2007
DOI: 10.1111/j.1747-1567.2007.00178.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Measurement of Pull-Off Forces by Atomic Force Microscope in Liquids Used for Biological Applications

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Adhesion forces were observed for only a few samples in force (loading and unloading) versus time profiles in any of the studies (data not shown; for an example profile, see Ladjal et al, 2010). The adhesion detected in these samples could be due to the wear of the spherical probe (Kwon et al, 2007). In those few samples, this force was negligible (less than 0.05 times the maximum indentation force) compared to the adhesion force (more than 0.1 times the maximum indentation force) observed by other researchers (Cao et al, 2005;Girot et al, 2006;Kwon et al, 2007).…”
Section: Analytical Modelingmentioning
confidence: 85%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Adhesion forces were observed for only a few samples in force (loading and unloading) versus time profiles in any of the studies (data not shown; for an example profile, see Ladjal et al, 2010). The adhesion detected in these samples could be due to the wear of the spherical probe (Kwon et al, 2007). In those few samples, this force was negligible (less than 0.05 times the maximum indentation force) compared to the adhesion force (more than 0.1 times the maximum indentation force) observed by other researchers (Cao et al, 2005;Girot et al, 2006;Kwon et al, 2007).…”
Section: Analytical Modelingmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…The adhesion detected in these samples could be due to the wear of the spherical probe (Kwon et al, 2007). In those few samples, this force was negligible (less than 0.05 times the maximum indentation force) compared to the adhesion force (more than 0.1 times the maximum indentation force) observed by other researchers (Cao et al, 2005;Girot et al, 2006;Kwon et al, 2007). Hence, the adhesion force was not considered in the subsequent analyses, and the JKR and DMT models were not applicable (Ladjal et al, 2010;Pillarisetti, 2009).…”
Section: Analytical Modelingmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…Here, several comments follow with regards to the measurement accuracy and deviations of the observed data. In general, the pull-off force depends on a variety of conditions such as the radius of the AFM tip, contamination of the tip or the inert liquid, and temperature [33,43,44]. Specifically, the pull-off force is severely affected by the size and geometry of the AFM tip.…”
Section: Comments On the Measurement Accuracy And Deviationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of these, the use of an inert liquid environment is more convenient and cost effective since conventional AFM allows for an operating mode in air as well as in liquid. In fact, many researchers have used the AFM liquid mode to measure adhesion or hardness of biomaterials [29,30], wear or rheology of liquids [31,32] and pull-off forces [25,33,34]. Therefore, we employ here the liquid-phase mode of AFM using an inert PFD solvent and measure the intermolecular interactions of an AFM tip and an imprinted nanopattern in a non-polar, nonreactive environment.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%