1995
DOI: 10.1016/0003-2670(95)00352-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Numerical approach to the explanation of the response time of the Severinghaus type electrode

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, Xi and Bakker [22] report that, for a shift in CO2 saturation from 0.04% to 0.66%, the Severinghaus probe takes at least 5 min to stabilise to its new potential. Interestingly, this is the probe's 'response time', as the concentration of CO2 has been increased, and it follows, from the work of others [42,43], that the associated recovery time for the probe will be longer, possibly by a factor of 4, which implies a recovery time of ca. 20 min.…”
Section: Drift In Hs Watermentioning
confidence: 95%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For example, Xi and Bakker [22] report that, for a shift in CO2 saturation from 0.04% to 0.66%, the Severinghaus probe takes at least 5 min to stabilise to its new potential. Interestingly, this is the probe's 'response time', as the concentration of CO2 has been increased, and it follows, from the work of others [42,43], that the associated recovery time for the probe will be longer, possibly by a factor of 4, which implies a recovery time of ca. 20 min.…”
Section: Drift In Hs Watermentioning
confidence: 95%
“…These response and recovery times are obviously completely inadequate for the monitoring of rapid changes in dissolved CO2, as required for blood gas monitoring for example, where the %CO2 is typically 5%. A Severinghaus electrode for example is often able to respond in a minute, although this can be considerably longer if it possesses a large volume internal bulk electrolyte, or if the concentrations of CO2 are low [22,42,43]. For example, Xi and Bakker [22] report that, for a shift in CO2 saturation from 0.04% to 0.66%, the Severinghaus probe takes at least 5 min to stabilise to its new potential.…”
Section: Drift In Hs Watermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[3][4][5][6][7][8][9] However, drift reported in the literature, ranging up to 20 mV/h, remains a serious problem for practical applications of the sensor. Any drift of the internal pH electrode may cause measurement errors.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The lower the PCO 2 value, the slower it gets. Previous numerical simulations have fully characterized this diffusion controlled process. , The lagging behind in the response is not desired when real time monitoring of PCO 2 is needed. Signal drifting will accumulate during the long equilibrating process and contribute also in part to the deviation from the ideal behavior of the Severinghaus CO 2 probe shown in Figure .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because it works on the basis of spontaneous diffusion and the establishment of bulk phase equilibrium between the internal compartment and the sample, the response time of the Severinghaus CO 2 probe is typically 1 min or longer. This response time increases with higher inner NaHCO 3 levels. , This slow response of the Severinghaus CO 2 probe has been characterized by numerical simulations and is therefore well understood. , It is not really an adequate tool when rapid real time variations of CO 2 need to be monitored, as in the depth profiling of aquatic systems or the rapid analysis of clinical blood samples.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%