Skip to content

ZMT zurich med tech
  1. Home
  2. Sim4Life

Sim4Life

719 Topics 2.3k Posts

Subcategories

  • Installing Sim4Life and configuring licenses

    36 126
    36 Topics
    126 Posts
    D
    Thank you so much!

  • Working with CAD models

    63 225
    63 Topics
    225 Posts
    brynB
    preview (still working on the distance from e.g. F7 to F9) [image: 1757340222351-c2ee64b1-55df-41d6-9583-bd5832ceb962-image.png]

  • Working with models from the Virtual Population

    59 280
    59 Topics
    280 Posts
    T
    @halder I hope this message finds you well. I am currently conducting a temporal interference (TI) simulation using the LF Electro Ohmic Quasi-Static solver in Sim4Life, and I have encountered an issue regarding the electric field distribution at the electrode–skin interface. Here are the specific settings I used: There are four electrodes in total. For the first pair of stimulating electrodes, I assigned PEC material type to the other two electrodes (which are not used for stimulation). The stimulating electrodes were not assigned a material type; instead, I only applied Dirichlet boundary conditions to them. In the voxel settings, the four electrodes were set with priority = 1, and the Duke model with priority = 0. For the second pair of electrodes, I applied the same procedure accordingly. However, during post-processing, I noticed that the region where the electrodes overlap with the skin shows no electric field distribution, which seems physically unreasonable. Could you please advise if there might be an issue with my setup or if there are additional steps required to properly model the electrode–skin contact in TI simulations? Thank you very much for your time and support. I truly appreciate your help.

  • FDTD, Low-Frequency, Neuron, Mode-Matching, Flow, Acoustics, etc...

    260 781
    260 Topics
    781 Posts
    G
    I've run multiple EM-LF simulations on the same domain, and I'm using all of them simultaneously as sources for a Neuron simulation by providing the overall field sensor as input. In this setup, can I assume that the input to the Neuron simulation is simply the sum of the EM potentials from all the EM-LF simulations across the entire domain? Otherwise, I'm looking for a way to verify that the resulting input is indeed the sum of the fields. Is there a way to extract the external field along the neuron (rather than the transmembrane potential) so that I can check the contribution from the EM-LF simulations? Screenshot of part of the simulation settings: [image: 1764862893325-28d57441-580b-487e-b882-2e62d9c138a3-image.png]

  • Postprocessing results

    123 374
    123 Topics
    374 Posts
    L
    UserDefinedFieldNormalizer previously used for normalization is marked as DEPRECATED. Now, I wonder if it's feasible to normalize to 1mA? I noticed that the factor remains 1 across different simulations. # Adding a new DataTableHTMLViewer output1 = current_extractor1.Outputs["Total Flux(J(x,y,z,f0))"] output1.Update() comp1 = output1.Data.GetComponent(0) flux1 = np.real(comp1)[0] inputs1 = [em_sensor_extractor1.Outputs["EM E(x,y,z,f0)"]] multiplier_filter = analysis.core.Multiplier(inputs=inputs1) multiplier_filter.Factor = 1.0 / (flux1 * 1000) multiplier_filter.Name = f"{value1}_{value2}_Normalize" multiplier_filter.UpdateAttributes() document.AllAlgorithms.Add(multiplier_filter) multiplier_filter.Outputs["EM E(x,y,z,f0)"].Update() [image: 1764417322818-b4ff24b6-a7c9-4eb0-a0a9-e1c33d4eb727-image.png]

  • Scripting interface for Sim4Life

    140 437
    140 Topics
    437 Posts
    brynB
    This is nice. Thanks @Robin-Wydaeghe

  • Running Sim4Life over a network

    4 7
    4 Topics
    7 Posts
    ofliO
    Hi, Please allow me to share here the response we sent you via the Sim4Life support email so that other users can benefit from your questions. The default machine provides 500GB of storage, and you are running out of space for this project. If your results require more than 500GB, consider upgrading to a higher-tier machine with greater storage capacity. Alternatively, you could reduce the size of your simulation project by splitting it into multiple smaller simulations. This would allow you to continue using the default tier. Additionally, you might optimize your sensor settings, such as by creating smaller sensors and recording data for specific volumes of interest, rather than using an Overall Field sensor.
  • S

    The file I created with Sim4Life light cannot be opened.

