Validation Study of Three-Dimensional Striations from Outsoles

2011 ◽  
pp. 161-186
Keyword(s):  
Validation Study ◽  
Three Dimensional

scholarly journals Three dimensional assessment of segmented Le Fort I osteotomy planning and follow-up: a validation study

2021 ◽  
pp. 103707
Author(s):  
Oliver da Costa Senior ◽  
Lukas Vaes ◽  
Delphine Mulier ◽  
Reinhilde Jacobs ◽  
Constantinus Politis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Validation Study ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Le Fort I Osteotomy ◽  
Le Fort ◽  
Dimensional Assessment ◽  
Le Fort I

scholarly journals Aeroelasticity Validation Study for a Three-Dimensional Membrane Wing

AIAA Journal ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (6) ◽  
pp. 2361-2371 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Q. Yang ◽  
J. Dudley ◽  
R. E. Harris
Keyword(s):  
Validation Study ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Membrane Wing

scholarly journals The validation study on a three-dimensional burn estimation smart-phone application: accurate, free and fast?

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. K. W. Cheah ◽  
T. Kangkorn ◽  
E. H. Tan ◽  
M. L. Loo ◽  
S. J. Chong
Keyword(s):  
Surface Area ◽  
Body Surface Area ◽  
Body Surface ◽  
Validation Study ◽  
Total Body Surface Area ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Smart Phone ◽  
Conventional Methods ◽  
Total Body ◽  
Smart Phone Application

Abstract Background Accurate total body surface area burned (TBSAB) estimation is a crucial aspect of early burn management. It helps guide resuscitation and is essential in the calculation of fluid requirements. Conventional methods of estimation can often lead to large discrepancies in burn percentage estimation. We aim to compare a new method of TBSAB estimation using a three-dimensional smart-phone application named 3D Burn Resuscitation (3D Burn) against conventional methods of estimation—Rule of Palm, Rule of Nines and the Lund and Browder chart. Methods Three volunteer subjects were moulaged with simulated burn injuries of 25%, 30% and 35% total body surface area (TBSA), respectively. Various healthcare workers were invited to use both the 3D Burn application as well as the conventional methods stated above to estimate the volunteer subjects’ burn percentages. Results Collective relative estimations across the groups showed that when used, the Rule of Palm, Rule of Nines and the Lund and Browder chart all over-estimated burns area by an average of 10.6%, 19.7%, and 8.3% TBSA, respectively, while the 3D Burn application under-estimated burns by an average of 1.9%. There was a statistically significant difference between the 3D Burn application estimations versus all three other modalities (p < 0.05). Time of using the application was found to be significantly longer than traditional methods of estimation. Conclusions The 3D Burn application, although slower, allowed more accurate TBSAB measurements when compared to conventional methods. The validation study has shown that the 3D Burn application is useful in improving the accuracy of TBSAB measurement. Further studies are warranted, and there are plans to repeat the above study in a different centre overseas as part of a multi-centre study, with a view of progressing to a prospective study that compares the accuracy of the 3D Burn application against conventional methods on actual burn patients.

scholarly journals A validation study of reconstructed rapid prototyping models produced by two technologies

2017 ◽  
Vol 87 (5) ◽  
pp. 782-787 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Andreas Dietrich ◽  
Andreas Ender ◽  
Stefan Baumgartner ◽  
Albert Mehl
Keyword(s):  
Rapid Prototyping ◽  
Validation Study ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Comparative Assessment ◽  
Precision Measurements ◽  
Mean Deviation ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Dimensional Errors ◽  
Stereolithographic Models

ABSTRACT Objective: To determine the accuracy (trueness and precision) of two different rapid prototyping (RP) techniques for the physical reproduction of three-dimensional (3D) digital orthodontic study casts, a comparative assessment using two 3D STL files of two different maxillary dentitions (two cases) as a reference was accomplished. Materials and Methods: Five RP replicas per case were fabricated using both stereolithography (SLA) and the PolyJet system. The 20 reproduced casts were digitized with a highly accurate reference scanner, and surface superimpositions were performed. Precision was measured by superimposing the digitized replicas within each case with themselves. Superimposing the digitized replicas with the corresponding STL reference files assessed trueness. Statistical significance between the two tested RP procedures was evaluated with independent-sample t-tests (P < .05). Results: The SLA and PolyJet replicas showed statistically significant differences for trueness and precision. The precision of both tested RP systems was high, with mean deviations in stereolithographic models of 23 (±6) μm and in PolyJet replicas of 46 (±13) μm. The mean deviation for trueness in stereolithographic replicas was 109 (±4) μm, while in PolyJet replicas, it was 66 (±14) μm. Conclusions: Comparing the STL reference files, the PolyJet replicas showed higher trueness than the SLA models. But the precision measurements favored the SLA technique. The dimensional errors observed in this study were a maximum of 127 μm. In the present study, both types of reproduced digital orthodontic models are suitable for diagnostics and treatment planning.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document