FTC Affiliate Disclosure: I am an affiliate for various PEMF devices and may earn a commission on the top devices I recommend.
Detailed PEMF TESTING
Results Initially Will Include for 12 popular PEMF Brands:
Spectra Apex HSR, iMRS Prime, BEMER Evo, Centropix Kloud+, QRS 101, Purewave, Celler8, Nextion, Sedona Pro, Vasindux Pro+, Higher Dose and Bon Charge. On this page we'll do a quick overview of 7 of these brands.
Hand Measurements
7500 measurement points taken with a robotic arm and put into MIT software to create stunning 3D visualizations of the actual fields above PEMF mats
Results Initially Will Include for 12 popular PEMF Brands:
Spectra Apex HSR, iMRS Prime, BEMER Evo, Centropix Kloud+, QRS 101, Purewave, Celler8, Nextion, Sedona Pro, Vasindux Pro+, Higher Dose and Bon Charge. On this page we'll do a quick overview of 7 of these brands.
Hand Measurements
- Slew Rate and Intensity Measurements 0,1,2,3, 4 and 5 Inches
- Spectrum Analysis Data Showing Spectral Content
- Mat Dissection to see coils and Graphs of Mat and Coils and Total Coil Area
- Penetration depths and percent drop-offs
- EMF tests with Trifield Meter and Spectrum analysis on an Oscilloscope
- Comparison Charts and Graphs to Compare Different PEMF devices with all this Dat
7500 measurement points taken with a robotic arm and put into MIT software to create stunning 3D visualizations of the actual fields above PEMF mats
- 3D Mapping of Magnetic X-Rays Showing Actual PEMF Intensity fields
- 3D Mapping of Magnetic X-Rays Showing Actual PEMF Slew Rate fields
Don't Blindly Believe PEMF Companies - Demand 3rd-Party Testing and Certification!
Also, we got 3rd-party testing from Gausslabs.tech to validate the results we measured on the Spectra Apex HSR, which is the same way all units were measured! I plan to use Gausslabs to test a couple of other popular devices as well to solidify our 3 months and $100,000 testing summarized on this page. Call me for details of this comprehensive 3rd Party testing.
Also, we got 3rd-party testing from Gausslabs.tech to validate the results we measured on the Spectra Apex HSR, which is the same way all units were measured! I plan to use Gausslabs to test a couple of other popular devices as well to solidify our 3 months and $100,000 testing summarized on this page. Call me for details of this comprehensive 3rd Party testing.
Magnetic X-Ray Images of 7 Popular PEMF Full Body Mats
(A=Spectra, B=iMRS, C=BEMER, D=Centropix, E=QRS/PureWave, F=Sedona Pro/MAS, G=Higher Dose).
Measurements to Create 3D PEMF Plots Over 7500 measurements using an accurate Hall Effect Probe was done on 12 Popular full body mat PEMF devices. Below are the graphs of 7 of these. The data was put into an MIT software program with AI to create an accurate visualization based on actual measurements. This is the first time any detailed test like this has ever been performed and gives a clear picture of the actual PEMF fields above a PEMF mat. Below are seven examples showing the magnetic field intensities above 40 microtesla (.4 Gauss). This threshold was selected so you could see the weak fields of these popular low intensity PEMF mats.
(A=Spectra, B=iMRS, C=BEMER, D=Centropix, E=QRS/PureWave, F=Sedona Pro/MAS, G=Higher Dose).
Measurements to Create 3D PEMF Plots Over 7500 measurements using an accurate Hall Effect Probe was done on 12 Popular full body mat PEMF devices. Below are the graphs of 7 of these. The data was put into an MIT software program with AI to create an accurate visualization based on actual measurements. This is the first time any detailed test like this has ever been performed and gives a clear picture of the actual PEMF fields above a PEMF mat. Below are seven examples showing the magnetic field intensities above 40 microtesla (.4 Gauss). This threshold was selected so you could see the weak fields of these popular low intensity PEMF mats.
|
3D Mapping “Magnetic X-Ray” Methodology for Intensity and Slew Rate Plots
To create the 3D maps, we used a highly controlled robotic arm, called a gantry, to move two specialized magnetic sensors across an area measuring 30 inches by 80 inches where the PEMF devices were placed. 7500 Measurements in total were taken. Data Collection and Software We programmed the instrument (the oscilloscope) to detect the specific magnetic pulse we were looking for while rejecting electrical noise caused by the robotic arm's motors. Although the automated measurements are slightly different from those taken manually (because of the electrical filtering requirement), the relative strength differences among all the mats remained accurate. Finally, dedicated plotting software took the raw data, smoothed out any remaining minor electrical interference, and then generated the visual map. The software can either show only the measured area (up to 5 inches) or create a projected view to estimate how the magnetic field would look beyond that height. A separate manual measurement was required to determine how quickly the magnetic pulse rises or falls (called the 'slew rate' or dB/dT) for each mat, and the results were then used to generate a slew-rate view. |
|
2D Full Body CAD Images of Coils And 3D Accurate PEMF Field Visualizers of 6 Popular PEMF Devices
You can Match the BELOW CAD images to above actual 3D visualized measurements (A=Spectra, B=iMRS, C=BEMER, D=Centropix, E=QRS, F=Higher Dose).
