Paper detail

A comparsion of force sensors for atomic force microscopy based on quartz tuning forks and length extensional resonators

The force sensor is key to the performance of atomic force microscopy (AFM). Nowadays, most AFMs use micro-machined force sensors made from silicon, but piezoelectric quartz sensors are applied at an increasing rate, mainly in vacuum. These self sensing force sensors allow a relatively easy upgrade of a scanning tunneling microscope to a combined scanning tunneling/atomic force microscope. Two fundamentally different types of quartz sensors have achieved atomic resolution: the 'needle sensor' that is based on a length extensional resonator and the 'qPlus sensor' that is based on a tuning fork. Here, we calculate and measure the noise characteristics of these sensors. We find four noise sources: deflection detector noise, thermal noise, oscillator noise and thermal drift noise. We calculate the effect of these noise sources as a factor of sensor stiffness, bandwidth and oscillation amplitude. We find that for self sensing quartz sensors, the deflection detector noise is independent of sensor stiffness, while the remaining three noise sources increase strongly with sensor stiffness. Deflection detector noise increases with bandwidth to the power of 1.5, while thermal noise and oscillator noise are proportional to the square root of the bandwidth. Thermal drift noise, however, is inversely proportional to bandwidth. The first three noise sources are inversely proportional to amplitude while thermal drift noise is independent of the amplitude. Thus, we show that the earlier finding that quoted optimal signal-to-noise ratio for oscillation amplitudes similar to the range of the forces is still correct when considering all four frequency noise contributions. Finally, we suggest how the signal-to-noise ratio of the sensors can be further improved and briefly discuss the challenges of mounting tips.

preprint2011arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.