, e& Y* E# X5 j& |! D4 |+ a. J( f+ g
Cross-talk between FM Broadcast Radio Transmitters (88-108 MHz)1 F. D5 S* @! R* E$ W0 B" |0 `) {
and NMR Spectroscopy: A recent experience) z, G) u ]0 P& }
7 v) }) n& M( \/ d+ bRecently I had to install a 400 MHz (9.4 T) NMR Spectrometer. The
: {8 J+ a! Q* f1 d. usystem worked fine and, using an Indirect Detection Probe , met quickly9 r* }6 \, E, X! h
and effortlessly the specifications. But later on, when the customer2 ?3 U4 i) T d" {
installed a 13C direct detection Probe, the S/N ratio turned out to be
, v- Q0 \5 w7 j4 H, w% p/ oquite low and, on top of it, the sensitivity was subject to erratic and i4 L4 v% F! o; Y4 i
very large variations from 50:1 to 130:1 (manufacturer's specs give
. ^) o4 ]6 K: Z( C155:1), without any apparent reason.& E( P, q5 S+ W7 s8 v: y4 |
Since the nominal 13C observe frequency at 9.4 T is 100,568
( S/ c, H/ H( m: Y. H9 Y2 {MHz, right in the middle of the range of commercial FM broadcasts, I
4 I9 Z9 o/ y0 Fhave immediately suspected that the spectrometer was picking up one of
& A$ i% D4 l0 Kthose radio stations. In fact, using a cheap FM radio receiver, a$ I; t, }" ~" D& [& W
strong station was quickly found at 100,60 MHz. At this point, I have
1 V! |2 H; L1 }connected a simple audio amplifier ending with a loudspeaker to the
8 ^/ D0 G+ B* U" V9 joutput BNC of the observe receiver which was there apparently just for6 f1 x+ y# q1 r4 Z
this purpose, and all of us were listening to the radio using a 200.0004 q* X, W0 j. B Y: ~2 W& l
Euro NMR spectrometer, except that the audio quality was really poor,# j3 T/ \ c, a5 J. g* ^
much worse than from the above-mentioned gadget radio (a shopping mall6 S+ E7 @0 h3 B5 l* D3 n7 g; \
gift).3 C0 d4 H) l0 q- M3 _: N
The problem is well known from the old times, when the highest
: ], z% a7 W4 T: f# S5 `6 ~field was 2.45 T and the nominal H1 frequency was close to 100 MHz. One
/ z. O+ Z9 j. y% I( ?( ~of the first Italian NMR spectroscopists to experience it, back in
( h4 p6 w( Q' O- ^' K( b6 Y' s) F1 k1974, was Prof. L.Lunazzi at University of Bologna, on his brand new! Z# d# w. x# I1 j& Z% x9 O
Varian XL100 spectrometer, and the radio station was Radio San Luchino,
( m) T0 p9 Q4 cwell known to anybody living in Bologna, which broadcasts from the top
: L. r( H# \6 {0 J0 @& \of the nearby Saint Luca hill.. N7 w) [0 }; E* `9 o' ~# G5 h' w
The obvious solution is to change the magnetic field, and thus% o7 K% m( Q1 \
all resonance frequencies, in order to get out of the modulation8 f) e7 a0 z: B% z( g
envelope of the interfering transmitter. But this is not always easy,) x: c# o$ `# y8 [' o
since the range by which one can move the magnetic field changing just
* O: F# ~6 s8 @, [$ rsome software parameters is usually limited to a few tens of kHz in the' z) v! z) y1 r3 r* g
frequency domain. If larger variations are required the poor engineer9 O% O( ^, f1 Q |
has to work on the superconducting coils of the magnet, which is a
: n* F5 y# b c1 K9 mno-trivial job entailing the risk of a total or partial quench.* U/ n4 V" W& j5 @
Bitter experience shows that persuading the involved radio; v4 Y) M$ b* F& F1 w; x6 a' h G
station to change its operating frequency is a time consuming,
' M2 a" h; j3 l& \frustrating, and apparently quite impossible task.
6 G8 A) I' q+ N" y) m3 y+ m Being well aware of the problem, my preliminary spectrometer$ D; Q' b& S g2 i$ L& @
checks always include some blank acquisitions taken before running up5 h- I; j; G2 ?, w- H% x
the magnet so that there is no chance to observe an NMR signal. The% s. U4 j2 e" x7 O/ Q
resulting dataset should be pure white noise, without significant, t9 r* ~/ w% |7 e2 d
spikes. This was done also in this particular installation but, as, n- n1 C# @' {: m
usual, in the days following the energization the magnet drifted a bit,
) ~; I$ U: `2 Y1 r) kgetting closer to the radio station carrier. Furthermore, the usual 13C' t7 v& [: ` ^% g$ s: F1 M8 L
spectral widths are quite wide which makes things even worse. Murphy's6 e) i9 J0 P' l, @4 E' h' Z0 a4 d8 G
Law has no exceptions!
