|
5 F" {2 C5 e* s: [4 e3 OCross-talk between FM Broadcast Radio Transmitters (88-108 MHz)
; e* o+ [; I' b7 y2 I0 kand NMR Spectroscopy: A recent experience2 n/ b: p5 J+ ]. I
1 b A8 B* ?0 \- d8 |. RRecently I had to install a 400 MHz (9.4 T) NMR Spectrometer. The
- e# S. A' S! |# ssystem worked fine and, using an Indirect Detection Probe , met quickly
" B& K, ^* B/ C) mand effortlessly the specifications. But later on, when the customer9 Y1 S* ]- k1 `0 J
installed a 13C direct detection Probe, the S/N ratio turned out to be- w& I: j1 z( T* l# f, f
quite low and, on top of it, the sensitivity was subject to erratic and2 L! [7 w* _, w4 c- W4 P, }
very large variations from 50:1 to 130:1 (manufacturer's specs give
" ` { L; T1 l0 i( F1 b3 {155:1), without any apparent reason.
. K# e5 ^+ d5 l* l# X: A# U Since the nominal 13C observe frequency at 9.4 T is 100,568
% ]& F# ~5 u/ b9 r% ^ m+ NMHz, right in the middle of the range of commercial FM broadcasts, I
/ j& C: f; K" w+ dhave immediately suspected that the spectrometer was picking up one of
/ ~. [/ \; N. L8 n/ x) Tthose radio stations. In fact, using a cheap FM radio receiver, a% Y& o9 P' H# [7 k2 U' y
strong station was quickly found at 100,60 MHz. At this point, I have
0 r3 ?3 t( I4 |5 d, r4 F! Gconnected a simple audio amplifier ending with a loudspeaker to the) V- T) f6 x! P0 ]' J: N1 f
output BNC of the observe receiver which was there apparently just for
" n* \- `8 y$ e, H+ y" y0 t. j9 Mthis purpose, and all of us were listening to the radio using a 200.0006 t3 L% P8 S; [0 |
Euro NMR spectrometer, except that the audio quality was really poor,
5 Y M* q7 @" r1 W4 Imuch worse than from the above-mentioned gadget radio (a shopping mall" S0 M/ c5 y! Q. G2 G& H
gift).. |+ k$ ?7 ^2 L: e1 o, M; x8 W
The problem is well known from the old times, when the highest" `( t9 m/ D0 J, }6 Z
field was 2.45 T and the nominal H1 frequency was close to 100 MHz. One- X6 z- c; ^8 ~3 ]+ n! F
of the first Italian NMR spectroscopists to experience it, back in
! Q% @- k# h! P/ z1974, was Prof. L.Lunazzi at University of Bologna, on his brand new
: ^2 v! T3 i( |( u; Q- bVarian XL100 spectrometer, and the radio station was Radio San Luchino,4 R: c* M( K2 ]* v
well known to anybody living in Bologna, which broadcasts from the top8 M6 i+ ~5 U! g
of the nearby Saint Luca hill.
3 `- C' S+ X% S' y0 c/ g. l6 k The obvious solution is to change the magnetic field, and thus
6 [' u. p3 Y2 t3 T Wall resonance frequencies, in order to get out of the modulation% A6 t7 l( P7 d) e- J. ?' G8 ~
envelope of the interfering transmitter. But this is not always easy,
% `) ~( c9 |; Z9 ]) \8 xsince the range by which one can move the magnetic field changing just
; `$ X& k/ e3 k; W4 ?2 @1 Psome software parameters is usually limited to a few tens of kHz in the; F! T7 {0 P' N ~8 C% [
frequency domain. If larger variations are required the poor engineer0 V, a( K) x5 q' y% L3 m! f3 b
has to work on the superconducting coils of the magnet, which is a' O. e" y4 y* m' R) V+ D
no-trivial job entailing the risk of a total or partial quench.
7 M* b2 _/ C- R) I, D$ _7 o$ @ Bitter experience shows that persuading the involved radio" U5 s: Q. ~+ ~9 |1 v* W
station to change its operating frequency is a time consuming,
9 s% [9 L4 c1 U9 w4 Pfrustrating, and apparently quite impossible task.
$ s( L& \4 \6 A! y Being well aware of the problem, my preliminary spectrometer
! L# H( i* g+ v2 g; |3 o8 Qchecks always include some blank acquisitions taken before running up- l- m0 `$ I% q% h: m
the magnet so that there is no chance to observe an NMR signal. The
# ~/ d$ ^! |) @/ P1 |resulting dataset should be pure white noise, without significant
% j" Z* X+ T' F% Espikes. This was done also in this particular installation but, as! P) _. p: C+ ?0 c! A$ V4 T+ \
usual, in the days following the energization the magnet drifted a bit,
) j; i) {6 F# }" Y3 W. \! H) ?getting closer to the radio station carrier. Furthermore, the usual 13C- p4 a! h( b) s" H8 {8 Y
spectral widths are quite wide which makes things even worse. Murphy's
! ]4 q$ i2 z& Y. J+ l5 tLaw has no exceptions!
