Ringberg seminar AK Butt : 24.05.04 – 28.05.04

Tip characterisation

Uwe Rietzler

The influence of tip geometry

imaging of surfaces

adhesion rapture forces

lipid penetration

Self-Assembled Monolayers

Different possibilities for tip characterisation

SPIP Software

SEM-basedSPM-based

Tipcheck sample SiGrating TGT01 sample

Nanoscope Software

Method 1 TipCheck

1. Acquire a picture

2. Analyse the datawith the SPIP Software

SPIP Software

TipCheck

TipCheck

Method 1 TipCheck

1. Acquire a picture

2. Analyse the datawith the SPIP Software

SPIP Software

TipCheck

SPIP, the Scanning Probe Image Processor software

y-axis

x-axis

11 11

radius 28nm

radius 20nm radius 38nm

Method 2 SiGrating TGT01

SiGrating TGT01

1. Acquire a picture

2. Analyse the datawith the SPIP software

3. Or analyse the datawith the NanoScopesoftware

Grating TGT01

Method 2 SiGrating TGT01

SiGrating TGT01

1. Take a picture

2. Analyse the datawith the SPIP software

3. Or analyse the datawith the NanoScopesoftware

Method 2 SiGrating TGT01

3. Analyse the data with the NanoScope software

Method 2 SiGrating TGT01

3. Analyse the data with the NanoScope software

1x1 aspect ratio

1 2 34

Method 2 SiGrating TGT01

3. Analyse the data with the NanoScope software

Method 3 SEM

r=31nm

Data interpretation

SEM

Tip [r]

1µm [nm]

5µm [nm]

1µm [nm]

5µm [nm]

1µm [nm]

standard deviation

[nm]

SEM value [nm]

1 13,8 369,1 320,9 628,9 80,2 30,7 84,851,6 352,7 210,8 685,0 89,4 32,9

2 132,6 491,5 148,0 663,4 71,3 40,2 103,5118,0 496,5 218,7 507,4 93,3 83,0

1 112,2 466,6 6,9 31,2 91,8 31,8 46,0193,0 608,2 71,1 41,5 81,9 26,9

2 29,6 23,6 5,4 27,6 41,7 14,3 23,022,9 25,2 6,3 40,7 67,4 26,6

1 11,2 40,6 5,2 37,5 55,0 16,1 21,614,5 39,7 13,4 30,2 79,3 89,3

2 15,8 23,0 4,1 46,8 74,1 33,5 46,013,9 42,0 32,9 34,6 72,8 51,2

1 15,0 25,6 6,3 53,4 468,9 193,1 132,36,9 19,6 17,4 54,5 158,3 167,8

2 6,3 53,4 4,3 23,2 135,4 102,0 40,317,4 54,5 5,9 67,9 161,4 45,0

Tipcheck SiGrating SiGratingSPIP NanoScope

NP

NPS

NPS with Au bad

NPS with Au good

1 2 3 4

±±±±±±

±±

±±

±±

±±

±±

Radius 20-60 nm

Radius 5-40 nm

Correlation

0

100

200

300

400

500

0 50 100 150

SEM [nm]

Nan

oS

c-S

iGra

tin

g 1

µm

[n

m]

Correlation

Correlation

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

0 50 100 150

SEM [nm]

SP

IP-S

iGra

tin

g 1

µm

[n

m]

Correlation

0

50

100

150

200

250

0 50 100 150

SEM [nm]

SP

IP-T

ipC

hec

k 1µ

m [

nm

]

Conclusion

Advantages of the software based methods

• no additional equipment

• powerful software tools

• offline evaluation

Disadvantages of the software methods

• change of the sample and second approach (tip crash)

• take a long time ~ 30 min

• large errors

Conclusion

Advantages of the SEM method

• checking quality of the whole tip (i.e. coatings) and measure radius at

the same time

• each takes 5min, measuring 50 tips in one SEM session

• recommended by cantilever manufacturers

Disadvantages of the SEM method

• metal coating if standard SEM is used (SiN-tips)

• contaminate or damage the tip if standard SEM is used

• limited tilt angle using Leo-Gemini SEM

Acknowledgements

Nice atmosphere and help:

AK Prof. Butt and in particular to my office colleagues: Gabi, Candie and Susana

Rüdiger Berger SPM and proof-reading Marco Möller SPIP and TipCheck

Gunnar Glaßer SEMRüdiger Stark NanoScope-SoftwareMarkus Wolkenhauer proof-reading

... and you for your attention

SEM value 84,8nm

SiGrating TGT01 TipCheck

SPIP, the Scanning Probe Image Processor software

Data interpretation

Deviation

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

1 2 3 4 5 6

Measure point

[nm

] Scan 1

SEM

Scan 2