Slashdot Mirror

Not sure what you're doing, but you're doing it wrong. The DICOM standard includes very specific tags for identifying orientation unambiguously. In hundreds of thousands of images over a decade and a half I've never seen a DICOM file from an image acquisition system that didn't properly implement them.

http://dicom.nema.org/medical/...

Also, if you can't figure out all the directions except L/R with the skull stripped, you should probably take an anatomy class. Or look at a scan.

I was going to suggest to put it in a NEMA enclosure with rating of around 6 or 6p or higher. Maybe with a filter one a side but it appears the box you suggested is about the same (although it doesn't look like it's certified NEMA).

Alternatively, if he wanted to go with a more powerful system, he could find a NEMA enclosure and bolt parts into it. IT won't likely resemble a real computer and probably need modification. I'm thinking a lot of the older alarm enclosure boxes might be viable too. Something from Honeywell or Knight maybe- some even had mounts for drives but good luck finding one.

So... not to stir up a hornets nest... but everyones aware that electric cars produce more pollution than gas right?

Let's look at some facts here. First off, the efficiency of a thermal power plant is somewhere around 33% to 48%, at least according to wikipedia. Let's split the difference and say 41% for a thermal plant. The typical thermal efficiency of a a gasoline engine is about 18% to 20%. Let's split the difference and say 19%. Thus, a thermal power plant is more than twice as efficient as a gasoline engine in terms of changing chemical potential energy to useful output.

But there are some caveats. Firstly, the electricity needs to be transmitted. High voltage power lines are extremely efficient, about 94% according to this article. That means that the chemical energy (lets assume from coal) reaching the charging station is 41% x 94% = 38.5%. And then there is the charging process. According to this article, the charge efficiency of a Li-Ion battery is about 97%, which makes sense to me, as batteries usually don't run too hot. The charging devices however probably are responsible for some loss. Let's assume they are 80% efficient. That gives us 38.5% x 80.0% x 97% = 30%. Thus, according to this, 30% of the coal chemical potential energy makes it to the engine.

But what about engine efficiency? Well electric motors run very cool, and have very high efficiencies, typically around 90%. I wouldn't be surprised if Tesla's motor is better. This means that if a coal power plant powered a Tesla, 30% x 90% = 27% of the energy would reach the wheels of the car, compared with a gasoline powered car, where 19% of the gasoline's potential energy comes out of the engine, never mind the losses in the transmission lines. Thus, a coal powered Tesla is 40% more energy efficient than a gasoline powered car.

However, there is one problem. Generating energy by coal produces more CO2 than generating it by gasoline. According to this article, coal generates about 215 pounds CO2 per btu of energy, while gasoline generates 157 pounds CO2 per btu. However, even with this, by my calculations, an equivalent gas powered car still emits 3.8% more CO2 than our coal powered Tesla.

Elon Musk made this claim in an interview, that even if a coal power plant generates the electricity, a Tesla still emits less CO2. My referenced back of a napkin calculations above support this assertion.

http://medical.nema.org/dicom/final/sup28_ft.pdf

CT images are commonly stored in DICOM [medical.nema.org] format. They are not stored as 3D mesh objects (like 3D apps do), but rather in CT slice packs. It's up to the software using the images (such as a treatment planning system) to construct a 3D image such as seen in the BBC article. The scanner itself is dumb with regards to human analogy. It just scans the density of the mater between the scanning elements and reconstructs a series of 2D images. Creating a 3D image from the stack is pretty straightforward, but contouring organs such as blood vessels, bones, muscles is a completely different story.

(For that matter, I sometimes use IrfanView + a DICOM plugin to look at CT images.)

Right, and here is another fact sheet, from the EPA, entitled FACT SHEET: Mercury in Compact Fluorescent Lamps (CFLs): http://www.nema.org/lamprecycle/epafactsheet-cfl.p df This sheet states that more mercury is put into the environment by 5 years' use of an incandescent bulb then by 5 years' use of a CFL, even if the CFL is broken and put in the Environment. This is assuming a coal power plant powers both.

