Portable cell phones emit about 0.6 watts of radiofrequency energy, limited primarily by the power of the battery. As with any radiofrequency transmitter, there will be some amount of absorption in the human body; the amount depends on how close you are to the antenna. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) limits the amount of radiofrequency energy which cell phones can deposit in the body to levels at which no health effects are to be expected. See an article on Cell Phone Safety on this website for more information.

Gary H. Zeman, ScD, CHP

Click the link to add information to this solution:
HOW MUCH RADIATION GIVEN OFF BY A CELL PHONE AND THERE ANY WAY TO STOP THE FROM BEING ABSORBED INTO YOURSELF?

You will have to contact the cell phone company that operates that particular antenna to obtain the radiation pattern (or emission pattern) of that particular type of antenna. Different models of antennae have different emission patterns to provide coverage of different size and shape geographical areas. For example, many of the antennae are directional, only broadcasting in the forward direction. Most emit very little radiation in the upward and downward directions, although the vertical extent of the beam can be quite different for different antennas. Some are strongly focussed on the horizon, others provide better coverage of nearby areas. Many antennae only broadcasting into a defined geometrical sector of the horizion, often 120 degrees so that three sets of antennae are required to cover the entire horizon. Therefore, to find the type of radiation pattern broadcast by any particular antenna will require local information from the equipment operator. Gary Zeman, ScD

Click the link to add information to this solution:
THERE´S A CELLULAR PHONE ANTENNA ON THE ROOF OF BUILDING RIGHT OPPOSITE MY WINDOW, LEVEL ABOUT TEN METERS ABOVE HEAD. AM I LIKELY TO BE IN RADIUS RADIATION?

A cell phone emits electromagnetic radiation of various frequencies at very low intensity and would not affect the development of a fetus whose mother placed the cell phone on her abdomen during her pregnancy. The mother's reproductive and developmental risk for her growing embryo would not be altered by these exposures. If you are healthy, young, and have no reproductive problems or family history of reproductive or developmental problems, your risk for birth defects is 3% and for miscarriage, 15%. These are background risks with which every woman begins her pregnancy. Neither you nor I can change these risks. Good luck with your pregnancy.

Robert Brent, MD, PhD

Click the link to add information to this solution:
DOES CELL PHONE VIBRATION ON YOUR STOMACH DURING PREGNANCY AFFECT THE BABY?

Cellular phones are designed to be safe for both the user and anyone standing nearby. Cellular phones are actually small radios that transmit signals to and from base-station antennas located on towers or buildings in the nearby neighborhood. Cellular phones use low-power radio signals, even weaker than CB, police, or fire radios.

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) sets safety standards for human exposure to radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic energy in the United States. Government agencies such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and many states recognize and accept the ANSI RF safety standard. Also, the United States standard for RF energy is comparable to those set in other countries.

Cellular phones and cellular-phone base stations have been shown to meet these RF safety standards. Safety standards for RF energy are threshold standards. Threshold standards define the level of RF energy above which there may be health or safety hazards and below which there have been no reported harmful effects. Unlike ionizing radiation, which many people believe to act cumulatively even at small exposure levels, RF energy at low levels is not considered a cumulative hazard. Therefore the consensus of scientific experts in this area is that RF exposure from cellular phones, meeting the threshold levels set in safety standards, is safe for all.

The specific answer to the question is that cellular phone technology is safe for all. There is no danger posed by either handheld phone units or by base-station antennas. In both cases, the radio signals transmitted from the antennas are required to meet the ANSI safety standard for RF safety as embodied in FCC regulations governing this technology. For more information:

The FCC has recently revised and reissued its Bulletin 56 on Questions and Answers about Biological Effects and Potential Hazards of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields.

OSHA provides information and links to more sites on RF safety at its Web page, Radiofrequency/Microwave Radiation.

