Distributions of deposits and hydrogen on the upper and lower TDUs3 target elements of Wendelstein 7-X

Distributions of deposits and hydrogen (H) on the graphite divertor target elements TM4h4 and TM3v5 in the test divertor units 3 (TDUs3) of Wendelstein 7-X (W7-X) are studied. The TM4h4 and TM3v5 are located at the magnetically symmetric positions in the upper and lower divertor. The microstructure of the deposition layer is characterized by a transmission electron microscope (TEM) combined with a focused ion beam (FIB). Metallic deposits such as iron (Fe), molybdenum (Mo), chromium (Cr) are detected in the deposition layer by energy-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDS). The depth-resolved distribution patterns of boron (B) and metallic deposits on upper and lower horizontal (h) divertor target elements TDUs3-TM4h4 as well as upper and lower vertical (v) divertor target elements TDUs3-TM3v5 are clarified by glow discharge optical emission spectrometry (GDOES). Results for both TDUs3-TM4h4 and TDUs3-TM3v5 show that the B deposition regions exhibit higher H retention due to the co-deposition with deposits. On the other hand, up-down asymmetries in B deposition caused by particle drift exist on both TDUs3-TM4h4 and TDUs3-TM3v5. The B deposition amount on upper TDUs3-TM4h4 is 40% smaller than that on lower TDUs3-TM4h4. While for the vertical target elements, the B deposition amount on upper TDUs3-TM3v5 is 35% larger than that on lower TDUs3-TM3v5. Meanwhile, a shift of around 3 cm in B deposition peaks is observed on upper and lower TDUs3-TM4h4 and TDUs3-TM3v5. Results of numerical simulation of carbon deposition/erosion profiles on the target elements using ERO2.0 code and power flux measured by infrared cameras are shown and compared with the above mentioned B profiles

Sinus lifting before Le Fort I maxillary osteotomy: a suitable method for oral rehabilitation of edentulous patients with skelettal class-III conditions: review of the literature and report of a case

BACKGROUND: Functional rehabilitation of patients afflicted with severe mandibular and maxillary alveolar atrophy might be challenging especially in malformed patients. METHODS: Treatment planning using sinus lifting and implant placement before Le Fort I maxillary osteotomy in a patient with severe mandibular and posterior maxillary alveolar atrophy and skelettal class-III conditions due to cleft palate are described. RESULTS: A full functional and esthetic rehabilitation of the patient was achieved by a stepwise surgical approach performed through sinus lifting as the primary approach followed by implant placement and subsequent Le Fort I maxillary osteotomy to correct the maxillo-mandibular relation. CONCLUSION: Stabilisation of the maxillary complex by a sinus lifting procedure in combination with computer aided implant placement as preorthodontic planning procedure before Le Fort I maxillary osteotomy seems to be suitable in order to allow ideal oral rehabilitation especially in malformed patients

Dentin dysplasia type I: a challenge for treatment with dental implants

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Dentin dysplasia type I is characterized by a defect of dentin development with clinical normal appearance of the permanent teeth but no or only rudimentary root formation. Early loss of all teeth and concomitant underdevelopment of the jaws are challenging for successful treatment with dental implants.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A combination of sinus lifting and onlay bone augmentation based on treatment planning using stereolithographic templates was used in a patient with dentin dysplasia type I to rehabilitate the masticatory function.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>(i) a predisposition for an increased and accelerated bone resorption was observed in our patient, (ii) bone augmentation was successful using a mixture of allogenic graft material with autogenous bone preventing fast bone resorption, (iii) surgical planning, based on stereolithographic models and surgical templates, facilitated the accurate placement of dental implants.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Bony augmentation and elaborate treatment planning is helpful for oral rehabilitation of patients with dentin dysplasia type I.</p

Model International Mobility Convention

While people are as mobile as they ever were in our globalized world, the movement of people across borders lacks global regulation. This leaves many refugees in protracted displacement and many migrants unprotected in irregular and dire situations. Meanwhile, some states have become concerned that their borders have become irrelevant. International mobility—the movement of individuals across borders for any length of time as visitors, students, tourists, labor migrants, entrepreneurs, long-term residents, asylum seekers, or refugees—has no common definition or legal framework. To address this key gap in international law, and the growing gaps in protection and responsibility that are leaving people vulnerable, the "Model International Mobility Convention" proposes a framework for mobility with the goals of reaffirming the existing rights afforded to mobile people (and the corresponding rights and responsibilities of states) as well as expanding those basic rights where warranted. In 213 articles divided over eight chapters, the Convention establishes both the minimum rights afforded to all people who cross state borders as visitors, and the special rights afforded to tourists, students, migrant workers, investors and residents, forced migrants, refugees, migrant victims of trafficking and migrants caught in countries in crisis. Some of these categories are covered by existing international legal regimes. However, in this Convention these groups are for the first time brought together under a single framework. An essential feature of the Convention is that it is cumulative. This means, for the most part, that the chapters build on and add rights to the set of rights afforded to categories of migrants covered by earlier chapters. The Convention contains not only provisions that afford rights to migrants and, to a lesser extent, States (such as the right to decide who can enter and remain in their territory). It also articulates the responsibilities of migrants vis-à-vis States and the rights and responsibilities of different institutions that do not directly respond to a right held by migrants