This is the guy from junkscience.com, he's not objective.

Now according to the EPA (allegedly) http://www.nema.org/lamprecycle/epafactsheet-cfl.p df

"A power plant will emit 10mg of mercury to produce
the electricity to run an incandescent bulb compared to only
2.4mg of mercury to run a CFL for the same time"

So you're still ahead, since the DFL only has 4mg in it.

... even if all CFLs were to break open, the mercury released would be less than would be released if the lights had remained incandescent ...

1. 2.931 * 10^14 watt-hours of energy produced by coal plants each year [1]
2. one-third of total electricity production if from coal [1]
3. 48 tons of mercury emitted by coal power plants, will eventually reduce to 15 tons under new rule [2]
4. 48 tons converts to 4.35 * 10^10 milligrams [3]
5. A compact fluorescent bulb lasts up to 10,000 hours
6. One 15 watt companct fluorescent bulb produced as much light as a 60 watt incandescent and contains 5 milligrams of mercury

• [1] http://energy.cr.usgs.gov/energy/stats_ctry/Stat1. html#1foot1
• [2] http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/powersystems /pollutioncontrols/overview_mercurycontrols.html
• [3] http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=48+tons+in+mi lligrams&btnG=Google+Search

The CFLs aren't that bad, though, and they've certainly been getting better. The first CFLs that we got our house were rather blue, but the most recent batch we got has a very pleasing white to it (they're dimmable, too!). Besides, LEDs have narrow frequency ranges too, you know.

As for the mercury, an incandescent light releases more mercury into the environment than a CFL bulb would if you were to take it, crack it open, and run it through an aerosolizer. How? Power plant mercury emissions. A CFL also has 1/125th as much mercury as a typical mercury thermometer, and 1/750th as much as an old-style mercury thermostat (which some of you in old houses might have).

Wow...is Karl Rove now the Chief Fiction Editor at the Financial Post? I love the fundamentalist tone of this "beat the truth to death with a single one of its facts" article (I use the term loosely).

Should anyone want to consider more than one of the facts in this matter (and I am not espousing a more thoughtful open-minded and scientific approach to viewing the world)...

http://www.nema.org/lamprecycle/epafactsheet-cfl.p df

It is a shame the "journalist" didn't do the 15 minutes of research I just did. (2K costs seemed a bit extreme) from:

  http://www.nema.org/lamprecycle/epafactsheet-cfl.p df

  "If a CFL breaks in your home, open nearby windows to disperse any vapor that may escape, carefully sweep up the fragments (do not use your hands) and wipe the area with a disposable paper towel to remove all glass fragments. Do not use a vacuum. Place all fragments in a sealed plastic bag and follow disposal instructions above."

Peace

You are supposed to recycle them! Look for a someone who does it in your area.

Here are some places to look for more information:
http://www.lightbulbrecycling.com/regulations.html
http://www.nema.org/lamprecycle/
http://www.scdhec.gov/brap/forms/flo_lamps.pdf

Also, for those of you guessing about how many bulbs there are in circulation:
"The Mercury from on fluorescent bulb can pollute 6000 gallons of water beyond safe levels for drinking"
and
"The Association of Lighting and Mercury Recyclers (ALMR) estimates that at least 400 million mercury lamps are being disposed of annually as part of the municipal solid waste stream and only 20 percent of all mercury lamps are being recycled."
and
"All fluorescent lamps contain mercury. In fact, the standard fluorescent bulb has about 20 milligrams of mercury."

So - that means that about 8,000,000,000 milligrams or 17,637 pounds of mercury is being put into our environment in the United States. Not a trivial matter.