% P/ l/ [: u: Q. q) K" B! g# H But we are just at the beginning of my real troubles. Before
2 B! e' A2 o( Y# q3 t# s& wputting one's hands on the magnet, one should better know how much, in1 \* y& Y5 m$ w1 `& D) r, W
which direction, should the field be moved. I have therefore used a
( K" X! z" S6 b" c1 e# w# @good Spectrum Analyzer (Tektronix model 2710) to check the frequency
% T" m8 ^# w. {) |% D0 Vspectrum around 100 MHz, ready for the worst. And the worst was what I4 }% h% m, d2 |' A$ e% d3 Y. ]
got! The band was filled with FM signals, evenly spaced by 250 kHz and1 N$ X( Y! Y7 p$ I# k( L8 S
with modulation envelopes as wide as 100 kHz, so that when I got far9 t2 E, C/ \! T
from one station I started receiving the next one; accounting for) {' S( C- K2 g0 b; P
folding and aliasing effects, there was no chance! The only somewhat- T# _5 n. G" W' n$ @2 e$ `2 R
free region was at 100,120 MHz, but this implied proton frequency of _2 n$ d: ?" W! ~5 o2 i2 `8 m2 M
398.100 MHz. So now the spectrometer is no longer a "400"!% m4 g* f; j4 S W- {
Before installing a spectrometer, you better get a Spectrum
8 x' q* N. r' }) | ~Analyzer and check for the presence of RF fields in the instrument4 M- j2 ^5 X' {6 f `- v9 }
room, taking care to explore the areas close to the observe frequencies E9 |9 x2 q* N3 F' \- [5 q8 M
of all the most important nuclei. Don't forget the lock: at 14 T$ U! Q# E/ B7 _; a0 D, U1 n$ `" z
(nominal 1H frequency of 600 MHz) 2H resonates at 92,095 MHz, once
) ^+ Q; U, R, ~8 M6 dagain in the FM broadcast band. The lock channel receiver has quite
6 i3 E r w# U6 D: Y" S! |narrow bandpass filters, so hitting a radio is a really bad luck, but
! v8 U2 e" n; v4 {0 J# ^$ wit had already happened, resulting in fast lock level variations and
8 [ |) W. C; y5 ctotally malfunctioning Gradient Shimming which uses deuterium as0 F1 A4 V" p2 k' G2 S
observe nucleus!
* `; Z! b; V& V" J$ A- c+ M6 H Needles to say, the extremely high sensitivity of an NMR
I* O" O; t3 x, [Spectrometer shows up. The signal from the guilty radio, as observed on
9 [1 I' D/ x9 S3 Z( ?7 o8 B3 \the spectrum analyzer inside the spectrometer room, had very low
2 ~8 J; V8 m4 e4 A6 Y( ~0 B) x5 ^9 Sintensity level of about -70 dBm, some microvolt/meter, but that was
+ Y' t; U& q' R0 Senough to almost completely hide the quite strong 13C signal from the5 s6 ?5 u& D2 F6 a+ U; r c9 x% X5 |
ASTM sample!
+ k7 @+ C y9 R: i$ a The radio was clearly picked up by the Probe (closing the- b" E3 C% s7 v( y% r" G" h
Preamplifier input with a shielded 50 ohm RF load, all signals7 p p- j5 [% z
disappear) but, quite surprisingly, there is almost no shielding effect
/ | ^3 R G1 G2 gattributable to the metal body of the magnet, which is after all an
, B. i+ |0 Z) C6 \- l" Calmost completely closed cylinder all around the Probe. Most probably a
8 ? v( v+ p, P6 ~/ w5 ~2 q2 Hgood deal of the signal leaks in through the Shim Coils which are
# p% t8 @. y/ S; G! k3 {mounted very close to the Probe and, together with their connection4 F, L9 m7 c; C0 e/ F
cables to the Console, constitute a quite good antenna.
, U" a1 T/ d$ x3 |- J" Y Too bad the Shim Coils are essential, and effective shielding
: t# t& v I# U7 D1 |! vof the instrument with a Faraday's cage is always difficult and
p% m+ }* p% B3 v8 ^* i! }( jexpensive (it may be almost impossible once the spectrometer is' ]2 z) V$ n# S& F, b' x0 N1 j8 y7 L
installed).8 D- z) P1 I' m) @( x
5 ?: `$ K9 P2 e/ J, h! M* KBefore concluding, let me venture some additional advice based on my experience:" G, E" h S7 \: T" n
- b" h- }# |# c" _
= Install the spectrometer in the best shielded room- ^3 R0 L9 T& a. C/ s
you can get; the best choice is once again in the basement, where you
, P! n6 q- U4 F8 chave the whole building above the ceiling and its [grounded]
% H8 z3 \" c1 W7 t! W, B) e1 ^foundations all around the rest, done in iron-reinforced concrete,
; T t8 I2 v/ P, }/ Jamounting to a good Faraday's cage at no extra cost.# n, t+ E5 Y) B( S& g+ I
1 E+ O- T: S& k& r! U( s+ S2 C: c% \= If possible, avoid top floors. If you can't avoid
* s% c2 b7 `5 i. D; ngoing upstairs, take a good look out of the window: if you see nearby/ f: G" u# w; j+ \7 m! b
transmission antennas, get ready for troubles proportional to their9 {: C A7 l2 C% ^
dimensions and closeness (to my knowledge, however, mobile telephony
: Z) i7 h1 F* ?# x( Q7 K- B8 Pantennas cause so far no harm).
% Y8 B5 s7 |+ E- ]0 u
) }) X) C/ ?6 v- H' B= I'm sure that an exchange of experiences and/or
4 [% | C+ A, M5 c T) `. d& zsuggestions regarding this matter would help a lot to solve many
4 [% [; U" B* Q; Z' `& G' uexisting installation problems and prevent ones yet to come. Stan's Blog is an ideal location and, needless to say, I will be absolutely glad to cooperate.
* j; C* `- ~& V6 G
g7 Y* O6 ]; n: A u4 JVanni Piccinotti, Firenze, 11 April 2008
摘自stan' NMR Blog.
|