The analytical relations between particles and probe trajectories in atomic force microscope nanomanipulation

Abstract

Analytical expressions relating the trajectories of spherical nanoparticles pushed by an atomic force microscope tip to the scan pattern of the tip are derived. In the case of a raster scan path, the particles are deflected in a direction defined by the geometries of tip and particles and the spacing b between consecutive scan lines. In the case of a zigzag scan path, the particles are deflected in a range of directions around 90 degrees, also depending on the parameter b. Experimental results on gold nanoparticles manipulated on silicon surfaces in ambient conditions confirm the predictions of our model.

Quantifying Pathways and Friction of Nanoparticles During Controlled Manipulation by Contact-Mode Atomic Force Microscopy

“…One of the most important experimental tools in this regard is the atomic force microscope (AFM), where the AFM tip is employed for pushing nanoparticles. For example, numerous papers have been published that focus on how the AFM is best and most efficiently used as a nanoparticle manipulation tool [2][3][4][5][6][7][8], while other work investigates the underlying physical mechanisms governing nanoparticle manipulation [9][10][11][12][13][14][15]. Over the last few years, however, a growing number of experimental and theoretical studies have looked into how nanoparticle manipulation can be used as a tool for nanotribology [16][17][18][19][20][21][22].…”

Facilitating the pickup of individual DNA molecules by AFM nanomanipulation with tips mechanically worn on bare mica

“…The above-mentioned results indicated that wear of AFM tips on the mica substrates resulted in larger tip radius that provided a higher affinity (Boer-Duchemin et al, 2010;Daeinabi and Korayem, 2011;Korayem and Zakeri, 2011;Rao et al, 2009;Wang et al, 2008) to the DNA molecules to be picked up from surfaces. The increase of the tip radius after tip wear was proved by scanning electronic microscope (SEM) images (Fig.…”

“…Both methods would increase the radius of AFM tips, which is believed to result in a higher affinity (Boer-Duchemin et al, 2010;Daeinabi and Korayem, 2011;Korayem and Zakeri, 2011;Rao et al, 2009;Ternes et al, 2008;Wang et al, 2008) to the nanoobjects to be picked up. However, in the case of chemical coating, the coated AFM tip was easily damaged and the sample would be contaminated because AFM tip applied a relatively large force on the sample during nano-objects picking up operation.…”

Measuring the Friction of Nanoparticles: A New Route towards a Better Understanding of Nanoscale Friction

“…[40] Nanoscale objects, such as nanotubes, have been pushed to distinguish sliding and rolling motion. [41] Recently, there has been an increase of systematic friction studies using nanoparticle manipulation, which highlighted the influence of surface structure on particle trajectories [43] as well as the influence of parameters such as surface chemistry and temperature. [44] The fundamental question of how friction is related to contact area has been addressed by a systematic variation of the size of metallic nanoparticles.…”

“…Similarly, Gnecco et al reported a detailed analysis of particle trajectories due to the impact between the oscillating tip and the particle within one scan frame. [43] Alternatively, manipulation can be carried out during contact-mode operation. [39][40][41][42]50] The two most crucial parameters influencing the manipulation of the particles in contact mode are the stiffness of the cantilever and the component of the tip force exerted during the scan along the surface normal.…”