R0401124S

jennifer

SAR report

Continental Conair Limited HUM1200 GMRS Radio LBBHUM1200 LBBHUM1200 hum1200

PDF Viewing Options

Not Your Device? Search For Manuals or Datasheets below:


File Info : application/pdf, 41 Pages, 2.65MB

Document DEVICE REPORTGetApplicationAttachment.html?id=398373
SAR EVALUATION REPORT
For

Continental Conair Limited
35/F Standard Chartered Tower Millennium City, 388 Kwun Tong Road
Kwun Tong, Kowloon, HK

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

2004-02-02

This Report Concerns: Original Report

Equipment Type:
GMRS Radio

Test Engineer: Eric Hong /

Report No.: R0401124S Test Date: 2004-01-013
Reviewed By: Ling Zhang /

Prepared By:

Bay Area Compliance Laboratory Corporation 230 Commercial Street Sunnyvale, CA 94085 Tel: (408) 732-9162 Fax: (408) 732 9164

Note: This test report is specially limited to the above client company and the product model only. It may not be duplicated without prior written consent of Bay Area Compliance Laboratory Corporation. This report must not be used by the client to claim product endorsement by NVLAP or any agency of the U.S. Government.

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY....................................................................................................................................................................3
1 - REFERENCE ...........................................................................................................................................................4
2 - TESTING EQUIPMENT.........................................................................................................................................5 2.2 EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION CERTIFICATE ...............................................................................................................5
3 - EUT DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................................................................17
4 - SYSTEM TEST CONFIGURATION...................................................................................................................18 4.1 JUSTIFICATION .....................................................................................................................................................18 4.2 EUT EXERCISE PROCEDURE ................................................................................................................................18 4.3 EQUIPMENT MODIFICATIONS ...............................................................................................................................18
5 ­ CONDUCTED OUTPUT POWER......................................................................................................................19 5.1 PROVISION APPLICABLE.......................................................................................................................................19 5.2 TEST PROCEDURE ................................................................................................................................................19 5.3 TEST EQUIPMENT .................................................................................................................................................19 5.4 TEST RESULTS .....................................................................................................................................................19
6 - DOSIMETRIC ASSESSMENT SETUP...............................................................................................................20 6.1 MEASUREMENT SYSTEM DIAGRAM .....................................................................................................................21 6.2 SYSTEM COMPONENTS.........................................................................................................................................22 6.3 MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY............................................................................................................................26
7 - SYSTEM EVALUATION .....................................................................................................................................27 7.1 SIMULATED TISSUE LIQUID PARAMETER CONFIRMATION ...................................................................................27 7.2 EVALUATION PROCEDURES..................................................................................................................................27 7.3 SYSTEM ACCURACY VERIFICATION .....................................................................................................................28 7.4 SAR EVALUATION PROCEDURE...........................................................................................................................31 7.5 EXPOSURE LIMITS................................................................................................................................................32
8 - TEST RESULTS ....................................................................................................................................................33 8.1 SAR TEST DATA..................................................................................................................................................33 8.2 PLOTS OF TEST RESULT .......................................................................................................................................33
EXHIBIT A - SAR SETUP PHOTOGRAPHS .........................................................................................................36 BODY-WORN WITH BELT CLIP & HEADSET IN TOUCHING WITH PHANTOM...............................................................36 2.5CM SEPARATION TO FLAT PHANTOM.....................................................................................................................36
EXHIBIT B - EUT PHOTOGRAPHS .......................................................................................................................37 CHASSIS - FRONT VIEW .............................................................................................................................................37 CHASSIS ­ REAR VIEW...............................................................................................................................................37 EUT ­ TOP VIEW.......................................................................................................................................................38 EUT ­ HOUSING AND BOARD VIEW ..........................................................................................................................38 EUT - COMPONENT VIEW..........................................................................................................................................39 EUT ­ COMPONENT VIEW WITH SHIELDING REMOVED.............................................................................................39 EUT ­ SOLDER VIEW ................................................................................................................................................40 EUT ­ ANTENNA CONNECTION VIEW .......................................................................................................................40
EXHIBIT C ­ Z-AXIS.................................................................................................................................................41

Report #R0401124S

Page 2 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

SUMMARY

The US Federal Communications Commission has released the report and order "Guidelines for Evaluating the Environmental Effects of RF Radiation", ET Docket No. 93-62 in August 1996 [1].

