Getting the Software Down

Last Thursday on my trip to Tulsa I was able to begin designing a template to be used with the e-beam hardware.  Unfortunately the e-beam and the SEM are not yet "talking" to each other, but the software itself is still operational.  Therefore, I was able to read the manual and make some decisions that will make using the e-beam much easier, as soon as it is operational.  One concern that the professor I've been working with at TU is that because the e-beam is different than the one they used previously (with the group before me) is that the counts/dose ( the energy delivered to the sample per specified area, line or spot) will be different.  This means that we can't just use the settings that were used prior and expect the same results right off the bat.
In order to determine the correct dose, I made a template the features several lines which I made different colors on the program.  Then I can make each differently colored line a different dosage and examine the results to determine which lines didn't go deep enough, which ones gave poor resolution and which give the best results.  There are still other optimization problems that go along with the system, such as the SEM optimization itself (stigmators, apertures, etc.) but I have quite a bit of practice with this and there is a very skilled technician available to assist if needed.
If the e-beam and software are not communicating by Thursday this week then I will forego a trip there this week as I feel that there is not much I can really do until that is completed, at least not that would warrant my driving there.
On the other side of the project (terraces) I am also moving forward.  I have made 5 200 nm sphere samples and today or tomorrow I am working with a research scientist here at OU to determine if there is anyway to clean the surfactant of the surface of the sphere layers using different solvents.  We will immerse the samples in 4 different solvents and keep one a control in order to determine what effect they have on their cleaning capabilities.  The reason for this detour is that using the etching system will be better optimized is the samples are as free of impurities (surfactant and other junk besides the spheres) as possible because it will create inconsistencies in the etching depth and performance.  Once we have determined that we have obtained as clean a sample as possible we are going to etch again at a length of time longer than 30 seconds but shorter than 5 min.  This should yield pillars and hopefully those pillars have a fine enough relief (edge on the top) that we can start using AFM to view surfactants on them!
I'll admit that we are moving slower than I had hoped, but at this point moving slowly is better than not moving at all!