20

Volume Conductor
Theory
Robert Plonsey
Duke University
20.1 Basic Relations in the Idealized Homogeneous
Volume Conductor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-1
20.2 Monopole and Dipole Fields in the Uniform Volume
of Innite Extent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-3
20.3 Volume Conductor Properties of Passive Tissue. . . . . . . 20-4
20.4 Effects of Volume Conductor Inhomogeneities:
Secondary Sources and Images . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-5
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-7
This chapter considers the properties of the volume conductor as it pertains to the evaluation of electric
and magnetic elds arising therein. The sources of the aforementioned elds are described by

J
i
, a function
of position and time, which has the dimensions of current per unit area or dipole moment per unit volume.
Such sources may arise from active endogenous electrophysiologic processes such as propagating action
potentials, generator potentials, synaptic potentials, etc. Sources also may be established exogenously,
as exemplied by electric or magnetic eld stimulation. Details on how one may quantitatively evaluate a
source function froman electrophysiologic process are found in other chapters. For our purposes here, we
assume that such a source function

J
i
is known and, furthermore, that it has well-behaved mathematical
properties. Given such a source, we focus attention here on a description of the volume conductor as it
affects the electric and magnetic elds that are established in it. As a loose denition, we consider the
volume conductor to be the contiguous passive conducting medium that surrounds the region occupied
by the source

J
i
. (This may include a portion of the excitable tissue itself that is sufciently far from

J
i
to
be described passively.)
20.1 Basic Relations in the Idealized Homogeneous
Volume Conductor
Excitable tissue, when activated, will be found to generate currents both within itself and also in all
surrounding conducting media. The latter passive region is characterized as a volume conductor. The
adjective volume emphasizes that current ow is three-dimensional, in contrast to the conned one-
dimensional ow within insulated wires. The volume conductor is usually assumed to be a monodomain
(whose meaning will be amplied later), isotropic, resistive, and (frequently) homogeneous. These are
simply assumptions, as will be discussed subsequently. The permeability of biologic tissues is important
20-1
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
20-2 Biomedical Engineering Fundamentals
when examining magnetic elds and is usually assumed to be that of free space. The permittivity is a
more complicated property, but outside cell membranes (which have a high lipid content) it is also usually
considered to be that of free space.
A general, mathematical description of a current source is specied by a function

J
i
(x, y, z, t ), namely,
a vector eld of current density in say milliamperes per square centimeter that varies both in space and
time. A study of sources of physiologic origin shows that their temporal behavior lies in a low-frequency
range. For example, currents generated by the heart have a power density spectrum that lies mainly
under 1 kHz (in fact, clinical ECG instruments have upper frequency limits of 100 Hz), while most other
electrophysiologic sources of interest (i.e., those underlying the EEG, EMG, EOG, etc.) are of even lower
frequency. Examination of electromagnetic elds in regions with typical physiologic conductivities, with
dimensions of under 1 mand frequencies less than 1 kHz, shows that quasi-static conditions apply. That is,
at a given instant in time, sourceeld relationships correspond to those found under static conditions.
1
Thus, in effect, we are examining direct current (dc) ow in physiologic volume conductors, and these
can be maintained only by the presence of a supply of energy (a battery). In fact, we may expect that
wherever a physiologic current source

J
i
arises, we also can identify a (normally nonelectrical) energy
source that generates this current. In electrophysiologic processes, the immediate repository of energy is
the potential energy associated with the varying chemical compositions encountered (extracellular ionic
concentrations that differ greatly from intracellular concentrations), but the long-term energy source is
the adenosine triphosphate (ATP) that drives various pumps that create and maintain the aforementioned
concentration gradients.
Based on the aforementioned assumptions, we consider a uniformly conducting medium of conduct-
ivity and of innite extent within which a current source

J
i
lies. This, in turn, establishes an electric
eld

E and, based on Ohms law, a conduction current density

E. The total current density

J is the sum
of the aforementioned currents, namely,

J =

E +

J
i
(20.1)
Now, by virtue of the quasi-static conditions, the electric eld may be derived from a scalar potential
[Plonsey and Heppner, 1967] so that

E = (20.2)
Since quasi-steady-state conditions apply,

J must be solenoidal, and consequently, substituting
Equation 20.2 into Equation 20.1 and then setting the divergence of Equation 20.1 to zero show that
must satisfy Poissons equation, namely,

2
=
_
1

J
i
(20.3)
An integral solution to Equation 20.3 is [Plonsey and Collin, 1961]

p
(x

, y

, z

) =
1
4
_
v
,

J
i
r
dv (20.4)
where r in Equation 20.4 is the distance froma eld point P(x

, y

, z

) to an element of source at dv(x, y, z),

that is,
r =
_
(x x

)
2
+(y y

)
2
+(z z

)
2
(20.5)
1
Note that while, in effect, we consider relationships arising when /t = 0, all elds are actually assumed to vary in
time synchronously with

J
i
. Furthermore for the special case of magnetic eld stimulation, the source of the primary
electric eld,

A/t , where

A is the magnetic vector potential, must be retained.
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
Volume Conductor Theory 20-3
Equation 20.4 may be transformed to an alternate form by employing the vector identity

__
1
r
_

J
i
_

_
1
r
_

J
i
+
_
1
r
_

J
i
(20.6)
Based on Equation 20.6, we may substitute for the integrand in Equation 20.4 the sum [(1/r)

J
i
]
(1/r)

J
i
, giving the following:

p
(x

, y

, z

) =
1
4
__
v

__
1
r
_

J
i
_
dv
_
v

_
1
r
_

J
i
dv
_
(20.7)
The rst term on the right-hand side may be transformed using the divergence theorem as follows:
_
v

__
1
r
_

J
i
_
dv =
_
s
_
1
r
_

J
i
d

S = 0 (20.8)
The volume integral in Equation 20.4 and Equation 20.8 is dened simply to include all sources. Con-
sequently, in Equation 20.8, the surface S, which bounds V, necessarily lies away from

J
i
. Since

J
i
thus is
equal tozeroonS, the expressioninEquation20.8 must likewise equal zero. The result is that Equation20.4
also may be written as

p
(x

, y

, z

) =
1
4
_
v

J
i
r
dv =
1
4
_
v

J
i

_
1
r
_
dv (20.9)
We will derive the mathematical expressions for monopole and dipole elds in the next section, but based
on those results, we can give a physical interpretation of the source terms in each of the integrals on the
right-hand side of Equation 20.9. In the rst, we note that

J
i
is a volume source density, akin to
charge density in electrostatics. In the second integral of Equation 20.9,

J
i
behaves with the dimensions
of dipole moment per unit volume. This conrms an assertion, above, that

J
i
has a dual interpretation
as a current density, as originally dened in Equation 20.1, or a volume dipole density, as can be inferred
from Equation 20.9; in either case, its dimension are mA/cm
2
= mA cm/cm
3
.
20.2 Monopole and Dipole Fields in the Uniform Volume of
Innite Extent
The monopole and dipole constitute the basic source elements in electrophysiology. We examine the elds
produced by each in this section.
If one imagines an innitely thin wire insulated over its extent except at its tip to be introducing a
current into a uniform volume conductor of innite extent, then we illustrate an idealized point source.
Assuming the total applied current to be I
0
and located at the coordinate origin, then by symmetry the
current density at a radius r must be given by the total current I
0
divided by the area of the spherical
surface, or

J =
I
0
4r
2
a
r
(20.10)
and a
r
is a unit vector in the radial direction. This current source can be described by the nomenclature
of the previous section as

J
i
= I
0
(r) (20.11)
where denotes a volume delta function.
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
20-4 Biomedical Engineering Fundamentals
One can apply Ohms law to Equation 20.10 and obtain an expression for the electric eld, and if
Equation 20.2 is also applied, we get

