You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 57 Next »

This is where all of our weekly progress will be recorded

Monday 23/10.23

Since last Friday's test had to be done without ham, we redid the test today, but this time with ham. We bought some ham from the store and froze it down while squeezed flat as this would make it most resemble the actual prostates.


We developed a new bed lid to test friction. The new bed with metal holes had a little bit more friction. While testing we also discovered a small air-leak between the old bed lid and the rest of the bed. This means that we should be able to grip a little bit harder with a completely air-tight setup. Solving this may be as easy as adding more magnets.


We also designed an adapter for attaching the vacuum to our tube.


The test

Starting the machine: The machine took 2 hours to reach -12°C

Attaching the computer: We had zero complications.

Starting the software: We had zero complications. No calibration had to be done.

Inserting the slice: The insertion of the slice was somewhat difficult, but we had no complications.




Cutting: The cutting went well. It was performed at ~-10°C. The slice was held perfectly still. There was however the problem of spooning, which we know is worse at higher degrees. We also suspect that the drill may have been a little bit dirty, which worsened the quality of the cut.


Retrieving the slice: The retrieval of the slice went well. The plate was somewhat stuck, but with some patience it went well.


Conclusion:

The vacuum solution is strong enough to keep a frozen slice of meat fastened to the drill-bed.



Comments:

The vacuum pulled a lot of cold out of the freezer. During the procedure the temperature rose from -10°C to -3°C. We can solve this by simply pumping the air back into the freezer.


The spooning gathered around the cut, which reduced visibility, but had no impact on the quality of the cut.


By sending the video feed to our other pc we managed to get a better view of the drilling during the procedure.





Friday 28/10.23


Today we first had a meeting with our counselor and then with the ARTS team at St.Olavs.

In our first meeting we talked a little bit about our progress and the way forward. Getting answers to the questions we had after these first two months with work.

We concluded that we have approximately 4-5 weeks left until we need to start writing our project thesis.

Going forward we want to focus on improving the gripping method as that is the part of our POC that needs most work. Håvard had a good idea of using a single hole in our drill-bed and have it sealed with an o-ring.

The upside of this is that the seal between the ham and the vacuum would be tighter, thus increasing the gripping force. As no spooning can escape down into the vacuum, no filter solution would be needed. Only the drill bed would have to be sterilized. In addition there would be less leakage of cold air, removing the need for an active cooling method during drilling.

The downside of this is that the area covered by the o-ring would then be unavailable for drilling. However if this area is small enough, then if wont be that much of an obstuction.


Håvard also advised us to look at his master thesis to se how a master thesis is structured, so that we know more about how we should think when structuring our thesis.

We have also scheduled a meeting next week where we will get to learn about ________, which will come in handy when writing our project thesis. 





  • No labels