The order requires routine SAR evaluation prior to equipment authorization of portable transmitter devices, including portable telephones. For consumer products, the applicable limit is 1.6 mW/g as recommended by the ANSI/IEEE standard C95.1-1992 [6] for an uncontrolled environment (Paragraph 65). According to the Supplement C of OET Bulletin 65 "Evaluating Compliance with FCC Guide-lines for Human Exposure to Radio frequency Electromagnetic Fields", released on Jun 29, 2001 by the FCC, the device should be evaluated at maximum output power (radiated from the antenna) under "worst-case" conditions for normal or intended use, incorporating normal antenna operating positions, device peak performance frequencies and positions for maximum RF energy coupling.
This report describes the methodology and results of experiments performed on wireless data terminal. The objective was to determine if there is RF radiation and if radiation is found, what is the extent of radiation with respect to safety limits. SAR (Specific Absorption Rate) is the measure of RF exposure determined by the amount of RF energy absorbed by human body (or its parts) ­ to determine how the RF energy couples to the body or head which is a primary health concern for body worn devices. The limit below which the exposure to RF is considered safe by regulatory bodies in North America is 1.6 mW/g average over 1 gram of tissue mass.
The test configurations were laid out on a specially designed test fixture to ensure the reproducibility of measurements. Each configuration was scanned for SAR. Analysis of each scan was carried out to characterize the above effects in the device.
The investigation was limited to the worst-case scenario from the device usage point of view. For the clarity of data analysis, and clarity of presentation, only one tissue simulation was used for the head and body simulation. This means that if SAR was found at the headset position, the magnitude of SAR would be overestimated comparing to SAR to a headset placed in the ear region.
There was no SAR of any concern measured on the device for any of the investigated configurations, please see following table for testing result summary:
Ambient Temperature (ºC): 23.0 Relative Humidity (%): 49.3
Worst case SAR reading

EUT position

Frequency Output (MHz) Power (W)

Back touching

phantom 462.7250

1.8

Face 2.5 cm

separation from

phantom 462.7250

1.8

Test Type
Body worn
Faceheld

Antenna Type

Liquid

Phantom

Notes / Accessories

Measured (mW/g) Limit 50% 100% (mW/g) duty duty

cycle cycle

With belt clip

Built-in body flat & headset 0.685 1.37 1.6

Built-in head flat

None 0.555 1.11 1.6

Plot #
1
2

Report #R0401124S

Page 3 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

1 - REFERENCE

[1] Federal Communications Commission, \Report and order: Guidelines for evaluating the environmental effects of radiofrequency radiation", Tech. Rep. FCC 96-326, FCC, Washington, D.C. 20554, 1996.
[2] David L. Means Kwok Chan, Robert F. Cleveland, \Evaluating compliance with FCC guidelines for human exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields", Tech. Rep., Federal Communication Commission, O_ce of Engineering & Technology, Washington, DC, 1997.
[3] Thomas Schmid, Oliver Egger, and Niels Kuster, \Automated E-field scanning system for dosimetric assessments", IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, vol. 44, pp. 105{113, Jan. 1996.
[4] Niels Kuster, Ralph K.astle, and Thomas Schmid, \Dosimetric evaluation of mobile communications equipment with known precision", IEICE Transactions on Communications, vol. E80-B, no. 5, pp. 645{652, May 1997.
[5] CENELEC, \Considerations for evaluating of human exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) from mobile telecommunication equipment (MTE) in the frequency range 30MHz - 6GHz", Tech. Rep., CENELEC, European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization, Brussels, 1997.
[6] ANSI, ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992: IEEE Standard for Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 kHz to 300 GHz, The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., New York, NY 10017, 1992.
[7] Katja Pokovic, Thomas Schmid, and Niels Kuster, \Robust setup for precise calibration of E-field probes in tissue simulating liquids at mobile communications frequencies", in ICECOM _ 97, Dubrovnik, October 15{17, 1997, pp. 120-24.
[8] Katja Pokovic, Thomas Schmid, and Niels Kuster, \E-_eld probe with improved isotropy in brain simulating liquids", in Proceedings of the ELMAR, Zadar, Croatia, 23{25 June, 1996, pp. 172-175.
[9] Volker Hombach, Klaus Meier, Michael Burkhardt, Eberhard K. uhn, and Niels Kuster, \The depen-dence of EM energy absorption upon human head modeling at 900 MHz", IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, vol. 44, no. 10, pp. 1865-1873, Oct. 1996.
[10] Klaus Meier, Ralf Kastle, Volker Hombach, Roger Tay, and Niels Kuster, \The dependence of EM energy absorption upon human head modeling at 1800 MHz", IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, Oct. 1997, in press.
[11] W. Gander, Computermathematik, Birkhaeuser, Basel, 1992.
[12] W. H. Press, S. A. Teukolsky,W. T. Vetterling, and B. P. Flannery, Numerical Recepies in C, The Art of Scientific Computing, Second Edition, Cambridge University Press, 1992.Dosimetric Evaluation of Sample device, month 1998 9
[13] NIS81 NAMAS, \The treatment of uncertainity in EMC measurement", Tech. Rep., NAMAS Executive, National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, Middlesex, England, 1994.
[14] Barry N. Taylor and Christ E. Kuyatt, \Guidelines for evaluating and expressing the uncertainty of NIST measurement results", Tech. Rep., National Institute of Standards and Technology, 1994. Dosimetric Evaluation of Sample device, month 1998 10

