Evaluation of Low Frequency Electrical and Magnetic Fields in a

Electrical Transmission Substation

ROMINA BELTRÁN, EMILY CHAMORRO, CARLOS QUINATOA, JIMMY TOAZA

Department of Electrical Engineering,

University Technical of Cotopaxi,

Av. Simón Rodríguez s/n Barrio El Ejido Sector San Felipe,

Latacunga,

ECUADOR

Abstract: -In recent years, there has been a stagnation in the investigation of the issues related to exposure to

electromagnetic fields, as it has been deemed that their presence is not significantly apparent; however, they may

induce alterations within the human body and pose certain occupational risks. It is widely accepted that these fields

do not emit sufficient energy to effectuate such changes at the atomic level, yet they can have detrimental effects

on the health of employees. This article delineates the findings from the assessment of non-ionizing radiation

within the premises of the MULALO Electric Transmission Substation, where the reference values for exposure

around the generation plant are based on public safety; conversely, within the substation, the relevant values should

pertain specifically to workers exposed in occupational settings. Ultimately, these results facilitate an analysis to

ascertain whether the emissions from AM No. 155, MAE, TULSMA CEM standards comply with the limits

established by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, in addition to identifying the

most significant values of electric and magnetic fields present within the easement strip.

Key-Words: - Problems, Workers, Radiation, Electromagnetic, Electric.

Received: April 9, 2024. Revised: August 11, 2024. Accepted: October 7, 2023. Published: November 14, 2024.

1 Introduction

The assessment of low-frequency electric and

magnetic fields in electrical substations is

fundamental to worker health and welfare standards,

[1]. This assessment focuses on magnetic fields

generated by equipment such as transformers,

busbars and cables in secondary substations. To

competently conduct the analysis, a methodological

approach is used to accurately measure magnetic

fields and assess the associated risks, [2]. The

methodology outlines protocols for measuring

exposure levels and ensures that potential hazards

are thoroughly identified and quantified, [2]. This

comprehensive process is critical to understanding

the potential hazards to which personnel are exposed

at medium and low voltage switchgear installations.

In addition, the presence of extremely low frequency

(ELF) electric fields, especially in the vicinity of

high-voltage transmission lines, has prompted the

study of their biological effects, raising concerns

about environmental impact and workplace safety,

[2] . In summary, the integration of these principles

provides a sound basis for assessing and mitigating

the risks associated with low-frequency electric and

magnetic fields in substations, [3]. Studies show

that electromagnetic fields (CEM) generated by

substations and transformers vary considerably, and

many measurements are often below internationally

established safety standards. For example, in Aguata,

Nigeria, a maximum electric field of 0.7783 V/m

was measured, while the magnetic field strength was

1.3317 A/m, which meets International Commission

on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP)

guidelines, [4]. Similarly, measurements near

high-voltage power lines in Iran showed average

magnetic flux densities below the recommended

limits, [5]. However, concerns remain about potential

health effects, as several studies have shown that

people exposed to ELF magnetic fields exhibit

health problems, [6]. This highlights the need for

continuous monitoring and thorough risk assessment

to ensure safety in these environments. Electric and

magnetic fields are quantified using CEM meters

and the results are evaluated below with respect to

ICNIRP standards. At Aguata, a maximum power

density of 1.0365 W/m² was measured, which means

that exposure levels are site-specific, [4]. Employees

working near transformers have reported symptoms

such as fatigue and dizziness, raising great concern

about the consequences of prolonged exposure, [6].

A research study conducted in Tehran indicated a

possible link between exposure to electromagnetic

fields and mental health problems, [7].

