Basics of NMR Sprectroscopy

Nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, commonly referred to as NMR, has become the preeminent technique for determining the structure of organic compounds. Of all the spectroscopic methods, it is the only one for which a complete analysis and interpretation of the entire spectrum is normally expected. Although larger amounts of sample are needed than for mass spectroscopy, NMR is non-destructive, and with modern instruments good data may be obtained from samples weighing less than a milligram. To be successful in using NMR as an analytical tool, it is necessary to understand the physical principles on which the methods are based.
The nuclei of many elemental isotopes have a characteristic spin (I). Some nuclei have integral spins (e.g. I = 1, 2, 3 ....), some have fractional spins (e.g. I = 1/2, 3/2, 5/2 ....), and a few have no spin, I = 0 (e.g. 12C, 16O, 32S, ....). Isotopes of particular interest and use to organic chemists are 1H, 13C, 19F and 31P, all of which have I = 1/2. Since the analysis of this spin state is fairly straightforward, our discussion of NMR will be limited to these and other I = 1/2 nuclei.
Spin Properties of Nuclei

Nuclear spin may be related to the nucleon composition of a nucleus in the following manner:

1.  Odd mass nuclei (i.e. those having an odd number of nucleons) have fractional spins.                                  
Examples are I = 1/2 ( 1H, 13C, 19F ), I = 3/2 ( 11B ) & I = 5/2 ( 17O ).
2. Even mass nuclei composed of odd numbers of protons and neutrons have integral spins.    
Examples are I = 1 ( 2H, 14N ).
 3. Even mass nuclei composed of even numbers of protons and neutrons have zero spin  ( I = 0 ).
Examples are 12C, and 16O.

Spin 1/2 nuclei have a spherical charge distribution, and their NMR behavior is the easiest to understand. Other spin nuclei have nonspherical charge distributions and may be analyzed as prolate or oblate spinning bodies. All nuclei with non-zero spins have magnetic moments (μ), but the nonspherical nuclei also have an electric quadruple moment.

The following features lead to the NMR phenomenon:
1. A spinning charge generates a magnetic field, as shown by the animation on the right.
The resulting spin-magnet has a magnetic moment (μ) proportional to the spin.

2. In the presence of an external magnetic field (B0), two spin states exist, +1/2 and -1/2.
The magnetic moment of the lower energy +1/2 state is alligned with the external field, but that of the higher energy -1/2 spin state is opposed to the external field. Note that the arrow representing the external field points north.

3. The difference in energy between the two spin states is dependent on the external magnetic field strength, and is always very small. The following diagram illustrates that the two spin states have the same energy when the external field is zero, but diverge as the field increases. At a field equal to Bx a formula for the energy difference is given (remember I = 1/2 and μ is the magnetic moment of the nucleus in the field).
Strong magnetic fields are necessary for NMR spectroscopy. The international unit for magnetic flux is the Tesla (T). The earth's magnetic field is not constant, but is approximately 10-4 T at ground level. Modern NMR spectrometers use powerful magnets having fields of 1 to 20 T. Even with these high fields, the energy difference between the two spin states is less than 0.1 cal/mole. To put this in perspective, recall that infrared transitions involve 1 to 10 kcal/mole and electronic transitions are nearly 100 times greater.

For NMR purposes, this small energy difference (ΔE) is usually given as a frequency in units of MHz (106 Hz), ranging from 20 to 900 Mz, depending on the magnetic field strength and the specific nucleus being studied. Irradiation of a sample with radio frequency (rf) energy corresponding exactly to the spin state separation of a specific set of nuclei will cause excitation of those nuclei in the +1/2 state to the higher -1/2 spin state. Note that this electromagnetic radiation falls in the radio and television broadcast spectrum. NMR spectroscopy is therefore the energetically mildest probe used to examine the structure of molecules .

The nucleus of a hydrogen atom (the proton) has a magnetic moment μ = 2.7927, and has been studied more than any other nucleus. The previous diagram may be changed to display energy differences for the proton spin states (as frequencies) by mouse clicking anywhere within it.