Report #R0401124S

Page 4 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited
2 - TESTING EQUIPMENT
Type / Model DASY3 Professional Dosimetric System Robot RX60L Robot Controller Dell Computer Optiplex GX110 Pentium III, Windows NT SPEAG EDC3 SPEAG DAE3 SPEAG E-Field Probe ET3DV6 SPEAG Dummy Probe SPEAG Generic Twin Phantom SPEAG Light Alignment Sensor Apprel Validation Dipole D-1800-S-2 SPEAG Validation Dipole D900V2 Brain Equivalent Matter (800MHz) Brain Equivalent Matter (1900MHz) Brain Equivalent Matter (2450MHz) Muscle Equivalent Matter (800MHz) Muscle Equivalent Matter (1900MHz) Muscle Equivalent Matter (2450MHz) Robot Table Phone Holder Phantom Cover HP Spectrum Analyzer HP8593GM Microwave Amp. 8349B Power Meter HP436A Power Sensor HP8482A Signal Generator RS SMIQ O3 Network Analyzer HP-8753ES Dielectric Probe Kit HP85070A Apprel Validation Dipole D-2450-S-1 Dipole Antenna AD-100 (450MHz)
2.2 Equipment Calibration Certificate
Please see the attached file.

Cal. Date N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 6/04 9/7/02 N/A N/A N/A 11/6/04 9/3/04 Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily N/A N/A N/A 6/20/04 N/A 4/2/04 4/2/04 2/10/04 7/30/04 N/A 10/1/04 5/7/04

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200
S/N: N/A F00/5H31A1/A/01 F01/5J72A1/A/01 N/A N/A N/A 456 1604 N/A N/A 278 BCL-049 122 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3009A00791 2644A02662 2709A29209 2349A08568 1084800403 820079 N/A BCL-141 02220

Report #R0401124S

Page 5 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

Report #R0401124S

Page 6 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

Report #R0401124S

Page 7 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

Report #R0401124S

Page 8 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

Report #R0401124S

Page 9 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

Report #R0401124S

Page 10 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

Report #R0401124S

Page 11 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

Report #R0401124S

Page 12 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

Report #R0401124S

Page 13 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

Report #R0401124S

Page 14 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

450MHz Body Liquid Validation

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

 =  o " = 2  f o "=0.9189 where f = 450x 106
o = 8.854 x 10-12 " = 36.7084

Report #R0401124S

Page 15 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

450MHz Head Liquid Validation

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

 =  where

o f

" = 2 = 450x

10f 6o

"=0.9141

o = 8.854 x 10-12

" = 36.5147

Report #R0401124S

Page 16 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

3 - EUT DESCRIPTION

Applicant: Product Description: FCC ID: Serial Number:
Transmitter Frequency: Maximum Output Power: Dimension: RF Exposure environment: Power Supply: Applicable Standard Application Type:

Continental Conair Limited GMRS Radio LBBHUM1200 0003
462.5625~467.725 MHz 1.8 W 7.9" L x 2.6"W x 17"H approximately General Population/Uncontrolled Battery FCC CFR 47, Part 95 Certification

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

1 Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) is a measure of the rate of energy absorption due to exposure to an RF transmitting source (wireless portable device). 2 IEEE/ANSI Std. C95.1-1992 limits are used to determine compliance with FCC ET Docket 93-62.
Note: The test data gathered are from production sample, serial number: #0003, provided by the manufacturer.

Report #R0401124S

Page 17 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

4 - SYSTEM TEST CONFIGURATION
4.1 Justification
The system was configured for testing in a typical fashion (as normally used by a typical user).

4.2 EUT Exercise Procedure
The EUT exercising program used during SAR testing was designed to exercise the various system components in a manner similar to a typical use. The EUT was tested by pushing the PTT bottom during the testing.

4.3 Equipment Modifications
No modification(s) were made to the EUT.

Report #R0401124S

Page 18 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

5 ­ CONDUCTED OUTPUT POWER
5.1 Provision Applicable
Per FCC §2.1046 and FCC § 95.639 (d), no FRS unit, under any condition of modulation, shall exceed 0.500W effective radiated power (ERP).
Per FCC §2.1046 and FCC § 95.639 (a) (1), no GMRS unit, under any condition of modulation, shall exceed 50W Carrier Power (average TP during one unmodulated RF cycle) when transmission type A1D, F1D, .G1D, A3E, F3E or G3E.

5.2 Test Procedure
The RF output of the transmitter was connected to the input of the spectrum analyzer through sufficient attenuation.

5.3 Test equipment
Hewlett Packard HP8564E Spectrum Analyzer, Calibration Date: 2003-08-01. Hewlett Packard HP 7470A Plotter, Calibration not required. A.H. Systems SAS200 Horn Antenna, Calibration Date: 2003-05-31 Com-Power AB-100 Dipole Antenna, Calibration Date: 2003-09-05

5.4 Test Results

Frequency (MHz)

Output Power in dBm

Output Power in W

462.718

32.5

1.8

Limit (W, ERP) 50

Note: The output power measured is conducted. During SAR, it is more convenient to measure conducted power rather than EIRP. EMC measurements only required EIRP and results are within 9% between EIRP and conducted.

Please refer to the following plots.

Report #R0401124S

Page 19 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

6 - DOSIMETRIC ASSESSMENT SETUP

These measurements were performed with the automated near-field scanning system DASY3 from Schmid & Partner Engineering AG (SPEAG). The system is based on a high precision robot (working range greater than 0.9m) which positions the probes with a positional repeatability of better than ±0.02mm. Special E- and H-field probes have been developed for measurements close to material discontinuity, the sensors of which are directly loaded with a Schottky diode and connected via highly resistive lines to the data acquisition unit. The system is described in detail in [3].
The SAR measurements were conducted with the dosimetric probe ET3DV6 SN: 1604 (manufactured by SPEAG), designed in the classical triangular configuration [3] and optimized for dosimetric evaluation. The probe has been calibrated according to the procedure described in [7] with accuracy of better than ±10%. The spherical isotropy was evaluated with the procedure described in [8] and found to be better than ±0.25dB.
The phantom used was the \Generic Twin Phantom" described in [4]. The ear was simulated as a spacer of 4 mm thickness between the earpiece of the phone and the tissue simulating liquid. The Tissue simulation liquid used for each test is in according with the FCC OET65 supplement C as listed below.

Ingredients (% by weight) Tissue Type
Water Salt (Nacl)
Sugar HEC Bactericide Triton x-100 DGBE Dielectric Constant Conductivity (s/m)

450 Head Body 38.56 51.16 3.95 1.49 56.32 46.78 0.98 0.52 0.19 0.05 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 43.42 58.0 0.85 0.83

835 Head Body 41.45 52.4 1.45 1.4 56.0 45.0 1.0 1.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 42.54 55.2 0.91 0.97

Frequency (MHz)

915

Head Body

41.05 56.0

1.35 0.76

56.5 41.76

1.0

1.21

0.1

0.27

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

42.0 55.9

1.0

0.98

1900

Head Body

54.9 40.4

0.18 0.5

0.0 58.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

0.1

0.0

0.0

44.92 0.0

39.9 53.3

1.42 1.52

2450 Head Body 62.7 73.2 0.5 0.04 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 36.8 0.0 0.0 26.7 39.8 53.6 1.88 1.81

Report #R0401124S

Page 20 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited
6.1 Measurement System Diagram

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

The DASY3 system for performing compliance tests consist of the following items:
1. A standard high precision 6-axis robot (Stäubli RX family) with controller and software. 2. An arm extension for accommodating the data acquisition electronics (DAE). 3. A dosimetric probe, i.e., an isotropic E-field probe optimized and calibrated for usage in tissue
simulating liquid. The probe is equipped with an optical surface detector system. 4. A data acquisition electronic (DAE), which performs the signal amplification, signal
multiplexing, AD-conversion, offset measurements, mechanical surface detection, collision detection, etc. The unit is battery powered with standard or rechargeable batteries. The signal is optically transmitted to the EOC. 5. A unit to operate the optical surface detector, which is connected to the EOC. The Electro-optical coupler (EOC) performs the conversion from the optical into a digital electric signal of the DAE. The EOC is connected to the PC plug-in card. The functions of the PC plug-in card based on a DSP is to perform the time critical task such as signal filtering, surveillance of the robot operation fast movement interrupts. 6. A computer operating Windows 95 or larger 7. DASY3 software 8. Remote control with teaches pendant and additional circuitry for robot safety such as warning lamps, etc. 9. The generic twin phantom enabling testing left-hand and right-hand usage. 10. The device holder for handheld EUT. 11. Tissue simulating liquid mixed according to the given recipes (see Application Note). 12. System validation dipoles to validate the proper functioning of the system.