Although several studies have identified generally

low levels of electromagnetic fields, potential health

risks, especially in occupational settings, require

thorough assessment and strict compliance with

safety standards, [8]. CEM are ubiquitous in modern

WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ELECTRONICS

DOI: 10.37394/232017.2024.15.10

Romina Beltrán, Emily Chamorro,

Carlos Quinatoa, Jimmy Toaza

E-ISSN: 2415-1513

Volume 15, 2024

society and are a growing problem in the workplace

and the environment. These fields can have biological

effects, especially in the case of ELF generated by

high-voltage power lines or electrical appliances, [9],

[10], [11]. A study by [12], evaluated CEM levels in

electrical substations and showed that occupationally

exposed workers were likely to exceed recommended

exposure limits, [13]. Researchers have also studied

the biological effects of ELF-CEM exposure and

have found evidence of changes in the central and

peripheral nervous systems, [14], [15], [16]. The

results underline the need for further research on the

possible harmful effects of these fields on human

health. Regarding regulatory standards, the authors

highlight in their contribution the importance of

following the protocols established by the ICNIRP

to ensure safety, [17]. These recommendations set

exposure limits based on available scientific evidence

and current research, which suggests that exposure

to CEM from substations may pose a risk to human

health, [17], [18]. Further research is needed in

this area to improve our understanding of exposure

to these fields and to develop effective protective

measures, [18]. CEM are a combination of electric

and magnetic waves that travel simultaneously at

the speed of light. The higher the frequency, the

more energy the wave transmits; these magnetic fields

are created by the accumulation of charge in certain

regions of the atmosphere due to the effects of storms,

[17], [19].

This section deals with the evaluation of low

frequency CEM in a substation. The significance of

this evaluation, regarding the safeguarding of human

health and the environment, will be articulated,

taking into account the potential effects associated

with exposure to CEM. Furthermore, the parameters

of the study will, specifying the elements that will be

examined in the methodology. In addition, the article

is structured as follows: the second section deals with

the measurement methodology, mathematical

methodology, measurement procedures, the

applicable legal framework and instrumentation.

The third section discusses the treatment of both

the measured results and their simulation in order

to apply the mathematical methodology. The fourth

section presents the simulation of the data using the

Least Squares Methods (MLS) method. The fifth

section presents additional information, based on

observations and location of the measured points in a

sketch. Finally, the last sections present conclusions

and recommendations, derived from the study carried

out.

2 Data0easurement0ethodology

The methodology used for measuring non-ionizing

radiation from electromagnetic fields followed the

regulations established in the internal procedure

detailed in [20], [21]. In the case of measurements

in substations, the limits to be used are the following:

for measurements in the periphery of the substation,

the reference values are those of population exposure;

inside the substation, the reference values should be

those of exposure to occupationally exposed workers.

Select the measurement points where there is greater

exposure of the worker as a reference point to perform

the measurement. Figure 1 shows the procedure

to be followed for electric and magnetic field

measurements, based mainly on the identification

and recognition of the site, determining the different

sources of energy to select measurement points

where workers are most exposed, carrying out the

measurements with equipment that complies with the

established regulations.

Fig. 1: Internal procedure PE/IPGM/11 measurement of

QRQLRQL]LQJradiations

2.1 Electrical6ubstations0easurement

3rocedure

In the case of measurements in substations, the

limits to be used are as follows: for measurements

in the periphery of the substation, the reference

values are those of population exposure; inside the

substation, the reference values should be those of

exposure to occupationally exposed workers. Select

the measurement points where there is the greatest

exposure of the worker as a reference point for

measurement.

Reference standards for exposure to CEM

originating from 60 Hz sources, applicable to both

the public and individuals in occupational settings.

WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ELECTRONICS

DOI: 10.37394/232017.2024.15.10

Romina Beltrán, Emily Chamorro,

Carlos Quinatoa, Jimmy Toaza

E-ISSN: 2415-1513

Volume 15, 2024

In this case measurements in substations the limits to

be used are the following: for measurements in the

periphery of the substation the reference values are

those of population exposure; inside the substation

the reference values should be those of exposure to

occupationally exposed workers. Select at least two

axes that are perpendicular to each other and that

cover the entire substation. The location of these

axes should have a horizontal separation of 0.2m in

addition to the safety distance. The first of the axes

should be located in front of the entrance gantry or

gantries inside the substation and the center phase

of each entrance line gantry should be taken as a

reference or first measurement point, then two points

should be measured both to the right and to the left

with respect to the reference point with an equally

spaced separation covering the entrance gantry.

Fig. 2: Procedure for measuring magnetic and electric fields

Figure 2 shows the correct procedure to perform

the respective measurements by locating the

geographic coordinates, through the use of GPS,

the measurement points that have already been

defined in the sampling strategy, detailing through

sketches, photographs, and views of the site, the

particularities of the sites exposed to non-ionizing

radiation, proceed to turn on the equipment and

set the units and measurement time according to

the equipment manual, perform the calibration

of the measuring equipment according to the

equipment instructions and measure the electric field.

Measurement uncertainties arising from calibration,

temperature, interference, observed proximity, and

parameters and presented as the comprehensive

estimated uncertainty of the measurements, ensuring

that the total uncertainty does not surpass ± 10%.