E = =
I
0
4r
2
a
r
(20.12)
where is the conductivity of the volume conductor. Since the right-hand side of Equation 20.12 is a
function of r only, we can integrate to nd , which comes out
=
I
0
4r
(20.13)
In obtaining Equation 20.13, the constant of integration was set equal to zero so that the point at innity
has the usually chosen zero potential.
The dipole source consists of two monopoles of equal magnitude and opposite sign whose spacing
approaches zero and whose magnitude during the limiting process increases such that the product of
spacing and magnitude is constant. If we start out with both component monopoles at the origin, then the
total source and eld are zero. However, if we now displace the positive source in an arbitrary direction

d, then cancellation is no longer complete, and at a eld point P we see simply the change in monopole
eld resulting from the displacement. For a very small displacement, this amounts to (i.e., we retain only
the linear term in a Taylor series expansion)

p
=

d
_
I
0
4r
_
d (20.14)
The partial derivative in Equation 20.14 is called the directional derivative, and this can be evaluated by
taking the dot product of the gradient of the expression enclosed in parentheses with the direction of d
(i.e., () a
d
, where a
d
is a unit vector in the

d direction). The result is

p
=
I
0
d
4
a
d

_
1
r
_
(20.15)
By denition, the dipole moment m = I
0

d in the limits as d 0; as noted, m remains nite. Thus, nally,

the dipole eld is given by [Plonsey, 1969]

p
=
1
4
m
_
1
r
_
. (20.16)
20.3 Volume Conductor Properties of Passive Tissue
If one were considering an active single isolated ber lying in an extensive volume conductor (e.g., an
in vitro preparation in a Ringers bath), then there is a clear separation between the excitable tissue and
the surrounding volume conductor. However, consider in contrast activation proceeding in the in vivo
heart. In this case, the source currents lie in only a portion of the heart (nominally where V
m
= 0).
The volume conductor now includes the remaining (passive) cardiac bers along with an inhomogeneous
torso containing a number of contiguous organs (internal to the heart are blood-lled cavities, while
external are pericardium, lungs, skeletal muscle, bone, fat, skin, air, etc.).
The treatment of the surrounding multicellular cardiac tissue poses certain difculties. A recently used
and reasonable approximation is that the intracellular space, in view of the many intercellular junctions,
can be represented as a continuum. A similar treatment can be extended to the interstitial space. This
results intwo domains that canbe regarded as occupying the same physical space; each domainis separated
from the other by the membrane. This view underlies the bidomain model [Plonsey, 1989]. To reect the
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
Volume Conductor Theory 20-5
TABLE 20.1 Conductivity Values
for Cardiac Bidomain
S/mm Clerc [1976] Roberts [1982]
g
ix
1.74 10
4
3.44 10
4
g
iy
1.93 10
5
5.96 10
5
g
ax
6.25 10
4
1.17 10
4
g
ay
2.36 10
4
8.02 10
5
underlying ber geometry, each domain is necessarily anisotropic, with the high conductivity axes dened
by the ber direction and with an approximate cross-ber isotropy. A further simplication may be
possible in a uniform tissue region that is sufciently far from the sources, since beyond a few space
constants transmembrane currents may become quite small and the tissue would therefore behave as a
single domain (a monodomain). Such a tissue also would be substantially resistive. On the other hand,
if the membranes behave passively and there is some degree of transmembrane current ow, then the
tissue may still be approximated as a uniform monodomain, but it may be necessary to include some of
the reactive properties introduced via the highly capacitative cell membranes. A classic study by Schwan
and Kay [1957] of the macroscopic (averaged) properties of many tissues showed that the displacement
current was normally negligible compared with the conduction current.
It is not always clear whether a bidomain model is appropriate to a particular tissue, and experimental
measurements found in the literature are not always able to resolve this question. The problemis that if the
experimenter believes the tissue under consideration to be, say, an isotropic monodomain, measurements
are set up and interpreted that are consistent with this idea; the inherent inconsistencies may never come
to light [Plonsey and Barr, 1986]. Thus one may nd impedance data tabulated in the literature for a
number of organs, but if the tissue is truly, say, an anisotropic bidomain, then the impedance tensor
requires six numbers, and anything less is necessarily inadequate to some degree. For cardiac tissue, it is
usually assumed that the impedance in the direction transverse to the ber axis is isotropic. Consequently,
only four numbers are needed. These values are given in Table 20.1 as obtained from, essentially, the only
two experiments for which bidomain values were sought.
20.4 Effects of Volume Conductor Inhomogeneities: Secondary
Sources and Images
In the preceding we have assumed that the volume conductor is homogeneous, and the evaluation of
elds from the current sources given in Equation 20.9 is based on this assumption. Consider what would
happen if the volume conductor in which

J
i
lies is bounded by air, and the source is suddenly introduced.
Equation 20.9 predicts an initial current ow into the boundary, but no current can escape into the
nonconducting surrounding region. We must, consequently, have a transient during which charge piles
up at the boundary, a process that continues until the eld from the accumulating charges brings the net
normal component of electric eld to zero at the boundary. To characterize a steady-state condition with
no further increase in charge requires satisfaction of the boundary condition that /n = 0 at the
surface (within the tissue). The source that develops at the bounding surface is secondary to the initiation
of the primary eld; it is referred to as a secondary source. While the secondary source is essential for
satisfaction of boundary conditions, it contributes to the total eld everywhere else.
The preceding illustration is for a region bounded by air, but the same phenomena would arise if the
region were simply bounded by one of different conductivity. In this case, when the source is rst turned
on, since the primary electric eld

E
a
is continuous across the interface between regions of different
conductivity, the current owing into such a boundary (e.g.,
1

E
a
) is unequal to the current owing
away from that boundary (e.g.,
2

E
a
). Again, this necessarily results in an accumulation of charge, and
a secondary source will grow until the applied plus secondary eld satises the required continuity of
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
20-6 Biomedical Engineering Fundamentals
current density, namely,

n
=
2

n
= J
n
(20.17)
where the surface normal n is directed from region 1 to region 2. The accumulated single source density
can be shown to be equal to the discontinuity of /
n
in Equation 20.17 [Plonsey, 1974], in particular,
K
s
= J
n
_
1

2
_

The magnitude of the steady-state secondary source also can be described as an equivalent double layer,
the magnitude of which is [Plonsey, 1974]

K
i
k
=
k
(

k
) n (20.18)
where the condition at the kth interface is described. In Equation 20.18, the two abutting regions are
designated with prime and double-prime superscripts, and n is directed from the primed to the double-
primed region. Actually, Equation 20.18 evaluates the double-layer source for the scalar function = ,
its strengthbeing givenby the discontinuity in at the interface [Plonsey, 1974] (the potential is necessarily
continuous at the interface with the value
k
called for in Equation 20.18). The (secondary) potential
eld generated by

K
i
k
, since it constitutes a source for with respect to which the medium is uniform and
innite in extent, can be found from Equation 20.9 as

S
P
=
P

S
P
=
1
4

k
_
k

k
(

k
) n
_
1
r
_
ds (20.19)
where the superscript S denotes the secondary source/eld component (alone). Solving Equation 20.19
for , we get

S
P
=
1
4
P

k
_
k

k
(

k
) n
_
1
r
_
ds (20.20)
where
P
in Equation 20.19 and Equation 20.20 takes on the conductivity at the eld point. The total eld
is obtained from Equation 20.20 by adding the primary eld. Assuming that all applied currents lie in a
region with conductivity
a
, then we have

S
P
=
1
4
a
_

J
i

_
1
r
_
dv +
1
4
P

k
_
k

k
(

k
) n
_
1
r
_
ds (20.21)
(If the primary currents lie in several conductivity compartments, then each will yield a term similar to
the rst integral in Equation 20.21.) Note that in Equation 20.20 and Equation 20.21 the secondary source
eld is similar in formto the eld in a homogeneous mediumof innite extent, except that
P
is piecewise
constant and consequently introduces interfacial discontinuities. With regard to the potential, these just
cancel the discontinuity introduced by the double layer itself so that
k
is appropriately continuous across
each passive interface.
The primary and secondary source currents that generate the electrical potential in Equation 20.21 also
set up a magnetic eld. The primary source, for example, is the forcing function in the Poisson equation
for the vector potential