Report #R0401124S

Page 21 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited
6.2 System Components
ET3DV6 Probe Specification Construction Symmetrical design with triangular core Built-in optical fiber for surface detection System Built-in shielding against static charges Calibration In air from 10 MHz to 2.5 GHz In brain and muscle simulating tissue at Frequencies of 450 MHz, 900 MHz and 1.8 GHz (accuracy ± 8%) Frequency 10 MHz to > 6 GHz; Linearity: ± 0.2 dB (30 MHz to 3 GHz) Directivity ± 0.2 dB in brain tissue (rotation around probe axis) ± 0.4 dB in brain tissue (rotation normal probe axis) Dynamic 5 mW/g to > 100 mW/g; Range Linearity: ± 0.2 dB Surface ± 0.2 mm repeatability in air and clear liquids Detection over diffuse reflecting surfaces. Dimensions Overall length: 330 mm Tip length: 16 mm Body diameter: 12 mm Tip diameter: 6.8 mm Distance from probe tip to dipole centers: 2.7 mm Application General dosimetric up to 3 GHz Compliance tests of mobile phones Fast automatic scanning in arbitrary phantoms
The SAR measurements were conducted with the dosimetric probe ET3DV6 designed in the classical triangular configuration and optimized for dosimetric evaluation. The probe is constructed using the thick film technique; with printed resistive lines on ceramic substrates. The probe is equipped with an optical multi-fiber line ending at the front of the probe tip. It is connected to the EOC box on the robot arm and provides an automatic detection of the phantom surface. Half of the fibers are connected to a pulsed infrared transmitter, the other half to a synchronized receiver. As the probe approaches the surface, the reflection from the surface produces a coupling from the transmitting to the receiving fibers. This reflection increases first during the approach, reaches maximum and then decreases. If the probe is flatly touching the surface, the coupling is zero. The distance of the coupling maximum to the surface is independent of the surface reflectivity and largely independent of the surface to probe angle. The DASY3 software reads the reflection during a software approach and looks for the maximum using a 2 nd order fitting. The approach is stopped when reaching the maximum.

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200 Photograph of the probe
Inside view of ET3DV6 E-field Probe

Report #R0401124S

Page 22 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

E-Field Probe Calibration Process

Each probe is calibrated according to a dosimetric assessment procedure described in [6] with accuracy better than +/- 10%. The spherical isotropy was evaluated with the procedure described in [7] and found to be better than +/-0.25dB. The sensitivity parameters (NormX, NormY, NormZ), the diode compression parameter (DCP) and the conversion factor (ConvF) of the probe are tested.

The free space E-field from amplified probe outputs is determined in a test chamber. This is performed in a TEM cell for frequencies bellow 1 GHz, and in a waveguide above 1 GHz for free space. For the free space calibration, the probe is placed in the volumetric center of the cavity and at the proper orientation with the field. The probe is then rotated 360 degrees.

E-field temperature correlation calibration is performed in a flat phantom filled with the appropriate simulated brain tissue. The measured free space E-field in the medium correlates to temperature rise in dielectric medium. For temperature correlation calibration a RF transparent thermistor-based temperature probe is used in conjunction with the E-field probe.

Data Evaluation

The DASY3 software automatically executes the following procedures to calculate the field units from the microvolt readings at the probe connector. The parameters used in the evaluation are stored in the configuration modules of the software:

Probe Parameter:
Device parameter: Media parameter:

-Sensitivity -Conversion Factor -Diode compression point -Frequency -Crest Factor -Conductivity -Density

Normi, ai0, ai1, ai2 ConvFi Dcpi f cf  

These parameters must be set correctly in the software. They can either be found in the component documents or be imported into the software from the configuration files issued for the DASY3 components. In the direct measuring mode of the multi-meter option, the parameters of the actual system setup are used. In the scan visualization and export modes, the parameters stored in the corresponding document files are used.

The first step of the evaluation is a linearization of the filtered input signal to account for the compression characteristics of the detector diode. The compensation depends on the input signal, the diode type and the DC-transmission factor from the diode to the evaluation electronics. If the exciting field is pulsed, the crest factor of the signal must be known to correctly compensate for peak power. The formula for each channel can be given as:
Vi = Ui + (Ui)2 cf / dcpi

With Vi = compensated signal of channel i (i =x, y, z) Ui = input signal of channel i (i =x, y, z) cf = crest factor of exciting field (DASY parameter) dcpi = diode compression point (DASY parameter)

Report #R0401124S

Page 23 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

From the compensated input signals the primary field data for each channel can be evaluated:

With

Vi = compensated signal of channel i (i =x, y, z) Normi = sensor sensitivity of channel i (i =x, y, z)
µV/ (V/m)2 for E-field probes ConF = sensitivity enhancement in solution aij = sensor sensitivity factors for H-field probes f = carrier frequency [GHz] Ei = electric field strenggy of channel i in V/m
Hi = diode compression point (DASY parameter)

The RSS value of the field components gives the total field strength (Hermitian magnitude): Etot = Square Root [(Ex)2 + (Ey)2+ (Ez)2]

The primary field data are used to calculate the derived field units. SAR = (Etot) 2  /( 1000)

With

SAR = local specific absorption rate in mW/g
Etot = total field strength in V/m  = conductivity in [mho/m] or [Siemens/m]  = equivalent tissue density in g/cm3

Note that the density is normally set to 1 (or 1.06), to account for actual brain density rather than the density of the simulation liquid.