2.2 Mathematical0ethodology

The moving least squares method was applied, which

is a technique used in data analysis and computer

graphics to make smooth approximations and fit

surfaces from a discrete data set.

2.2.1 MLS5epresentation

The interpolation method applied was the “griddata”

method incorporated in MATLAB, which generates a

uniform grid every 5 m that adapts to the original data

and fills the information by means of an interpolation

based on “biharmonic spline” adjustment. With the

fitted meshes the surfaces and contour lines for the

electric and magnetic field can be generated. The

fitted meshes correspond to the matrices Eand B,

which correspond to the input data of the whole

analysis process. Once the adjustment meshes and the

E and B matrices are available, the MLS adjustment

method can be applied.

F= Φ ·F(1)

Where:

•F: It is the original data matrix.

•Φ: It is the fit shape matrix.

•ˆ

F: It is the resulting matrix of adjusted values.

The main objective is to obtain the fitting shape

matrix Φ, which is given by the equation:

Φ = P0·A−1·B(2)

Where:

•P: It is the vector of polynomials chosen, P0is

the transpose of P.

•A−1:Pitch matrix.

•B: Pitch matrix.

The polynomial matrix is made up of polynomials

of a given degree. The higher the degree of the

polynomial, the smoother the surface will be. In

this case it was determined that the results would be

sufficiently satisfactory with second order.

P=p11 p1n

pn1pnn(3)

WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ELECTRONICS

DOI: 10.37394/232017.2024.15.10

Romina Beltrán, Emily Chamorro,

Carlos Quinatoa, Jimmy Toaza

E-ISSN: 2415-1513

Volume 15, 2024

Where each pij value is obtained by evaluating the

following expression:

pij = 1 + xij +yij +x2

ij +xij ·yij +y2

ij (4)

Once the polynomial matrix is assembled, we

proceed with the other parameters. The step matrices

Aand Bare matrices that are calculated as a

function of the polynomial matrix and the diagonal

matrix of weights W. They are calculated solely

for the purpose of saving computation time and

organizing mathematical formulas. The expressions

for calculating the step matrices are given by:

A=P0·W·P(5)

B=P0·W(6)

Where matrix W, as mentioned above, is the

weight matrix. This matrix is a diagonal matrix,

where each matrix entry is a variable determined by

the weight function ω. The matrix W, will have the

following form:

W=ω10

0ωn(7)

To calculate the value of each weight ωkthe

following expression is applied:

ωk











3−4r2

k+ 4r3

ksi rk≤1

34rk+ 4r2

k−4

3r3

ksi 1

2< rk≤1

0si r < 1

(8)

The value of βis a constant, and depending on the

configuration of the problem and the criteria of the

data analyst, it can range from:

2.0≤β≤5.0(9)

For this case study it was established that β= 3.0.

On the other hand, the value of the parameter rkis

calculated by the following equation:

kFk−Fk+ 1k

dmi

(10)

In other words, the magnitude between a point

and its adjacency is considered, and divided for the

parameter dmi. The parameter dmi is known as

the radius of convergence, and is one of the most

important parameters in the MLS process, since it

determines how smooth the resulting surface will be.

For this particular case study, a convergence radius

of 5was established, since it coincides with the initial

meshing every 5 m. A convergence radius smaller

than 5 may have no effect on the result, while a

convergence radius larger than 5 may exaggeratedly

smooth the surface, [22]. The following flowchart

MLS shows the process followed to obtain the CEM

(Figure 3).

Fig. 3: Procedure for obtaining MLS data matrices

3 Results3rocessing

3.1 Measurement5esults

In the results of the measurement of electric and

magnetic fields 54 points were considered, the first

50 points are points of analysis within the substation

and the remaining 4 are points of analysis of the

boundaries of the S/E, it is considered that the

greatest presence of electric fields are at points P5,

P6,P8,P9,P17,P19,P20,P48 and of the boundaries is

point P2, while in the magnetic field the greatest

WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ELECTRONICS

DOI: 10.37394/232017.2024.15.10

Romina Beltrán, Emily Chamorro,

Carlos Quinatoa, Jimmy Toaza

E-ISSN: 2415-1513

Volume 15, 2024

presence is identified in points P25,P26,P27,P28 and

in the points of the boundaries point P4 is considered

with the greatest presence, these data are shown in

Table 1.

