Erratum to “Improving tapping mode atomic force microscopy with piezoelectric cantilevers” [Ultramicroscopy 100 (2004) 267–276]

Please download to get full document.

View again

All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
  Erratum to “Improving tapping mode atomic force microscopy with piezoelectric cantilevers” [Ultramicroscopy 100 (2004) 267–276]
  Ultramicroscopy 103 (2005) 251–252 Erratum Erratum to ‘‘Improving tapping mode atomic forcemicroscopy with piezoelectric cantilevers’’[Ultramicroscopy 100 (2004) 267–276] B. Rogers  , L. Manning, T. Sulchek, J.D. Adams Department of Mechanical Engineering and the Nevada Ventures Nanoscience Program, University of Nevada, Mail Stop 312, Reno,NV 89557, USA Received 30 November 2004; accepted 13 December 2004 It has come to our attention that the sinusoidal interference srcinally shown in Fig. 4, which we referredto as optical interference, does not have the proper wavelength to be consistent with red laser light. Whilethe data we intended to use did show the optical interference, we did not include this data and made themistake of plotting other data where that effect was not as pronounced. Please find below the corrected Fig.4, showing representative force curve data that more clearly depicts the periodic interference of red laserlight as well as the shape of the self-sensing curve below the operating region. ARTICLE IN PRESS$-see front matter r 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2004.12.006DOI of srcinal article: 10.1016/j.ultramic.2004.01.016  Corresponding author. Tel.: +17757847576; fax: +17757841701. E-mail addresses: (B. Rogers), (J.D. Adams). URL:  ARTICLE IN PRESS 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 z position [nm]    A  m  p   l   i   t  u   d  e   [   V   ] ~ 335nm 73 nm/V -0.1-0.0500.050.1 0 50 100 150 200 z position [nm]    A  m  p   l   i   t  u   d  e   [   V   ] 34 nm/V (a)(b) Fig. 4. Force curve sample approach comparison. Tapping mode force versus distance curves were taken using: (a) the self-sensingmethod, and (b) the optical detection method. Both curves were taken using the same type of cantilever. The operating regime forimaging is the steep section of the curve corresponding to the onset of the probe’s intermittent contact with the surface, or tapping. Theself-sensing slope shown is approximately twice as steep (sensitive) as the optical approach shown (optical: 73nm/V; self-sensing:34nm/V). Notice the sinusoidal interference in (b). Its wavelength,  l  335nm ;  corresponds to half that of the red laser light used.With self-sensing curves we found that below the operating region the curve takes on the characteristic, nonlinear shape shown in thegraph. This does not appear to affect normal imaging and operation. However, future examination of this behavior would be of interest. B. Rogers et al. / Ultramicroscopy 103 (2005) 251–252 252
Related Search
Similar documents
View more
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks

We need your sign to support Project to invent "SMART AND CONTROLLABLE REFLECTIVE BALLOONS" to cover the Sun and Save Our Earth.

More details...

Sign Now!

We are very appreciated for your Prompt Action!