Work out cardiac cycle and heart rate

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the cardiac cycle and heart rate from an ECG after exercise. Initially, a user calculated the cardiac cycle as 0.45 seconds and heart rate as 133 bpm based on counting 9 grid lines, but later corrected this to 0.5 seconds and 120 bpm after realizing they needed to count the lines instead of spaces. The participants agreed on the updated values and confirmed that the calculations were accurate. Additionally, another ECG labeled 'resting' was introduced, with users counting 15 grid lines per cycle. Overall, the calculations and understanding of ECG interpretation were clarified through collaborative discussion.
shadows122
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
I would just like to know if i have worked out one cardiac cycle and heart rate correctly.
I have attached the image of the ecg called 'after exercise'

here are my workings out:

1. CARDIAC CYCLE:

there are 4 cycles so:
9 (grids) x 0.05 = 0.45
9x 0.05 = 0.45
9x 0.05 = 0.45
9x 0.05 = 0.45

average = 0.45 x 4/4 = 0.45

so cardiac cycle = 0.45 seconds

2. HEART RATE:
60/0.45 =133 bpm

are these worked out correctly?
 

Attachments

  • afterExercise.JPG
    afterExercise.JPG
    49.2 KB · Views: 406
  • resting.png
    resting.png
    23.5 KB · Views: 450
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
shadows122 said:
I would just like to know if i have worked out one cardiac cycle and heart rate correctly.
I have attached the image of the ecg called 'after exercise'

here are my workings out:

1. CARDIAC CYCLE:

there are 4 cycles so:
9 (grids) x 0.05 = 0.45
9x 0.05 = 0.45
9x 0.05 = 0.45
9x 0.05 = 0.45

average = 0.45 x 4/4 = 0.45

so cardiac cycle = 0.45 seconds

2. HEART RATE:
60/0.45 =133 bpm

are these worked out correctly?
I'm seeing one heartbeat every 10 grid lines. Are you sure about your 9 grid lines number?
 
berkeman said:
I'm seeing one heartbeat every 10 grid lines. Are you sure about your 9 grid lines number?

Oh, dammit i was counting the spaces between the lines.
So you have to count the lines? then yeah it should be 10.

so its:
1. CARDIAC CYCLE:
there are 4 cycles so:
10 (grids) x 0.05= 0.5
10x 0.05 = 0.5
10x 0.05 = 0.5
10x 0.05 = 0.5

average = 0.5 x 4/4 =0.5

so cardiac cycle = 0.5 seconds

2. HEART RATE:
60/0.5 = 120 bpm

is this right?? :smile:
 
shadows122 said:
Oh, dammit i was counting the spaces between the lines.
So you have to count the lines? then yeah it should be 10.

so its:
1. CARDIAC CYCLE:
there are 4 cycles so:
10 (grids) x 0.05= 0.5
10x 0.05 = 0.5
10x 0.05 = 0.5
10x 0.05 = 0.5

average = 0.5 x 4/4 =0.5

so cardiac cycle = 0.5 seconds

2. HEART RATE:
60/0.5 = 120 bpm

is this right?? :smile:
That's what I got as well. :smile:
 
berkeman said:
That's what I got as well. :smile:

i just uploaded another ECG called 'resting' as i can't tell how many grids there are. I counted 15 ? for each cycle, what about you?
 
shadows122 said:
i just uploaded another ECG called 'resting' as i can't tell how many grids there are. I counted 15 ? for each cycle, what about you?
Yep, I get 15 as well.
 
  • Like
Likes shadows122
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top