Table 1. Measurement results

Measuring

point X Y Electric

field V/m

Magnetic

field uT

Measurement points within the S/E

P5 766282 9911973 1000 0.713

P6 766282 9911962 948.9 0.735

P7 766282 9911952 935.9 0.9236

P8 766282 9911944 1001.4 0.786

P9 766282 9911935 995 0.7019

P17 766259 9912000 107.5 1.14

P19 766229 9912013 1868 1.223

P20 766231 9912004 1477 1.154

P48 766185 9911951 1176.5 1.277

P25 766232 9911966 1656 2.064

P26 766231 9911959 3524 2.952

P27 766231 9911952 3024 2.712

P28 766231 9911945 763.8 2.294

Measurement points within the S/E

P2 766298 9911980 110.5 1.275

P4 766146 9911980 240.9 1.352

3.2 Final5esults

Table 2. Final results

Measuring

point

Electric

field V/m

Uncertainty

±U(V/m)

Magnetic

field uT

Uncertain

±U(uT)

Reference

level

P5 1000 8.42 0.713 0.21 8333V/m

;417uT

P6 948.9 8 0.735 0.21 8333V/m

;417uT

P7 935.9 7.89 0.9236 0.21 8333V/m

;417uT

P8 1001.4 8.43 0.786 0.21 8333V/m

;417uT

P9 995 8.38 0.7019 0.21 8333V/m

;417uT

P17 107.5 1.13 1.14 0.21 8333V/m

;417uT

P18 432.1 3.77 0.76 0.21 8333V/m

;417uT

P19 1868 15.54 1.223 0.21 8333V/m

;417uT

P20 1477 12.33 1.154 0.21 8333V/m

;417uT

P48 1176.5 9.87 1.277 0.21 8333V/m

;417uT

P25 1656 13.8 2.064 0.21 8333V/m

;417uT

P26 3524 29.12 2.952 0.21 8333V/m

;417uT

P27 3024 25.02 2.712 0.21 8333V/m

;417uT

P28 763.8 6.49 2.294 0.21 8333V/m

;417uT

Measuring points on the boundaries

P2 110.5 1.15 1.275 0.21 4167vV/m

;83uT

P4 240.9 2.21 1.352 0.21 4167vV/m

;83uT

With the measurement points that have a

higher presence of electromagnetic fields, the

corresponding verification is performed with

the declared uncertainty based on the expanded

uncertainty multiplied by a coverage factor k=2,

which guarantees an approximate confidence level

of 95%. Therefore the values of Table 2, of the final

results are governed by the TULSMA regulations.

3.3 Operation data

Table 3, Table 4 identifies the mean which is the

measure of central tendency that provides an overall

representation of the data set, the mode is the value

useful for identifying the most common value in a

data set.

The standard deviation is a measure of dispersion

that indicates how much the individual values deviate

from the mean in a data set, quartile 1is the value that

separates the bottom 25% of the ordered data from

the top 75%, quartile 2, also known as the median or

second quartile is the value at which 50% of the data

are above and 50% are below, quartile 3 is the value

that separates the top 75% of the ordered data from

the bottom 25%, minimum is the smallest value in a

data set, maximum is the largest value in a data set.

These statistical measures provide important

information about the distribution and structure of

a data set, which can help in the analysis and

interpretation of the data.

Table 3. Results of 50 points taken from electric and magnetic field

within the S/E

Data within the S/E

Data Electric

field

Magnetic

field

Half 1389,18776 1,36405

Median 884,35 1,299

Standard

deviation

1325,789867 1,119426703

Quartile 1 al 25% 467,65 0,78825

Quartile 2 al 50% 884,35 1,299

Quartile 3 al 75% 2066 1,51225

Minimum 2,078 0

Maximum 5313 7,387

Table 4. Results of 4 points taken from electric and magnetic field at the

S/E boundaries

S/E boundary data

Data Electric

field

Magnetic

fiel

Half 216,765 1,287

Median 175,7 1,283

Standard

deviation

200,1612239 0,050444689

Quartile 1 al 25% 49,195 1,24125

Quartile 2 al 50% 175,7 1,283

Quartile 3 al 75% 425,4 1,33675

Minimum 28,76 1,23

Maximum 486,9 1,352

WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ELECTRONICS

DOI: 10.37394/232017.2024.15.10

Romina Beltrán, Emily Chamorro,

Carlos Quinatoa, Jimmy Toaza

E-ISSN: 2415-1513

Volume 15, 2024

3.4 Graphical5epresentation of MLS

0ethod

To visualize the coordinates of the points evaluated at

the station, a plot of the scattered points of the xand

ycoordinates is made. It is shown in Figure 4.

