Reducing MRI gradient coil vibration with rib stiffeners
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This work investigates the effect of rib stiffeners on the free and forced vibration of a gradient coil in a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanner. Several reinforcement schemes are studied in this article. One scheme utilizes the existing holes in the gradient coil structure (typically reserved for magnetic shims) to produce the reinforcement. Nonferrous, nonmagnetic carbon fiber rib stiffeners are employed to fill these holes in several ways to strengthen a gradient coil. Another scheme replaces the inner half of the gradient coil material with a grid of interconnected axial and circumferential rib stiffeners. It is found that the structural stiffness of the gradient coil increases substantially when the coil is reinforced by carbon fiber rib stiffeners. The reinforcement affects the noise and vibration response of the gradient coil structure in the following ways. It increases the frequency range of forced response of the gradient coil at low frequencies due to the increased resonant frequency of the fundamental mode of the coil. Second, it reduces the forced response amplitude of the coil structure (which is governed by the structural stiffness of the coil). Thirdly, it reduces the number of natural modes in the low and medium frequency range and therefore lessens the chance of the coil structure being excited resonantly by magnetic resonance signal acquisition sequences. It is shown that gradient coils modeled by solid finite element models have higher stiffness along the coil's circumference and lower stiffness in the axial direction than those using shell finite element models. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Concepts Magn Reson Part B (Magn Reson Engineering) 35B: 198–209, 2009
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".