4.  For spin 1/2 nuclei the energy difference between the two spin states at a given magnetic field strength will be proportional to their magnetic moments. For the four common nuclei noted above, the magnetic moments are: 1H μ = 2.7927, 19F μ = 2.6273, 31P μ = 1.1305 & 13C μ = 0.7022. These moments are in nuclear magnetons, which are 5.05078•10-27 JT-1. The following diagram gives the approximate frequencies that correspond to the spin state energy separations for each of these nuclei in an external magnetic field of 2.35 T. The formula in the colored box shows the direct correlation of frequency (energy difference) with magnetic moment (h = Planck's constant = 6.626069•10-34 Js).

The 14 π-electron bridged annulene on the right is an aromatic (4n + 2) system, and has the same anisotropy as benzene. Nuclei located over the face of the ring are shielded, and those on the periphery are deshielded. The ring hydrogens give resonance signals in the range 8.0 to 8.7 δ, as expected from their deshielded location (note that there are three structurally different hydrogens on the ring). The two propyl groups are structurally equivalent (homotopic), and are free to rotate over the faces of the ring system. On average all the propyl hydrogens are shielded, with the innermost methylene being the most affected. The negative chemical shifts noted here indicate that the resonances occur at a higher field than the TMS reference signal. A remarkable characteristic of annulenes is that antiaromatic 4n π-electron systems are anisotropic in the opposite sense as their aromatic counterparts. A dramatic illustration of this fact is provided by the dianion derivative of the above bridged annulene. This dianion, formed by the addition of two electrons, is a 16 π-electron (4n) system. In the NMR spectrum of the dianion, the ring hydrogens resonate at high field (they are shielded), and the hydrogens of the propyl group are all shifted downfield (deshielded). The innermost methylene protons (magenta) give an NMR signal at +22.2 ppm, and the signals from the adjacent methylene and methyl hydrogens also have unexpectedly large chemical shifts. By clicking on the above structure the dianion data will appear.
Compounds in which two or more benzene rings are fused together were described in an earlier section.
 Examples such as naphthalene, anthracene and phenanthrene, shown in the following diagram, present interesting insights into aromaticity and reactivity.

 The resonance stabilization of these compounds, calculated from heats of hydrogenation or combustion, is given beneath each structure.


Unlike benzene, the structures of these compounds show measurable double bond localization, which is reflected in their increased reactivity both in substitution and addition reactions. However, the 1Hnmr spectra of these aromatic hydrocarbons do not provide much insight into the distribution of their pi-electrons. As expected, naphthalene displays two equally intense signals at δ 7.46 & 7.83 ppm. Likewise, anthracene shows three signals, two equal intensity multiplets at δ 7.44 & 7.98 ppm and a signal half as intense at δ 8.4 ppm. Thus, the influence of double bond localization or competition between benzene and higher annulene stabilization cannot be discerned.
The much larger C48H24 fused benzene ring cycle, named "kekulene" by Heinz Staab and sometimes called "superbenzene" by others, serves to probe the relative importance of benzenoid versus annulenoid aromaticity. A generic structure of this remarkable compound is drawn on the left below, together with two representative Kekule contributing structures on its right. There are some 200 Kekule structures that can be drawn for kekulene, but these two canonical forms represent extremes in aromaticity. The central formula has two [4n+2] annulenes, an inner annulene and an outer annulene (colored pink and blue respectively). The formula on the right has six benzene rings (colored green) joined in a ring by meta bonds, and held in a planar configuration by six cis-double bond bridges.

The coupled annulene contributor in the center has an energetically equivalent canonical form in which the single and double bonds making up the annulenes are exchanged. If these contributors dominate the aromatic character of kekulene, the 6 inside hydrogens should be shielded by the ring currents, and the 18 hydrogens on the periphery should be deshielded. Furthermore, the C:C bonds composing each annulene ring should have roughly equal lengths.
If the benzene contributor on the right (and its equivalent Kekule form) dominate the aromaticity of kekulene, all the benzene hydrogens will be deshielded, and the six double bond links on the periphery will have bond lengths characteristic of fixed single and double bonds
The extreme insolubility of kekulene made it difficult to grow suitable crystals for X-ray analysis or obtain solution NMR spectra. These problems were eventually solved by using high boiling solvents, the 1Hnmr spectrum being taken at 150 to 200° C in deuterated tetrachlorobenzene solution. The experimental evidence demonstrates clearly that the hexa-benzene ring structure on the right most accurately represents kekulene. This evidence will be shown above by clicking on the diagram. The extremely low field resonance of the inside hydrogens is assigned from similar downfield shifts in model compounds.

It is important to understand that the shielding and deshielding terms used through our discussion of relative chemical shifts are themselves relative. Indeed, compared to a hypothetical isolated proton, all the protons in a covalent compound are shielded by the electrons in nearby sigma and pi-bonds. Consequently, it would be more accurate to describe chemical shift differences in terms of the absolute shielding experienced by different groups of hydrogens. There is, in fact, good evidence that the anisotropy of neighboring C-H and C-C sigma bonds, together with that of the bond to the observed hydrogen, are the dominate shielding factors influencing chemical shifts. The anisotropy of pi-electron systems augments this sigma skeletal shielding.

Sigma bonding electrons also have a less pronounced, but observable, anisotropic influence on nearby nuclei. This is seen in the small deshielding shift that occurs in the series CH3–R, R–CH2–R, R3CH; as well as the deshielding of equatorial versus axial protons on a fixed cyclohexane ring.
Solvent Effects


Chloroform-d (CDCl3) is the most common solvent for NMR measurements, thanks to its good solubilizing character and relative underactive nature ( except for 1º and 2º-amines). As noted earlier, other deuterium labeled compounds, such as deuterium oxide (D2O), benzene-d6 (C6D6), acetone-d6 (CD3COCD3) and DMSO-d6 (CD3SOCD3) are also available for use as NMR solvents. Because some of these solvents have π-electron functions and/or may serve as hydrogen bonding partners, the chemical shifts of different groups of protons may change depending on the solvent being used. The following table gives a few examples, obtained with dilute solutions at 300 MHz.

For most of the above resonance signals and solvents the changes are minor, being on the order of ±0.1 ppm. However, two cases result in more extreme changes and these have provided useful applications in structure determination. First, spectra taken in benzene-d6 generally show small up field shifts of most C–H signals, but in the case of acetone this shift is about five times larger than normal. Further study has shown that carbonyl groups form weak π–π collision complexes with benzene rings that persist long enough to exert a significant shielding influence on nearby                                                    

groups. In the case of substituted cyclohexanones, axial α-methyl groups are shifted up field by 0.2 to 0.3 ppm; whereas equatorial methyls are slightly deshielded (shift downfield by about 0.05 ppm). These changes are all relative to the corresponding chloroform spectra.

The second noteworthy change is seen in the spectrum of tert-butanol in DMSO, where the hydroxyl proton is shifted 2.5 ppm down-field from where it is found in dilute chloroform solution. This is due to strong hydrogen bonding of the alcohol O–H to the sulfoxide oxygen, which not only deshields the hydroxyl proton, but secures it from very rapid exchange reactions that prevent the display of spin-spin splitting. Similar but weaker hydrogen bonds are formed to the carbonyl oxygen of acetone and the nitrogen of acetonitrile.


Chemical shift:
The magnetic field at the nucleus is not equal to the applied magnetic field; electrons around the nucleus shield it from the applied field. The difference between the applied magnetic field and the field at the nucleus is termed the nuclear shielding.
Consider the s-electrons in a molecule. They have spherical symmetry and circulate in the applied field, producing a magnetic field which opposes the applied field. This means that the applied field strength must be increased for the nucleus to absorb at its transition frequency. This upfield shift is also termed diamagnetic shift.

Electrons in p-orbitals have no spherical symmetry. They produce comparatively large magnetic fields at the nucleus, which give a low field shift. This "deshielding" is termed paramagnetic shift.

In proton (1H) NMR, p-orbitals play no part, which is why only a small range of chemical shift (10 ppm) is observed. We can easily see the effect of s-electrons on the chemical shift by looking at substituted methanes, CH3X. As X becomes increasingly electronegative, so the electron density around the protons decreases, and they resonate at lower field strengths.