When creating the scatter plot, it is important to

properly configure the axes and scales so that the

points are distributed in a clear and understandable

way. You can add labels to the axes, a legend if

necessary, and other graphical elements that help to

better interpret the data.

Fig. 4: Coordinates of the measurement points

Each point has an associated electric field and

magnetic field value. Because the measurements

were taken under difficult field access conditions, the

data obtained are not perfectly aligned and do not

form a perfectly gridded grid. It is shown in Figure

Fig. 5: Electric field measurement adjustment grid

The following Figure 6, Figure 7, and Figure 8

show the mesh and grids adjustment.

Fig. 6: Magnetic field measurement adjustment grid

Fig. 7: Adjustment grids for electric field measurements with critical

points

Fig. 8: Adjustment grids for magnetic field measurements with critical

points

Therefore, part of the data preprocessing is to

generate a perfectly spaced grid by interpolating the

collected data, as this shows the most critical points

in both CEM, as shown in Figure 7 and Figure 8.

WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ELECTRONICS

DOI: 10.37394/232017.2024.15.10

Romina Beltrán, Emily Chamorro,

Carlos Quinatoa, Jimmy Toaza

E-ISSN: 2415-1513

Volume 15, 2024

4 Simulation

The result of applying the MLS adjustment is shown

below. It can be seen that now the results are

displayed for a finer grid, exactly 1m by 1m,

previously coarser 5m by 5m.

This gives the appearance of a continuous surface,

thus meeting the criteria for the application of MLS

for data refinement.

In Figure 9, the electric field and contour lines

of a point charge show how an electric charge

generates a force in the surrounding space. The

direction of the electric field indicates the direction

and magnitude of this force, being more intense

near the charge. Contour lines, or equipotential

lines, are perpendicular to these curves and represent

regions where the electric potential is constant. This

diagram visualizes the relationship between electric

field and potential, facilitating the understanding of

fundamental concepts in electromagnetism.

Fig. 9: Original electric field and its respective contour lines

In Figure 10, the electric field and contour lines

fitted with MLS provide an accurate and smoothed

representation of the field behavior in the presence

of multiple charges or complex distributions. MLS

allows to fit the experimental electric field data

to minimize errors and to obtain a continuous

and differentiated model of the field and its

equipotentials. This technique is useful for analyzing

real systems where the charge distributions are not

ideal, improving the accuracy in the prediction and

visualization of the electric field and its associated

potential.

Fig. 10: Electric field and contour lines fitted with MLS

If we distinguish between these two

representations, it is clear that the electric field with a

point charge and the contour allows us to understand

the relationship between the charge dynamics, the

electric field strength, and the potential.

In Figure 11, the initial magnetic field generated

by an electric current shows a configuration of lines

creating closed loops, indicating both the orientation

and magnitude of the field. These magnetic field lines

show a higher density in the vicinity of the source,

suggesting an increase in field strength. Contour lines

showing the magnetic potential are perpendicular

to the field lines and delineate regions of constant

magnetic potential. This representation is crucial

WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ELECTRONICS

DOI: 10.37394/232017.2024.15.10

Romina Beltrán, Emily Chamorro,

Carlos Quinatoa, Jimmy Toaza

E-ISSN: 2415-1513

Volume 15, 2024

for understanding the interactions between magnetic

fields and materials, as well as electric currents in

various technological and scientific fields.

Fig. 11: Original magnetic field and its respective contour lines

In Figure 12, the integration of the magnetic field

with contour lines, enhanced by the MLS technique,

provides a representation of magnetic phenomena

within systems. The MLS methodology allows to

synchronize the experimental data of the magnetic

field, thus minimizing inaccuracies and obtaining a

complete model, even in the midst of irregular current

distributions. This methodology is indispensable

for accurate analysis in practical applications, thus

improving the capability of magnetic behavior in real

devices and systems.

The magnetic field and its contour lines associated

with the field function generated by a magnet or an

electric current. Although they serve to elucidate

fundamental principles, they fail to adequately

capture the complexities inherent in real systems. In

contrast, MLS-enhanced magnetic field and contour

lines provide a more accurate and realistic modeling

approach, facilitating smoothing of experimental data

and addressing complexities to current and material

distributions. While the original model is ideal for

theoretical illustrations, MLS fitting is essential for

detailed practical applications.

