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

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 127 Next »

This is where all of our weekly progress will be recorded

Monday 29/01.24

We had a little start up meeting with Håvard. Together we came up with an idea of how to make drilling a prostate work. We also laid a plan for testing popping extraction one more time, this time at even colder temperatures and with less temperature fluctuations during milling. This is described in Prostate Extraction under test 2.


Tuesday 30/01.24

The main plan for today is to have a discussion with Sebastian about the way forward, and then execute popping extraction test 2 and begin preparations for popping extraction test 3.

The MR Core Labs team requested a statement regarding the projects progress so far and its state at this time, as well as a rough weekly plan so that they can better plan ahead. This plan can be found here.

We also tested the popping extraction method with the samples being left in the freezer overnight, before being put into a box filled with dry ice, with a temp of around -100*C. The tests resulted in the slice shattering into pieces, with the samples also shattering. Images can be found here Therefore, another slice will be milled, and extraction at a lower temperature will be performed tomorrow.


Wednesday 31/01.24

Today we conducted extraction popping test 3 and got good results. Many samples were extracted without harm to the slice or sample. The best success rate was achieved when we used a scalpel to further weaken the bond between slice and sample. 


With this we now have a complete overview of what benefits and disadvantages comes with vacuum gripping. After consideration we have chosen to pivot from the vacuum gripping solution and instead incorporate a solution more similar to the one currently in use at MR Core Labs, only automatic. Even though the vacuum gripping with popping extraction would be possible to perform, we feel that the concept bring too many extra components and therefore possible complications to the product. In addition we believe that we can guarantee a higher success rate, less workload for the operator, and a less complicated product to learn/operate with normal clamping. 


We will still perform a test tomorrow regarding the effect of spooning on the extraction of the slice.


Going forwards we want to start creating rough designs of how we envision the final product to look/work, as well as incorporating any components necessary for prostate milling into the ARTS 1.0. 


Thursday 01/02.24


Friday 02/02.24


  • No labels