Gary Zeman, ScD, CHP Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Click the link to add information to this solution:
IT MORE DANGEROUS STAY FOR ONE HOUR AT A TEN-METER DISTANCE FROM CELLULAR ANTENNA OR TALK INTO PHONE THE SAME AMOUNT OF TIME?

VFD settings........
1) To program the VFD, wire it up, plug it in. It takes several seconds to come to life.

2) Push the PRGM button to enter programing mode.

3 )Push the SET button. The display will read PD000.

4) If you push the SET button again, it will display the present setting of PD000.

5 )By pushing the up or down arrows, you can change the setting to whatever it needs to be. (This is just an example. PD000 needs no changes)

6)Push the SET button again to lock in the setting of PD000 and advance to the next number, in this case, PD001.

7) Push the SET button and it will display the present setting of PD001. Again, use the up and down arrows as necessary to set PD001, then push SET again to lock it in.

Note: You can also scroll through the PD numbers with the up and down arrows.

8) make all settings this way.

9) by pushing the SET button you can scroll through the settings. First push of SET moves to the next number, second push displays it's setting, third push moves to the next PD number.

Note- If you take too long, it will leave the programing mode on it's own. If it does, just push PRGM again to return to programing mode. Then press SET and continue what you were doing.

10) Start with PD013. Set it to 1, which returns the settings to the factory settings.

11) Then set PD005 to 400, PD004 to 400, and PD003 to 400 IN THAT ORDER.

12) Then set the following: PD041=8, PD144=3000

13) Set PD209=50

That's it for the programing. You should get 24000RPM when you push RUN.

Click the link to add information to this solution:
I JUST RECEIVED A REPLACEMENT SPINDLE (2.2KW 220V). HOWEVER, WHEN ATTEMPTED IT USE THE NEW SPINDLE, WOULD ONLY REACH 1500 RPM. IS THERE SOMETHING NEED TO CHANGE ON CONTROLLER?

Cellular telephone base stations are low-powered radiofrequency (RF) transmitters which operate at around 850-900 or 1800-1900 MHz (depending on the technology and region of the world). RF energy in a similar frequency range is used by many other technologies such as microwave ovens, UHF television, other communications systems, and radar. Health and safety issues related to RF energy have been studied for many years and there is an immense literature on the subject. Here are some sources that review health and safety issues related to RF energy from cellular base stations.

A fact sheet published by the World Health Organization. There is also a Spanish version available on the WHO EMF website.
Also see the IEEE EMBS Committee on Man and Radiation Report. Other reports are available through its website.
The International Commission on Nonionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) has published a lot on health and safety of RF energy. See its website. The ICNIRP published an article that describes the ICNIRP exposure limits for RF energy and their scientific rationale. See "Guidelines for Limiting Exposure to Time-Varying Electric, Magnetic, and Electromagnetic Fields (up to 300 GHz)," Health Physics Vol. 74, No 4, pp 494-522, 1998.
A very detailed assessment of the scientific evidence related to health and safety of mobile telephones and base stations is in the recent (May 2000) report by the Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones (IEGMP) titled "Mobile Phones and Health" This study concludes "the balance of evidence to date suggests that exposures to RF radiation at levels below [international exposure guidelines] do not cause adverse health effects to the general population" but that "there may be biological effects at exposures below those guidelines." Public exposure to RF energy from cellular base stations is invariably far below the ICNIRP exposure guidelines.

Kenneth R. Foster
Professor, Bioengineering
University of Pennsylvania

Click the link to add information to this solution:
I'M SEARCHING FOR INFORMATION ABOUT THE HEALTH RISKS OF CELLULAR ANTENNAS' RADIATION. I NEED SCIENTIFIC (SCIENTIFIC PAPERS IN JOURNALS) THIS.

The NEMA 11 16.7 oz-in motor is a dual shaft motor and the rear shaft extend 15mm or .59 inches.