EPA provides the following breakage advisory:

The Handling of Small Numbers of Broken Fluorescent Lamps

Recommended Broken Lamp Handling Practices: If a lamp breaks in your home, close off the room to other parts of the building. Open a window to disperse any vapor that may escape, and leave the room for at least 15 minutes. Carefully scoop up the fragments with a stiff paper (do not use your hands) and wipe the area with a disposable paper towel to remove all glass fragments. Do not use a vacuum as this disperses the mercury over a wider area. All fragments should be placed in a sealed plastic bag and properly disposed of. For proper disposal instructions, see the "Message for Environmental Groups."

Universal Waste Rule Requirements: Under the EPA Universal Waste Rule, a lamp that does not pass the TCLP test and is broken must be cleaned up and placed in a container. The container must be closed, structurally sound, compatible with lamps, and lacking any evidence of spillage. This advice is applicable to any mercury-containing lamp. In some states, universal waste status is lost when lamps are broken and they must be handled as a full hazardous waste. It is important to check with your local, state, or federal office for the latest update in regulatory status or go to www.lamprecycle.org.

Health Effects: No adverse effects are expected from occasional exposure to broken lamps.

moreover, according to the EPA, more mercury is released into the air while burning fossil fuels to produce electricity for the incandescent bulbs replaced by the CFL than is contained in the CFL.

http://www.nema.org/lamprecycle/epafactsheet-cfl.p df

http://www.nema.org/lamprecycle/epafactsheet-cfl.p df Also, from the lightbulbs that I buy: All fluorescent bulbs contain small amounts of mercury that is energized by the lamp and in turn causes the phosphors inside the lamp to glow and create visible light. The amount of mercury in a CFL's glass tubing is very small and would fit on the tip of a ball point pen or about 1/750th of that found in an older household thermostat. Inexpensive CFL bulbs, like those found in home improvement and discount stores, contain mercury in elemental form or as mercury vapor which pose a risk of the mercury being released if the bulb is broken. All BlueMax(TM) CFLs are made with special amalgam technology where the mercury content is held within the amalgam fill of the bulb and will not "spill out". This amalgam fill/alloy structure is the same as is used in dentistry for tooth fillings. BlueMax(TM) CFLs actually present an opportunity to prevent mercury from entering our air, where it most affects our health. The largest source of mercury in our air comes from the burning of coal to produce electricity. A CFL uses 75% less energy than an incandescent light bulb and lasts up to 10 times longer. A power plant will emit 10mg of mercury to produce the electricity to run an incandescent bulb compared to only 2.4mg of mercury to run a CFL over a period of 5 years.

Safe cleanup precautions: If a CFL breaks in your home, open nearby windows to disperse any vapor that may escape, carefully sweep up the fragments (do not use your hands) and wipe the area with a disposable paper towel to remove all glass fragments. Do not use a vacuum. Place all fragments in a sealed plastic bag and follow disposal instructions above.

But when you add the 4mg included in the CFL, you end up comparing (CFL) 6.4mg to (Incan.) 10mg.
Which is still great, until you stop using coal to generate your power.
Source: http://www.nema.org/lamprecycle/epafactsheet-cfl.p df

The amount of mercury in a CFL's glass tubing is small, about 4mg.

"CFLs Responsible for Less Mercury than Incandescent Light Bulbs
Ironically, CFLs present an opportunity to prevent mercury from entering our air, where it most affects our health. The highest source of mercury in our air comes from burning fossil fuels such as coal, the most common fuel used in the U.S. to produce electricity. A CFL uses 75% less energy than an incandescent light bulb and lasts at least 6 times longer. A power plant will emit 10mg of mercury to produce the electricity to run an incandescent bulb compared to only 2.4mg of mercury to run a CFL for the same time."

http://www.nema.org/lamprecycle/epafactsheet-cfl.p df If your electricity is coming from a coal based power plant than more mercury is released using incandascent bulbs versus CFLs. 6.4 grams versus 10 grams for the power in incandascent.

Negatives... the thought of having mercury gas a few feet bothers me. Why, after figuring out just how bad mercury is, are we putting the stuff in more products that can expose people and especially children to it?

