Freshman HS student working on a scanning tunneling microscope

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around a high school freshman's project to build a scanning tunneling microscope (STM) for a science fair, focusing on the challenges of creating a vacuum system for bottom-up capabilities and the overall feasibility of the project.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • The student seeks assistance with building a vacuum for an STM project, expressing a desire for guidance on both the STM and vacuum components.
  • Some participants inquire about the project's timeline and budget, suggesting that significant financial resources may be necessary for a successful build.
  • Concerns are raised about the complexity and time commitment required to build a functional STM, with estimates suggesting costs could exceed $1000 to $2000 and that the project may be too ambitious for a freshman.
  • One participant argues that a vacuum is not strictly necessary for basic STM operation, noting that it is primarily needed for bottom-up capabilities and to prevent oxidation of tungsten tips.
  • Another participant suggests that if the goal is to build a "bad" STM, it might be more practical to create a simpler tunneling junction instead.
  • The student mentions having some experience with electronics and plans to continue improving the project over several years.
  • There is a call for alternative project suggestions, with some participants expressing skepticism about the feasibility of the STM project given the student's resources.
  • The student references collaboration with a professor who has experience in molecular electronics, indicating a potential source of support for the project.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of skepticism about the feasibility of the STM project and support for the student's ambition. There is no consensus on the project's viability, with some arguing it is too complex while others suggest it could be pursued with the right resources and guidance.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight various assumptions regarding budget, time constraints, and the necessary technical knowledge, which remain unresolved. The discussion reflects differing views on the requirements for building an effective STM.

baconbits423
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
I am a freshman high school student working on a scanning tunneling microscope for a science fair project. I need to build a vacuum for bottom up capabilities. If anyone can help with the STM or the vacuum it would be greatly appreciated.:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
What's your time limit (deadline for completion) and total budget?
 
There arent any really demanding time constraints, april or may i would guess. I am hoping to apply for and receive a grant to cover the cost, if you have any suggestions f where to apply.
 
I hope you have the design and cost analysis worked out (do you have any source that told you this was possible). I can't imagine building an ambient (no or low-vacuum) low-end STM for less than $1000 (probably will come closer to $2000 - much more if you want medium to high vacuum), and I don't think it can be done over 4-5 months unless you're got lots and lots of spare time.

And in addition to all this, there's the whole knowledge thingy. You'd better be pretty good at designing and debugging electronics (pre-amps, ADCs, etc.) and writing data acquisition codes (unless there's something out there that you can steal). The vibration isolation is far from trivial - you need to know a good bit of vibration theory.

I'd say this project is far beyond the scope of the typical high-school freshman. I'm not trying to discourage you, because I don't really know anything about you to make a specific judgement, but this is my honest opinion.
 
I tend to agree with Gokul. The whole reason to build an STM is the fine resolution that one can achieve with the atomic-scale tip. To be able to do that, one then needs a lot of things: ultra-high vacuum, vibration isolation, electrical/thermal isolation, etc... These are neither cheap nor easy to do.

If you want to simply build a "bad" STM, then you might as well simply build a generic tunneling junction, since all the ability of an STM will be washed out.

Zz.
 
It is not necessary to have a vacuum just for normal scanning with a stm. A vacuum would only be required for bottom up capabilities or to reduce oxidation of the tungsten tips if that is what you choose to use. As for the electronics i have a bit of expirence and outside of school i have lots of spare time, and the project doesn't necessarily have to be done in a few months, i will be continuing this project for a few years making improvements each year.
 
I have noticed all of the people who have viewed the post, please if you have the time please respond.



Thanks
 
baconbits423 said:
I have noticed all of the people who have viewed the post, please if you have the time please respond.

Well, since you asked, I also fail to see any point in trying to make something that really won't work. Why not devote the energy to something that you can make work well, given your resources. There exists no shortage of interesting projects you could build (though I won't bother listing those that I am interested in, I'm sure there are other projects, or stepping-projects, that you could become even more enthusiastic about).
 
what other projects can you think of?
 
  • #10
Why won't my stm project work well by the way??
 
  • #11
Baconbits: do you know of anyone that has built an STM with the capabilities that you envision, within the budget and time limit that you've got?
 
  • #12
Not someone who has built one but i am working in cooperation with a professor at umsl center for molecular electronics and he has done something similar, and for now i only need to be able to see with atomic resolution.
 
  • #13
please anyone who can offer any assistance please write something!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
28K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
3K