The power flow density is calculated assuming the excitation field as a free space field. Ppwe = (Etot)2 / 3770 or Ppwe = (Htot)2  37.7

With Ppwe = equivalent power density of a plane wave in mW/cm3 Etot = total electric filed strength in V/m Htot = total magnetic filed strength in V/m

Report #R0401124S

Page 24 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited
Generic Twin Phantom
The Generic Twin Phantom is constructed of a fiberglass shell integrated in a wooden table. The shape of the shell is based on data from an anatomical study designed to determine the maximum exposure in at least 90% of all users [9][10]. It enables the dosimetric evaluation of left and right hand phone usage as well as body mounted usage at the flat phantom region. A cover prevents the evaporation of the liquid. Reference markings on the Phantom allows the complete setup of all predefined phantom positions and measurement grids by manually teaching three points in the robot. Shell Thickness 2 ± 0.1 mm Filling Volume Approx. 20 liters Dimensions 810 x 1000 x 500 mm (H x L x W)
Device Holder
In combination with the Generic Twin Phantom V3.0, the Mounting Device enables the rotation of the mounted transmitter in spherical coordinates whereby the rotation points is the ear opening. The devices can be easily, accurately, and repeatedly positioned according to the FCC and CENELEC specifications. The device holder can be locked at different phantom locations (left head, right head, flat phantom).
* Note: A simulating human hand is not used due to the complex anatomical and geometrical structure of the hand that may produced infinite number of configurations [10]. To produce the worst-case condition (the hand absorbs antenna output power), the hand is omitted during the tests.

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200 Generic Twin Phantom Device Holder

Report #R0401124S

Page 25 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

6.3 Measurement Uncertainty

The uncertainty budget has been determined for the DASY3 measurement system according to the NIS81 [13] and the NIST1297 [14] documents and is given in the following Table.

Measurement Uncertainty Analysis per

IEEE P1528-2002

Description

Section Reported Probability Divisor Ci (1g) Ui (1g)

Vi

welc/satt series term

Variance Distributio

(%)

n type

Probe Calibration

E.2.1

Axial isotropy

E.2.2

Hemispherical isotropy

E.2.2

Boundary effects

E.2.3

Linearity

E.2.4

System Detection Limit

E.2.5

Readout Electronics

E.2.6

Response time

E.2.7

Integration time

E.2.8

RF Ambient conditions

E.6.1

Probe positioning mechanical E.6.2 tolerance

Probe positioning wrt phantom E.6.3

shell

Extra/inter-polation &

E.5.2

integration algorithmsfor max

SAR evaluation

Test sample positioning

8, E.4.2

Device holder distance

E.4.1

tolerance

Output power and SAR drift 8,

measurement

E.6.6.2

Phantom uncertainty, shell E.3.1

thickness tolerance

Liquid conductivity, deviation E.3.2

from target values

Liquid conductivity, measurement uncertainty

E.3.3

Liquid permitivity, deviation E.3.2

from target values

Liquid permitivity, measurement uncertainty

E.3.3

4.80 N 4.70 R 9.60 R 8.30 R 4.70 R 1.00 R 0.00 N 0.00 R 0.00 R 3.00 R 0.40 R
2.90 R
3.90 R
6.00 R 5.00 N
5.00 R
4.00 R
5.00 R
5.00 N
5.00 R
5.00 N

1

1

1.732 0.707107

1.732 0.707107

1.732 1

1.732 1

1.732 1

1

1

1.732 1

1.732 1

1.732 1

1.732 1

1.732 1

1.732 1

4.80 1.00E+09 1.92 1.00E+09 3.92 1.00E+09 4.79 1.00E+09 2.71 1.00E+09 0.58 1.00E+09 0.00 1.00E+09 0.00 1.00E+09 0.00 1.00E+09 1.73 1.00E+09 0.23 1.00E+09
1.67 1.00E+09
2.25 1.00E+09

1.732 1

1

1

1.732 1

1.732 1

1.732 0.64

1

0.64

1.732 0.6

1

0.6

3.46 1.00E+09 5.00 1.00E+09

2.89 1.00E+09

2.31 1.00E+09

1.85 1.00E+09

3.20

5

1.73 1.00E+09

3.00

5

Probe isotropy sensitivity 0.5

coefficient

Combined Standard

Uncertainty

Expanded Uncertainty, 95%

k=

confidence

2.004

12.65 % 25.34 %

5.30842E-07 1.35563E-08 2.35957E-07 5.27377E-07
5.4225E-08 1.11124E-10
0 0 0 9.00106E-09 2.84478E-12
7.8596E-09
2.57079E-08
1.44017E-07 0.000000625
6.94526E-08
2.84478E-08
1.16522E-08
20.97152
9.00106E-09
16.2
689

