The Nanoscale World

Search

  • Re: View Setpoint Used in Nanoscope Analysis

    indeed I was using an older version of nanoscope analysis, the new version allows me to get the values I'm after. Thanks for your help, it's great to have such a wealth of information and support on this forum. Ash
    Posted to SPM Digest (Forum) by Ashley Slattery on Thu, Jun 7 2012
  • Re: FastScan Atomic Resolution on Calcite: Large Sample Platform, Large Cantilever!

    Hi Steve, The atomic PeakForce capture function seems somewhat different to standard PeakForce tapping, where (as far as I'm aware) a force curve is performed at each pixel, but not recorded. Is there a way to retain the force curves at each pixel in any PeakForce tapping or ScanAsyst image? Cheers, Ash
    Posted to SPM Digest (Forum) by Ashley Slattery on Wed, Jun 6 2012
  • Re: View Setpoint Used in Nanoscope Analysis

    Thanks for that Bede, I've only been able to find the three options below with regards to setpoint: "Deflection Setpoint" "Amplitude Setpoint" "Drive Amplitude" I've selected Deflection setpoint which gives me a value of 0.0414V, roughly the value I was using during the scans. However I'm sure I changed the
    Posted to SPM Digest (Forum) by Ashley Slattery on Tue, Jun 5 2012
  • View Setpoint Used in Nanoscope Analysis

    Hi, I'm trying to determine the setpoint that was used when acquiring some images taken with a Dimension Fastscan system. In Nanoscope Analysis, looking in the "Display Properties of (Filename) > Ciao Scan List" window, I can find values such as the scan rate and gains among many other values, but can't seem to find the setpoint
    Posted to SPM Digest (Forum) by Ashley Slattery on Mon, Jun 4 2012
  • Re: Laser Interference Noise

    Hi Bede, Thanks for your reply, For the first point, this shouldn't be an issue as the optics are always well-focused of the cantilever before approach. Following on from this though, does the small size of the laser spot contribute to the issue of transmission through the cantilever? Would it actually be better to use a spot as large as possible
    Posted to SPM Digest (Forum) by Ashley Slattery on Sun, Jun 3 2012
  • Laser Interference Noise

    Hi, I am currently working with a Dimension FastScan system, and have been getting some promising results using carbon nanotube AFM probes, overall I'm really impressed with the instrument. My question relates to the laser interference I've been observing, and the issues that is causes when trying to engage very softly with a probe. When engaging
    Posted to SPM Digest (Forum) by Ashley Slattery on Wed, May 23 2012
  • Re: CNT probe Shortening

    Thanks Chunzeng, After reading some more papers on this process, it seems that people can achieve this oxidative shortening at or below 12V DC. Connecting to the sample should be relatively simple, however I'm not sure how to make a connection to the cantilever using a standard TM AFM tip holder. We have a tip holder which has a wire attached that
    Posted to SPM Digest (Forum) by Ashley Slattery on Wed, Apr 27 2011
  • CNT probe Shortening

    Hi All, I'm looking to shorten some fabricated carbon nanotube probes using the electrical discharge method, where electrical pulses of up to 60V are applied to the tip whilst tapping the surface. My question is how this might be achieved using a multimode AFM. Currently we have a new Multimode 8, however I'm fairly sure that we don't have
    Posted to SPM Digest (Forum) by Ashley Slattery on Wed, Apr 13 2011
  • Re: Thermal Calibration method

    Thankyou for your help Stephen, I am reasonably familiar with the thermal tune method, however that aspect of it makes a lot more sense now. I have two follow-up questions if you're able to help: Are the correction factors of 0.971 and 0.817 described in the app note by Ben Ohler applied automatically by the nanoscope 8 software, or must they be
    Posted to SPM Digest (Forum) by Ashley Slattery on Thu, Dec 2 2010
  • Thermal Calibration method

    Hi, I am curious as to where on the cantilever the thermal method gives the spring constant to. Many methods will specify the spring constant at the end of the cantilever, in which case the value must be corrected back to the tip; but I am unsure of whether this is the case when using the thermal method. Any advice would be greatly appreciated Cheers
    Posted to SPM Digest (Forum) by Ashley Slattery on Wed, Nov 24 2010
Page 2 of 2 (20 items) < Previous 1 2 | More Search Options
Copyright (c) 2011 Bruker Instruments