Chemical shift is defined as nuclear shielding / applied magnetic field. Chemical shift is a function of the nucleus and its environment. It is measured relative to a reference compound. For 1H NMR, the reference is usually tetramethylsilane, Si (CH3)4
Unlike infrared and uv-visible spectroscopy, where absorption peaks are uniquely located by a frequency or wavelength, the location different NMR resonance signals is dependent on both    the external magnetic field strength and the rf frequency. Since no two magnets will have exactly the same field, resonance frequencies will vary accordingly and an alternative method for characterising and specifying the location of NMR signals is needed. This problem is illustrated by the eleven different compounds shown in the following diagram. Although the eleven resonance signals are distinct and well separated, an unambiguous numerical locator cannot be directly assigned to each.

Method of solving this problem is to report the location of an NMR signal in a spectrum relative to a reference signal from a standard compound added to the sample. Such a reference standard should be chemically unreactive, and easily removed from the sample after the measurement. Also, it should give a single sharp NMR signal that does not interfere with the resonances normally observed for organic compounds. Tetramethylsilane, (CH3)4Si, usually referred to as TMS, meets all these characteristics, and has become the reference compound of choice for proton and carbon NMR.

Since the separation (or dispersion) of NMR signals is magnetic field dependent, one additional step must be taken in order to provide an unambiguous location unit. This is illustrated for the acetone, methylene chloride and benzene signals by clicking on the previous diagram. To correct these frequency differences for their field dependence, we divide them by the spectrometer frequency (100 or 500 MHz in the example), as shown in a new display by again clicking on the diagram. The resulting number would be very small, since we are dividing Hz by MHz, so it is multiplied by a million, as shown by the formula in the blue shaded box. Note that νref is the resonant frequency of the reference signal and νsamp is the frequency of the sample signal. This operation gives a locator number called the Chemical Shift, having units of parts-per-million (ppm), and designated by the symbol δ .Chemical shifts for all the compounds in the original display will be presented by a third click on the diagram.

The compounds referred to above share two common characteristics:

• The hydrogen atoms in a given molecule are all structurally equivalent, averaged for fast conformational equilibria.
• The compounds are all liquids, save for neopentane which boils at 9 °C and is a liquid in an ice bath.

The first feature assures that each compound gives a single sharp resonance signal. The second allows the pure (neat) substance to be poured into a sample tube and examined in a NMR spectrometer. In order to take the NMR spectra of a solid, it is usually necessary to dissolve it in a suitable solvent. Early studies used carbon tetrachloride for this purpose, since it has no hydrogen that could introduce an interfering signal. Unfortunately, CCl4 is a poor solvent for many polar compounds and is also toxic. Deuterium labeled compounds, such as deuterium oxide (D2O), chloroform-d (DCCl3), benzene-d6 (C6D6), acetone-d6 (CD3COCD3) and DMSO-d6 (CD3SOCD3) are now widely used as NMR solvents. Since the deuterium isotope of hydrogen has a different magnetic moment and spin, it is invisible in a
spectrometer tuned to proto

From the previous discussion and examples we may deduce that one factor contributing to chemical shift differences in proton resonance is the inductive effect. If the electron density about a proton nucleus is relatively high, the induced field due to electron motions will be stronger than if the electron density is relatively low. The shielding effect in such high electron density cases will therefore be larger, and a higher external field (Bo) will be needed for the rf energy to excite the nuclear spin. Since silicon is less electronegative than carbon, the electron density about the methyl hydrogens in tetramethylsilane is expected to be greater than the electron density about the methyl hydrogens in neopentane (2,2-dimethylpropane), and the characteristic resonance signal from the silane derivative does indeed lie at a higher magnetic field. Such nuclei are said to be shielded. Elements that are more electronegative than carbon should exert an opposite effect (reduce the electron density); and, as the data in the following tables show, methyl groups bonded to such elements display lower field signals (they are deshielded). The deshielding effect of electron withdrawing groups is roughly proportional to their electronegativity, as shown by the left table. Furthermore, if more than one such group is present, the deshielding is additive (table on the right), and proton resonance is shifted even further downfield.

