Robert, Bill, and the rest of the AMMRLers,
I've gotten quite a good number of responses from people, and, as I
expected, most who responded are sympathetic to the problems I outlined in
my earlier posting entitled "ruminations."
Having now chewed my cud a little more (in keeping with the whole ruminant
theme) on this matter and having now digested the material sent my way, I
offer the following abbreviated summary of what I got back:
Other AMMRL members experience similar problems with regard to (numbering
and emphasis here is different than in my original posting...void where
prohibited, CA residents add sales tax) (1) being taken for granted, (2)
the assumption/expectation that an easy-to-use interface implies that there
is little of intellectual worth (or complexity) behind the technique, (3)
clueless users with late-night 'emergencies.'
The bottom line is that education of the users is the solution. Some
categorize the users based on their NMR needs and instruct them
accordingly. Others mandate a strict training regimen that is almost
always unpopular with faculty and others pushing for more results at a
faster pace.
Some who responded to me expressed regret that they had ever made IconNMR
or GLIDE available to their users, as once a student realizes that a couple
of mouse clicks will produce a spectrum (not necessarily useful, but at
least something to show their advisor - blame it on the staff if it's not
good data), that's all they'll ever want to do.
Safegaurding instruments and guaranteeing good (or at least as good as
possible) results can best be done with a dedicated technician, but that is
an expensive solution.
I think it is safe to say that any person that does synthesis and claims
NMR expertise should be quizzed and, if appropriate, beaten on the soles of
the feet.
Solutions to the problem of how to deal with those who refuse to believe
that NMR is not a simple technique range from allowing people to flounder
without assistance for short intervals, public humiliation, and
ridicule. A related problem is that some people find it hard to believe
that an NMR experiment might take a while and balk at paying for an
overnight run on a basic compound (doesn't that INADEQUATE just take a few
minutes?).
Another solution is to take a long vacation and come back to save the day
(and be appreciated). This can, unfortunately, lead to charges of neglect,
so this course of action should be taken only with proper warning of one's
superiors (i.e., every faculty member and researcher, since they all boss
you around).
In the riducule category I offer proudly the concept of the Chemical Ouija
board. You would put the sample in the 'carrier' and lay on your hands,
preferably with the help of somebody who was impartial like the research
advisor. The board would be covered with various datum like ee, mp, bp,
refractive index, cis, trans, gauche, eclipsed, chair, boat, skew-boat, and
so on. You could then ask questions of your sample (while playing the
intro to Mike Oldfield's Tubular Bells in the background with the lights
down low) and get information whose certainty is known exactly (zero, but
the price of the analysis would be right). Just think, no more repeating
experiments, no more statistics, no more messy error bars. This looks like
it could make it into the Journal of Irreproducible Results (actually
exists, very good reading).
Somebody else suggested having a toaster as part of the suite of analytical
instruments made available to researchers. At least it would have a knob
to turn.
Knobs seem to help, as it gives people a better understanding of how many
things can or need to be adjusted.
Motivating people to learn more about NMR is also tricky. I had a quiz I'd
give to people to make sure they understood the importance/concepts of tube
quality, locking, shimming, tuning, etc when I was at MIT. I had no
problem failing people.
In general, I find it is easier to make sure people are more thoroughly
educated and instructed in the proper use of NMR instrumentation when there
is less money around for carrying out repairs. That is when faculty are
more likely to understand that a progress-at-any-cost mentality will in
fact cost a lot.
Finally, with regard to job satisfaction and all those late-night calls,
there really isn't much one can do (once they've already woken you up from
a deep sleep - this reminds me a being the parent of a newborn) other than
try to assess the nature of the problem. One can then calculate explicitly
the probability of whether or not you're going to put on street clothes
based on problem severity over the product of your irritability and how
long it takes to drive in. Floods and frosty magnets rank high, samples
that don't eject don't, results required for group meeting the following
day also do not.
I hope I did justice to summarizing the sentiments of those who responded.
Jeff
Jeffrey H. Simpson, Ph.D.
Director, University Instrumentation Center
220 Parsons Hall, University of New Hampshire
23 College Road, Durham, NH 03824-3598
603-862-2457 (2790 asst) (4104 fax)
jeff.simpson_at_unh.edu
http://www.unh.edu/instrumentation-center/
Received on Thu Nov 21 2002 - 12:19:33 MST