User:Anthony Salvagno/Notebook/Research/2010/10/25/More DOG Signal: Difference between revisions

From OpenWetWare
< User:Anthony Salvagno‎ | Notebook‎ | Research‎ | 2010‎ | 10‎ | 25
Jump to navigationJump to search
(New page: {{qn}}Continuing from Friday ==Notes== I made two samples today, one of 0.51um beads and the other of 1.0um beads both in 4M NaCl to promote surface adhesion. I'm doing DOG (derivative of ...)
 
m (Quick-adding category Optical tweezers calibration (using HotCat))
Line 11: Line 11:


Just from watching the signal without analyzing it seems that the best signal is when I start and it gets progressively worse. Maybe the camera and the eyepiece aren't in the same focal plane, or maybe that is indicative of where the trap is. Perhaps moving the trap back some will improve this, but I'm not inclined to play with it right now.
Just from watching the signal without analyzing it seems that the best signal is when I start and it gets progressively worse. Maybe the camera and the eyepiece aren't in the same focal plane, or maybe that is indicative of where the trap is. Perhaps moving the trap back some will improve this, but I'm not inclined to play with it right now.
[[Category:Optical tweezers calibration]]

Revision as of 11:39, 25 October 2010

Continuing from Friday

Notes

I made two samples today, one of 0.51um beads and the other of 1.0um beads both in 4M NaCl to promote surface adhesion. I'm doing DOG (derivative of gaussian) signals of the beads. I'm using 2.5V for the AOM power and am moving the z-piezo in increments of 20mV. I took pictures of my start and end positions.

Just from watching the signal without analyzing it seems that the best signal is when I start and it gets progressively worse. Maybe the camera and the eyepiece aren't in the same focal plane, or maybe that is indicative of where the trap is. Perhaps moving the trap back some will improve this, but I'm not inclined to play with it right now.