4.3 Article

Cryogenic receive coil and low noise preamplifier for MRI at 0.01 T

Journal

JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE
Volume 203, Issue 1, Pages 57-65

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmr.2009.11.021

Keywords

Low field; Cooled; Litz; Low noise; Active damping

Funding

  1. University of Aberdeen
  2. Clerk Maxwell Cancer Research Fund

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We have investigated the design and Construction of liquid nitrogen cooled surface coils made from stranded (litz) copper wire for low field MRI applications If designed correctly, cooled litz coils can provide a competitive alternative to high temperature Superconducting (HTS) coils without the complications associated with flux trapping Litz coils can also be produced with a wider range of shapes and sizes, and at lower cost Existing models were verified experimentally for flat spiral coils wound from solid and litz wires, operated at room temperature and 77 K. and then used to design and optimise a cooled receive coil for MRI at 0 0 1 T (425 kHz) The Q-factor reached 1022 when the coil was cooled to 77 K, giving a bandwidth Of Just 0 42 kHz, so a low noise JFET preamplifier was developed to provide active damping of the coil resonance and thus minimise image intensity artefacts The noise Contribution of the preamplifier was determined using a method based oil resistive Sources and image noise analysis The voltage and Current noise were measured to be 1 25 nV/Hz(1/2) and 51 fA/Hz(1/2), respectively, and these values were used to estimate a noise figure ON 32 dB at the resonant frequency of the cooled coil The coil was used to acquire 001 T spin echo images, first at room temperature and then cooled to 77 K in a low noise liquid nitrogen cryostat The measured SNR improvement on cooling, by a factor of 3 0, was found to correspond well with theoretical predictions (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc All rights reserved

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available