von Kindern:

Exposure to Induction Cooktops

Abschlubericht. (Numerical evaluation of the specic absorption rate of children under whole-body exposure: Final
report.). ITIS Foundation: Zurich, Switzerland. http://
www.emf-forschungsprogramm.de/www/home/akt_emf_
forschung.html/dosi_HF_003_ZwB_01.pdf (Last accessed
17 April 2012).
Christ A, Kainz W, Hahn EG, Honegger K, Zefferer M, Neufeld
E, Rascher W, Janka R, Bautz W, Chen J, Kiefer B,
Schmitt P, Hollenbach HP, Shen J, Oberle M, Szczerba D,
Kam A, Guag JW, Kuster N. 2010. The Virtual Family
Development of surface-based anatomical models of two
adults and two children for dosimetric simulations. Phys
Med Biol 55:N23N38.
Dawson TW, Caputa K, Stuchly MA. 1997. A comparison of
60 Hz uniform magnetic and electric induction in the human body. Phys Med Biol 42:23192329.
Dimbylow P. 2008. Quandaries in the application of the ICNIRP
low frequency basic restriction on current density. Phys
Med Biol 53:133145.
Gabriel S, Lau RW, Gabriel C. 1996. The dielectric properties of
biological tissues: III. Parametric models for the dielectric
spectrum of tissues. Phys Med Biol 41:22712293.
Gandhi OP, Chen JY. 1992. Numerical dosimetry at power-line
frequencies using anatomically based models. Bioelectromagnetics 13(Suppl. 1):S43S60.
ICNIRP. 1998a. Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying
electric, magnetic and electromagnetic elds (up to
300 GHz). Health Phys 74:494522.
ICNIRP. 1998b. Response to questions and comments on the
guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric,
magnetic and electromagnetic elds (up to 300 GHz).
Health Phys 75:438439.
ICNIRP. 2010. ICNIRP StatementGuidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric and magnetic elds (1 Hz to
100 kHz). Health Phys 99:818836.
IEC. 2005. Standard 62233. Measurement methods for electromagnetic elds of household cooktops and similar apparatus with regard to human exposure, 106/99, Final Draft
International Standard, Brussels, Belgium.
IEEE. 2002. C95.6. IEEE standard for safety levels with respect
to human exposure to electromagnetic elds, 03 kHz.
IEEE Standards Department, International Committee on

705

Electromagnetic Safety. The Institute of Electrical and

Electronics Engineers, New York, NY, USA.
Kos B, Valic B, Miklavcic D, Kotnik T, Gajsek P. 2011. Pre- and
post-natal exposure of children to EMF generated by domestic induction cookers. Phys Med Biol 56:61496160.
Kromeyer-Hauschild L, Wabitsch M, Kunze D, Geller F, Gei
HC, Hesse V, von Hippel A, Jaeger U, Johnsen D, Korte
W, Menner K, Muller G, Muller JM, Niemann-Pilatus A,
Remer T, Schaefer F, Wittchen HU, Zabransky S, Zellner
K, Ziegler A, Hebebrand J. 2001. Perzentile fur den Bodymass-Index fur das Kindes und Jugendalter unter Heranziehung verschiedener deutscher Stichproben (Percentiles
for the body mass index for childhood and adolescence
with reference to several German random samples). Monatsschr Kinderheilkd 149:807818.
Levine D. 2005. Atlas of fetal MRI. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor &
Francis.
Liu F, Zhao H, Crozier S. 2003. On the induced electric eld
gradients in the human body for magnetic stimulation by
gradient coils in MRI. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 50:804
815.
Orcutt N, Gandhi OP. 1988. A 3-D impedance method to calculate power deposition in biological bodies subjected to
time varying magnetic elds. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng
35:577583.
Petoussi-Henss N, Zankl M, Fill U, Regulla D. 2002. The GSF
family of voxel phantoms. Phys Med Biol 47:89.
Taove A, Hagness SC. 2000. Computational electromagnetics:
The nite-difference time-domain method, 2nd edition.
Boston, USA, London, UK: Artech House.
Viellard C, Romann A, Lott U, Kuster N. 2006. B-eld exposure
from induction cooking appliances, Technical Report.
ITIS Foundation: Zurich, Switzerland. http://www.bag.admin.
ch/themen/strahlung/00053/00673/03156/index.html?lang
de&downloadM3wBPgDB/8ull6Du36WenojQ1NTTjaXZnqWfVpzLhmfhnapmmc7Zi6rZnqCkkIZ3fnyDbKbXrZ6lhuDZz8mMps2gpKfo (Last accessed 14 March 2012).
Yamazaki K, Kawamoto T, Fujinami H, Shigemitsu T. 2004.
Equivalent dipole moment method to characterize magnetic elds generated by electric appliances: Extension to
intermediate frequencies of up to 100 kHz. IEEE Trans
Electromagn Compat 46:115120.

Bioelectromagnetics