Proton Chemical Shifts of Methyl Derivatives

The general distribution of proton chemical shifts associated with different functional groups is summarized in the following chart. Bear in mind that these ranges are approximate, and may not encompass all compounds of a given class. Note also that the ranges specified for OH and NH protons (colored orange) are wider than those for most CH protons. This is due to hydrogen bonding variations at different sample concentrations.

Hydroxyl Proton Exchange and the Influence of Hydrogen Bonding

The last two compounds in the lower row are alcohols. The OH proton signal is seen at 2.37 δ in 2-methyl-3-butyne-2-ol, and at 3.87 δ in 4-hydroxy-4-methyl-2-pentanone, illustrating the wide range over which this chemical shift may be found. A six-membered ring intramolecular hydrogen bond in the latter compound is in part responsible for its low field shift, and will be shown by clicking on the hydroxyl proton. We can take advantage of rapid OH exchange with the deuterium of heavy water to assign hydroxyl proton resonance signals . As shown in the following equation, this removes the hydroxyl proton from the sample and its resonance signal in the NMR spectrum disappears. Experimentally, one simply adds a drop of heavy water to a chloroform-d solution of the compound and runs the spectrum again. The result of this exchange is displayed below.

R-O-H   +   D2O   →  R-O-D   +   D-O-H

Hydrogen bonding shifts the resonance signal of a proton to lower field ( higher frequency. Numerous experimental observations support this statement, and a few of these will be described here.

i)   The chemical shift of the hydroxyl hydrogen of an alcohol varies with concentration. Very dilute solutions of 2-methyl-2-propanol, (CH3)3COH, in carbon tetrachloride solution display a hydroxyl resonance signal having a relatively high-field chemical shift (< 1.0 δ ). In concentrated solution this signal shifts to a lower field, usually near 2.5 δ.

ii)   The more acidic hydroxyl group of phenol generates a lower-field resonance signal, which shows a similar concentration dependence to that of alcohols. OH resonance signals for different percent concentrations of phenol in chloroform-d are shown in the following diagram (C-H signals are not shown).

iii)   Because of their favored hydrogen-bonded dimeric association, the hydroxyl proton of carboxylic acids displays a resonance signal significantly down-field of other functions. For a typical acid it appears from 10.0 to 13.0 δ and is often broader than other signals. The spectra shown below for chloroacetic acid (left) and 3,5-dimethylbenzoic acid (right) are examples.

iv)   Intramolecular hydrogen bonds, especially those defining a six-membered ring, generally display a very low-field proton resonance. The case of 4-hydroxypent-3-ene-2-one (the enol tautomer of 2,4-pentanedione) not only illustrates this characteristic, but also provides an instructive example of the sensitivity of the NMR experiment to dynamic change. In the NMR spectrum of the pure liquid, sharp signals from both the keto and enol tautomers are seen, their              
mole ratio being 4 : 21 (keto tautomer signals are colored purple). Chemical shift assignments for these signals are shown in the shaded box above the spectrum. The chemical shift of the hydrogen-bonded hydroxyl proton is δ 14.5, exceptionally downfield. We conclude, therefore, that the rate at which these tautomers interconvert is slow compared with the inherent time scale of NMR spectroscopy.

Two structurally equivalent structures may be drawn for the enol tautomer (in magenta brackets). If these enols were slow to interconvert, we would expect to see two methyl resonance signals associated with each, one from the allylic methyl and one from the methyl ketone. Since only one strong methyl signal is observed, we must conclude that the interconversion of the enols is very fast-so fast that the NMR experiment detects only a single time-averaged methyl group (50% α-keto and 50% allyl).