A [Plonsey, 1981], namely,

A =

J
i
(20.22)
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
Volume Conductor Theory 20-7
From this it is not difcult to show that, due to Equation 20.21 for , we have the following expression
for the magnetic eld

H [Plonsey, 1981]:

H =
1
4
_

J
i

_
1
r
_
dv +
1
4

k
_

k
(

k
) n
_
1
r
_
dS (20.23)
A simple illustration of these ideas is found in the case of two semi-innite regions of different con-
ductivity, 1 and 2, with a unit point current source located in region 1 a distance h from the interface.
Region 1, which we may think of as on the left, has the conductivity
1
, while region 2, on the right,
is at conductivity
2
. The eld in region 1 is that which arises from the actual point current source plus
an image point source of magnitude (
2

1
)/(
2
+
1
) located in region 2 at the mirror-image point
[Schwan and Kay, 1957]. The eld in region 2 arises from an equivalent point source located at the actual
source point but of strength [1 + (
2

1
)/(
2
+
1
)]. One can conrm this by noting that all elds
satisfy Poissons equation and that at the interface is continuous while the normal component of current
density is also continuous (i.e.,
1

1
/n =
2

2
/n).
The potential on the interface is constant along a circular path whose origin is the foot of the perpen-
dicular from the point source. Calling this radius r and applying Equation 20.13, we have for the surface
potential
S

S
=

1
4

h
2
+r
2
_
1 +

2

2
+
1
_
(20.24)
and consequently a secondary double-layer source

K
S
equals, according to Equation 20.18,

K
S
=

1
4

h
2
+r
2
_
1 +

2

2
+
1
_
(
2

1
) n (20.25)
where n is directed from region 1 to region 2. The eld from

K
S
in region 1 is exactly equal to that from a
point source of strength (
2

1
)/(
2
+
1
) at the mirror-image point, which can be veried by evaluating
and showing the equality of the following:

P
=
1
4
1
_

K
S

_
1
r
_
ds =
(
2

1
)/(
2

1
)
4
1
R
(20.26)
where R in Equation 20.26 is the distance from the mirror-image point to the eld point P, and r in
Equation 20.26 is the distance from the surface integration point to the eld point.
References
Clerc, L. 1976. Directional differences of impulse spread in trabecular muscle from mammalian heart.
J. Physiol. (Lond.) 255: 335.
Plonsey, R. 1969. Bioelectric Phenomena. New York, McGraw-Hill.
Plonsey, R. 1974. The formulation of bioelectric sourceeld relationship in terms of surface
discontinuities. J. Frank Inst. 297: 317.
Plonsey, R. 1981. Generation of magnetic elds by the human body (theory). In S.-N. Ern,
H.-D. Hahlbohm, and H. Lbbig (Eds.), Biomagnetism, pp. 177205. Berlin, W de Gruyter.
Plonsey, R. 1989. The use of the bidomain model for the study of excitable media. Lect. Math. Life Sci.
21: 123.
Plonsey, R. and Barr, R.C. 1986. A critique of impedance measurements in cardiac tissue. Ann. Biomed.
Eng. 14: 307.
Plonsey, R. and Collin, R.E. 1961. Principles and Applications of Electromagnetic Fields. New York,
McGraw-Hill.
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
20-8 Biomedical Engineering Fundamentals
Plonsey, R. and Heppner, D. 1967. Consideration of quasi-stationarity in electrophysiological systems.
Bull. Math. Biophys. 29: 657.
Roberts, D. and Scher, A.M. 1982. Effect of tissue anisotropy on extracellular potential elds in canine
myocardium in situ. Circ. Res. 50: 342.
Schwan, H.P. and Kay, C.F. 1957. The conductivity of living tissues. NY Acad. Sci. 65: 1007.
2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC