Temperature dependence of magnetic stripe domain period in ultrathin films

Polyakova, T.; Zablotskii, V.; Maziewski, A.

doi:10.1016/j.jmmm.2007.02.063

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, periodic and nearly isotropic patterns are formed at 300 K as predicted by domain theories [Málek 1958, Kooy 1960, Kaplan 1993. These results show that pinning of domain wall is unimportant for the formation of demagnetized state in CoFeB/MgO system at T ≥ 100 K. Figure 4( with decreasing temperature and peaks at around 150-200 K. This behavior of D p is in agreement with that predicted for stripe domain period in ultrathin magnetic films , Polyakova 2007]. On the other hand, D p starts to decrease at temperatures below 150 K, which may be attributed to the appearance of domain wall pinning effects on forming the lowest energy domain configuration.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 85%

Domain Structure in CoFeB Thin Films With Perpendicular Magnetic Anisotropy

Yamanouchi¹,

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Domain structures in CoFeB-MgO thin films with a perpendicular easy magnetization axis were observed by magneto-optic Kerr-effect microscopy at various temperatures. The domain wall surface energy was obtained by analyzing the spatial period of the stripe domains and fitting established domain models to the period. In combination with SQUID measurements of magnetization and anisotropy energy, this leads to an estimate of the exchange stiffness and domain wall width in these films. These parameters are essential for determining whether domain walls will form in patterned structures and devices made of such materials.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 85%

Domain Structure in CoFeB Thin Films With Perpendicular Magnetic Anisotropy

Yamanouchi¹,

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, domain characteristic parameters (mean period, size, and shape) strongly depend on the relation between the coercivity field and the demagnetization field. Domain structures also strongly depend on the sample magnetic history generated by an external magnetic field or temperature (especially when RPT is achieved) – metastable domain structures with periods which significantly differ from that of equilibrium domains could be created. In the ultrathin region, far from the RPT, at low film thickness, the coercivity field dominates the demagnetization one.…”

Section: Magnetization Distributions Near the Anisotropy‐ And Field‐imentioning

confidence: 99%

Magnetization states and magnetization processes in nanostructures: From a single layer to multilayers

Maziewski

Faßbender

Kisielewski

et al. 2014

Physica Status Solidi (a)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The results of combined (experimental, analytical, and micromagnetic simulations) studies on the evolution of magnetization states and processes in ultrathin films and multilayered systems are presented. We show ways to manipulate magnetization distributions in ultrathin magnetic single or multilayers by tuning: the thickness of the magnetic layer, the thickness of either the non‐magnetic cap or spacer layer, the magnetic anisotropy, and the geometrical constrictions of the system. In ultrathin magnetic films, both the magnetization distribution and the critical thickness of the magnetization reorientation phase transition (RPT) between perpendicular and in‐plane states can be also controlled by post‐growth treatments, e.g., by either ion or light irradiation. By changing the geometrical parameters of the nanostructure, as well as by an applied external magnetic field, one can tune magnetic domain sizes in a giant range (of a few orders of magnitude) and induce the RPT. Transitions between two‐ and three‐dimensional magnetization distributions are discussed.

show abstract

“…These interactions, which are affected by intrinsic pinning, determine the actual magnetic DS of the sample. Under the influence of temperature changes, temperature dependencies of the magnetic anisotropy (K) and magnetization saturation (M S ), the DS becomes metastable and can undergo either a continuous or discontinuous transition to a DS with another domain period and size [29,30]. The actual pathway from a metastable state to an equilibrium state depends upon intrinsic and external agitations, which can include the rate of the temperature changes, thermal activation of domain wall displacements and an application of magnetic fields.…”

Section: Temperature-induced Transformation Of Magnetic Domain Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

“…where l ex = (A/2pM S 2 ) 1/2 is the exchange length and Q = (K/2pM S 2 ) [30,33]. Of note, for a broad range of materials and temperatures the exchange length is of the order of 10 nm (depending on the definition used), l ex = a B /a = 7.52 nm (here a = 1/137 is the finestructure constant and a B is the Bohr radius [34].…”

Section: Temperature-induced Transformation Of Magnetic Domain Structurementioning

confidence: 99%