Although hydroxyl protons have been the focus of this discussion, it should be noted that corresponding N-H groups in amines and amides also exhibit hydrogen bonding NMR shifts, although to a lesser degree. Furthermore, OH and NH groups can undergo rapid proton exchange with each other; so if two or more such groups are present in a molecule, the NMR spectrum will show a single signal at an average chemical shift. For example, 2-hydroxy-2-methylpropanoic acid, (CH3)2C(OH)CO2H, displays a strong methyl signal at δ 1.5 and a 1/3 weaker and broader

OH signal at δ 7.3 ppm. Note that the average of the expected carboxylic acid signal and the alcohol signal is 7. Rapid exchange of these hydrogens with heavy water, as noted above, would cause the low field signal to disappear.

Hydrogen Bonding Influences                                                                                     
Hydrogen bonding of hydroxyl and amino groups not only causes large variations in the chemical shift of the proton of the hydrogen bond, but also influences its coupling with adjacent C-H groups. As shown on the right, the 60 MHz proton NMR spectrum of pure (neat) methanol exhibits two signals, as expected. At 30° C these signals are sharp singlets located at δ 3.35 and 4.80 ppm, the higher-field methyl signal (magenta) being three times as strong as the OH signal (orange) at lower field. When cooled to -45 ° C, the larger higher-field signal changes to a doublet (J = 5.2 Hz) having the same chemical shift. The smaller signal moves downfield to δ 5.5 ppm and splits into a quartet (J = 5.2 Hz). The relative intensities of the two groups of signals remains unchanged. This interesting change in the NMR spectrum, which will be illustrated by clicking the "Cool the Sample" button, is due to increased stability of hydrogen bonded species at lower temperature. Since hydrogen bonding not only causes a resonance shift to lower field, but also decreases the rate of intermolecular proton exchange, the hydroxyl proton remains bonded to the alkoxy group for a sufficient time to exert its spin coupling influence.

Under routine conditions, rapid intermolecular exchange of the OH protons of alcohols often prevents their coupling with adjacent hydrogens from being observed. Intermediate rates of proton exchange lead to a broadening of the OH and coupled hydrogen signals, a characteristic that is useful in identifying these functions. Since traces of acid or base catalyze this hydrogen exchange, pure compounds and clean sample tubes must be used for experiments of the kind described here.

Another way of increasing the concentration of hydrogen bonded methanol species is to change the solvent from chloroform-d to a solvent that is a stronger hydrogen bond acceptor. Examples of such solvents are given in the following table. In contrast to the neat methanol experiment described above, very dilute solutions are used for this study. Since chloroform is a poor hydrogen bond acceptor and the dilute solution reduces the concentration of methanol clusters, the hydroxyl proton of methanol generates a resonance signal at a much higher field than that observed for the pure alcohol. Indeed, the OH resonance signal from simple alcohols in dilute chloroform solution is normally found near δ 1.0 ppm.

The exceptionally strong hydrogen bond acceptor quality of DMSO is demonstrated here by the large downfield shift of the methanol hydroxyl proton, compared with a slight upfield shift of the methyl signal. The expected spin coupling patterns shown above are also observed in this solvent. Although acetone and acetonitrile are better hydrogen-bond acceptors than chloroform, they are not as effective as DMSO.

1H Chemical Shifts of Methanol in Selected Solvents

The solvent effect shown above suggests a useful diagnostic procedure for characterizing the OH resonance signals from alcohol samples. For example, a solution of ethanol in chloroform-d displays the spectrum shown on the left below, especially if traces of HCl are present (otherwise broadening of the OH and CH2 signals occurs). Note that the chemical shift of the OH signal (red) is less than that of the methylene group (blue), and no coupling of the OH proton is apparent. The vicinal coupling (J = 7 Hz) of the methyl and methylene hydrogens is typical of ethyl groups. In DMSO-d6 solution small changes of chemical shift are seen for the methyl and methylene group hydrogens, but a dramatic downfield shift of the hydroxyl signal takes place because of hydrogen bonding.

Coupling of the OH proton to the adjacent methylene group is evident, and both the coupling constants can be measured. Because the coupling constants are different, the methylene signal pattern is an overlapping doublet of quartets (eight distinct lines) rather than a quintet. Note that residual hydrogens in the solvent give a small broad signal near δ 2.5 ppm.
For many alcohols in dilute chloroform-d solution, the hydroxyl resonance signal is often broad and obscured by other signals in the δ 1.5 to 3.0 region. The simple technique of using DMSO-d6 as a solvent, not only shifts this signal to a lower field, but permits 1°-, 2 °- & 3 °-alcohols to be distinguished. Thus, the hydroxyl proton of 2-propanol generates a doublet at δ 4.35 ppm, and the corresponding signal from 2-methyl-2-propanol is a singlet at δ 4.2 ppm. The more acidic OH protons of phenols are similarly shifted – from δ 4 to 7 in chloroform-d to δ 8.5 to 9.5 in DMSO-d6.

π-Electron Functions
An examination of the proton chemical shift chart (above) makes it clear that the inductive effect of substituents cannot account for all the differences in proton signals. In particular the low field resonance of hydrogens bonded to double bond or aromatic ring carbons is puzzling, as is the very low field signal from aldehyde hydrogens. The hydrogen atom of a terminal alkyne, in contrast, appears at a relatively higher field. All these anomalous cases seem to involve hydrogens bonded to pi-electron systems, and an explanation may be found in the way these pi-electrons interact with the applied magnetic field.Pi-electrons are more polarizable than are sigma-bond electrons, as addition reactions of electrophilic reagents to alkenes testify. Therefore, we should not be surprised to find that field induced pi-electron movement produces strong secondary fields that perturb nearby nuclei. The pi-electrons associated with a benzene ring provide a striking example of this phenomenon, as shown below. The electron cloud above and below the plane of the ring circulates in reaction to the external field so as to generate an opposing field at the center of the ring and a supporting field at the edge of the ring. This kind of spatial variation is called anisotropy, and it is common to nonspherical distributions of electrons, as are found in all the functions mentioned above. Regions in which the isupports or adds to the external field are said to be deshielded, because a slightly weaker External field will bring about resonance for nuclei in such areas.

However, regions in which the induced field opposes the external field are termed shielded because an increase in the applied field is needed for resonance. Shielded regions are designated by a plus sign, and deshielded regions by a negative sign.The anisotropy of some important unsaturated functions will be displayed by clicking on the benzene diagram below. Note that the anisotropy about the triple bond nicely accounts for the relatively high field chemical shift of ethynyl hydrogens. The shielding & deshielding regions about the carbonyl group have been described in two ways, which alternate in the display.

 Examples of Anisotropy Influences on Chemical Shift
The compound on the left has a chain of ten methylene groups linking para carbons of a benzene ring. Such bridged benzenes are called paracyclophanes. The meta analogs are also known. The structural constraints of the bridging chain require the middle two methylene groups to lie over the face of the benzene ring, which is a NMR shielding region. The four hydrogen atoms that are part of these groups display resonance signals that are more than two ppm higher field than the two methylene groups bonded to the edge of the ring (a deshielding region).

The following general rules summarize important requirements and characteristics for spin 1/2 nuclei :

1)   Nuclei having the same chemical shift (called isochronous) do not exhibit spin-splitting. They may actually be spin-coupled, but the splitting cannot be observed directly.
                                                                                                                                                                      
2)   Nuclei separated three or fewer bonds will usually be spin-coupled and will show mutual spin-splitting of the resonance signals, provided they have different chemical shifts. Longer-range coupling may be observed in molecules having rigid configuration of atoms .

3)   The magnitude of the observed spin-splitting depends on many factors and is given by the coupling constant J (units of Hz). J is the same for both partners in a spin-splitting interaction and is independent of the external magnetic field strength

4)   The splitting pattern of a given nucleus can be predicted by the n+1 rule, where n is the number of neighboring spin-coupled nuclei with the same (or very similar) Js. If there are 2 neighboring, spin-coupled, nuclei the observed signal is a triplet (2+1=3); if there are three spin-coupled neighbors the signal is a quartet (3+1=4). In all cases the central line(s) of the splitting pattern are stronger than those on the periphery. The intensity ratio of these lines is given by the numbers in Pascal's triangle. Thus a doublet has 1:1 or equal intensities, a triplet has an intensity ratio of 1:2:1, a quartet 1:3:3:1 etc.