Discretized solenoid design of a 1.5 T and a 3.0 T REBCO wholebody MRI magnets with cost comparison according to magnetic flux

被引:0
|
作者
Jung, Wonju [1 ]
Kim, Geonyoung [1 ]
Choi, Kibum [1 ]
Park, Hyunsoo [1 ]
Hahn, Seungyong [1 ]
机构
[1] Seoul Natl Univ, Dept Elect & Comp Engn, Seoul, South Korea
来源
基金
新加坡国家研究基金会;
关键词
MRI magnet; MRI cost; REBCO;
D O I
10.9714/psac.2023.25.4.075
中图分类号
O59 [应用物理学];
学科分类号
摘要
Rare earth barium copper oxide (REBCO) materials have shown the possibility of high-temperature superconductor (HTS) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) magnets due to their elevated transition temperature. While numerous MRI magnet designs have emerged, there is a growing emphasis on estimating the cost before manufacturing. In this paper, we propose two designs of REBCO whole-body MRI magnets: (1) 1.5 T and (2) 3.0 T, the standard center field choices for hospital use, and compare their costs based on conductor usage. The basis topology of the design method is based on discretized solenoids to enhance field homogeneity. Magnetic stress calculation is done to further prove the mechanical feasibility of their construction. Multi-width winding technique and outer notch structure are used to improve critical current characteristic. We apply consistent constraints for current margins, sizes, and field homogeneities to ensure an equal cost comparison. A graph is plotted to show the cost increase with magnetic flux growth. Additionally, we compare our designs to two additional MRI magnet designs from other publications with respect to the cost and magnetic flux, and present the linear relationship between them.
引用
收藏
页码:75 / 80
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison of MRI scans of patients with optic neuritis at 1.5 T and 3.0 T
    Nielsen, K
    Rostrup, E
    Frederiksen, J
    Knudsen, S
    Mathiesen, H
    Hansson, L
    Paulson, O
    NEUROLOGY, 2005, 64 (06) : A236 - A237
  • [2] Cardiac cine MRI: Comparison of 1.5 T, non-enhanced 3.0 T and blood pool enhanced 3.0 T imaging
    Gerretsen, S. C.
    Versluis, B.
    Bekkers, S. C. A. M.
    Leiner, T.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2008, 65 (01) : 80 - 85
  • [3] Neuroimaging at 1.5 T and 3.0 T:: Comparison of oxygenation-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging
    Krüger, G
    Kastrup, A
    Glover, GH
    MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE, 2001, 45 (04) : 595 - 604
  • [4] Multimodal MRI Performance Comparison between 1.5T and 3.0T in Recurrent GBM
    Ronan, Lara J.
    Hampton, Thomas
    Eskey, Clifford
    Fadul, Camilo
    ANNALS OF NEUROLOGY, 2013, 74 : S86 - S86
  • [5] Conduction cooled magnet design for 1.5T, 3.0T and 7.0T MRI systems
    Baig, Tanvir
    Yao, Zhen
    Doll, David
    Tomsic, Michael
    Martens, Michael
    SUPERCONDUCTOR SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2014, 27 (12):
  • [6] Prospective Comparison of 1.5 and 3.0-T MRI for Evaluating the Knee Menisci and ACL
    Van Dyck, Pieter
    Vanhoenacker, Flip M.
    Lambrecht, Valerie
    Wouters, Kristien
    Gielen, Jan L.
    Dossche, Lieven
    Parizel, Paul M.
    JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2013, 95A (10): : 916 - 924
  • [7] Pancreatic Duct in Autoimmune Pancreatitis Intraindividual Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Pancreatography at 1.5 T and 3.0 T
    Kim, Jin Hee
    Byun, Jae Ho
    Kim, Myung-Hwan
    Lee, Sung Koo
    Kim, Song Cheol
    Kim, Hyoung Jung
    Lee, Seung Soo
    Kim, So Yeon
    Lee, Moon-Gyu
    PANCREAS, 2017, 46 (07) : 921 - 926
  • [8] Comparison between 1.5-T and 3.0-T MRI for the diagnosis of placenta accreta spectrum disorders
    Bourgioti, Charis
    Zafeiropoulou, Konstantina
    Tzavara, Chara
    Daskalakis, George
    Fotopoulos, Stavros
    Theodora, Marianna
    Nikolaidou, Maria Evangelia
    Konidari, Marianna
    Gourtsoyianni, Sofia
    Panourgias, Evangelia
    Koutoulidis, Vassilis
    Martzoukos, Epameinondas Anastasios
    Konstantinidou, Anastasia Evangelia
    Moulopoulos, Lia Angela
    DIAGNOSTIC AND INTERVENTIONAL IMAGING, 2022, 103 (09) : 408 - 417
  • [9] Exposure levels of radiofrequency magnetic fields and static magnetic fields in 1.5 and 3.0 T MRI units
    Rathebe, P.
    Weyers, C.
    Raphela, F.
    SN APPLIED SCIENCES, 2021, 3 (02):
  • [10] Exposure levels of radiofrequency magnetic fields and static magnetic fields in 1.5 and 3.0 T MRI units
    P. Rathebe
    C. Weyers
    F. Raphela
    SN Applied Sciences, 2021, 3