If any of them are still working by next december (or well if they even last 6 months) we will probably replace the majority of bulbs (except some which are on dimmers) with them.

When I actually do turn it off and several hours turn it back on, it seems to be much dimmer at first. It definitely seems less bright than a normal 60-watt (which is what this one is rated to replace) It's adequate for my computer area.

Good question..

However, fluorescent lighting has been around for many many years and has proven time and time again to be far more cost effective and environment friendly than incandescent.

A little research finds this: http://www.nema.org/lamprecycle/epafactsheet-cfl.p df

Fluorescent lights have needed ballast for years. The cost of making them is insignificant. CFL's use glass just like incandescent, so I don't see how there could be much of a different in use of energy or resources to make them.

And, making an LED, or a cluster of 36 LED's for a light bulb probably takes even less to produce.. After all.. It's just a diode. They get turned out by the trillions every day.

List of Companies Claiming to Recycle or Handle Spent Mercury Containing Lamps (last update May 2006)

http://www.sensorsmag.com/ is often a good starting point for sources of this type of technology.

Some manufactures of modules are http://www.napion.com/ and http://irtec.com/ . MuRata makes the IRA-E700, Global makes the RE200B and good ol' Hotek makes a controller for the sensors, HT761X.

Here is the NEMA spec for motion sensing http://www.nema.org/stds/wd7.cfm

EPAFactSheet - CFL [PDF]

For the lazy:

• The amount of mercury in a CFL's glass tubing is small, about 4mg.
  
• Ironically, CFLs present an opportunity to prevent mercury from entering our air, where it most affects our health. The highest source of mercury in our air comes from burning fossil fuels such as coal, the most common fuel used in the U.S. to produce electricity. A CFL uses 75% less energy than an incandescent light bulb and lasts at least 6 times longer. A power plant will emit 10mg of mercury to produce the electricity to run an incandescent bulb compared to only 2.4mg of mercury to run a CFL for the same time.
  

Note: The NEMA website clearly states, "NEMA is the leading trade association in the U.S. representing the interests of electroindustry manufacturers of products used in the generation, transmission and distribution, control, and end-use of electricity."

The important thing to remember is that CFLs need to be disposed of properly. Here are some links to help you out before you discard your next CFL:

• US EPA information on mercury in CFLs
• Lamp recycling resource (USA-oriented)
• Earth 911 has extensive recycling information on all types of items all over the world

This sheet may prove helpful. In summary, CFLs prevent enough mercury emissions (from coal power) to offset their own mercury content. A typical CFL contains 4mg of mercury, over 100x less than a typical thermometer and almost 1000x less than the mercury switches frequently used in older thermostats.

Now I have actually figured out that in the country where there are a multitude of responsibility write-offs (read USA) the electrical plugs are still "unsafe at any handling" (compare with Unsafe at any speed) I have since figured out that the Underwriters Laboratories isn't doing a good enough job when they are checking the safety of our household utilities. A most notably thing is the electrical plug for 220V 30/50A applinces where you actually can grab around the plug and come in contact with both the live pins at the same time when inserting/removing the plug. This can be prevented by a design that protects the user from coming into contact with the pins while inserting the plug. This picture shows the outlet in a well that actually serves two purposes - protecting the userd during insert/removal and also catching any mechanical sideway stresses that can break the pins inside the connector.

I have also noted that NEMA is not doing a very good job either since the amount of different electrical plug pinnings that are present is more confusing than helping. Too many pin configurations for the same electrical rating is not very good.

The issue that I would like to point out is that even if there is an international standard that standard isn't followed and adopted as superseding the national standards.

mod parent up, but don't be paranoid about florescent bulbs, either. The amount of mercury in a normal 4-foot tube is about 5mg, which is about the same volume as the amount of ink on the tip of a ball-point pen.