Fig. 12: Magnetic field and contour lines adjusted with MLS

5 Additional,nformation

5.1 Remarks

The purpose of the measurements was to evaluate the

electric and magnetic field generated at the MULALO

transmission substation, to which the personnel who

work there and the general public are exposed. The

monitoring was carried out at 50 points within the

facilities and 4 points on the substation boundaries in

order to be able to cover all the behavior of the energy

sources.

The results obtained inside the substation with

respect to the Maximum Exposure Criteria for

occupationally exposed personnel do not exceed the

reference levels established in current regulations as

shown in Table 4, likewise the results obtained at

the boundaries of the substation with respect to the

Maximum Exposure Criteria for the general public do

not exceed the reference limits established in current

regulations.

WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ELECTRONICS

DOI: 10.37394/232017.2024.15.10

Romina Beltrán, Emily Chamorro,

Carlos Quinatoa, Jimmy Toaza

E-ISSN: 2415-1513

Volume 15, 2024

5.2 LocationRf Measurement Points

The sketch of the location of the measurement points

is presented below.

5.2.1 Measurement3oints within the6ubstation

Fig. 13: Measurement points within the S/E

Figure 13 shows a sketch of the 50 measurement

points used for the investigation.

The image presents an aerial perspective of

the Mulaló Substation, where numerous points of

interest are prominently marked with yellow pins and

alphanumeric labels. These points, identified with

numbers ranging from P1 to P50, are systematically

arranged in an organized grid of rows and columns

across the substation. The bounded area appears

to be segmented into several sections, and it is

possible that the numbers assigned to each point

refer to equipment, structures, or poles in the facility.

The structured design implies that the identified

elements adhere to a specific configuration within

the substation, characteristic of this type of facility

in terms of the systematic arrangement of electrical

components, including transformers, transmission

lines and other essential apparatus. In addition,

it can be observed that certain sections of the

substation have a higher concentration of points,

which may correspond to areas of increased activity

or aggregation of electrical equipment.

5.2.2 Substation%oundary0easurement3oints

Fig. 14: Measurement points of the S/E boundaries

Figure 14 shows a sketch of the 4 measurement

points used for the investigation.

The diagram presents a panoramic view of

the Mulaló electrical substation, with perimeter

delineations indicated at four designated points.

The reference coordinates indicated in the image

(P1, P2, P3 and P4) can serve as critical data points for

environmental impact assessments, electromagnetic

field monitoring, perimeter security measures or for

possible facility expansions. The exact location

of these coordinates establishes a framework for

systematic inspections and maintenance operations or

for the formulation of technical evaluations at the

substation.

6 Conclusion

The results acquired within the substation concerning

the Maximum Non-Ionizing Radiation Exposure

Criteria for personnel exposed in occupational

settings indicate conformity with the reference

levels set forth in the prevailing regulations. These

outcomes signify that the exposure levels are within

acceptable limits and do not surpass the thresholds

established to safeguard the health and safety of

workers who may encounter non-ionizing radiation

in their professional environment. Moreover,

the analysis guarantees a confidence level of

approximately 95%, considering the measurement

uncertainty associated with the data. This elevated

confidence level underscores the dependability of

the results and reinforces the conclusion that the

exposure levels remain significantly below the

maximum permissible limits, thereby mitigating

potential health risks to personnel operating in

such environments. This compliance with the

established criteria ensures the execution of safety

measures consistent with regulatory standards,

thereby enhancing the overall safety and well-being

of the workforce.

The maximum measured value for the electric

field is 5.313 kV/m, while the maximum value for the

electric field adjusted with MLS is 5.335 kV/m. If

we take the field measurement value as the accepted

value, we have that the variation between the adjusted

value and the accepted value is 0.41%. Similarly, the

maximum value measured for the magnetic field is

7.387 uT, while the adjusted value is 5.625 uT; being

the variation of 23.84%.

The refined values derived from the MLS

methodology for the electric field demonstrate

an average deviation of approximately 0.53%

when juxtaposed with the values obtained through

direct on-site measurements. This slight deviation

signifies a substantial concordance between the

adjusted model values and the empirical field

measurements, implying that the MLS adjustments

yield a dependable representation of the electric field.

Conversely, the adjusted values for the magnetic

WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ELECTRONICS

DOI: 10.37394/232017.2024.15.10

Romina Beltrán, Emily Chamorro,

Carlos Quinatoa, Jimmy Toaza

E-ISSN: 2415-1513

Volume 15, 2024

field reveal a more significant average deviation

of around 5.85% in relation to the values acquired

on-site. While this deviation is somewhat greater

than that noted for the electric field, it remains

within permissible thresholds, suggesting that the

adjusted magnetic field values still offer a reasonably

precise estimation of the actual conditions. This

discrepancy may be ascribed to a range of factors,

including measurement uncertainties, environmental

impacts, or the intrinsic complexities associated with

modeling magnetic field dynamics in fluctuating

substation settings.

Based on the percentage of fit between the values

taken in the field and those fitted by the MLS method,

it can be said that the smoothing for the electric field

was not so significant, while it was significant for

the magnetic field. This is quite common, since

the electric field values present variations in the

whole region; while in the magnetic field it is almost

flat with a single concentrated peak. The MLS

setting ”smooths” and ”flattens” the surfaces, with the

magnetic field being more affected than the electric

field.

Acknowledgment:

The students, Beltrán Romina and Chamorro Emily,

are grateful for the guidance and support provided

by professors Quinatoa Carlos and Toaza Jimmy, for

their guidance throughout the research, whose support

has been essential to ensure a thorough and complete

work.

Statement:

During the preparation of this article, the authors

used Grammarly for linguistic proofreading. After

using this site, the authors reviewed and edited the

content as necessary and assume full responsibility

for the content of the publication.

5HIHUHQFHV

[1] E. Salinas, “Passive and active shielding

of power-frequency magnetic fields from

secondary substation components,” vol. 2,

pp. 855–860, 2000.

[2] T. Keikko, R. Pääkkönen, S. Kännälä,

R. Seesvuori, and S. Valkealahti, “Magnetic

field risk evaluation of workers in indoor

distribution substations,” pp. 1–4, 2009.

[3] M. Misakian, “Extremely low frequency electric

and magnetic field measurement methods,”

pp. 451–457, Springer, Boston, MA, 1998.

[4] O. E. Okoye, B. Atisi, M. Idonje, and

E. O. Agbalagba, “Evaluating the effect

of electromagnetic field from electrical

distribution substations in aguata, nigeria,”

International journal of research and

innovation in applied science, vol. IX, no. VI,

pp. 414–424, 2023.

[5] M. A. Zazouli, M. Mohammadyan, S. N.

Mousavinasab, M. M. Darabi, and A. S. Safari,

“Magnetic flux emission from extremely low

frequency electromagnetic fields around high

voltage power transmission lines,” Journal of

Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences,

vol. 28, no. 169, pp. 140–150, 2019.

[6] S. Özden, B. S. Aral, A. C. Kurşun, and

N. Seyhan, “Measurement and risk assessment

of extremely low frequency magnetic fields

around transformers in a working place,”

vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 857–867, 2020.

[7] P. Nassiri, M. R. Monazzam, S. A. Hosseyni,

K. Azam, and P. J. Shalkouhi, “Extremely

low-frequency electromagnetic field due to

power substations in urban environment,”

Environmental Engineering and Management

Journal, vol. 17, no. 8, pp. 1825–1830, 2018.

[8] K. Friedl, A. Abart, R. Schürhuber, and

E. Schmautzer, “Standardised evaluation

of the electric field for meeting safety

aspects for workers according to directive

2013/35/eu and vemf,” Elektrotechnik

Und Informationstechnik, vol. 136, no. 8,

pp. 352–360, 2019.

[9] Q.-z. Qin, Y. Chen, T.-t. Fu, L. Ding, L.-l.

Han, and J.-c. Li, “The monitoring results

of electromagnetic radiation of 110-kV

high-voltage lines in one urban location

in Chongqing P.R. China,” Environmental

Monitoring and Assessment, vol. 184, no. 3,

pp. 1533–1540, 2012.

[10] H. Liu, G. Chen, Y. Pan, Z. Chen, W. Jin,

C. Sun, C. Chen, X. Dong, K. Chen,

Z. Xu, S. Zhang, and Y. Yu, “Occupational

Electromagnetic Field Exposures Associated

with Sleep Quality: A Cross-Sectional Study,”

PLOS ONE, vol. 9, no. 10, pp. 1–8, 2014.

[11] R. Stam and S. Yamaguchi-Sekino,

“Occupational exposure to electromagnetic

fields from medical sources,” Industrial Health,

vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 96–105, 2018.

