Alexander Bratch1,2, Peter B. Roemer3, Gregor Adriany2, Kamil Ugurbil2, and Brian K. Rutt1
1Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States, 2Center for Magnetic Resonance Research (CMRR), Department of Radiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States, 3Roemer Consulting, Lutz, FL, United States
Synopsis
Keywords: High-Field MRI, High-Field MRI
With increasing prevalence of ultra-high field magnets and
high-performance gradients, it is important to understand gradient-induced
magnet heating, which can yield significant helium boil-off. Here, we propose a
method to model this effect requiring no knowledge of gradient coil
construction. Using measured gradient stray fields, we construct equivalent
current surface models of gradient coils that can be input into finite element
model of magnet systems to predict the deposited energy. We validate this
equivalent current surface method using a gradient with a known winding pattern
and further validate the energy deposition models by measuring power deposition
in a 7T magnet.
Introduction
It is well known
that gradient activity
can deposit significant energy into a superconducting magnet cryostat, particularly
at higher gradient frequencies and higher B0 field strength1.
This results from time-varying gradient stray fields producing a cascade of
mechanical vibrations propagating through the conductive magnet structures. This
energy deposition can lead to increased liquid helium boil-off, even to the
point of quench. With the growing prevalence of both UHF magnets and high-performance
gradients, it is critically important to understand this energy transfer
mechanism. While basic elements of magnet construction can be relatively easily
measured or inferred, details of gradient coil design and construction are not
typically known or provided by the manufacturer.
Here, we propose a
methodology for analyzing gradient-magnet interactions which requires no knowledge
of gradient construction, but rather uses an equivalent current surface (ECS) to
represent the gradient coil exterior fields, derived from simple field
measurements. Using stray field measurements along one or more Z-profiles, we construct
an ECS for each gradient axis which is then used as input to a multi-physics finite-element
model to assess the deposition of energy into a given magnet model. We validated
these new modeling methods in several ways including against experimentally measured
magnet heating data. Methods
To derive an ECS model for a given
gradient coil, we measured stray field profiles along Z at 5mm increments and at
a radius just outside the coil’s
outer surface, using a field sensor (MLX90393, Melexis, Belgium) and measurement apparatus. A weighted sum of sine or cosine current basis
functions was then fit to these measurements to describe the current flowing on
the ECS cylinder. The ECS radius was chosen to
be larger than the coil outer radius but smaller than the field measurement radii
(Figure 1). The equivalent current surfaces derived in this way for gradient
coils of interest were used to define the stray fields that served as
electromagnetic input to a multi-physics model of magnet heating.
We
compared magnetic fields produced by the ECS to those obtained by Biot-Savart calculation
from a known winding pattern (our recently-built LH7 head gradient coil). We
also evaluated the fields generated by the ECS for consistency with Maxwell’s
equation as follows: we fit the basis functions using only one (e.g. Bz) component
of the measured fields and then compared radial and transverse components of
field generated by the ECS to the measured radial and transverse fields.
Multi-physics
finite-element simulations were performed using COMSOL v6.0 (COMSOL Inc,
Burlington MA). We built FEM models of various magnets, with particular
attention paid to the innermost layers of the cryostat (warm bore, thermal
shields, helium vessel inner bore, magnet winding former) (Figure 2).
Dimensions and material properties of these cylindrical structures were
obtained for the Agilent 7T AS 900 magnet installed in
our lab. We first generated an ECS for the whole-body gradient coil installed
in this magnet and then used this ECS to derive simulated power deposition
profiles. Experimental power deposition profiles were derived by applying 3mT/m
amplitude sinusoidal Z-gradient waveforms at frequencies between 500 and 3000
Hz and measuring the power drop in the LHe heater that forms part of the zero-boil-off
control system2.Results
Biot-Savart calculations from the LH7
winding pattern matched stray field profiles calculated from the ECS extremely
well (Figure 3A) with peak field errors less than 0.02 µT/A, or about 3% of the
peak fields found on that profile (Figure 3B).
For the LH7
gradient, we could accurately predict the measured radial and tangential field
components from the ECS fits to the measured Z component. For example, the maximum
error between predicted and measured Br fields was about 0.1µT/A
(ignoring lead contamination) compared to a peak Br field of about
0.6µT/A, demonstrating that the current-surface-generated fields conform to
Maxwell’s equations and predict measured field profiles reasonably well (Figure
4).
Plots of normalized modeled and
measured magnet heating profiles show a good match, with peak power deposition
occurring near 2kHz in both cases although the measured data show relatively
larger values at lower and higher frequency ranges (Figure 5A). Plots of
absolute modeled and measured magnet heating profiles also show a good match,
with simulated power peaking within a factor of two of the measured peak power
deposition (Figure 5B).Discussion and Conclusions
We have developed and demonstrated a method for assessing
gradient-induced magnet heating that requires minimal knowledge of the
underlying gradient design and construction. Using a small number of measured stray
field profiles, equivalent current surfaces can be generated which accurately
predict the stray field behavior of a gradient coil. Use of these ECSs with a
multi-physics FEM model of gradient-magnet interaction yields magnet heating
profiles which match experimentally-derived profiles with good accuracy. Our
model makes a number of simplifying assumptions and to date the model does not
consider any direct mechanical coupling between the gradient and the magnet;
these and other approximations likely explain the remaining discrepancies between
simulations and experimental measurements. On balance, the presented methodology
is very promising and will assist in the definition of safe operating limits as
well as in the development of new gradient technologies designed to minimize
magnet heating.Acknowledgements
The
authors would like to acknowledge research support from NIH U01 EB025144 and NIH R01 EB025131.References
1Dietz, Peter, Franz Schmitt, and Jürgen Hennig. "Gradients in ultra
high field (UHF) MRI." In High-Field MR Imaging, pp. 27-40.
Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012.
2Boulant, Nicolas. “Progress on the commissioning of the CEA 11.7T: Gradient-Magnet Interaction test results”. Talk presented at the ISMRM MR Engineering Study Group virtual meeting, 2021.