I've added an image to the product page:
https://www.buildyourcnc.com/item/electronicsAndMotors-nema11-16!7ozin-NEWBIEHACK-motors-stepping_motor-16!7_ozin

Click the link to add information to this solution:
Is the NEMA 11 Stepper Motor (16.7 oz-in .185" dual shaft) 0.67 Amps actually a dual shaft stepper motor? The drawings only show the shaft coming out one side.

It is not clear that mobile phones do produce brain tumors, or any serious health effects for that matter. A number of epidemiology studies have been almost completely negative on the issue.

See the article I wrote with John Moulder in IEEE Spectrum magazine and also Moulder's FAQ on mobile phones and health.

There has been a lot of discussion over the years about the possible mechanisms by which microwave energy such as emitted by cell phones might produce biological effects. The one unequivocal mechanism is the heating of tissue, but mobile phones operate at power levels that are too low to cause noticeable heating in the user. Scientists have speculated about other mechanisms, but these theories remain unproven and many of them have been challenged on biophysical grounds.

Whatever may be the risks or nonrisks of mobile phone radiation, a hands-free kit is an effective way for the user to reduce his or her exposure to radiofrequency energy while using a mobile phone.

Kenneth R. Foster, Professor
Department of Bioengineering
University of Pennsylvania

Click the link to add information to this solution:
I WOULD LIKE TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE PHYSICS PRINCIPLES REGARDING USE OF MOBILE PHONES AND DEVELOPMENT BRAIN TUMORS. I'VE BEEN THROUGH MANY SITES BUT THEY CAN NEVER GIVE AN EXACT ANSWER. REALLY SOMEONE TUMORS OR DOES IT HAVE DO WITH INTENSITY RADIATION DISTANCE BETWEEN PHONE INDIVIDUAL?

I don't see anything in the datasheet for the relay that indicates an overheat condition. While the relay is engaged, the power consumption is 400 mW and I don't believe this is enough to raise the temperature faster than the heat dissipation from the metal on the leads through convection or radiation outside of the rated temperature working ranges providing that you maintain an ambient temperature range within -40°C to 85°C (with no icing or condensation).

http://www.omron.com/ecb/products/pdf/en-g2rl.pdf

Click the link to add information to this solution:
IS IT OK TO LEAVE THE VACUUM PRESSURE CONTROLLER PLUGGED IN ALL TIME WHEN PUMP SWITCHED OFF?

There has been a lot of public concern around the world about potential health effects from using mobile phones. This concern has spilled over to other cordless phone technologies and indeed to many other devices that transmit radiofrequency energy.
Scientists have been studying possible health and biological effects of radiofrequency energy since World War II and even before, and the literature at this point is very large. Since the 1990s many studies have been conducted on possible health effects of mobile phones. I am not aware of any studies that have searched for possible health effects of DECT phones specifically, but DECT phones operate in a generally similar frequency band and at similar average power levels as many mobile phones.

Health agencies around the world have repeatedly examined the scientific literature and have found no clear evidence of health effects from use of mobile phones, or indeed from any exposures to radiofrequency energy at levels below international exposure guidelines. But these agencies also point out the limitations to the data (for example, lack of data regarding long-term use of mobile phones) and they all call for more research. The most recent report on this subject is by a group affiliated with the Health Protection Agency of the United Kingdom (U.K.) (http://www.mthr.org.uk/documents/MTHR_report_2007.pdf).

Some activist groups (such as the one whose website you cited) claim that there are health hazards from mobile phones and other sources of radiofrequency energy at levels below international exposure limits. Such claims are not reflected in opinions of health agencies including the U.K. Health Protection Agency, the World Health Organization, and other major health agencies.

That said, if a person is concerned about possible health effects of a cordless or mobile phone, he or she might consider using a hands-free kit (which reduces exposure to the head) or simply not use such a phone at all.

