This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

ADS1298R: (Augmented) limb leads in analog domain - lead III noise

Part Number: ADS1298R


We are designing an ECG monitoring device where the requirements a.o. are:

  • all limb leads (I, II, III, aVR, aVL, aVF) are derived in analog domain
  • respiration measured by impedance pneumography is provided

For this reason we are evaluating ADS1298R on ADS1298RECGFE-PDK board.

It is connected (jumpers rearranged and additional connections added) in the following way:

  • IN1N and IN1P - on-board respiration circuitry
  • IN2N - R (RA)
    IN2P - L (LA)
  • IN3N - R (RA)
    IN3P - F (LL)
  • IN4N - L (LA)
    IN4P - F (LL)
  • IN5N - N/C
    IN5P - L (LA)
  • IN6N - N/C
    IN6P - F (LL)
  • IN7N - N/C
    IN7P - R (RA)

Augmented leads (channels 5, 6, and 7) are configured according to section 9.3.1.7.3.1 Augmented Leads of the ADS129x data sheet.
WCT amplifiers are set as follows:

In general the circuitry provides satisfactory results.

However, when the patient (or the patient simulator) is not connected, channel 4 (F-L measurement, thus lead III) measures enormous noise signal while other leads (CH2, CH3, CH5, CH6, and CH7) are flat lines - what can be the result of such inconsistent behaviour?

In such configuration (lead I - CH2, lead II - CH3, lead III - CH4) how should I configure RLD registers for the best results, as RLDN2, RLDP2, and RLDP3 only or rather RLDN2, RLDP2, RLDN3, RLDP3, RLDN4, and RLDP4? From what I checked it does not have any influence on the lead III behaviour.

Thank you.

  • Hi,

    For, "However, when the patient (or the patient simulator) is not connected, channel 4 (F-L measurement, thus lead III) measures enormous noise signal while other leads (CH2, CH3, CH5, CH6, and CH7) are flat lines - what can be the result of such inconsistent behaviour?"

    Would you please provide some screen shots? e.g. the ADC Register-> Channel Registers page and the Analysis->Scope page to show a comparison between CH4 and any 1 of the good channel?

    What are the noises peak to peak of Channel 4 compare to any 1 of other channel you think is good?

    1. Could you not connect any signals to inputs and restart the EVM and GUI, i.e. everything is default(the Channel Input should be all Input Short), and then click ACQUIRE, how does Channel 4 compare to any 1 of other channel?

    2. Then, repeat 1, but change the Channel Input to Normal Electrode.

    For, "In such configuration (lead I - CH2, lead II - CH3, lead III - CH4) how should I configure RLD registers for the best results, as RLDN2, RLDP2, and RLDP3 only or rather RLDN2, RLDP2, RLDN3, RLDP3, RLDN4, and RLDP4?"

    May I ask what you mean by "best results"?

    RLD registers settings heavily depend on cases by cases that depend on, but not limited to the following sources and factors -

    environment/surroundings noises, EMI, electrodes/patches materials, cables/wires materials/lengths, external circuits, board designs, RC/integrator circuit tuning, experiment setup.

    And then, during the product/system prototyping and developing stages, results will depend on products'/systems power supplies, PCBAs, mechanical, chassis, shielding, grounding, enclosures designs, data transmission cables to computer, computer and/or any other power adapters, and the operating/usage environments.

    Then, when contacting with human, results depend on electrodes/patches materials/conditions, cables/wires materials/lengths, gels, skin conditions, body, breathing, air in lung, walking/talking, etc.

    Any of above could affect the signal integrity and/or SNR, so RLD registers settings are the combinations that customers need to play around/adjust to find the appropriate combinations/configurations with respect to customers' products designs and applications and operating environments.

    Therefore, designers and/or engineers need to do tests&trials to test, collect data, study, data analysis, verify and validate, and then tune, reiterate/revise before making final decisions.

    Thanks.

  • Hi,
    Since I did not hear back from you, I believe my suggestions answered your questions.
    I will close this post and if you have any pending questions, feel free to post them here or open a new thread.
    Thanks and have a great day!

  • Hi,
    I'm sorry to tell you that this issue was assigned a lower priority and I was not able to provide you with the screenshots you've asked. 
    Looking at the planning I'll be able to provide you with some additional information by the end of the next week the earliest. 

    If it's not according to your policy to have a thread open for a longer time, please, close this one. I'll open a new one once I'm working on the issue again.

    Have a nice day!

  • Hi,

    It's okay to keep this thread open if it's still pending.

    And, it's better and easier to come back to review and understand what have been discussed, tried and the progress.

    Thanks for letting me know.