Imaging surfaces of nano-scale roughness by atomic force microscopy with carbon nanotubes as tips: a comparative study

2011 ◽  
Vol 43 (11) ◽  
pp. 1382-1391 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Munz ◽  
Jae-Ho Kim ◽  
Oliver Krause ◽  
Debdulal Roy
2003 ◽  
Vol 543 (1-3) ◽  
pp. 57-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Decossas ◽  
L. Patrone ◽  
A.M. Bonnot ◽  
F. Comin ◽  
M. Derivaz ◽  
...  

Nano Research ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 235-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rouholla Alizadegan ◽  
Albert D. Liao ◽  
Feng Xiong ◽  
Eric Pop ◽  
K. Jimmy Hsia

Nano Letters ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (8) ◽  
pp. 4110-4116 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. T. Araujo ◽  
N. M. Barbosa Neto ◽  
H. Chacham ◽  
S. S. Carara ◽  
J. S. Soares ◽  
...  

1999 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. 413-419 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernardo R.A. Neves ◽  
Michael E. Salmon ◽  
Phillip E. Russell ◽  
E. Barry Troughton

Abstract: In this work, we show how field emission–scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM) can be a useful tool for the study of self-assembled monolayer systems. We have carried out a comparative study using FE-SEM and atomic force microscopy (AFM) to assess the morphology and coverage of self-assembled monolayers (SAM) on different substrates. The results show that FE-SEM images present the same qualitative information obtained by AFM images when the SAM is deposited on a smooth substrate (e.g., mica). Further experiments with rough substrates (e.g., Al grains on glass) show that FE-SEM is capable of unambiguously identifying SAMs on any type of substrate, whereas AFM has significant difficulties in identifying SAMs on rough surfaces.


2000 ◽  
Vol 154-155 ◽  
pp. 337-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Flicstein ◽  
E. Guillonneau ◽  
J. Marquez ◽  
L.S. How Kee Chun ◽  
D. Maisonneuve ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document