Citation

Sweeney JD. Conf. Proc. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. 2009; 2009: 3188-3190.

Affiliation

U.A. Whitaker School of Engineering, Florida Gulf Coast University, FL 33965-6565, USA. jsweeney@fgcu.edu

Copyright

(Copyright © 2009, IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers))

DOI

10.1109/IEMBS.2009.5334537

PMID

19964799

Abstract

In this study important aspects of the TASER(R) M26 and X26 neuromuscular incapacitation device waveforms are simulated, analyzed and contrasted against electrical stimulation with rectangular waveforms (commonly used in therapeutic stimulation devices). Expected skeletal muscle forces evoked by M26 and X26 stimulation are simulated also and compared against forces expected with higher or lower frequency trains. The first half-cycle of the M26 damped 50 kHz sinusoidal wave is the main contributor to stimulation threshold with this device. The pseudo-monophasic component of the X26 waveform primarily determines threshold for this system, with the leading damped 100 kHz component contributing little in this regard. Simulated isometric forces evoked at 19 Hz with either device are moderately intense (about 46% of maximal). Lower frequencies would likely not provide sufficient levels of contraction to override volitional motor control.

Language: en