Sure you don't want to break a bulb and inhale the vapors deliberately, sure Hg is toxic, but if you break a bulb, it's not going to kill everyone within 100 feet, either. There isn't enough Hg in one bulb to be that dangerous. Good link here:

http://www.nema.org/lamprecycle/epafactsheet-cfl.p df

"Safe cleanup precautions: If a CFL breaks in your home, open nearby windows to disperse any vapor that may escape, carefully sweep up the fragments (do not use your hands) and wipe the area with a disposable paper towel to remove all glass fragments. Do not use a vacuum. Place all fragments in a sealed plastic bag and follow disposal instructions above."

What about those 3d-object printers. Sure, they're used in labs somewhere, but when will these things become commercially viable and available?

I have a jaw problems, so I went and got a CT scan of my head. The results were given to me on a CD-ROM in a standard format called DICOM. I had the data converted into an STL file format mesh of my skull using software called Mimics (google cache, site seems to be down at the moment). I then had it output on a Z-printer, which is one of those 3D printers your talking about, I presume. So basically, I now have an anatomically correct life-size model of my skull. The data conversion and the printing cost me around $500 US each. At first I thought it was so cool to be able to do this with technology now and that it was a work of art, but then I started to get the creeps after it sunk in that I was holding an actual copy of my skull.

While it is cool that they can do this, I hope it leads to more complicated things like joints being grown to the right shape

You can create joints grown to the right shape. You can create Rapid Prototyping Models of bones from CT scans. You can have CT scans of bones exported to a format called DICOM which you can then have converted to a file format called STL, used in Rapid Prototyping. In your case, you could probably get a CT Scan of your other wrist in DICOM format, and have the STL mesh flipped to be a mirror image.

There are some services that can provide conversion software, or do the file conversions, as well as provide the RP models, although the models are made through stereolythography from what I gather. There are newer methods of creating rapid prototyping models that use the same STL file format, that are probably more precise.

You can obtain some software packages that let you do the conversion yourself, and although there is probably a bit of a learning curve, the biggest problem would be the price. It would be best to just let the services handle the conversion and you choose which Rapid Prototyping method to use.

From this point, you can use the model to construct a titanium mold, which could then be used to produce actual bone. And as for cartilege for the joint, the Carticel cartilege growth and transplant procedure could probably be applied. The FDA has approved Carticel for the knees and hips, but it would be up to a doctor's discretion to apply it in other ways.

Although some mercury is used in manufacturing the CF bulb, even more is released in coal combustion.
According to http://www.nema.org/lamprecycle/epafactsheet, the overall release of mercury reduced by about 40% over incandescent bulbs.

I just went to their site.

I get a: [code=CANT_CONNECT] 500 Server Error. The entire display is black and white. This seems to run contrary to their own guidelines. I see absolutely no amber or red to indicate abnormal status or trouble status.

NEMA should dogfood their own 'standard'.

I am glad to see that the Nobel Committee has finally awarded this. As a medical image analysist I have worked with MR for many years now. What the area needs to do now is move away from the idea of an MR scanner as something which produces pretty pictures and start to think of it as a measurement device. The scanner manufacturers focus on producing nice looking pictures for the clinicians to look at, often at the expense of reproducible, accurate measurements. I also doubt whether anyone will be receiving any awards for DICOM the industry standard format for getting data off the scanner. And you think your tax form is overly complex....

It's a known problem with certain types of fluorescent lamps. We found out the hard way after facilities replaced all of the lights in the building with these "new, energy efficient" lights. We do a lot of presentations, and we use handheld infrared mice so we aren't tethered to the podium. We thought that every single one of them went bad all at once. The cursor went bonkers. After about a month of this, someone told us to try turning off the lights, and guess what, the mice worked every time. So, facilities had to come back in and fix the lights.

This document explains it all.

Parvus has several for the PC/104 size, as does Tri-M. Digital has some for their products.

There are plenty of generic NEMA enclosures available, up to walk-in size.

Remember you may need a heater or cooler. There are standalone devices, although I also have seen one PC/104 card with thermostats.