Abstract This work presents an empirically obtained novel mutual relation between the hardware design and operating parameters, namely: (a) molarity of the coupling media, (b) scanning duration, (c) size of the object, and parameters defining the size of the scanning assembly (d) Number of electrodes, (e) the area of the vessel, and (f) the percentage periphery covered by the electrodes, affecting its performance. The expression suggests that by maintaining these six parameters within a specified range, it's anticipated that the reconstruction error can be limited to less than 10%. The minimum root mean square error between the experiment values and predicted values from the presented equation is 1.4053. Additionally, the parameter selection and optimization are done using the help of the obtained relation. The capability of discriminating Impedance profiles in recovery is around 73%. However, similar to other modalities, EITs’ performance depends on its hardware design, operating parameters and recovery algorithm. It is observed that scanning time significantly affects the recovery process compared to other optimizing parameters thus characterizing dynamically varying profile imaging. The accepted molarity value for the presented system is also found to be 0.5M.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sharma et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: