2017 LIterature

An undergraduate experiment on x-ray spectra and Moseley's law using a scanning electron microscope:https://physlab.lums.edu.pk/images/7/73/An_udergraduate_experiment_Ref4.pdf

The scanning electron microscope as an accelerator for the undergraduate advanced physics lab:
http://www.rle.mit.edu/qnn/documents/Peterson-2010-78.pdf

Welcome to Our Blog!

(From Left to Right: Asaph Ko, Tristen Protzmann, Chamidu Warnakulasuriya, Dr. Michele McColgan, Brendan Waffle)

WELCOME TO OUR BLOG!

In this blog you will see the contents of our Summer 2016 Research. Tristen Protzmann, Asaph Ko, Chamidu Warnakulasuriya, and Brendan Waffle are the four students responsible for the creation of this blog. Our research was funded by The Friars of Siena College, and provided to us by The Center for Undergraduate Research and Creative Activity (CURCA). All experiments took place at Siena College. Our primary mentor and supervisor was Dr. Michele McColgan, a physics professor at Siena College. We also received additional aid from Dr. Kolonko, Dr. Hassel, Ann Klotz, Hilary Hofstein, and Dr. Moriarty. Our research primarily consisted of learning and operating the instruments located in The Stewart's Advanced Instrumentation & Technology Center (SAInT Center). Our research topics consisted of Dust Analysis, Dirt Analysis, Fabric Analysis, and much more. More details of each analysis is found in the blogs below. Enjoy!

Special Recognition!

We would like to give Special Thanks and Recognition to the following Siena College Faculty:

Dr. Michele W. McColgan

For helping us with EVERYTHING regarding our Summer Research! Thank you for accepting our research applications, guiding us, supporting us, and educating us. We are forever grateful. Thank you.

Dr. Daniel F. Moriarty

For his help with our AFM Research. Thank you.

Dr. Kristopher J. Kolonko

For helping us conduct our research in the SAInT Center. Specifically with training, educating, and supervising us on the SEM, XRF, TGA, and DSC. Thank you.

Dr. George Hassel

For helping us when needed, and supplying us with the Graphite for our Graphene experiments. Thank you.

Hilary A. Hofstein

For providing us with Radiation Training. Thank you.

Ann M. Klotz

For providing us with Safety Training. Thank you.

The Friars of Siena College

For funding all of the Summer Research being offered to the Summar Scholars. Thank you.

Dr. Rajj Devasagayam

For accepting our research proposals, and guiding our research experiences. We are so grateful to have CURCA at Siena College. Thank you.

GO SAINTS!!

Graphene Samples with AFM

Our last few days of research with Dr. McColgan consisted of starting a Graphene Project using the Atomic-Force Microscope (AFM). An AFM is a very high resolution type of scanning probe microscopy (SPM), with demonstrated resolution on the order of fractions of a nanometer, more than 1,000 times better than the optical diffraction limit. The Graphene is taken by ripping off layers of Graphite using Double Sided Adhesive Tape. Carbon atoms make up the structure of Graphene. It is important not to use locations on the sample that are too adhesive when looking at the samples. The tip will then stick to it when collecting data, and then not analyze it as well. The importance of analyzing Graphene is that it is conductive, manipulative, strong, an atom thick, and overall very cool to look at. It is important to note that Dr. Daniel Moriarty was extremely helpful and informative in our experiments with the AFM. We thank him very much. Below are some videos and pictures we took during our experiments with the Graphene.

Below is what the inside of the AFM looks like. This is where the majority of the experiment takes place. Bruker supplies the hardware and software for the AFM.

The AFM is very well insulated. Below we can see how well the AFM is insulated internally. This is because when collecting data the operator wants to reduce as much vibrations in the machine as much as possible so it does not skew the data. Examples of how this may affect the data are if there is a bunch of people walking around or near the AFM, the vibrations in the floor affect data collection. Speaking too loud or too close to the AFM produces sound waves and that vibrates the tip and affects data. Bumping into the machine shakes the AFM and skews data because it shakes the tip. To prevent any of these problems from occurring the AFM is insulated on the inside. 