Kenneth R. Foster, Professor
Department of Bioengineering

Click the link to add information to this solution:
WHILE RESEARCHING A NEW CORDLESS PHONE TECHNOLOGY (DECT [DIGITAL ENHANCED TELECOMMUNICATIONS] 6.0), I SAW REFERENCE TO POTENTIAL BRAIN DAMAGE AND/OR CANCER DUE THE RADIATION FREQUENCY AND PULSES FROM THESE DEVICES.

Physical size of the subject affects the fraction of the total radiofrequency energy that is absorbed in the body. To account for this known effect, the maximum permissible exposure standards for radiofrequency energy were set for the worst-case condition, that is assuming the body size for maximal absorption at a given frequency. Thus the maximum permissible exposure standards are fully protective for bodies of different sizes. For more detailed information, see the answers and the cited references to questions 79, 109, 694, and 893 under the Nonionizing Radiation section of the Health Physics Society Ask The Expert Web page. Gary H. Zeman, ScD, CHP

Click the link to add information to this solution:
WHAT EFFECTS OF CELL PHONES WILL THERE BE ON YOUNGER PEOPLE OPPOSED TO OLDER PEOPLE? THE AGE OR STATE DEVELOPMENT EFFECT DANGERS A PHONE?

Try slowing your feedrate down and increasing spindle RPMs. End-mills will leave a poor finish if you go too fast. Make sure your cutting depth isn't too much. Maybe the endmill or cutter is blunt? Could it be the feed direction of the cutter? Some materials need to be fed in a certain direction.

Click the link to add information to this solution:
MOTOR GOING TWO DIRECTION WHEN JUST PUSH UP. IT WILL GO DOWN AND THEN GOES AGAIN UP WITH THE SAME BUTTON.

As of January 1, 2006, the use of a VIS for influenza vaccine given to a child or an adult became mandatory under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Two VISs are published annually, one for LAIV and one for TIV. Each can be found at www.immunize.org/vis along with many translations.

Click the link to add information to this solution:
A VACCINE INFORMATION STATEMENT (VIS) MANDATORY OR IT ONLY RECOMMENDED WHEN ADMINISTERING INFLUENZA VACCINE?

There are a number of opportunistic gadgets on the market to allegedly protect the user from hazards of cellular phones. You can search the Internet to find the latest, ranging from antenna shields to whole-body shielding materials. Most experts believe that these devices take advantage of customers' misunderstanding and unfounded fears to sell products with no real value. First of all, cell phones that operate within the guidelines established by national and international safety panels have never been shown to pose a health risk to the user (see answers to other questions on cell phone safety on this website). Secondly, placing any kind of shield over the antenna of a cell phone will in most cases cause it to increase its RF output as it attempts to compensate for signal loss in the shield and maintain a quality phone call. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration published an advisory on cell phones several years ago that said if you are concerned about risks of using a cell phone, then simply use it less. That is still good advice today. Gary Zeman, ScD, CHP Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Additional Information:



Additional Information:

Click the link to add information to this solution:
ARE THERE PRODUCTS AVAILABLE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC THAT CAN BE PURCHASED PROTECT CELLULAR OR PORTABLE TELEPHONE USERS FROM RADIATION? IF SO, WHERE THESE FOUND?

The best single reference is the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Website. Look for:
Bulletin 56, "Questions and Answers about Biological Effects and Potential Hazards of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields,"

Bulletin 65, "Evaluating Compliance With FCC Guidelines for Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields,"

"A Local Government Official's Guide to Transmitting Antenna RF Emission Safety: Rules, Procedures, and Practical Guidance."
An excellent technical paper with field measurements of cell-tower emissions was published by R.C. Petersen and P.A. Testagrossa in the journal Bioelectromagnetics, volume 13, page 527ff, 1992. If you need onsite technical support and services there are various consultants available, such as Richard Tell Associates, Inc. Gary Zeman, ScD, CHP Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Click the link to add information to this solution:
I NEED HELP IN GATHERING PUBLISHED INFORMATION ABOUT THE RISKS POSED BY CELL TOWERS PLACED ON SCHOOL GROUNDS. THERE WHICH WOULD ENABLE ME TO GATHER/CALCULATE OR MEASURE RADIATION SPECIFIC SITE?

The video showing the hookup of the large motors showed a sequence that was not correct, or I totally misread what was recommended. I hooked the first motor up that way and it would only go in one direction in a very jerky mode. I confirmed that i had hooked it up the way the video showed, disconnected the wiring that runs through to the motor and reconnected it, thinking maybe a cold solder joint was the problem. No good. I finally went to the motor page that showed a different connection pattern. I tried the one that the motor page said to do, and it works smoothly and in the right direction now.

Click the link to add information to this solution:
my motor only goes one direction. I checked all the wiring and it's correct. Any suggestions?

The assembly instructions for the greenBull v2 are through an instruction set emailed to the customer that purchased the machine kit.

Click the link to add information to this solution:
Are there any videos or other sources of information on assembling the greenBull v2?

Headsets have been tested by the manufacturers and meet the current ANSI/IEEE standards for RF safety, the same standards that the Federal Communications Commission enforces under the Telecommunications Act of 1996. These standards place limits on the specific absorption rate (SAR) of radiofrequency (RF) energy in the body. Recent inflamatory articles in British press were not substantiated by testing in ISO-accredited testing facilities at Motorola. Manufacturers of cellular phones are required under FCC regulations to assure that their products meet the SAR limits on both hand-held and hands-free units. Further information may be available from the FDA or from the FCC. Ron Petersen, Lucent C.K. Chou, Motorola

Click the link to add information to this solution:
HAVE THERE BEEN ANY STUDIES OF POSSIBLE RADIATION DANGER FROM HEADSETS USED WITH HANDSETS CORDED TELEPHONES? I A TELEPHONE BATTERY-POWERED HANDSET. THIS HANDSET HAS JACK FOR HEADSET, SO YOU CAN WALK AROUND THE HOUSE AND YARD ON YOUR BELT WHILE TALK INTO HEADSET. EITHER OR HEADSET GIVING OFF RADIATION, LIKE CELLULAR PHONE? DANGEROUS AMOUNT RADIATION?

There are several CAD/CAM programs out there for MacOS. Here is a list of a few: http://www.macuser.de/forum/f53/3d-2d-cad-395058/#post4499316
I've also read good things about punchCAD: http://www.punchcad.com/
Of course, there is always SketchUp if you are in a pinch. There are a few CAM plugins for SketchUp as well, but I've never used them, so I can't vouch for them.

CAD/CAM will get you as far as designing your parts and producing the g-code, but if you also want to run the CNC machine with your Mac, you will need a piece of software similar to Mach3 or EMC to run the g-code. I haven't been able to find anything like these programs that runs on Mac, so you may have to run Mach3 or EMC in Windows using Boot Camp or a virtual machine such as VMware or Parallels.

Personally, I would use the Mac to do all the CAD/CAM, then use a cheap PC to run the CNC machine.

Additional Information:


Additional Information:
EasyDNC for OSX
www.dnc-x.com

Additional Information:


Additional Information:
Hi guys I’m new to the cnc and I’m beginning to learn how to operate and cad-cam software also my cnc runs on Mach3 my questions is if I should use MacBook to do all designs if I can have all this software to run on Mac or I have to use windows software to operate it? I have separate small computer connected to the cnc table who have Mach3 on it please help. Also if you know any other software much easy for beginners please let me know thank you guys!
My email if needed is r1jastrzebski@gmail.com

Additional Information:


Additional Information:
Hi , thank you for your advise!

Additional Information:
Hi , thank you for your advise!

Additional Information:
Hi , thank you for your advise!

Additional Information:
Hi , thank you for your advise!

Additional Information:

Click the link to add information to this solution:
DOES ANY OF THE SOFTWARE THAT COMES WITH IT COMPATIBLE MAC 10.6?