Figure 8(a) shows the geometries of the J-tip and the grating sample. Figure 8(b) shows the image obtained with CD-AFM2 and is composed of five traces and five retraces, alternately. The length of the trace is 10 µm, and each trace is offset by 200 nm from the next one. At a glance we can see that the image is much cleaner than the earlier images. One of the profiles is shown in Fig. 9(a). The apparent sticking-related artifacts C and D are not seen anymore, except for nonuniform sampling intervals. This is because the abnormal signal is treated properly so that the empty points do not distort the measured profile. Assuming similar interactions of the J-tip and the grating, we can conclude that the scan algorithm for dealing with such interactions has superior performance in this instrument. For comparison, another CD-AFM2 image of the same grating but with the less flexible I-tip (i.e., a vertical and straight CNT tip) is shown in Fig. 9(b). Note that this grating has non-re-entrant sidewalls with an outward slope of about 85 deg. The sampling is quite uniform in the more densely spaced data points. Therefore, another possible conclusion is that the remaining issue of nonuniform sampling with the J-tip is still due to nanotube slenderness. This nonuniform sampling could be addressed by either stiffening the CNT or by more sophisticated control of the tip–sample interaction.