Report #R0401124S

Page 26 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

7 - SYSTEM EVALUATION
7.1 Simulated Tissue Liquid Parameter Confirmation

The dielectric parameters were checked prior to assessment using the HP85070A dielectric probe kit. The dielectric parameters measured are reported in each correspondent section:

7.2 Evaluation Procedures
Maximum Search
The maximum search is automatically performed after each coarse scan measurement. It is based on splines in two or three dimensions. The procedure can find the maximum for most SAR distributions even with relatively large grid spacings. After the coarse scan measurement, the probe is automatically moved to a position at the interpolated maximum. The following scan can directly use this position for reference, e.g., for a finer resolution grid or the cube evaluations.
Extrapolation
The extrapolation can be used in z-axis scans with automatic surface detection. The SAR values can be extrapolated to the inner phantom surface. The extrapolation distance is the sum of the probe sensor offset, the surface detection distance and the grid offset. The extrapolation is based on fourth order polynomal functions. The extrapolation is only available for SAR values.
Boundary Corrections
The correction of the probe boundary effect in the vicinity of the phantom surface can be done in two different ways. In the standard (worse case) evaluation, the boundary effect is reduced by different weights for the lowest measured points in the extrapolation routine. The result is a slight overestimation of the extrapolated SAR values (2% to 8%) depending on the SAR distribution and gradient. The advanced evaluation makes a full compensation of the boundary effect before doing the extrapolation. This is only possible of probes with specifications on the boundary effect.
Peak Search for 1g and 10g cube averaged SAR
The 1g and 10g peak evaluations are only available for the predefined cube 4x4x7 and cube 5x5x7 scans. The routine are verified and optimized for the grid dimensions used in these cube measurements. The measured volume of 32x32x35mm contains about 35g of tissue. The first procedure is an extrapolation (incl. Boundary correction) to get the points between the lowest measured plane and the surface. The next step uses 3D interpolation get all points within the measured volume in a 1mm grid (35000 points). In the last step, a 1g cube is place numerically into the volume and its averaged SAR is calculated. This cube is the moved around until the highest averaged SAR is found. This last procedure is repeated for a 10g cube. If the highest SAR is found at the edge of the measured volume, the system will issue a warning,: higher SAR values might be found outside of the measured volume. In that case the cube measurement can be repeated, using the new interpolated maximum as the center.

Report #R0401124S

Page 27 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

7.3 System Accuracy Verification

Prior to the assessment, the system validation kit was used to test whether the system was operating within its specifications of ±10%. The validation results are tabulated below. And also the corresponding SAR plot is attached as well in the SAR plots files.

IEEE P1528 recommended reference value

Frequency (MHz) 300 450 835 900 1450 1800 1900 2000 2450 3000

1 g SAR
3.0 4.9 9.5 10.8 29.0 38.1 39.7 41.1 52.4 63.8

10 g SAR
2.0 3.3 6.2 6.9 16.0 19.8 20.5 21.1 24.0 25.7

Local SAR at surface (above feed point) 4.4 7.2 14.1 16.4 50.2 69.5 72.1 74.6 104.2 140.2

Local SAR at surface (v=2cm offset from feed point)
2.1 3.2 4.9 5.4 6.5 6.8 6.6 6.5 7.7 9.5

Validation Dipole SAR Reference Test Result for Body (450 MHz)

Validation Measurement
Test 1 Test 2 Test 3 Test 4 Test 5 Test 6 Test 7 Test 8 Test 9 Test 10 Average

SAR @ 9.225mW Input averaged over 1g
0.0451 0.0447 0.0448 0.0450 0.0451 0.0450 0.0451 0.0449 0.0449 0.0448 0.0449

SAR @ 1W Input averaged over 1g
4.89 4.85 4.86 4.88 4.89 4.88 4.89 4.87 4.87 4.86 4.874

SAR @ 9.225mW Input averaged over 10g
0.0315 0.0312 0.0313 0.0313 0.0313 0.0315 0.0314 0.0312 0.0312 0.0311 0.0313

SAR @ 1W Input averaged over 10g
3.4 3.38 3.39 3.39 3.39 3.4 3.4 3.38 3.38 3.37 3.388

System validation result

Ambient Temperature (ºC): 23.0 Relative Humidity (%): 49.3

Simulant Freq [MHz]

Body

450

Head

450

Parameters
  1g SAR   1g SAR

Liquid Temp [ºC]
23 23 23 23 23 23

 = relative permittivity,  = conductivity and =1000kg/m3 Note: Body Forward power = 20.26 dBm = 106.17 mW
Head Forward power = 20.25 dBm = 105.93 mW

