Jump to content

Specific Process Knowledge/Characterization/AFM: Atomic Force Microscopy/Workspaces: Difference between revisions

Bghe (talk | contribs)
Bghe (talk | contribs)
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 36: Line 36:
'''[https://www.nanoandmore.com/AFM-Probe-Tap150Al-G Tap150Al-G]''' or '''[http://www.nanoandmore.com/AFM-Probe-Tap300Al-G TAP300Al-G]''' for Tapping mode
'''[https://www.nanoandmore.com/AFM-Probe-Tap150Al-G Tap150Al-G]''' or '''[http://www.nanoandmore.com/AFM-Probe-Tap300Al-G TAP300Al-G]''' for Tapping mode
|'''[http://www.nanoandmore.com/AFM-Probe-AR5T-NCHR AR5T-NCHR]''' or
|'''[http://www.nanoandmore.com/AFM-Probe-AR5T-NCHR AR5T-NCHR]''' or
'''[http://www.brukerafmprobes.com/p-3679-fib6-400a.aspx FIB6-400A]'''
'''[http://www.brukerafmprobes.com/p-3679-fib6-400a.aspx FIB6-400A]''' <br>
 
or '''[https://www.brukerafmprobes.com/p-4050-pfdt350.aspx PFDT350 for ScanAsyst mode]
PFDT350 | Contact Mode | Bruker AFM Probes
|'''[https://www.brukerafmprobes.com/p-3693-snl-10.aspx SNL]'''
|'''[https://www.brukerafmprobes.com/p-3693-snl-10.aspx SNL]'''
|-
|-
Line 73: Line 72:


=Evaluation of used probes=
=Evaluation of used probes=
This evaluation was done to know if the tip end of the ScanAsyst probes was typically dirty or broken when we got bad images. If it was dirty, maybe we could find a way to clean it. If it was broken off we needed to replace it. It turned out it was in most cases broken.
{| border="1" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="2"  align="left"
{| border="1" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="2"  align="left"
! Box number and probe number
! Box number and probe number