Nanoscale measurement of the power spectral density of surface roughness: how to solve a difficult experimental challenge

Abstract

In this study, we show that the correct determination of surface morphology using scanning force microscopy (SFM) imaging and power spectral density (PSD) analysis of the surface roughness is an extremely demanding task that is easily affected by experimental parameters such as scan speed and feedback parameters. We present examples were the measured topography data is significantly influenced by the feedback response of the SFM system and the PSD curves calculated from this experimental data do not correspond to that of the true topography. Instead, either features are "lost" due to low pass filtering or features are "created" due to oscillation of the feedback loop. In order to overcome these serious problems we show that the interaction signal (error signal) can be used not only to quantitatively control but also to significantly improve the quality of the topography raw data used for the PSD analysis. In particular, the calibrated error signal image can be used in combination with the topography image in order to obtain a correct representation of surface morphology ("true" topographic image). From this "true" topographic image a faithful determination of the PSD of surface morphology is possible. The corresponding PSD curve is not affected by the fine-tuning of feedback parameters, and allows for much faster image acquisition speeds without loss of information in the PSD curve.

Surface microtopography modulates sealing zone development in osteoclasts cultured on bone

“…Pyramidal silicon nitride triangular cantilevers (DNP) with a nominal stiffness of 0.12 N m 21 and a nominal radius of 20 nm were used (Bruker Corporation, Camarillo, CA, USA). Imaging parameters (SetPoint ¼ 1 V; line rate ¼ 0.7 Hz; IGain ¼ 100 Hz) were kept constant for all samples, to enable accurate comparison between the different surfaces [39]. Scans of both 10 and 100 mm areas were taken from different bone slices, each at seven different locations.…”

Surface Roughness Characterization of ZnO: TiO2-Organic Blended Solar Cells Layers by Atomic Force Microscopy and Fractal Analysis

“…In the modern approach from material applied science, nanostructure of materials can be characterized properly using quantitative descriptions. Two main approaches to describe the 3D engineering surface roughness: statistical 22,23 and fractal description 24,25 are used in 3D surface characterization. Traditional Euclidean geometry describes objects with integer dimensions: zero-dimensional points, one-dimensional lines and curves, two-dimensional surfaces such as planes, and three-dimensional solid objects like cubes and spheres.…”

Metal‐conducting polymer interface studied by Kelvin probe microscopy: Au and Al on poly(3‐octyl‐thiophene)

“…(g)] for each of the images shown in Figure . The PSD allows to determine not only the total roughness (height variation from the mean value) but also the lateral length scale on which this height variation occurs, that is the lateral size of the features that contribute to the roughness …”