From last "EEtimes Europe" news:
"One such system is a battery-less electrocardiogram (EKG) sensor that supports a 1Mbit per second data rate over 10 meters distance".
If EKG sensor has 10 bits resolution, samples of EKG are transmitted in the band 100 kHz. EKG signals have the baseband F < 1 kHz, Why should we transmit them in so wide band? Can it be narrowed?
Hi Anatoliy and Marcus,
I think there are some missing information indeed.In my view, the question here is the sense of "1Mbit/sec" data rate for an ECG signal as the data rate is low indeed. Assuming an ECG sampling frequency of 500Hz, we have 500 samples/sec. With 10 bits/sample quantization (example), the BB useful data rate is 5kbits/sec. But the needed frequency BW to transmit this signal is a trade-off to many things like : base band (useful) data rate, coding scheme and redundancy, choice of digital modulation...etc. As of today, various RF standards are already defined in that sense and it's unclear if claimed 1Mbit/sec is related to the useful data rate or antenna data rate. By the way, on the provided link I was not able to see that needed BW is 100kHz.
Vasile
Hi Anatoliy,
for general ECG purposes (detect QRS, recognize beat types) the presented 1Mbit rate seems to be unnecessarilly high.
On the other hand, our current research works with 24bit - 25 kHz ECG recordings (later downsampled to 5 kHz) meaning that 1Mbit transfer rate would be safe with enough reserve (but we do not need to go wireless in our projects anyway).
For me, 1Mbit transfer makes a sense for the research and the future. It does not make a sense for a regular ECG recordings. But if a new product is going to the market, I think that ability to go up to 1Mbit is good choice.
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=7319888&newsearch=true&queryText=uhf%20ecg
Conference Paper Time-frequency interpretation of ultra-high-frequency QRS components
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Engineering
- Electrical Engineering
- Electrodes