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    2k Views
    brynB
    If you don't have a full version, i think (untested) you can still recover the model by importing the smash file in the modeling tab.
  • P

    'Point Sensor Tool' is not available

    7
    0 Votes
    7 Posts
    3k Views
    M
    Sorry, don't have S4L with neuron available at the moment, but I looked at the tutorial and it seems to have changed. When you create the sensor settings can you try to drag and drop the axon to the sensor setting and then chose the section name? (That was the old way of doing it) Still, you should be able to run the simulation without a point sensor.. Sorry can't help more
  • L

    Everytime I'm doing a too complex simulation the file is lost

    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    3k Views
    L
    I am using Sim4Life 6.2.1.4972. It happened once when I've had put a high "maximum number of samples" in the time domain (200 I think) with the acoustic head tutorial that I changed a bit, by putting 2 transducers instead of 1. Another time it was weird because it happened with a SEFT targeting a square of skin, which was rather simple but it did crash again. My simulation was probably wrong in a way, but it didn't throw and error and just stopped. But now that I am applying @gbgbha advices, it is fine :) and thanks for the tip ! I'll try for the file that I lost
  • R

    Why does TRP exceed input power(Antenna)?

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    1k Views
    SylvainS
    The TRP is computed in a different way than the input power. Both ways are mathematically correct and would both be "exact" if there were no numerical errors. In any FDTD simulation, however, there are spatial (finite grid) or temporal (finite time step) discretization error. What you are seeing in this half-wave dipole example, is that those discretization errors are larger than the precision you would require to distinguish TRP from input power (because the radiation efficiency is very high in this case, there is almost no difference between TRP and input power). To solve this "problem", either you accept that the simulation results are accurate enough for your needs (the warning is a simple consistency check) or you increase the precision of the simulation. You can do so by increasing the grid resolution, the overall convergence level and the resolution of the far-field sensor. This will be computationally expensive, though. To help you understand, you could try to add some lossy media in your (coarse) simulation (e.g. place the dipole next to a phantom or any other dielectric). The simulation will not be more precise, but the numerical errors will be less "obvious" because they will be dwarfed by the losses occurring in the dielectric. The TRP will be lower than the input power and the warning will not be triggered. I hope this helps.
  • D

    The effect of electromagnetic field on the temperature of human tissues

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    575 Views
    No one has replied
  • A

    S4L is unable to read and load my project

    18
    0 Votes
    18 Posts
    8k Views
    ali.oezenA
    THank you very much for the hints.
  • E

    How to export images from Sim4Life Analysis Results

    image export png jpeg
    5
    0 Votes
    5 Posts
    3k Views
    M
    That works! If it's for a 2D plot, you can always right click and export the data to an excel or csv file and then work with that if you'd prefer
  • A

    Optimal performance

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    1k Views
    SylvainS
    The full version has the same performance as the Light version: it can just deal with bigger problems. Note that the low-frequency solvers are not GPU-accelerated, so if you are using that the GPU is anyway not used. If you are using the FDTD solver instead, it is accelerated by the GPU but its performance might be severely affected by the frequency of your simulation (the lower the frequency, the more iteration the FDTD method has to do in order to reach convergence). If you are in a regime where the quasi-static approximations hold, I would strongly advise you to use the LF solvers.
  • J

    Editing the excitation signal

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    953 Views
    SylvainS
    I think your signal was fine, but your settings for the Field Sensor need to be changed.
  • J

    Invalid Bounding Box Error

    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    859 Views
    SylvainS
    2kHz will probably not be feasible in most propagating media, because the wavelength will simply be too large compared to the grid resolution your geometry requires (leading to unreasonably large time steps). You might want to check for e.g. what your grid look like, especially the padding at the boundaries of your computational domain.
  • H

    This topic is deleted!

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    2 Views
    No one has replied
  • S

    CEM43 / Arrhenius Thermal Damage

    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    498 Views
    No one has replied
  • S

    how to model a bent wire with a fixed length?

    10
    1 Votes
    10 Posts
    3k Views
    S
    Thanks for the code. Actually I need to model some wires with the fixed length, with one part in the brain in different spots and the remaining out of the brain, It takes a long time to model each one and I'm looking for a way to make them in a shorter time. Thanks.
  • S

    grid resolution of wire and insulation

    3
    0 Votes
    3 Posts
    1k Views
    S
    Thanks for your reply.