You can Match the BELOW CAD images to above actual 3D visualized measurements (A=Spectra, B=iMRS, C=BEMER, D=Centropix, E=QRS, F=Higher Dose).
|
|
|
|
Magnetic X-Ray - SLEW RATE - Images of Spectra vs 7 Popular PEMF Full Body Mats
(A=Spectra, B=iMRS, C=BEMER, D=Centropix, E=QRS/PureWave, F=Sedona Pro/MAS, G=Higher Dose).
Measurements to Create 3D PEMF Plots Over 7500 measurements using an accurate Hall Effect Probe was done on 12 Popular full body mat PEMF devices. Below are the graphs of 7 of these. The data was put into an MIT software program with AI to create an accurate visualization based on actual measurements. This is the first time any detailed test like this has ever been performed and gives a clear picture of the actual PEMF fields above a PEMF mat. Below are seven examples showing the magnetic field SLEW RATES above .1 T/s. This threshold was selected so you could see the weak fields of these popular low intensity PEMF mats. Spectra is at the top of each plot. Bottom plot on each image is as follows: Top Row from left to Right [iMRS, BEMER, Centropxi]; Bottom Row left to right [QRS/Pure Wave, Sedona Pro, Higher Dose].
(A=Spectra, B=iMRS, C=BEMER, D=Centropix, E=QRS/PureWave, F=Sedona Pro/MAS, G=Higher Dose).
Measurements to Create 3D PEMF Plots Over 7500 measurements using an accurate Hall Effect Probe was done on 12 Popular full body mat PEMF devices. Below are the graphs of 7 of these. The data was put into an MIT software program with AI to create an accurate visualization based on actual measurements. This is the first time any detailed test like this has ever been performed and gives a clear picture of the actual PEMF fields above a PEMF mat. Below are seven examples showing the magnetic field SLEW RATES above .1 T/s. This threshold was selected so you could see the weak fields of these popular low intensity PEMF mats. Spectra is at the top of each plot. Bottom plot on each image is as follows: Top Row from left to Right [iMRS, BEMER, Centropxi]; Bottom Row left to right [QRS/Pure Wave, Sedona Pro, Higher Dose].
Comprehensive PEMF Rating
(A=Spectra, B=iMRS, C=BEMER, D=Centropix, E=QRS/PureWave, F=Sedona Pro/MAS, G=Higher Dose)
Rankings Based on 15 Criteria. The final rankings are in order.
(A=Spectra, B=iMRS, C=BEMER, D=Centropix, E=QRS/PureWave, F=Sedona Pro/MAS, G=Higher Dose)
Rankings Based on 15 Criteria. The final rankings are in order.
Example Below Comparing Spectra Apex HSR to the iMRS Prime
(Call me for a Consultation to See Other Brands Compared 941-928-0124)
(Call me for a Consultation to See Other Brands Compared 941-928-0124)
|
|
|
Visualization of Spectra Penetration Depth
Visualization of iMRS Penetration Depth
|
MIT Software to Visualize 3D PEMF Field (From over 7500 Measurement points!).
Top image is Intensity Comparison. Bottom is Slew Rate Comparison. 
|
Below is a 3rd Party Tested 3D Image of the SpectraApex HSR from Gausslabs.tech
|
|
|
Spectra Slew Rate Test
Test Probe Used: AKM EQ730L
Above is the measurement at the surface in the center of the coil: 312.1 mV divided by 13mV per gauss equals 24.0 gauss intensity. For this measurement, the rise time is 1.0 us, yielding a slew rate of 24.0 T/s. (2.40 mT/.100 ms = 24.0 T/s) Slew Rate 3rd Party Confirmed by Gausslabs.tech |
iMRS Prime Slew Rate Test
Above is the measurement on the surface at the point of maximum intensity (over the windings of the coil). The measured voltage was 469 mV divided by 460mV per gauss equals 1.02 gauss intensity.
The pulse rise time in this measurement is .0857 millisecond (ms) during steepest part to give iMRS best possible slew rate. So for this measurement, the slew rate is 1.2 T/S. |
Based on a thorough investigation, we found 19 successful slew rate PEMF studies that can help guide us in what the best slew rates to use. The successful slew rates from these clinical studies average 26.7 T/s which can be a guiding light and a ballpark number for the ideal slew rate to use. It is noteworthy to add that these 19 studies covered a wide range of tissue healing and regeneration from nerve to muscle to bone to joint/cartilage to tendons. The slew rate studies are summarized in the chart above left.
|
Spectra HSR Frequency Spectrum - 20 - 16,000 Hz
|
iMRS Frequency Spectrum - 20 - 6000 Hz
|
In the case of these measurements, we are analyzing the magnetic field of PEMF mats to see what frequencies are contained in the magnetic field. It is important to know that the electrical signals that come out of the controller do not equal the magnetic fields coming out of the coil. These measurements are all taken with the same settings and the same sensor to show the relative difference between each mat. Using the same settings and sensor is important because a Fourier Transform can look very different based on the settings.
The measurements were taken with the following parameters:
The measurements were taken with the following parameters:
- Asahi Kasei Microdevices/AKM EQ-730L with 5v power supply
- A USB Ossilocope with configurable FFT settings in the software (waveforms software in particular used with these measurements)
- The start frequency is 20hz and the end frequency is 20khz
- The window setting is rectangular
For Engineers - Methodology for 3D PEMF Magnetic X-Rays Images
These plots were made by raster scanning 2 magnetic field sensors (AKM EQ730L) across an area of 30 inches by 80 inches. The magnetic field was measured in 1 inch increments on the X and Y plane, and in 2 inch increments on the z axis for a total of 3 planes. The first plane is measured at 1 inch above the mat, the second plane at 3 inches and the third at 5 inches. These measurements were taken with a 3 axis gantry controlled by closed loop stepper motors. The measurements were taken with the PEMF devices within the 30”x80” window. One sensor mapped 40 inches of the 80 inch section while another sensor positioned 39” away along the y axis allowed the gantry to reach beyond its normal travel limits and capture the other 40 inch section with an inch of overlap at the end. The gantry would move into position, trigger the oscilloscope to take a measurement, pause while the measurement was taken and then move to the next position. See short video below for demonstration.
The oscilloscope used was a Digilent Analog Discovery 2. It was programmed via the SDK (software development kit) to stream data from the magnetic field sensors, analyze the data stream for a pulse (while rejecting most spurious pulses from the gantry motors) and record the intensity of the pulse relative to the offset of the sensor. This resulted in most of the measurements being slightly under the actual intensity as measured manually with an oscilloscope, but the relative difference between each mat is maintained within a certain margin of error.
The plotting software takes the numbers gathered by the oscilloscope, smooths the ripples from the slight electrical interference caused by the gantry motors, and optionally displays a projected view beyond the 5 inch height or stops at the 5 inch height to show only the area measured. To generate a slew rate view, each mat was measured manually to determine the rise or fall time of the pulse. This time was then used to calculate the dB/dT (slew rate) for each mat.
These plots were made by raster scanning 2 magnetic field sensors (AKM EQ730L) across an area of 30 inches by 80 inches. The magnetic field was measured in 1 inch increments on the X and Y plane, and in 2 inch increments on the z axis for a total of 3 planes. The first plane is measured at 1 inch above the mat, the second plane at 3 inches and the third at 5 inches. These measurements were taken with a 3 axis gantry controlled by closed loop stepper motors. The measurements were taken with the PEMF devices within the 30”x80” window. One sensor mapped 40 inches of the 80 inch section while another sensor positioned 39” away along the y axis allowed the gantry to reach beyond its normal travel limits and capture the other 40 inch section with an inch of overlap at the end. The gantry would move into position, trigger the oscilloscope to take a measurement, pause while the measurement was taken and then move to the next position. See short video below for demonstration.
The oscilloscope used was a Digilent Analog Discovery 2. It was programmed via the SDK (software development kit) to stream data from the magnetic field sensors, analyze the data stream for a pulse (while rejecting most spurious pulses from the gantry motors) and record the intensity of the pulse relative to the offset of the sensor. This resulted in most of the measurements being slightly under the actual intensity as measured manually with an oscilloscope, but the relative difference between each mat is maintained within a certain margin of error.
The plotting software takes the numbers gathered by the oscilloscope, smooths the ripples from the slight electrical interference caused by the gantry motors, and optionally displays a projected view beyond the 5 inch height or stops at the 5 inch height to show only the area measured. To generate a slew rate view, each mat was measured manually to determine the rise or fall time of the pulse. This time was then used to calculate the dB/dT (slew rate) for each mat.