Target Value
56.7 0.94 4.874 43.5 0.87 4.9

Measured Value
54.1 0.92 4.879 43.0 0.91 4.899

Deviation [%]
-4.58 -2.13 0.103 -1.15 4.60 -0.02

Limits [%]
±5 ±5 ±10 ±5 ±5 ±10

Report #R0401124S

Page 28 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

Report #R0401124S

Page 29 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

Report #R0401124S

Page 30 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

7.4 SAR Evaluation Procedure
a. The evaluation was performed in the applicable area of the phantom depending on the type of device being tested. For device held to the dear during normal operation, both the left and right ear positions were evaluated in accordance with FCC OET Bulletin 65, Supplement C (Edition 01-01) using the SAM phantom. For body-worn and face-held devices a planar phantom was used. The EUT in the test setup for body-worn and face-held devices was placed in three different positions (relative to the phantom): with belt clip, without belt clip and 2.5cm facing left head side and 2.5cm facing right head side.
b. The SAR was determined by a pre-defined procedure within the DASY3 software. Upon completion of a reference and optical surface check, the exposed region of the phantom was scanned near the inner surface with a grid spacing of 20mm x 20mm.
c. A 5x5x7 matrix was performed around the greatest special SAR distribution found during the area scan of the applicable exposed region. SAR values were then calculated using a 3-D spline interpolation algorithm and averaged over spatial volumes of 1 and 10 grams.
d. The depth of the simulating tissue in the planar used for the SAR evaluation and system validation was no less than 15.0cm.
e. For this particular evaluation, a stack of low-density, low-loss dielectric foamed polystyrene was used in place of the device holder.
f. Re-measurement of the SAR value at the same location as in a. If the value changed by more than 5%, the evaluation was repeated.

Report #R0401124S

Page 31 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited
7.5 Exposure Limits
Table 1: Limits for Occupational/Controlled Exposure (W/kg)

Whole-Body 0.4

Partial-Body 8.0

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200
Hands. Wrists. Feet and Ankles 20.0

Table 2: Limits for General Population/Uncontrolled Exposure (W/kg)

Whole-Body 0.08

Partial-Body 1.6

Hands. Wrists. Feet and Ankles 4.0

Note: Whole-body SAR is averaged over the entire body, partial-body SAR is averaged over any 1 gram of tissue defined as a tissue volume in the shape of a cube SAR for hands, writs, feet and ankles is averaged over any 10 grams of tissue defined as a tissue volume in the shape of a cube.
Population/Uncontrolled Environments are defined as locations where there is the exposure of individual who have no knowledge or control of their exposure.
Occupational/Controlled Environments are defined as locations where there is exposure that may be incurred by people who are aware of the potential for exposure (i.e. as a result of employment or occupation).
Population/uncontrolled environments Partial-body limit 1.6W/kg applied to the EUT.

Report #R0401124S

Page 32 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

8 - TEST RESULTS

This page summarizes the results of the performed dosimetric evaluation. The plots with the corresponding SAR distributions, which reveal information about the location of the maximum SAR with respect to the device could be found in the following pages.
According to the data in section 8.1, the EUT complied with the FCC 2.1093 RF Exposure standards, with worst case of 1.37W.

8.1 SAR Test Data
Ambient Temperature (ºC): 23.0 Relative Humidity (%): 49.3
Worst case SAR reading

EUT position

Frequency Output (MHz) Power (W)

Back touching

phantom 462.7250

1.8

Face 2.5 cm

separation from

phantom 462.7250

1.8

Test Type
Body worn
Faceheld

Measured

Antenna Type

Liquid

Phantom

Notes / Accessories

(mW/g) Limit 50% 100% (mW/g)

duty duty

cycle cycle

With belt clip

Built-in body flat & headset 0.685 1.37 1.6

Built-in head flat

None 0.555 1.11 1.6

Plot #
1
2

8.2 Plots of Test Result
The plots of test result were attached as reference.

Report #R0401124S

Page 33 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

Report #R0401124S

Page 34 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

Report #R0401124S

Page 35 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited
EXHIBIT A - SAR SETUP PHOTOGRAPHS
Body-Worn with Belt Clip & Headset in Touching with Phantom

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

2.5cm Separation to Flat Phantom

Report #R0401124S

Page 36 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited
EXHIBIT B - EUT PHOTOGRAPHS
Chassis - Front View

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

Chassis ­ Rear View

Report #R0401124S

Page 37 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited
EUT ­ Top View

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

EUT ­ Housing and Board View

Report #R0401124S

Page 38 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited
EUT - Component View

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

EUT ­ Component View with Shielding Removed

Report #R0401124S

Page 39 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited
EUT ­ Solder View

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

EUT ­ Antenna Connection View

Report #R0401124S

Page 40 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report

Continental Conair Limited
EXHIBIT C ­ Z-Axis

FCC ID: LBBHUM1200

Report #R0401124S

Page 41 of 41

SAR Evaluation Report



Related FCC IDs:

Search Any Device: