Performance of a Halo Ion Trap Mass Analyzer with Exit Slits for Axial Ejection

  • Miao Wang
  • Hannah E. Quist
  • Brett J. Hansen
  • Ying Peng
  • Zhiping Zhang
  • Aaron R. Hawkins
  • Alan L. Rockwood
  • Daniel E. Austin
  • Milton L. Lee
Research Article

Abstract

The halo ion trap (IT) was modified to allow for axial ion ejection through slits machined in the ceramic electrode plates rather than ejecting ions radially to a center hole in the plates. This was done to preserve a more uniform electric field for ion analysis. An in-depth evaluation of the higher-order electric field components in the trap was also performed to improve resolution. The linear, cubic and quintic (5th order) electric field components for each electrode ring inside the IT were calculated using SIMION (SIMION version 8, Scientific Instrument Services, Ringoes, NJ, USA) simulations. The preferred electric fields with higher-order components were implemented experimentally by first calculating the potential on each electrode ring of the halo IT and then soldering appropriate capacitors between rings without changing the original trapping plate design. The performance of the halo IT was evaluated for 1% to 7% cubic electric field (A4/A2) component. A best resolution of 280 (mm) for the 51-Da fragment ion of benzene was observed with 5% cubic electric field component. Confirming results were obtained using toluene, dichloromethane, and heptane as test analytes.

Key words

Ion trap Toroidal Higher-order field Microfabrication Miniaturized mass spectrometry 

1 Introduction

With its inherent high sensitivity, compact analyzer size, and high specificity, ion trap (IT) mass spectrometry (MS) [1] has been widely accepted for many applications, including cosmic exploration [2, 3], threat and forensic detection [4, 5], identification of chemical and biochemical compounds in pure form or in complex mixtures [6, 7], and environmental monitoring [8, 9]. Other major advantages that enhance the attractiveness of ITMS for field portable applications [10] include simple construction, relatively high pressure operation compared with other mass analyzers, low power consumption, and the ability to perform multi-stage tandem MS in a single analyzer.

The conventional quadrupole IT was originated by Paul and Steinwedel in 1953 [11]. A hyperbolic ring electrode between two hyperboloidal endcap electrodes produces a time-dependent quadrupole electric field when a megahertz radiofrequency (rf) voltage is supplied to the ring electrode. Current commercial IT mass spectrometers typically have a trap radius (r0) of approximately 1 cm and are operated with an rf trapping voltage on the order of 15 kVp-p. For portable analysis by ITs, it is desirable both (1) to reduce electrical power by operating the trap using a lower voltage, and (2) to reduce the trap dimensions (z0 and r0). At the same time, the rf frequency must be increased to maintain an adequate pseudopotential well depth. However, smaller IT mass analyzers are more subject to space charge performance degradation [12]. One of the solutions to this problem is to increase the ion storage capacity of the trap without increasing its characteristic trapping dimensions (z0 and r0). Recently, several groups [13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18] have investigated various IT geometry designs to maintain ion capacity while miniaturizing the analyzer. The toroidal IT [19, 20], reported by Lammert et al., is comprised of four hyperboloidal electrodes: two endcaps, an inner ring, and an outer ring, which form a toroidal trapping geometry; rf trapping voltage supplied to the two ring electrodes forces ions to focus in a circular band rather than at a point as in a 3-D quadrupole IT, thus maintaining the ion storage volume while significantly decreasing the characteristic trapping dimensions. This miniature device, with a 2.5-mm trapping field radius, has approximately the same ion storage volume as a commercial IT mass analyzer with a 1 cm radial dimension, but operates at rf voltages around 1 kVp-p instead of the 15 kVp-p typical of commercial quadrupole ITs. Unit mass resolution was obtained for toluene, dibromochloromethane, and diethylphthalate, which is comparable to resolution values observed from most bench-top GC-MS systems [4]. However, improvement in the performance of the toroidal IT is limited to a large degree by the machining tolerances [20], which are specified to 0.0005 in. (0.013 mm) for the electrodes and which are at or near the limits of current machining capabilities.

The halo IT mass analyzer [21], which has a circular trapping geometry analogous in shape and size to the toroidal IT, was recently reported by our group. It consists of two patterned parallel ceramic plates made by microlithography. The toroidal trapping volume is located between the two plates, which is produced not by hyperboloidal electrodes, but rather by a number of concentric electrode rings fabricated on the two facing planar surfaces. By the same process, we have also created a conventional Paul ion trapping field between two ceramic plates, which demonstrates better resolution than the halo IT [22]. While the halo IT possesses a similar trapping volume as the toroidal IT, its open structure provides much greater access for electron ionization. The use of microlithographic methods to fabricate the traps resolves the issue of close machining tolerances, and all ITs fabricated in this manner can be further miniaturized without being limited by machining tolerances. By adjusting the array of the electrode rings (i.e., number of rings and spacing between rings) and the voltages applied to the rings, the radius of curvature of the toroidal trapping field can be changed to modify the shape and size of the ion storage volume.

In the previously reported halo IT, the trapped ions were resonantly ejected radially to the center of the plates (in the r direction, as shown in Figure 1b), and then drawn by a high negative voltage through a hole in the middle of one of the plates to an orthogonally positioned detector. The spatial spread of ions in the r direction across the trapping field as well as spatial dispersion that occurs when the ions turn 90º from the trap to the detector compromise the peak intensity. Furthermore, the high voltage on the detector could interfere with the quadrupolar trapping field near the center hole. Efforts to shield the trapping field from the detector voltage by inserting a hollow copper cylinder into the center hole did not solve this problem. Moreover, it is possible that the electric field for radial ejection is less linear than for axial ejection, degrading the mass resolution.
Fig. 1

Schematic diagrams (not to scale) of (a) previous and (b) new halo IT mass analyzer designs

In the toroidal IT [19], trapped ions are ejected through three equally spaced 93° arc slits in the endcap electrodes rather than through the inner electrode. The slits in one endcap electrode serve as the entrance for energetic electrons from the filament, and the slits in the other endcap electrode provide an exit passway for resonantly ejected ions in the axial direction (i.e., in the z direction) to the detector. In an attempt to improve the resolution of the halo IT, we simulated the resonant ejection of ions in the axial (z) direction instead of in the radial direction and found that axial ejection should improve resolution and ejection efficiency. Therefore, in this study, three equally spaced 92° arc slits for ion ejection were machined in each of the trapping plates (Figure 1b) at the same radius as in the toroidal IT.

It is well known that the mass resolution in ITMS is affected by the presence of multipole fields. A number of investigations of multipole field components in trapping fields of conventional quadrupole [1, 23], cylindrical [24], and rectilinear ITs [17] have been made to understand the behavior of trapped ions and to optimize the performance of the ITs. Certain amounts and types of higher-order multipole fields can increase the speed with which ions accumulate energy during dipole ejection to improve the ITMS resolution. To date, no detailed studies have been made of the effects of higher-order fields on the performance of toroidal trapping fields. In fact, the curvature of the toroidal trapping area contributes additional higher-order field components to the electric field compared to the normal quadrupole IT [19]. Therefore, determination of the higher-order components in the toroidal field is an important step in the optimization of the performance of the halo IT.

In this study, the halo IT plates were modified by machining thin slits in the sixth electrode rings in order to determine if axial ejection of ions would improve ITMS resolution compared with radial ejection. Furthermore, a variety of potential distributions were simulated and then applied across the series of halo IT electrode rings to study the effects of higher-order electric field components on resolution. Both efforts were designed to improve the overall resolution of the halo IT.

2 Theory

The electrical potential [23] in a quadrupole ion trap with cylindrical symmetry can be expressed in spherical coordinates (ρ,θ,φ) as
$$ \Phi \left( {\rho, \theta, \varphi, t} \right) = {\Phi_0}(t){\sum\limits_{l = 0}^\infty {{A_l}\left( {\frac{\rho }{{{r_N}}}} \right)}^l}{P_l}\left( {\cos \theta } \right) $$
(1)
where Φ0 is the rf voltage applied to the ring electrode while the endcap electrodes are grounded, rN is the normalization radius (typically the inner radius of the ring electrode), Al is the expansion coefficient of the order l, and Pl(cos θ) is the Legendre polynomial of order l. The values of l = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4… (representing monopole, dipole, quadrupole, hexapole, octopole) form a multipole expansion for a given potential distribution. The quadrupole term gives the main contribution of the potential in the IT.
For an rf quadrupolar device with toroidal geometry, the form of a quadratic electric potential in cylindrical coordinates r and z in the axial direction of the toroidal IT can be expressed as [19]
$$ \Phi \left( {r,z} \right) = \lambda {\left( {r - R} \right)^2} + \mu {z^2} $$
(2)
where R is the distance from the trapping center to the rotational axis, and λ and μ are arbitrary constants. The potential in the toroidal region is constrained by the Laplace equation, which in cylindrical coordinates takes the form:
$$ {\nabla^2}\Phi \left( {r,z} \right) = \frac{1}{r}\frac{\partial }{{\partial r}}\left( {r\frac{{\partial \Phi }}{{\partial r}}} \right) + \frac{{{\partial^2}\Phi }}{{\partial {z^2}}} = 2\lambda \left( {2 - \frac{R}{r}} \right) + 2\mu = 2\lambda \left( {2 - \frac{R}{{R + s}}} \right) + 2\mu = 0 $$
(3)
where s is defined as
$$ s = r - R $$
(4)
From Equation 3, the quadrupole electric potential distribution can only be generated for two cases
$$ R = 0,\;{\hbox{then}}\;\lambda = 1,\;\mu = - 2, $$
(5)
resulting in a three-dimensional (3-D) quadrupole IT.
$$ R \to \infty, \;{\hbox{then}}\;\lambda = - \mu = 1,$$
(6)
resulting in a two-dimensional (2-D) linear IT.
Thus, it is impossible to have a mathematically correct quadrupole potential distribution in a toroidal system. Conceptually, this is due to the singularity at the rotational axis; the potential may increase quadratically from the trapping center toward the rotational axis, however, the field must be discontinuous at the axis, violating the Laplace equation. For the same reason, it is impossible to have any mathematically correct higher-order multipole in a toroidal system. However, if the curvature of the toroidal region is small enough, i.e., s << R, then the electric field in the vicinity of the trapping center (away from the rotational axis) may approximate the electric fields in quadrupole devices. For instance, the potential near the trapping center can be approximated by a polynomial (in either r or z) over a short distance, and the quadratic term of that polynomial will produce electric forces similar to those created by a true quadrupole. Using this approximation, equation 3 reduces to
$$ \lambda + \mu = 0 $$
(7)
similar to a 2-D linear IT. Thus, the toroidal trapping field more closely resembles a 2-D quadrupolar field than a 3-D quadrupolar field.

Recognizing that exact multipoles do not exist in toroidal systems, it is nonetheless useful to investigate the effects of higher-order fields on ion trapping and ejection in the halo IT. Although some of the effects of higher-order multipoles in conventional ion traps will correspond directly with similar effects created by the multipole-like fields in a toroidal trap, some differences may also be present, particularly as the distance from the trapping center increases. For instance, in a conventional ion trap, the electric field exactly on the ejection axis is collinear with the axis itself due to symmetry. Thus, ions are pushed back exactly to the trapping center. In toroidal traps, this condition is not guaranteed by symmetry and may not exist. The “center” of a cubic, quartic, or other field component may not lie exactly at the trapping center. As another example, in a conventional trap, a linear field in the z direction is also linear in the r direction. In a toroidal trap, a field linear in the z direction may be linear in the r direction only instantaneously at the trapping center. These and other differences between quadrupole and toroidal ion traps doubtless have consequences for ion behavior. Therefore, throughout this paper, higher-order electric field terms are used to describe the multipole-like components in a toroidal trapping system. For example, a quadratic field produces a hexapole-like component, a cubic field produces an octopole-like component, and a quintic (5th-order) field produces a dodecapole-like component.

For a primarily quadrupole device, the A0 term (monopole) does not produce an electric field [25] and, therefore, does not affect the behavior of ions. The odd ordered field components are zero for a toroidal trapping field because of symmetry about the plane perpendicular to the rotational axis. The potential along the z direction in the center of the toroidal trapping region can be evaluated at s = 0 in the above equation as follows:
$$ \Phi {\left( {z,t} \right)_{s = 0}} = {\Phi_0}(t)\left[ {{A_2}{{\left( {\frac{z}{{{r_N}}}} \right)}^2} + {A_4}{{\left( {\frac{z}{{{r_N}}}} \right)}^4} + {A_6}{{\left( {\frac{z}{{{r_N}}}} \right)}^6}} \right] $$
(8)
where Φ0(t) is the rf voltage on the ring electrode, Al is a dimensionless coefficient for the lth order, and rN is the corresponding normalization radius. Since the halo IT more closely resembles a 2-D quadrupole, equation 8 was used in the present work to approximate the higher-order electric fields, i.e., cubic field (A4/A2) and quintic field (A6/A2), along the z direction at the minimum of the radial potential (s = 0).

3 Experimental

3.1 Fabrication of the Halo IT with Axial Ejection Slits

Figure 1b shows the design of the halo IT with machined slits in the 6th electrode ring. The mass analyzer was comprised of two parallel ceramic plates with 11 concentric electrode rings, assembled face to face with each other and separated by a distance of 5.06 mm. Table 1 lists the dimensions of the electrode rings and the separation distances between successive concentric rings. A detailed description of the fabrication of the trapping plates was given in a previous publication [21]. The plates were constructed from alumina substrates (50.00-mm diameter, 0.635-mm thickness, 99.6% purity; Hybrid-Tek, Clarksburg, NJ, USA). Holes and slits in the ceramic plates were machined by laser cutting. Three equal distance 3.91-mm diameter holes were machined 20.30-mm distance from the center for positioning three 6.35-mm diameter stainless steel balls to ensure accurate and precise spacing and parallel alignment of the trapping plates. The accuracy of plate alignment is limited by the placement precision of the laser-drilled holes, which was specified as ±12 μm, but may be much tighter. The expected upper limit of misalignment is ±10 μm in the z direction and ±12 μm in the r direction.
Table 1

Dimensions and positions of the electrode rings on the ceramic plates

Ring number

Inner radius (mm)

Outer radius (mm)

1

0.0

2.8

2

3.5

3.6

3

4.2

4.3

4

4.8

4.9

5

5.3

5.4

6

5.7

6.3

7

6.6

6.7

8

7.1

7.2

9

7.8

7.9

10

8.7

8.8

11

9.8

16.0

Two smaller holes (127-μm diameter) were laser drilled in each electrode ring and filled with a gold-tungsten alloy to serve as vias for electrically connecting the electrode rings to gold contact pads on the opposite side of the substrate. Finally, three equally spaced 92º arc slits with 6-mm radius and 0.4-mm width were cut by laser in the ceramic plates to function as axial ejection exits. The electrode rings were lithographically patterned on the ceramic plates and covered with a thin semiconducting germanium coating in a clean room facility as described previously [21]. A series of printed circuit boards (PCBs) were fabricated with spring-loaded contact pins that matched the contact pads on the ceramic plates. Each PCB contained a different capacitor network that determined the specific rf voltages to be applied to the individual electrode rings (Figure 2) in order to test the desired higher-order electric fields. The capacitance between each ring was measured using a capacitance/conductance meter (HP 4280A 1 MHz C Meter/C-V Plotter; Hewlett-Packard, Palo Alto, CA, USA). Differences between measured and intended capacitor values were typically between 0.1 and 0.8%. The resulting errors in the cubic and quintic field components for each design were calculated using SIMION, and were found to be less than 0.02 of the magnitude of the cubic and quintic field, respectively [that is, for a stated 5% cubic field (A4/A2), the measured error was (5 ± 0.001)%]. This level is likely to be less significant than factors such as capacitor heating, rf noise, and simulation/calculation error.
Fig. 2

Schematic diagram illustrating the design for connection of the capacitor network to the electrode rings

3.2 Experimental Setup

The experimental setup to test the modified halo IT design was identical to that described previously [21]. Briefly, the halo ITMS system included a custom-built electron gun, halo IT mass analyzer, discrete dynode electron multiplier detector, rf waveform generator, arbitrary waveform generator, and control and data acquisition system. The electron gun was gated by changing the bias voltage from −70 to +120 V on the filament (W5; Scientific Instrument Services, Ringoes, NJ, USA) with a 1.7-A current to control the ionization time. A custom-built rf generator was used to apply a 1.7-MHz sinusoidal waveform with amplitude up to 900 Vp-p to the capacitor network on the PCB for trapping of ions, as shown in Figure 2. For monopole ejection, an AC signal was frequency swept using an arbitrary waveform generator (33250A; Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA), which was amplified up to 10 Vp-p using a custom-built amplifier. For dipole ejection, the signal from the custom-build amplifier was further converted into two signals with 180º phase difference using a custom-built converter. The ejection signal (either before the converter for monopole or one of the two phase different signals after the converter for dipole) was connected to the 6th electrode ring (where the slits are located) on the ceramic plate farthest from the detector, which was spread to the other electrode rings on the same plate by the capacitor network. The 6th electrode ring in the other plate (i.e., the plate closest to the detector through which the ejected ions pass) was grounded for monopole ejection, or connected to the out-of-phase signal after the converter for dipole ejection. The discrete dynode detector (AF138, ETP; SGE Inc., Austin, TX, USA) at −1.9 kV was used to collect positive ions ejected from the trap. The output of the detector was amplified using a custom-built integrating amplifier (128 MΩ) and fed into the DAQ board on a computer. The halo IT system was controlled using a PC through a BNC-2110 data acquisition board (National Instruments, Austin, TX, USA). The control and data handling software was Labview 7.1.

The halo IT was enclosed in a custom-built vacuum chamber pumped using a 520 L/s turbomolecular pump (model TMH 520-020; Pfeiffer, Asslar, Germany). Sample headspace vapors and helium buffer gas were introduced directly into the vacuum chamber via precision needle leak valves (Nupro/Swagelok, Solon, OH, USA) at pressures of 10−5 mbar and 10−4 mbar, respectively, which were measured using a full-range cold cathode vacuum gauge (model PKR 251/261; Pfeiffer). All pressure readings reported in this paper are uncorrected.

3.3 Computation Methods

According to the superposition principle in electric field theory, the coefficients for each order (i.e., linear, cubic and quintic fields in equation 8) for all rings in the halo IT can be summed to provide the overall higher-order field component to the total electric field. SIMION 8.0 and MATLAB R2008b were used to calculate the A2, A4, and A6 dimensionless higher-order coefficients as described in a previous paper [26]. The resultant higher-order components of the total electric field in the halo IT were calculated by multiplying the voltages applied to each ring by the various higher-order coefficients, and summing all of the products of each higher-order type. The various summed higher order component percentages were obtained by dividing each summed higher-order coefficient by the summed linear field coefficient, and then multiplying by 100% (i.e., A4/A2 for cubic field, and A6/A2 for quintic field). Finally, the SOLVER function in Microsoft Office Excel (Microsoft Corp., Bellevue, WA, USA) was used to specify new voltages to apply to the electrode rings in order to adjust the higher-order component percentages to the desired values.

4 Results and Discussion

4.1 Performance of the Halo IT with Axial Ejection

In the halo IT, ions are formed, trapped, and collisionally cooled within the toroidal field. In the original halo IT design [21], a 9.14-mm-diameter center hole served as an exit for ions ejected from the trap during mass analysis (Figure 1a). During ejection, the trapped ions absorbed energy from the ejection signal and resonated in a direction parallel to the trapping plates (i.e., in the r direction), then were drawn out through the center hole by the voltage on the detector. As shown in Figure 1b, in the modified halo IT, three 92º arc (6-mm radius) slits with 0.4-mm width were fabricated in the ceramic plates to allow direct axial ejection from the toroidal trapping field. In this new design, trapped ions resonate in a direction perpendicular to the trapping plates (i.e., in the z direction), and ultimately escape through the slits to the detector. From simulation using SIMION, we observed that axial ejection should improve mass resolution compared to radial ejection.

Actual measurements using the new halo IT plate with axial ejection slits gave comparable peak intensities (Figure 3) to the older center ejection design, even though the total exit area through the slits was only approximately 0.176 times the area of the center hole. The center hole design was originally thought to provide high ion ejection transmission, however, the large negative voltage on the detector interfered with the ejection electric field. Consequently, ions with high energies were given trajectories that caused them to collide with the trapping plate instead of being drawn out through the center ejection hole, thus, significantly reducing ejected ion transmission efficiency. In contrast, axial ejection through the small slits gave similar ion transmission efficiency, even though the area through which the ions could escape from the trapping field was much smaller and only half of them eject to the detector side to give signals.
Fig. 3

Toluene mass spectra obtained using (a) radial ejection, sample pressure 9.9 × 10−6 mbar, helium pressure 2.7 × 10−3 mbar, rf frequency 1.9 MHz, amplitude 626 Vp-p, ejection AC frequency scanned from 50 to 600 kHz in 100 ms, amplitude 938 mVp-p; (b) axial ejection, sample pressure 1.4 × 10−5 mbar, helium pressure 1.3 × 10−4 mbar, rf frequency 1.7 MHz, amplitude 669 Vp-p, ejection AC frequency scanned from 640 to 100 kHz in 100 ms, amplitude 2.9 Vp-p with DC offset −0.8 V, dipole ejection; and (c) simulation of axial ejection (only ions with m/z values of 63, 65, 91, and 92). Note the presence in (b) of a peak at 105, the result of an ion–molecule interaction (H from tolyl ion exchanges with methyl from a neutral toluene) [22]

Mass spectral resolution was increased from approximately 100 (mm) to 280 (mm) when ion ejection was changed from radial to axial. The higher-order electric field components along the ejection (radial) direction in the original halo IT were calculated using SIMION as described in the experimental section, which gave a cubic field (A4/A2) percentage of 24.3% and a quintic field (A6/A2) percentage of 1.6%. Such a high percentage of quintic field, which has the greatest influence on ion trapping among all of the higher-order fields, was much higher than needed or desired. It lengthened the resonant ejection process, keeping the ions in the trapping field longer than necessary, and producing poor resolution as a result.

In the new design, trapped ions are ejected in the z direction through the slits. Therefore, the trapping center must be exactly in-line with the ejection slits. Simulation has shown that ions should be trapped in a very thin circular band exactly between the slits in the two ceramic plates under the electric field conditions we have considered in this work. In the toroidal IT [19], geometric modification was made from symmetric to asymmetric geometry to intentionally add a slight nonlinear (mainly cubic field) field to improve the performance of the device. Since the halo IT has the same trapping geometry, the higher-order fields also play a very important role in the ejection of ions. Accordingly, they were studied in detail in order to optimize the performance of the new halo IT design.

4.2 Effect of Percentage of Cubic Field Component on Performance of the Halo IT

It was reported that the optimum performance of cylindrical ITs [24] and rectilinear ITs [17] was achieved when the sum of the percentages of the positive octopole component (cubic field) and the negative dodecapole component (quintic field) was approximately −10% in the axial direction. Since the curvature of a toroidal trapping geometry inherently produces higher-order field components, as indicated in equation 3, it became necessary to determine their compositions in different electric fields and to investigate their effects on trap performance in order to optimize the performance of the halo IT. When we tried to constrain the percentages of the cubic and quintic field components, the quintic field component could not be more positive than −45% when the cubic field was kept below 10%. This was mostly due to the curvature of the toroidal geometry in the halo IT [19]. The electric fields in a toroidal trapping volume are not symmetric with respect to radial motion toward or away from the rotational axis. This asymmetry, which does not exist in other types of ITs, affects both the ion motion and the higher-order fields. The influence of fields higher than quintic, such as heptic (A8), nonic (A10), and undecic (A12), on the performance of more conventional ITs have not previously received much attention because they are typically very small. Likewise, we did not consider their contributions to halo IT performance because the cubic and quintic field components were likely much more important. In this work, we fabricated four sets of PCBs to generate 1%, 3%, 5%, and 7% cubic fields (A4/A2) with constant −50% quintic field (A6/A2) to investigate the influence of cubic field percentage in the axial direction.

Three ejection modes were used to investigate the effects of different cubic field percentages: (1) rf amplitude ramp and ejection at the stability boundary, (2) rf amplitude ramp with constant resonant ejection frequency, and (3) resonant frequency scan with constant rf amplitude. The resonant frequency scan mode gave the highest ion intensity of the three excitation methods. Figure 4 shows the effects of cubic field percentage on the mass spectra of benzene obtained from the halo IT using resonant frequency scan ejection. At 1% cubic field, the peaks at m/z 77 and 78 were narrow (1.2 Da full width at half-maximum, FWHM) and partially separated with approximately 60% valley. At 3% cubic field, the molecular ion peak (i.e., 78 Da) was much wider (3.8 Da FWHM), and the resolution was reduced. A broad peak appears at m/z 90, possibly the result of an ion molecule reaction in the trap, such as the H/CH3 exchange that occurs for toluene [20]. When the cubic field was increased to 5%, very narrow peaks were observed for the C4H3+ and C4H4+ fragments at m/z 51 and 52 (0.19 Da FWHM), however, peaks for 77 and 78 were unresolved, and the peak at 90 m/z was still present. Finally, for 7% cubic field, the spectrum showed the poorest mass resolution of any set of conditions. Fragment peaks were only observed for 5% cubic field conditions, which also provided the best overall resolution for these low masses (e.g., 280 mm for m/z 51 and 52 and 52 mm for m/z 77 and 78). The peaks for m/z 90 in 3% and 5% cubic fields are probably products of fragment ion condensations with benzene molecules [27] due to electron transfer by helium, which could be stable if the pressure was high enough. Both 1% and 3% cubic fields gave better results than the 7% cubic field. The strongest ion intensities were obtained for the 3% and 5% cubic fields. Of the field combinations studied, the 5% cubic field appears to give the best performance.
Fig. 4

Benzene mass spectra obtained using trapping fields containing (a) 1% (sample pressure 2.9 × 10−5 mbar, helium pressure 5.8 × 10−4 mbar, rf frequency 1.7 MHz, amplitude 910 Vp-p, ejection AC frequency scanned from 600 to 80 kHz in 100 ms, amplitude 1.1 Vp-p), (b) 3% (sample pressure 1.4 × 10−5 mbar, helium pressure 1.3 × 10−4 mbar, rf frequency 1.7 MHz, amplitude 825 Vp-p, ejection AC frequency scanned from 500 to 100 kHz in 100 ms, amplitude 2.6 Vp-p with DC offset −2.0 V, dipole ejection), (c) 5% (sample pressure 2.0 × 10−5 mbar, helium pressure 1.1 × 10−4 mbar, rf frequency 1.7 MHz, amplitude 644 Vp-p, ejection AC frequency scanned from 640 to 100 kHz in 100 ms, amplitude 2.3 Vp-p with DC offset −0.6 V, dipole ejection), and (d) 7% (sample pressure 3.6 × 10−5 mbar, helium pressure 3.1 × 10−4 mbar, rf frequency 1.7 MHz, amplitude 657 Vp-p, ejection AC frequency scanned from 650 to 100 kHz in 100 ms, amplitude 0.2 Vp-p, dipole ejection) cubic field contributions

4.3 Performance of the Halo IT with 5% Cubic Field

Mass spectra for dichloromethane and heptane are shown in Figure 5. The spectra were obtained using dipole ejection by sweeping the resonant ejection frequency. A few volts of DC offset were added to the ejection signal in order to obtain stronger peak intensity. From equation 7, the electric field in the halo IT more closely resembles that of a linear quadrupole than a 3-D quadrupole IT. The secular frequencies in the axial and radial directions are equal for a linear quadrupole, and trapped ions are resonantly excited in both directions simultaneously unless a DC voltage is used to differentiate the two secular frequencies such that ions are excited only in the axial direction [19].
Fig. 5

Mass spectra obtained using 5% cubic field contribution for (a) dichloromethane (sample pressure 3.7 × 10−5 mbar, helium pressure 1.9 × 10−4 mbar, rf frequency 1.2 MHz, amplitude 485 Vp-p, ejection AC frequency scanned from 600 to 100 kHz in 100 ms, amplitude 0.3 Vp-p with DC offset −0.2 V, dipole ejection), and (b) heptane (sample pressure 2.8 × 10−5 mbar, helium pressure 1.9 × 10−4 mbar, rf frequency 1.2 MHz, amplitude 360 Vp-p, ejection AC frequency scanned from 600 to 100 kHz in 100 ms, amplitude 1.2 Vp-p with DC offset −0.3 V, dipole ejection)

Figure 5a shows an average of 10 spectra of dichloromethane taken sequentially. The fragment peaks at m/z 49 and 51 were clearly resolved with a mass resolution of 0.18 Da (WHM for m/z 49). However, the molecular ions at m/z 84/86/88 could not be resolved. Figure 5b shows an average of 10 spectra of heptane with resolution of 0.20 and 0.36 Da (FWHM) for the fragment peaks at m/z 43 and 57, respectively. However, the peaks at m/z 71 and 100 are relatively wide. From these and other mass spectra not shown here, good resolution was only observed for ions with m/z values less than 70. The largest and smallest ions observed in this work were m/z 198 and 38, respectively. Fragments with m/z values lower than 38 were below the low-mass cut-off and could not be detected.

Simulations of the halo IT using SIMION 8.0 also indicated that good mass resolution could be obtained in the low mass region, as shown in Figure 3c. In this simulation, ions with m/z at 63, 65, 91, and 92, matching the m/z values and relative abundances of the typical fragment ions of toluene, were generated between the two trapping plates at random positions, random energies, and random directions. For collisions between ions and helium atoms, only elastic collisions were taken into account. Two out-of-phase frequency-sweeping ejection signals were applied, one to each plate, with a DC offset voltage to eject ions out of the trap. The conditions in the simulation were close to those in the real experiment, except no neutral sample molecules were added. In the simulation, space charge effects were not considered. The simulation was terminated when all ions hit the trapping plates, the boundary walls, or the detector.

From the simulated mass spectrum in Figure 3c, peaks at m/z 63 and 65 are well resolved (0.55 Da FWHM for m/z 63). Much worse resolution (1.9 Da FWHM) was obtained for m/z 91/92. Since the depth of the pseudopotential well is dependent on ion m/z value, higher mass ions are trapped in shallower wells and may be more easily ejected from oscillations stimulated by the ejection signal, even though their matched secular frequencies have not yet been reached [28]. Therefore, there essentially exists a wider range of ejection frequencies to move ions of specific m/z values out of the trap, which broadens the time interval for ejecting ions and, hence, lowers the resolution. This may possibly be a result of using lower operating voltages in miniaturized ion traps, and will need to be addressed if operating power is to be reduced for portable analysis.

During experiments with 5% cubic field contribution, an unexpected phenomenon was observed. With an increase in rf potential, mass spectral peaks with m/z values greater than 70 moved further into the lower mass region as expected, while peaks with m/z values less than 70 moved further into the higher mass region, as shown in Figure 6. The degree of movement was less for peaks with m/z values lower than 70. This behavior was consistent regardless of test analyte or rf generator, and only occurred in a 5% cubic field with resonant frequency scan ejection from high to low frequency in the dipole ejection mode with DC offset. While we do not completely understand this phenomenon, it may be related to the non-linear electric fields present in the toroidal geometry. The movement of low-mass peaks with increase in rf amplitude is not a chemical mass shift [23], since it is not compound-dependent.
Fig. 6

Heptane mass spectra showing the effects of (a) 423 Vp-p, (b) 402 Vp-p, (c) 381 Vp-p, and (d) 360 Vp-p rf amplitudes on peak positions for 5% cubic field contribution, other experimental parameter: sample pressure 2.0 × 10−5 mbar, helium pressure 1.9 × 10−4 mbar, rf frequency 1.2 MHz, ejection AC frequency scanned from 600 to 100 kHz in 100 ms, amplitude 1.1 Vp-p with DC offset −0.4 V, dipole ejection

5 Conclusions

The performance of the halo IT mass spectrometer was improved by axial ejection of ions from the trapping region through slits machined in the ceramic plates because a more linear field was obtained in the axial ejection design than in the original trap. The resolution was improved by a factor of 2.3. The resolution and abundance of the mass spectral peaks were greatly affected by percentages of high-order components of the electric field. The best resolution (280 mm for m/z 51) was obtained using an electric field with 5% cubic component. It was found important to consider higher-order components in the trapping field to optimize the performance of the halo IT. The overall trapping field shape and higher-order field composition can be changed by applying different potentials to the electrode rings. This is accomplished by soldering the appropriate capacitor network onto the PCB without having to change the ceramic plates and the structure of the halo IT. This design should allow straightforward evaluation of the effects of higher-order fields other than linear and cubic fields on ion trapping and the effects of all higher-order field components on resonant ejection [29, 30] to further enhance the performance of the halo IT. Improvements in mass resolution may also be possible with higher frequency or higher amplitude rf, or with optimization of other trapping parameters.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge financial support for this work by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) grant no. NNH06ZDA001N-PIDDP, by Torion Technologies, and by Brigham Young University.

