| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| smhayes |
Posted - May 08 2008 : 11:33:59 AM
It appears as though data acquired using the spiral-in SENSE sequence (even when using "standard" acquisition parameters (TR=2, FOV=240, 64X64, slices =32)) requires much more storage space than non SENSE sequences. I had attributed storage space issues w/ a previous experiment to my using a dual-echo sequence (also SENSE), but it looks like the SENSE is what's causing the large increase in file size. Is that correct?
Thanks,
Scott |
| 4 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| smhayes |
Posted - May 08 2008 : 3:18:14 PM
Thanks Jimmy. It looks like this is an issue for HAIM.01 as well. |
| jimmy.dias |
Posted - May 08 2008 : 2:44:50 PM
I see whats going on. For SENSE runs, the raw data files (pfiles) are still being transferred even though reconstruction is done on the cluster later. I'll turn that option off by default if its SENSE.
If you ever see that pfiles directory, and you don't need the pfiles, you can safely remove it- this should leave plenty of space for your actual results.
I went ahead and removed the Pfiles directory from StAIM.01.
Jimmy |
| smhayes |
Posted - May 08 2008 : 2:36:50 PM
The study is StAIM.01. I didn't think it made a difference in file size, but it appears that data from the first subject exceeded the 5GB CCN storage space allocation. Others in the CCN have informed me that they're able to have 4-5 Ss (spiral-in, non SENSE) stored at a time. |
| jim.voyvodic |
Posted - May 08 2008 : 2:04:37 PM
I believe that if you are not saving p-files the SENSE images shouldn't be much more data than non-SENSE. What experiment is this? I'm curious to look at your file sizes.
Jim |
