4.5 Review

Impedance evaluation of textile electrodes for EEG measurements

Journal

TEXTILE RESEARCH JOURNAL
Volume 93, Issue 7-8, Pages 1878-1888

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/00405175221135131

Keywords

Conductive textiles; EEG; textile electrodes; wearable technology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper evaluated the impedance of textile electrodes for electroencephalography measurements. The study found that copper-based textile electrodes were more suitable than silver-based textile electrodes and comparable to commercial electrodes in terms of impedance.
In this paper, we evaluated the impedance of textile electrodes for electroencephalography measurements. We compared the commercially available standard dry silver/silver chloride dry electrodes, copper-based, and silver-based textile electrodes by measuring impedance on the skin. First, on dry skin, the impedance range of the electrodes was 93-350 k omega at 0 min; after 60 min, the range was 20-56 k omega. The commercial electrode showed the lowest impedance of 20 k omega, and the silver-based textile electrode showed the highest impedance of 56 k omega in dry skin conditions after 60 min. When tap water was applied as an electrolyte, the impedance range was 13-15 k omega at 0 min; after 60 min, the range was 17-22 k omega for all three types of electrodes. In this case, the copper-based textile electrode showed the lowest impedance of 17 k omega and the commercial electrode showed the highest impedance of 22 k omega after 60 min. When saline water was applied as an electrolyte, at 0 min, the impedance range was 8-11 k omega; after 60 min, the range became 11-12 k omega for all three types of electrodes. Thus, all electrodes showed similar results. It was concluded that the copper-based textile electrodes were more suitable than the silver-based textile electrodes and comparable to commercial electrodes regarding impedance in all three skin conditions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available