2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmmm.2020.166522
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Origin of magnetocrystalline anisotropy in Ni-Mn-Ga-Co-Cu tetragonal martensite

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 53 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…One should keep in mind that within the GGA+U method, increasing U on Mn sites results in a stronger SIC for the 3d-Mn orbitals. Several authors [60][61][62] have shown that the parameter U is needed to obtain better agreement with experiments for elastic constants, tetragonal ratios, and magnetic anisotropy energy of Ni 2 MnGa. In particular, Refs.…”
Section: B Reduction Of Sicmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…One should keep in mind that within the GGA+U method, increasing U on Mn sites results in a stronger SIC for the 3d-Mn orbitals. Several authors [60][61][62] have shown that the parameter U is needed to obtain better agreement with experiments for elastic constants, tetragonal ratios, and magnetic anisotropy energy of Ni 2 MnGa. In particular, Refs.…”
Section: B Reduction Of Sicmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In particular, Refs. 61,62 have shown that U should be 1.8 eV for Mn. This value is smaller than the effective Coulomb correlation of 2 eV in SCAN, therefore in order to improve the agreement with experiment, one needs to consider a revised SCAN scheme where the SIC is reduced at the Mn sites.…”
Section: B Reduction Of Sicmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The reported U values used on the Mn d orbitals range from U = 5.97 eV calculated by the linear response approach 43 to U = 3.93 eV obtained by a fit to the experimental elastic constants 44 . Even a lower value of U = 1.8 eV was applied to Mn in works on doped Ni–Mn–Ga alloys in order to fit experiments on martensite phases 45 , 46 . The calculations with U on Mn larger than 1.2 eV correctly identify the five-layered modulated martensite (10M) as the ground state structure 47 while GGA predicts a theoretical four-layered 4O martensite as the most stable structure 48 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, the DFT calculation correctly predicted the reduced c/a ratio, and, to a lesser extent, the MCA. [ 188 ] This example shows that, despite appearing to have the same crystal structure, NM martensites with additional alloyed elements have different stability with respect to twinning than Mn‐rich NM martensite and that the ab initio calculations may allow for a direct and reliable insight into this difference. Elastic stability with respect to twinning is an important parameter for MIR, and it will be discussed in the next section.…”
Section: Beyond a Perfect Lattice: Off‐stoichiometry Alloying And Ord...mentioning
confidence: 99%