The Nanoscale World

Search

  • Re: Force volume resolution ?

    Dear Guillaume, IF you are referring to the theoretical resolution of this technique, I would say that it's influenced by a large number of factors (tip radius, applied force, deformation of the sample, treatment of the tip spring to mind). However, AFAIK, no-one has done any systematic studies to try to find out the ultimate resolution. However
    Posted to SPM Digest (Forum) by Peter Eaton on Fri, Sep 10 2010
  • Re: image filtering

    Hi Guillaume, Both WSxM and Gwyddion have specific routines to do this. I am not aware if there is one in nano-scope software. Be aware, that you are altering the data (usually by averaging lines above and below) when you use these..for publication, the lines might be better than having averaged data....and they can skew your analysis as well. Pete
    Posted to SPM Digest (Forum) by Peter Eaton on Wed, Aug 18 2010
  • Re: cantilever substrate tweezers

    Thanks Esa, That's useful!
    Posted to SPM Digest (Forum) by Peter Eaton on Mon, Jul 12 2010
  • cantilever substrate tweezers

    Hi, I'd like to buy a pair of the nice little tweezers supplied with Veeco systems for picking up the probe substrates. The ones with the "square" ends that are about 45 degrees to the handle, I find this the best for picking up the chips. Ideally, I don't want to buy the whole pack of five tweezers, since I just want this pair. Anyone
    Posted to SPM Digest (Forum) by Peter Eaton on Mon, Jul 12 2010
  • Re: DNA and mica prep for AFM

    Hi Morgan, As Andrea said, you can use either the divalent cations or the APTES-modification methods. Regarding what you originally said, I think kit's best to use EITHER Nickel OR Magnesium, not both, if that's what you meant. I do not know if using both will cause some competition problems, but it is simpler to stick with one or the other
    Posted to SPM Digest (Forum) by Peter Eaton on Fri, Jul 2 2010
  • Re: live XY drift correction?

    As Stephan said, this feature was available on NSIV, and then "dissapeared" on NSV instruments. I don't know for sure why, but you might guess that it was because this turns out NOT to be very useful. The reason why it's not that useful is that it can only work if drift is constant, and does not change direction, accelerate or decelerate
    Posted to SPM Digest (Forum) by Peter Eaton on Mon, Jun 28 2010
  • Re: Help on surface roughness

    Hi Again. Yes, I think John made an important point there -scanning with the fast axis (usually the horizontal axis of the image in the software) parallel to the fibre axis, can actually remove/lessen many problems. For example, as mentioned, it will simplify processing, and lead to "removal" of effects due to different fiber radii (assuming
    Posted to SPM Digest (Forum) by Peter Eaton on Mon, May 24 2010
  • Re: Mechanical measurements on hard materials

    Hi Gerald, An interesting question. The silicon levers with diamonds attached seem like a good choice, maybe another way to go would be to use BLUNT silicon tips, becuase you would expect less damage due to greater contact area. As well as the diamond ones, some companies are offering probes with lower sharpness, more more reprodicuble shapes. THey
    Posted to SPM Digest (Forum) by Peter Eaton on Sat, May 22 2010
  • Re: Help on surface roughness

    Dear Linda, I suspect the main reason for what you are seeing is that Veeco software generally applies a planefit to your files when they are saved by the acquisition software. Thus, planefitting after wards does nothing. YOu can actually turn this off in the Nanoscope acquisition module, but in most cases, it does not do any harm having it turned on
    Posted to SPM Digest (Forum) by Peter Eaton on Sat, May 22 2010
Page 3 of 3 (29 items) < Previous 1 2 3 | More Search Options
Copyright (c) 2011 Bruker Instruments