 

To obtain our Graphene samples we needed to use a block of Graphite and rip off Graphene samples using Double Sided Adhesive Tape. The block of Graphite we used is shown below. The Graphite was supplied to us by Dr. McColgan and Dr. Hassel.

To collect our Graphene samples we needed to use Double Sided Adhesive Tape. A picture of the tape we used is shown below. 

Below is a picture of our Graphene sample we collected with the help of Dr. Moriarty. We used the Double Sided Tape to rip layers of Graphene off the block of Graphite. We placed the sample on a transparent glass slide and placed it in the AFM. We used a small vacuum feature inside the AFM to keep the glass slide in place while analyzing. Disregard the writing on the glass slide because it is writing from a previous experiment that the glass slide was probably used for before our experiments with it.

Below is a poster hanging in Roger Bacon on the first floor near the Key Auditorium. It is a research project by Andre Geim and Konstantin Novoselov regarding Graphene similar to the experiments we ran. It helped us better understand the research we were conducting.

We ran one sample of Graphene during our research, but have not received the software yet that is compatible to help us put it into this blog. We will be sure to update it once we do.

Below is a picture of Dr. Moriarty.

Future Research

For future research we plan on trying the following experiments:

1. We plan on trying to leave a piece of Double Sided Adhesive Tape on the block of Graphite overnight (or a longer period of time). This will let the tape sit on the Graphite and collect as much of a sample as possible without being disrupted. This may increase the accuracy of our sample and may help to collect more of the Graphene on the tape. 
2. Try taking layers of Graphene by applying the Double Sided Tape numerous times to the same section of the Graphite and then riping them off. This will make our sample thinker and better to use.
3. Try to find ways to burn the samples and increase the accuracy on collection of samples.
4. Collect more samples to increase accuracy, and to get us more familiar with the AFM.
5. Overall find better ways to take a Graphene sample.

New Dust Sampling in Roger Bacon 136 Bookshelf

A project of Summer Research 2016 was to compare data analyzed between new dust obtained from a location where we already obtained dust and analyzed it. After collecting the dust we cleaned the location. We did this for two locations and the one we will be analyzing in this post is Roger Bacon 136. A period of 20 days were allowed for dust to be accumulated in the cleaned location.

Similar to the procedure shown in the first post of the blog is conducted on this sample.

The data that was obtained is shown below, including the raw data of the elemental composition.

Element	AN	series	[wt.%]	[norm. wt.%]	[norm. at.%]	Error in wt.% (1 Sigma)
Magnesium	12	K-series	0.126009454	1.851589585	2.488742942	0.033900691
Aluminium	13	K-series	1.768736178	25.98990291	31.46797964	0.115097583
Silicon	14	K-series	1.385979959	20.36566279	23.68903262	0.088461615
Sulfur	16	K-series	0.799261829	11.74439556	11.9651134	0.056091193
Chlorine	17	K-series	0.63889081	9.387895342	8.650672307	0.048585004
Calcium	20	K-series	1.04393797	15.33967972	12.5037761	0.057230467
Titanium	22	K-series	0.307056741	4.511907983	3.078484912	0.035176369
Iron	26	K-series	0.6027232	8.856446558	5.180725658	0.042383505
Zinc	30	K-series	0.132878217	1.952519546	0.975472409	0.030730399
		Sum:	6.805474357	100	100

The results that was obtained for the dust sample 20 days ago was;

Element	AN	series	[wt.%]	[norm. wt.%]	[norm. at.%]	Error in wt.% (1 Sigma)
Sodium	11	K-series	0.462124365	6.490968876	9.15554883	0.060391958
Magnesium	12	K-series	0.276086655	3.877895256	5.173803521	0.043458414
Aluminium	13	K-series	0.654099667	9.187441519	11.04173542	0.059937915
Silicon	14	K-series	1.660582071	23.32442813	26.93012241	0.100833669
Sulfur	16	K-series	0.626715149	8.802800357	8.901958126	0.050017739
Chlorine	17	K-series	0.859096484	12.06681353	11.03704386	0.056475889
Potassium	19	K-series	0.5277701	7.413024611	6.148186745	0.043002157
Calcium	20	K-series	1.516960073	21.30712286	17.23964236	0.071686671
Iron	26	K-series	0.536062908	7.529504864	4.37195872	0.041334532
		Sum:	7.119497471	100	100

As usual Oxygen and Carbon are neglected from analyzing and quantifying data.

The New elements that were analyzed were Titanium and Zinc. Titanium was recognized before as non-toxic and harmless because it could be found in lot of objects including house paint, artists’ paint, plastics, enamels and paper therefore the presence of it in the new dust sample could be explained. 

Zinc could be found in materials such as car bodies, street lamp posts, safety barriers and suspension bridges. Oxides of Zinc is also used in electrical and hardware industries and can be found in many products such as paints, rubber, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, plastics, inks, soaps, batteries, textiles and electrical equipment. So the presence of Zinc in Roger Bacon 136 with a lot of electric components (electronics) and students doing summer research can be explained.



Above is a picture of Tristen Protzmann analyzing the new dust sample we collected.

References;

http://www.rsc.org/periodic-table/element/22/titanium

http://www.rsc.org/periodic-table/element/30/zinc

How to Clean Stages

Put on gloves before this process! First we take the stages into the chemistry room and use a scraper to get as much carbon tape off as possible. Then we put the stages in a beaker filled with acetone and let it sit for 10-15 minutes, during this process keep the acetone under a fume hood. The fume hood is used to prevent inhalation of the acetone fumes by slowly vacuuming out the air in the chamber. After the stages soak we rub the stages with a paper towel to make sure they are completely cleaned off. Next the stages are washed under water and dried off again, ready to use again.


Scraper is in between the scalpel and tweezers (bottom right). Acetone is to the top right and the glove can clearly be seen (it is blue).


Here is Asaph Ko cleaning the stages.

Here is a video of Asaph Ko cleaning the stages.

New Dust from Roger Bacon Room 136 Closet

New Dust has been found! After 20 days dust has finally appeared on top of the shelf in the closet in Roger Bacon Room 136.  Unlike before, only 1 sample was taken off the shelf. Reasoning for this is that there were simply not enough dust there and not enough time to analyze it. The same procedure has has been used in taking the sample as in every other time. 

This is the mapping of the new dust collected. The elements that appeared after analyzing the dust were Na, Mg, Al, Si, P, S, Cl, Ca, Ti, Fe,Zn, In, C, O. Oxygen and Carbon had to be removed due to the fact that the tape was made out of Carbon and the adhesive parts are Oxygen. The other elements that we had to remover were Zinc, Phosphorus, and Titanium. Compared to the old dust, there has been elements added as well elements that are no longer there. The elements in the old dust Sample 1 comprised of Si, Ca, Na, Al, S, Cl, K, Mg. The elements in the old dust Sample 2 comprised of Mg, Al, Si, S, Cl, K, Ca, Fe, Ti, Na. There was clearly some difference from Sample 1 and Sample 2 of the old dust. When comparing these to the new dust, the new dust had Indium and did not have any Potassium. 

Iron may appear to not have a peak, however, when zoomed in on the area a peak is clearly visible.

This is the results after quantifying. As mentioned before, Oxygen and Carbon were taken away from the results because of the tape. This shows that the indium amount found in this sample as greater than most of the other elements. This is surprising because of the fact that there were no indium found in the previous two samples taken in the past.  

Element	AN	series	[wt.%]	[norm. wt.%]	[norm. at.%]	Error in wt.% (1 Sigma)
Sodium	11	K-series	0.599309452	4.048669362	5.84123213	0.06914773
Magnesium	12	K-series	0.494239524	3.338863444	4.556483609	0.055676487
Aluminium	13	K-series	2.677707767	18.08940835	22.23742054	0.160817549
Silicon	14	K-series	4.221714835	28.52003663	33.681754	0.214442335
Sulfur	16	K-series	1.096525304	7.407639562	7.662347343	0.067247144
Chlorine	17	K-series	1.274477056	8.609802826	8.055095078	0.070540067
Calcium	20	K-series	2.086551644	14.09581927	11.66570694	0.087911173
Iron	26	K-series	0.829707312	5.605135316	3.328994162	0.048326136
Indium	49	L-series	1.522394783	10.28462525	2.970966191	0.073482072
		Sum:	14.80262768	100	100