> >From what I knew NMR and MRI are similar but 2 different
> technologies.
> Of course I could be wrong too. NMR I thought was used more for
> material
> research while MRI was more for diagnosis of human patients.
Its probably better to say MRI is a subset of NMR. NMR does cover
spectscopy (probably what you mean by material reseach), but the term
'NMR' has been droped in hospitals - as least amongst clinicians when
talking to patients. Spectroscopy can be used to find out brain function
etc.
Nobody (at least in the UK) has a nuclear magnetic resonance scan
nowdays - the term just worries people too much.
I have, by the way, had a couple of NMR/MRI scans to help fellow reseach
scientists. So whatever its called, dont worry about it. I would not
myself have x-ray scans just for the fun of it, but feel there are no
significant risks with the NMR/MRI.
> The strength of the amp depends on the strength of the magnetic field
> generated. The frequency of the amp also depends on the strength
> too. A
> 2 Tesla system (the strongest that I know of) operates around 64 MHz.
> For the 2T system, I want to say it goes as high as 20 KW, but then
> that
> might be too high (7 KW also comes to mind). Anyhow, it's much higher
>
> than 1 KW for the bigger systems. And yes, average power is very low
> on
> these.
>
We have a 2.4 T clinical machine, and a 7 T reseach machine. To the best
of my knowledge, the peak powers are only 1 kW - but I'll check this.
Bruker is another manufacturer of these things, but I dont know if they
use valve PA's.
G8WRB.
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|