References

  1. 1.
    March, R. E.; Todd, J. F. J. Quadrupole Ion Trap Mass Spectrometry, 2nd ed.; John Wiley and Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, 2005Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Spann, J.F., Abbas, M.M., Venturini, C.C., Comfort, R.H.: Electrodynamic Balance for Studies of Cosmic Dust Particles. Phys. Scr. T89, 147–153 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Palmer, P.T., Limero, T.F.: Mass Spectrometry in the U.S. Space Program: Past, Present, and Future. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 12, 656–675 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Contreras, J.A., Murray, J.A., Tolley, S.E., Oliphant, J.L., Tolley, H.D., Lammert, S.A., Lee, E.D., Later, D.W., Lee, M.L.: Hand-Portable Gas Chromatograph-Toroidal Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer (GC-TMS) for Detection of Hazardous Compounds. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 19, 1425–1434 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blay, P.K.S., Brombacher, S., Volmer, D.A.: Studies on Azaspiracid Biotoxins. III. Instrumental Validation for Rapid Quantification of AZA 1 in Complex Biological Matrices. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 17, 2153–2159 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    You, J., Wang, D.L., Lydy, M.J.: Determination of Pyrethroid Insecticides in Sediment by Gas Chromatography—Ion Trap Tandem Mass Spectrometry. Talanta 81, 136–141 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dulaurent, S., Moesch, C., Marquet, P., Gaulier, J.M., Lachatre, G.: Screening of Pesticides in Blood with Liquid Chromatography-Linear Ion Trap Mass Spectrometry. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 396, 2235–2249 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gros, M., Petrovi, M., Barceló, D.: Tracing Pharmaceutical Residues of Different Therapeutic Classes in Environmental Waters by Using Liquid Chromatography/Quadrupole-Linear Ion Trap Mass Spectrometry and Automated Library Searching. Anal. Chem. 81, 898–912 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Madureira, T.V., Barreiro, J.C., Rocha, M.J., Cass, Q.B., Tiritan, M.E.: Pharmaceutical Trace Analysis in Aqueous Environmental Matrices by Liquid Chromatography-Ion Trap Tandem Mass Spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. A 1216, 7033–7042 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Badman, E.R., Cooks, R.G.: Miniature Mass Analyzers. J. Mass Spectrom. 35, 659–671 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Paul, W., Steinwedel, H.: A New Mass Spectrometer without a Magnetic Field. Z. Naturforsch. 8A, 448–450 (1953)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fulford, J.E., Hoa, D.N., Hughes, R.J.: March, R. E.; Bonner, R. F.; Wong, G. J. Radio-Frequency Mass Selective Excitation and Resonant Ejection of Ions in a Three-Dimensional Quadrupole Ion Trap. J. Vac. Sci. Technol. 17, 829–835 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Campbell, J.M., Collings, B.A., Douglas, D.J.: A New Linear Ion Trap Time-of-flight System with Tandem Mass Spectrometry Capabilities. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 12, 1463–1474 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schwartz, J.C., Senko, M.W., Syka, J.E.P.: A Two-Dimensional Quadrupole Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 13, 659–669 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Prestage, J.D., Dick, G.J., Maleki, L.: New Ion Trap for Frequency Standard Applications. J. Appl. Phys. 66, 1013–1017 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Douglas, D.J., Frank, A.J., Mao, D.: Linear Ion Traps in Mass Spectrometry. Mass Spectrom. Rev. 24, 1–29 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ouyang, Z., Wu, G., Song, Y., Li, H., Plass, W.R., Cooks, R.G.: Rectilinear Ion Trap: Concepts, Calculations, and Analytical Performance of a New Mass Analyzer. Anal. Chem. 76, 4595–4605 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gao, L., Song, Q., Patterson, G.E., Cooks, R.G., Ouyang, Z.: Handheld Rectilinear Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer. Anal. Chem. 78, 5994–6002 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lammert, S.A., Plass, W.R., Thompsom, C.V., Wise, M.B.: Design, Optimization, and Initial Performance of a Toroidal rf Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer. Int. J. Mass Spectrom. 212, 25–40 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lammert, S.A., Rockwood, A.A., Wang, M., Lee, M.L., Lee, E.D., Tolley, S.E., Oliphant, J.R., Jones, J.L., Waite, R.W.: Miniature Toroidal Radio Frequency Ion Trap Mass Analyzer. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 17, 916–922 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Austin, D.E., Wang, M., Tolley, S.E., Maas, J.D., Hawkins, A.R., Rockwood, A.L., Tolley, H.D., Lee, E.D., Lee, M.L.: Halo Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer. Anal. Chem. 79, 2927–2932 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zhang, Z., Peng, Y., Hansen, B.J., Miller, I.W., Wang, M., Lee, M.L., Hawkins, A.R., Austin, D.E.: Paul Trap Mass Analyzer Consisting of Opposing Microfabricated Electrode Plates. Anal. Chem. 81, 5241–5248 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    March, R. E.; Todd, J. F. J. Practical Aspects of Ion Trap Mass Spectrometry, Vol. I; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 1995; Chap III.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wu, G., Cooks, R.G., Ouyang, Z.: Geometry Optimization for the Cylindrical Ion Trap: Field Calculations, Simulations, and Experiments. Int. J. Mass Spectrom. 241, 119–132 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Szilagyi, M. Electron and Ion Optics; Plenum Press: New York, NY, 1988; p. 62.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Austin, D.E., Hansen, B.J., Peng, Y., Zhang, Z.: Multipole Expansion in Quadrupolar Devices Comprised of Planar Electrode Arrays. Int. J. Mass Spectrom. 295, 153–158 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Field, F.H., Hamlet, P., Libby, W.F.: Chemical Ionization Mass Spectrometry. VII. Reactions of Benzene Ions with Benzene. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 89, 6035–6038 (1967)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Julian, R.K., Nappi, M., Weil, C., Cooks, R.G.: Multiparticle Simulation of Ion Motion in the Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer: Resonant and Direct Current Pulse Excitation. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 6, 57–70 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kaiser, R.E., Cooks, R.G., Stafford, G.C., Syka, J.E.P., Hemberger, P.H.: Operation of a Quadrupole Ion Trap Mass Spectrometer to Achieve High Mass/Charge Ratios. Int. J. Mass Spectrom. Ion Processes 106, 79–115 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Traldi, P., Curcuruto, O., Bortolini, O.: Mass Displacement in Ion Trap Mass Spectrometry: A Unique and Valuable Tool in Ion Structural Studies. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 6, 410–412 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© American Society for Mass Spectrometry 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miao Wang
    • 1
  • Hannah E. Quist
    • 2
  • Brett J. Hansen
    • 2
  • Ying Peng
    • 1
  • Zhiping Zhang
    • 1
  • Aaron R. Hawkins
    • 2
  • Alan L. Rockwood
    • 3
  • Daniel E. Austin
    • 1
  • Milton L. Lee
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Chemistry and BiochemistryBrigham Young UniversityProvoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringBrigham Young UniversityProvoUSA
  3. 3.ARUP Institute for Clinical and Experimental PathologySalt Lake CityUSA

Personalised recommendations