The Nanoscale World

Tip Selection Question

rated by 0 users
Not Answered This post has 0 verified answers | 1 Reply | 2 Followers

Top 500 Contributor
2 Posts
Points 22
kefalonitis posted on Thu, Nov 4 2010 10:45 AM


Before we order new tips, I try to decide which cantilever-tip would be the more efficient to deduce the topography of my surface at dry and liquid conditions.

My surface is a polymeric film Polybutadiene-Polyethylene oxide. Polymer chains conformation is expected to be brush or mushroom like and the chains be assembled in micelles. In that architecture, Polybutadiene is most likely to be found away from the substrate that support the film while Polyethylene oxide likes more the substrate.

Micelle diameter calculations range from 5nm to 140nm.

What tip spring constant k (mN/m) and radius (nm) you think would fit better to study the topography as described above?


  • | Post Points: 12

All Replies

Top 10 Contributor
288 Posts
Points 3,905
Bruker Employee


It depends on which mode you are using. I certainly suggest Peak Force Tapping (PFQNM or ScanAsyst). We have been able to achieve superior results when compared to regular tapping on brush-like samples.

If you are using PFT, try both ScanAsyst Air, or SNL -B (~0.3 N/m); for fluid - ScanAsyst_Fluid (~0.7 N/m).

If you plan to use tapping, your samples are likely too sticky for those probes, so the you will need to try FESPA or TESPA probes.  One issue is the regular probes may not have a high enough aspect ratio sharp enough to get into deep pores.  If that is an issue they could try HAR probes. 
Again, I would start with ScanAsyst-Air in PeakForce QNM mode.

Good luck,

  • | Post Points: 10
Page 1 of 1 (2 items) | RSS
Copyright (c) 2011 Bruker Instruments