9 ]1 t8 j9 q; k8 y3 w, \+ R But we are just at the beginning of my real troubles. Before
4 r7 P9 W; r* `putting one's hands on the magnet, one should better know how much, in/ x6 t% B; U4 R+ P2 v
which direction, should the field be moved. I have therefore used a Y- f Y) i Y: Y" {, v
good Spectrum Analyzer (Tektronix model 2710) to check the frequency
$ f3 b$ z/ z4 l) l+ z% A' X. B" dspectrum around 100 MHz, ready for the worst. And the worst was what I" J% [9 x H" |3 c& @0 b
got! The band was filled with FM signals, evenly spaced by 250 kHz and7 K* c( u1 p" F2 R
with modulation envelopes as wide as 100 kHz, so that when I got far5 W$ ~! @* B: w3 I4 C: _( k
from one station I started receiving the next one; accounting for
4 ^% l: z; z2 K1 L$ E' ~ ^folding and aliasing effects, there was no chance! The only somewhat
2 y" J" G. C$ W: g X2 n3 Q, Ofree region was at 100,120 MHz, but this implied proton frequency of
. r0 s z: T. Q9 S+ Z" G398.100 MHz. So now the spectrometer is no longer a "400"!
( O! |- d8 L# z! V Before installing a spectrometer, you better get a Spectrum
I' i: d' `' U% w1 P5 |Analyzer and check for the presence of RF fields in the instrument) |# m, ~8 t9 g) f- ?# ?
room, taking care to explore the areas close to the observe frequencies# T7 o; K8 G& X2 t% s4 G
of all the most important nuclei. Don't forget the lock: at 14 T4 k1 K( D) S- O) }- c
(nominal 1H frequency of 600 MHz) 2H resonates at 92,095 MHz, once
% T5 q- j1 y" g* }4 Jagain in the FM broadcast band. The lock channel receiver has quite* y5 r, m" Y$ [" E
narrow bandpass filters, so hitting a radio is a really bad luck, but2 r) T( _; c! B" X8 F. _
it had already happened, resulting in fast lock level variations and
* b2 ]; |: J+ l* ttotally malfunctioning Gradient Shimming which uses deuterium as
6 P! C. p/ c* M0 C- Fobserve nucleus!( X0 |% L/ K8 u0 ]* `
Needles to say, the extremely high sensitivity of an NMR' Z$ O8 m: _" E; }. |3 ?
Spectrometer shows up. The signal from the guilty radio, as observed on
! Z) R+ u" l+ L7 |3 ^. l) o* Bthe spectrum analyzer inside the spectrometer room, had very low
/ T) h, ?. v3 j% F( x( u0 bintensity level of about -70 dBm, some microvolt/meter, but that was( X6 z* ~6 K; n# e" ^ ]
enough to almost completely hide the quite strong 13C signal from the
4 a9 ?$ J/ g. A' U6 zASTM sample!. {! r3 b# B% s0 L; p) Q
The radio was clearly picked up by the Probe (closing the, U- c" {1 d7 d- I1 x0 U
Preamplifier input with a shielded 50 ohm RF load, all signals
4 C) o# ^* N7 P" D% udisappear) but, quite surprisingly, there is almost no shielding effect
! S: x' K' t& t" t+ tattributable to the metal body of the magnet, which is after all an1 k! f+ ^2 h5 `7 @
almost completely closed cylinder all around the Probe. Most probably a
: N. G# W! d$ B3 O2 bgood deal of the signal leaks in through the Shim Coils which are
0 Z5 c- i: A8 X% Rmounted very close to the Probe and, together with their connection E' y, b2 ?2 V) W2 p/ R$ k/ Q) R
cables to the Console, constitute a quite good antenna.& {' q& E$ r, S, x: D
Too bad the Shim Coils are essential, and effective shielding$ }' {2 T' d8 }8 Y
of the instrument with a Faraday's cage is always difficult and8 T' A2 L# k9 r6 x c7 P
expensive (it may be almost impossible once the spectrometer is* K6 D, i2 P# _1 Q& H+ [
installed).! U/ P* O7 D, A- T
7 G& Y7 m/ P6 w+ r4 xBefore concluding, let me venture some additional advice based on my experience:0 b$ q2 Q9 i1 k8 I9 \
# [' N% y0 f B/ ~6 K7 |# [* C= Install the spectrometer in the best shielded room$ R! ?% X8 a D, t. q, p$ L6 J$ [
you can get; the best choice is once again in the basement, where you
+ g! m8 b: L. ?' yhave the whole building above the ceiling and its [grounded]/ X2 b; K' U7 X2 m8 E) B1 ^
foundations all around the rest, done in iron-reinforced concrete,& S3 G6 ^/ g8 J! F! Q: ]+ {( ?' ^' i: d9 S
amounting to a good Faraday's cage at no extra cost.5 _2 y6 r$ X* J h H# ^% ]
5 h& z8 p( |1 ?! U, {, B8 m! k/ c" f
= If possible, avoid top floors. If you can't avoid
! c4 S& N- Y6 B$ d. B/ ?going upstairs, take a good look out of the window: if you see nearby0 `. y% a q7 G
transmission antennas, get ready for troubles proportional to their
. s# U5 v, }' a: R" D1 R gdimensions and closeness (to my knowledge, however, mobile telephony
8 Y) D! @( P# G) ~: fantennas cause so far no harm).7 _ L1 ?, }0 G! p9 |9 N
* v4 g% E( r; D. M+ ^ b% I= I'm sure that an exchange of experiences and/or: T# _4 a6 M8 M! m' r
suggestions regarding this matter would help a lot to solve many e: ^8 i+ F$ X( I
existing 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.
3 g8 r r' a$ Q ; V4 I l, z- z4 o9 j
Vanni Piccinotti, Firenze, 11 April 2008
摘自stan' NMR Blog.
|