Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

PSD_FIESTA3D #3

Closed
romainVala opened this issue Apr 7, 2017 · 6 comments
Closed

PSD_FIESTA3D #3

romainVala opened this issue Apr 7, 2017 · 6 comments

Comments

@romainVala
Copy link

Hello

I was interested to simulate the banding artefact for different phase cycling of th bSSFp sequence.
So I play a little bit with the phase increment (CV3)
I first test on the GM/WM/CSF phantome, with one uniform coil, uniform B0.
with the default phase (2*pi/2) the image looks ok, but when I put a RF phase increment (CV3 = 0) I get a big aliasing (in the phase encoding direction) only for the csf compartment.
I do not expect such an artifact ...
Any idea where it may come from ?

Many thanks

Romain

@leoliuf
Copy link
Owner

leoliuf commented Apr 7, 2017

Can you provide the screenshot to help diagnosis? When you mentioned one uniform coil and uniform B0, did you mean you used additional coil and mag for the simulation?

@romainVala
Copy link
Author

romainVala commented Apr 9, 2017 via email

@leoliuf
Copy link
Owner

leoliuf commented Apr 11, 2017

Try to use smaller FlipAng and larger DP_Num (more dummy TR section). The artifact is caused by the transient steady-state signal from CSF. You can use SpinWatcher to check MR signal from individual voxel.

@romainVala
Copy link
Author

romainVala commented Apr 11, 2017 via email

@romainVala
Copy link
Author

Hi
I notice a bug when I put a DP_Num greater than 700 (for 8 slices)
it stop ate TR Counts = 640 or 700 (number of TR without dummy scan) and complains about wrong dimension.
Strange because it works ok for smaller DP_NUM

Thanks

Romain

@leoliuf
Copy link
Owner

leoliuf commented May 10, 2017

Yes, I noticed that too. I will possibly change the limitation of DP_Num to any number in the future version. So far, the DP_Num must be smaller than total phase encoding steps.

@leoliuf leoliuf closed this as completed May 10, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants