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 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.

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?

Whenever they are turned on, cell phones communicate at infrequent intervals with a nearby base station even when they are not being used for a call. This is necessary to tell the system where the user is in case a call should come in. Thus, even while they are inactive, the phones are a source of (very low) radiofrequency energy exposure to the user. Hands-free kits reduce exposure to a user by removing the phone from the vicinity of the head. There is no identifiable health benefit in using the kits, but there is no detriment either, and using them may increase a user's peace of mind. Contrary to a widely publicized report by a British magazine last year, the kits are effective in reducing exposure. (This is not necessarily true of other devices that can be bought to be used with phones.) In your case, the cell phone and hands-free kit are clearly an important link to the outside world and I would not hesitate in using them. There may be comfort issues with having the earpiece in place for a long time, but radiofrequency radiation exposure should not be a concern at all. The hands-free kits will reduce exposure below that which you would receive if the phone were kept close to your head. Kenneth R. Foster Professor, Department of Bioengineering

Click the link to add information to this solution:
DOES THE RADIATION ONLY EXIST WHEN I'M ACTUALLY MAKING A CALL, OR JUST ANY TIME PHONE ON?

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?

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?

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?

Did you connect the USB connector to the breakout board?

Additional Information:
YES I CONNECTED THE USB TO THE BREAKOUT BOARD

Click the link to add information to this solution:
I connected the electronics (for 2 x 4 feet) that I ordered from you. But how do I check if I connected all the wiring properly. There is neither any light on motor drivers nor on breakout board. And the motor shaft also does not move before and after the power supply is given.

blackToe requires a minimum cable length of of 15 ft for X, 17 ft for Y and 18 ft for Z for the redLeaf to be positioned at midpoint along the long axis and under the table. Each axis would need have 6 feet extra (form the midpoint)

Click the link to add information to this solution:
IF WE ASSUME DESIRE TO PLACE THE RED LEAF 6' AWAY FROM TABLE, HOW MUCH CABLE IS NEEDED CONNECT MOTORS ON TABLE ITSELF?

You should use the linuxcnc.org site and click on the download menu item. They have an EU mirror as the main download option.

Click the link to add information to this solution:
AM STRUGGLING TO DOWNLOAD THE LINUX EMC2 FREEWARE. MY GET INTERRUPTED AT LAST MINUTE. IS THERE ANOTHER WAY OR PLACE WHERE COULD MAYBE TRY IT FROM?

If you select the Settings Page and select or tick Auto Limit Override - this will allow you to back off the switch.

Additional Information:
limit and home switch

Click the link to add information to this solution:
IS THERE A WAY TO GET RID OF THE PARALLEL CABLE AND SOMEHOW USE USB ?

What 3d printer do you have?

Additional Information:
whiteant

Click the link to add information to this solution:
HAVE 3D PRINTER THAT WANT TO MAKE CNC ROUTER ,IS THERE ANY GUIDES SHOW ME THE WAY

We are currently working on a relay board that will connect to USB breakout board, and the router/spindle for both the on/off function. Unfortunately we still do not have it completed or ready to be placed on our website, but it is in the final stages of testing. Please check back regularly for updated stock!

Here is a link to a tutorial for a DIY relay circuit:

Click the link to add information to this solution:
I AM PUTTING TOGETHER THE BLACKFOOT AND USING A PORTER CABLE ROUTER. CONFUSED ON HOW TO RELAY ROUTETR WITH USB BOARD. IS THERE ANOTHER SWITCH THAT GOES BETWEEN BOARD ROUTER SO PLANET CNC CAN TURN PERHAPS VACUUM OFF?

Conceptually it is straightforward to predict the radiofrequency (RF) exposure intensity at any point in the vicinity of a cellular radio base station antenna. Simply multiply the effective radiation power times the inverse square of the distance times the relative gain of the antenna in the direction of the interest. The relative gain in different directions is know as the antenna radiation pattern and is usually available from the antenna manufacturer in graphical or tabular form.

Unfortunately, in real life the calculations involved in base station antenna evaluations are quite complex and require expert knowledge and experience to deal with the many parameters that are involved. An excellent reference summarizing this process is the Federal Communications Commission OET Bulletin No. 65 titled "Evaluating Compliance With FCC Guidelines for Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields," available on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) website.

To assess the RF hazards associated with handheld cell phones it is necessary to predict the rate of absorption in the body of radiofrequency energy, a parameter called the specific absorption rate (SAR). This is a very complex calculation, and cell phone manufacturers often rely on measurements of SAR in fluid-filled cylinders or plastic containers in the shape of a head. The FCC requires cell phone manufacturers to provide this data to FCC. You can obtain the data for your model phone on the the FCC's website. Unfortunately only cell phones manufactured in the last couple years are listed here.

As to your question about keeping RF exposures within the safety code, please read the other questions posted on this website this matter. Cellular radio products that meet FCC requirements will be within the guidelines established by safety standards organizations for users' and public exposure to RF radiation fields.

Gary H. Zeman, ScD, CHP

Click the link to add information to this solution:
FIRST OF ALL, THANKS FOR DESIGNING A WONDERFUL SITE. MY QUESTION IS: HOW DO YOU CALCULATE EME (ELECTROMAGNETIC EMISSIONS) AROUND THE TRANSMITTER (ANTENNA) AT ANY GIVEN POINT AND WHAT ARE MEASURES TO KEEP IT UNDER SAFETY CODE?

At this time we are working to release a new USB controller board that will be compatible with Mach4 software and do not have any immediate plans to update the Planet-CNC USB board.

Click the link to add information to this solution:
Are there plans to release a USB Controller to work with the Planet CNC Output Board for more advanced spindle control from within Planet CNC?

This video may serve helpful on the homing and limit switches:
https://www.buildyourcnc.com/PrimeronHomingandLimitSwitches.aspx

I don't go into great detail on the wiring, however. If after you watch that video and you still need a video, please let me know and I will make a video on the wiring of limit switches and the E-stop button.

Click the link to add information to this solution:
Are there any videos detailing wiring of limit switches and stop button?

If you are located near Houston, Texas area you can stop by our shop. If you are not near us, you can check in our forums, and see if you can find someone in your area that has one of our machines, and would be willing to let you come see it in action.

Click the link to add information to this solution:
I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF THERE IS A STORE OR SHOP WHERE CAN SEE THE PRODUCT AND BUY IT?

You will need a cam program to create machining operations for the geometry in the .dwg file. The CAM program outputs these machining operations into g-code for the control program (planet-cnc) to use.

I have a couple of tutorials that explain this concept.
http://www.buildyourcnc.com/tutorials/Tutorial-sketchup-fabrication-fabricate-cad-cam-dxf

The following is an older video but get's the point across:
http://www.buildyourcnc.com/process1.aspx

Additional Information:

Click the link to add information to this solution:
HAVE CAD FILES (.DWG AND .DWF) FOR THE GUITARS. HOW DO LOAD THEM INTO PLANT CNC SOFTWARE USE?