Quantitative magnetic force microscopy on perpendicularly magnetized samples

Journal of Applied Physics

Volumn 83, Issue 11, 1998, Pages 5609-5620

  Hug, Hans J ^a   Stiefel, B ^a   Van Schendel, P J A ^a   Moser, A ^a   Hofer, R ^a   Martin, S ^a   Guntherodt H J ^a   Porthun, Steffen ^b   Abelmann, Leon ^b   Lodder, J C ^b   Bochi, Gabriel ^c   O'Handley, R C ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BASEL   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^c MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0000353305     PISSN: 00218979     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1063/1.367412     Document Type: Article

References (94)

1. J. J. Saenz, N. Garcia, P. Grütter, E. Meyer, H. Heinzelmann, R. Wiesendanger, L. Rosenthaler, H. R. Hidber, and H.-J. Güntherodt, J. Appl. Phys. 62, 4293 (1987).
2. Y. Martin and H. K. Wickramasinghe, Appl. Phys. Lett. 50, 1455 (1987).
3. C. Schönenberger and S. F. Alvarado, Z. Phys. B 80, 373 (1990).
4. H. J. Hug, Ph.D. thesis, Universität Basel, 1993.
5. S. Porthun, Ph.D. thesis, University of Twente, 1996.
6. A. Wadas, H. J. Hug, A. Moser, and H.-J. Güntherodt, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 120, 379 (1992).
7. A. Wadas, H. J. Hug, and H.-J. Güntherodt, Z. Phys. B 91, 403 (1993).
8. J. R. Barnes, S. J. O'Shea, and M. E. Welland, J. Appl. Phys. 76, 418 (1994).
9. R. Proksch, S. Foss, E. D. Dahlberg, and G. Prinz, J. Appl. Phys. 75, 5776 (1994).
10. R. Proksch, S. Foss, C. Orme, S. Sahu, and B. Moskowitz, J. Appl. Phys. 75, 6892 (1994).
11. D. E. Dahlberg, R. B. Proksch, B. M. Moskowitz, D. A. Bazylinski, and R. B. Frankel, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 140-144, 1459 (1995).
12. G. Bochi, H. J. Hug, D. I. Paul, B. Stiefel, A. Moser, I. Parashikov, H.-J. Güntherodt, and R. C. O'Handley, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 1839 (1995).
13. G. Bochi, C. A. Ballentine, H. E. Inglefield, C. V. Thompson, R. C. O'Handley, H. J. Hug, B. Stiefel, A. Moser, and H.-J. Güntherodt, Phys. Rev. B 52, 7311 (1995).
14. H. J. Hug, G. Bochi, D. I. Paul, B. Stiefel, A. Moser, I. Parashikov, A. Klicznik, D. Lipp, H.-J. Güntherodt, and R. C. O'Handley, J. Appl. Phys. 79, 5609 (1996).
15. Z. Quanmin, Y. Zheng, A. Roytburd, and M. Wuttig, Appl. Phys. Lett. 66, 2424 (1995).
16. H. Hug, T. Jung, H.-J. Güntherodt, and H. Thomas, Physica C 175, 357 (1991).
17. C. Bruder, Physica C 185, 1671 (1991).
18. H. J. Reittu and R. Laiho, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 5, 448 (1992).
19. A. Wadas, O. Fritz, H. J. Hug, and H.-J. Güntherodt, Z. Phys. B 88, 317 (1992).
20. O. Fritz, M. Wülfert, A. Wadas, H. J. Hug, H.-J. Güntherodt, and H. Thomas, Phys. Rev. B 47, 384 (1993).
21. H. J. Hug, A. Moser, O. Fritz, I. Parashikov, H.-J. Güntherodt, and Th. Wolf, Physica B 194-196, 377 (1994).
22. H. J. Hug, A. Moser, I. Parashikov, B. Stiefel, O. Fritz, H.-J. Güntherodt, and H. Thomas, Physica C 235-240, 2695 (1994).
23. A. Moser, H. J. Hug, I. Parashikov, B. Stiefel, O. Fritz, A. Baratoff, H. Thomas, H.-J. Güntherodt, and P. Chaudhari, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 1847 (1995).
24. A. Wadas and H.-J. Güntherodt, J. Appl. Phys. 68, 4767 (1990).
25. C. Schönenberger and S. F. Alvarado, J. Appl. Phys. 67, 7278 (1990).
26. H. J. Hug, A. Moser, Th. Jung, A. Wadas, I. Parashikov, and H.-J. Güntherodt, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 64, 2920 (1993).
27. A. Wadas, H. J. Hug, and H.-J. Güntherodt, J. Appl. Phys. 72, 203 (1992).
28. G. Matteucci, M. Muccini, and U. Hartmann, Phys. Rev. B 50, 6823 (1994).
29. G. Matteucci, M. Muccini, and U. Hartmann, IEEE Trans. Magn. 133, 422 (1994).
30. T. Göddenhenrich, U. Hartmann, and C. Heiden, Ultramicroscopy 42-44, 256 (1992).
31. T. Ohkubo, J. Kishigami, and K. R. Kaneko, NTT Res. and Dev. (Japan) 42, 545 (1993).
32. T. Ohkubo, J. Kishigami, and K. R. Kaneko, IEEE Trans. Magn. 29, 4086 (1993).
33. K. Wago, K. Sueoka, and F. Sai, IEEE Trans. Magn. 27, 5178 (1991).
34. K. Sueoka, K. Wago, and F. Sai, IEEE Trans. Magn. 28, 2307 (1992).
35. O. Watanuki, F. Sai, and K. Sueoka, Ultramicroscopy 42-44, 315 (1992).
36. S. Takayama, K. Sueoka, H. Setoh, R. Schafer, B. E. Argyle, and P. L. Trouilloud, IEEE Trans. Magn. 28, 2647 (1992).
37. G. A. Gibson, S. Schultz, T. Carr, and T. Jagielinski, IEEE Trans. Magn. 28, 2310 (1992).
38. G. Persch and H. Strecker, Ultramicroscopy 42-44, 1269 (1992).
39. A. Hubert, Institut für Werkstoffwissenschaften Universität Erlangen, Martenstrasse 7 D-91058 Erlangen, Schluchsee, Germany, 1994 (private communication).
40. J. Saenz and N. Garcia, J. Appl. Phys. 63, 2947 (1988).
41. U. Hartmann, J. Appl. Phys. 64, 1561 (1988).
42. U. Hartmann and C. Heiden, J. Microsc. 152, 281 (1988).
43. U. Hartmann, Phys. Rev. B 40, 7421 (1989).
44. A. Wadas, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 78, 263 (1989).
45. A. Wadas and P. Grütter, Phys. Rev. B 39, 12013 (1989).
46. A. Wadas and H.-J. Güntherodt, Phys. Lett. A 146, 277 (1990).
47. A. Wadas, P. Grütter, and H.-J. Güntherodt, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 8, 416 (1990).
48. A. Wadas, P. Grütter, and H.-J. Güntherodt, J. Appl. Phys. 67, 3462 (1990).
49. U. Hartmann, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 8, 411 (1990).
50. D. Rugar, H. J. Mamin, P. Güthner, P. Lambert, J. E. Stern, I. McFadyen, and T. Yogi, J. Appl. Phys. 68, 1169 (1990).
51. A. Mansuripur and R. Giles, IEEE Trans. Magn. 25, 3467 (1989).
52. M. Scheinfein, J. Unguris, D. Pierce, and R. Celotta, J. Appl. Phys. 67, 5932 (1990).
53. A. Aharoni and J. P. Jakubovics, J. Appl. Phys. 73, 6498 (1993).
54. J. O. Oti, IEEE Trans. Magn. 29, 2359 (1993).
55. J. O. Oti and P. Rice, J. Appl. Phys. 73, 5802 (1993).
56. S. Müller-Pfeiffer, M. Schneider, and W. Zinn, Phys. Rev. B 49, 15 745 (1994).
57. Note that a transfer function theory is also possible in the case of a MFM tip above a superconductor in the Meissner state (soft sample) (Ref. 16).
58. C. Xiaodong, M. Lederman, G. A. Gibson, H. N. Bertram, and S. Schultz, J. Appl. Phys. 73, 5805 (1993).
59. I. D. Mayergoyz, A. A. Adly, R. D. Gomez, and E. R. Burke, J. Appl. Phys. 73, 5799 (1993).
60. T. Chang, M. Lagerquist, J.-G. Zhu, J. H. Judy, P. B. Fischer, and S. Y. Chou, IEEE Trans. Magn. 28, 3138 (1992).
61. C. D. Wright and E. W. Hill, Appl. Phys. Lett. 68, 1726 (1996).
62. Here we treat only perpendicularly magnetized samples. However, the application of transfer functions to an arbitrarily complex micromagnetic structure including in-plane magnetization components is straight forward.
63. Sample·n with n being the surface normal.
64. C. Kittel, Phys. Rev. 70, 945 (1946).
65. C. Kooy and U. Enz, Philips Res. Rep. 15, 7 (1960).
66. -kz, and integration over the sample charge distribution [reciprocity principle, Ref. 61].
67. These zeros are analogous to the gap null in a magnetic recording head.
68. H. N. Bertram, Theory of Magnetic Recording 4 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1994).
69. y.
70. Visual Numerics Inc., PV-WAVE, 6230 Lookout Road, Boulder Colorado 80301.
71. R. Hofer, B. E. Bürgler, G. Tarrach, and D. Brodbeck, SXM-Shell, Institute of Physics, University of Basel, Klingelbergstrasse 82, CH-4056 Basel, Switzerland (unpublished).
72. H. J. Hug et al., 1996 (unpublished).
73. R. Wiesendanger and H.-J. Güntherodt, Scanning Tunneling Microscopy II (Springer, Germany, 1992), Vol. Springer Series in Surface Science 28.
74. 4 cantilevers. Due to their low mass, the energy stored in the cantilever oscillation is small and the damping caused by air flowing in and out the gap formed by the relatively flat pyramid tip and the surface of the sample becomes severe.
75. Note that this is also true for all present true-atomic-resolution experiments.
76. The temperature plays an important role. Measurements performed at 3 K instead of room temperature will improve the minimal detectable force derivative by a factor of ten. Further the decreased drift rate at low temperatures allows long measurement times and therefore reduced measurements bandwidths, Δν leading to improved force sensitivity.
77. F. J. Giessible, Science 267, 68 (1995).
78. P. Güthner, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 14, 2428 (1995).
79. S. Kitamura and M. Iwatsuki, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., Part 1 34, 145 (1995).
80. H. Ueyama, M. Ohta, Y. Sugawara, and S. Morita, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., Part 1 34, 1086 (1995).
81. R. Luethi, E. Meyer, M. Bammerlin, A. Baratoff, T. Lehmann, L. Howald, Ch. Gerber, and H.-J. Güntherodt, Z. Phys. B 100, 165 (1996).
82. S. Kitamura and M. Iwatsuki, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., Part 1 35, 668 (1996).
83. L. Olsson, R. Wigren, and R. Erlandson, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 67, (1996).
84. T. R. Albrecht, P. Grütter, D. Horne, and D. Rugar, J. Appl. Phys. 69, 668 (1991).
85. H. J. Hug, A. Moser, D. Weller, I. Parashikov, A. Tonin, H. R. Hidber, and H.-J. Guntherodt, Physica B 12, 1591 (1994).
86. M. Rührig, S. Porthun, and J. C. Lodder, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 165, 3225 (1994).
87. S. Y. Chou, M. S. Wei, and P. B. Fischer, IEEE Trans. Magn. 30, 4485 (1994).
88. M. Rührig, S. Porthun, J. C. Lodder, S. McVitie, L. J. Heyderman, A. B. Johnston, and J. N. Chapman, J. Appl. Phys. 79, 2913 (1996).
89. A. Moser, H. J. Hug, Th. Jung, U. D. Schwarz, and H.-J. Güntherodt, Meas. Sci. Technol. 4, 769 (1993).
90. CAMST Topical Meeting on Magnetic Force Microscopy (MESA Research Institute, University of Twente, The Netherlands, 1995).
91. A similar procedure would be applicable to scanning tunneling microscopy data (exponential decay of the corrugation above a periodic atomic structure) as well as to scanning near field optical microscopy data (exponential decay of the evanescent light field of a standing surface wave).
92. A. J. Meixner, M. A. Bopp, and G. Tarrach, Appl. Opt. 33, 7995 (1994).
93. Note that many of the small domains would be missed by the discrimination plane if the original data is used instead of the working image with its reduced tip-to-sample distance. However the exact amount of the reduction and the assumed tip-to-sample distance of the measured data are not sensitive parameters. Here we assume the tip-to-sample distance of the measured data to be 170 nm and the reduced tip-to-sample distance to be 150 nm.
94. The magnetic charge-to-sample distance of 176 nm is larger than the distance between the physical end of the tip and the sample (≈100 nm) as determined from the experiment. This is reasonable given the radius of curvature of the tip (50-100 nm).