[12] R. Gallego-Martínez, F. J. Muñoz-Gutiérrez,

and A. Rodríguez-Gómez, “Trajectory

optimization for exposure to minimal

electromagnetic pollution using genetic

WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ELECTRONICS

DOI: 10.37394/232017.2024.15.10

Romina Beltrán, Emily Chamorro,

Carlos Quinatoa, Jimmy Toaza

E-ISSN: 2415-1513

Volume 15, 2024

algorithms approach: A case study,” Expert

Systems with Applications, vol. 207, p. 118088,

2022.

[13] S. Esmailzadeh, M. A. Delavar, A. Aleyassin,

S. A. Gholamian, and A. Ahmadi, “Exposure

to Electromagnetic Fields of High Voltage

Overhead Power Lines and Female Infertility.,”

The international journal of occupational and

environmental medicine, vol. 10, pp. 11–16, jan

2019.

[14] A. Ayuso-Álvarez, J. García-Pérez, J.-M.

Triviño-Juárez, U. Larrinaga-Torrontegui,

M. González-Sánchez, R. Ramis,

E. Boldo, G. López-Abente, I. Galán, and

P. Fernández-Navarro, “Association between

proximity to industrial chemical installations

and cancer mortality in Spain,” Environmental

Pollution, vol. 260, p. 113869, 2020.

[15] X. Zhao, J. Wang, Y. Gao, and T. Chen,

“The fuzzy comprehensive evaluation on

occupational health hazards of electric field

in substation,” AIP Conference Proceedings,

vol. 1839, 2017.

[16] J. C. Muñoz-Mateos, A. Gil De Paz, S. Boissier,

J. Zamorano, D. A. Dale, P. G. Pérez-González,

J. Gallego, B. F. Madore, G. Bendo, M. D.

Thornley, B. T. Draine, A. Boselli, V. Buat,

D. Calzetti, J. Moustakas, and R. C. Kennicutt,

“Radial distribution of stars, gas, and dust in

sings galaxies. ii. derived dust properties,”

Astrophysical Journal, vol. 701, no. 2,

pp. 1965–1991, 2009.

[17] A. M. García, “Pesticide exposure and women’s

health.,” American journal of industrial

medicine, vol. 44, pp. 584–594, dec 2003.

[18] J. A. Heredia-Rojas, A. O. la Fuente,

R. Gomez-Flores, O. Heredia-Rodríguez,

L. E. Rodríguez-Flores, M. Beltcheva, and

M. E. Castañeda-Garza, “In Vivo Cytotoxicity

Induced by 60 Hz Electromagnetic Fields under

a High-Voltage Substation Environment,”

Sustainability, vol. 10, no. 8, 2018.

[19] E. Lumnitzer, E. L. Jurgovska, M. Andrejiova,

and R. Kralikova, “Application of

Metal Shielding Materials to Protect

Buildings Occupants from Exposure to the

Electromagnetic Fields,” Materials, vol. 16,

no. 15, 2023.

[20] TULSMA, “Unified Text of Secondary

Legislation of the Ministry of the Environment,

TULSMA,” Registro Oficial Edición Especial

2 de 31-mar.-2003, no. 3399, p. 407, 2017.

[21] “IEEE Standard Procedures for Measurement of

Power Frequency Electric and Magnetic Fields

from AC Power Lines,” IEEE Std 644-2019

(Revision of IEEE Std 644-2008), pp. 1–40,

2020.

[22] H. Zhang, C. Guo, X. Su, and C. Zhu,

“Measurement data fitting based on moving

least squares method,” Mathematical Problems

in Engineering, vol. 2015, 2015.

Contribution of Individual Authors to the

Creation of a Scientific Article (Ghostwriting

Policy)

Beltran Romina and Chamorro Emily are

responsible for the original writing of the article

based on adequate research, reinforcing the

validity of the findings through data collection

and corresponding analysis through simulation.

Carlos Quinatoa and Jimmy Toaza played the

role of teacher guides, dedicated to providing

guidance and supervision for the research and

analysis of the appropriate results, also providing

theoretical and technical advice in order to ensure

a good inquiry, as their experience and knowledge

are crucial to ensure a rigorous and ethical work.

Sources of Funding for Research Presented in

a Scientific Article or Scientific Article Itself

No funding was received for conducting this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors state that they have no financial interests

or personal relationships that could affect the work

done in this study.

Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0

(Attribution 4.0 International , CC BY 4.0)

This article is published under the terms of the

Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en

_US

WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ELECTRONICS

DOI: 10.37394/232017.2024.15.10

Romina Beltrán, Emily Chamorro,

Carlos Quinatoa, Jimmy Toaza

E-ISSN: 2415-1513

Volume 15, 2024