Boundary spin disorder in nanocrystalline FeRh alloys

Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics

Volumn 58, Issue 9, 1998, Pages 5181-5184

  Hernando, A ^a   Navarro, E ^a   Multigner, M ^a   Yavari, A ^a   Fiorani, D ^b  

^a INSTITUTO DE MAGNETISMO APLICADO   (Spain)

^b CNR   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0001178901     PISSN: 10980121     EISSN: 1550235X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.58.5181     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. L. J. Swartzendruber, Bull. Alloy Phase Diagrams 5, 1099 (1984).
2. M. Fallot and R. Hocart, Rev. Sci. 77, 498 (1939).
3. J. M. Lommel and J. S. Kouvel, J. Appl. Phys. 38, 126 (1967).
4. V. L. Moruzzi and P. M. Marcus, Phys. Rev. B 46, 2864 (1992).
5. E. Navarro, A. R. Yavari, A. Hernando, C. Marquina, and M. R. Ibarra, Solid State Commun. 100, 57 (1996).
6. N. C. Halder and C. N. J. Wagner, Acta Crystallogr. 20, 312 (1966).
7. P. Scherrer, Nachr. Ges. Wiss. Göttingen 26, 98 (1918).
8. J. Eckert, J. C. Holzer, C. E. Krill, and W. L. Johnson, J. Appl. Phys. 73, 2794 (1993).
9. R. Sumiyama, M. Shiga, and V. Nakamura, Phys. Status Solidi A 1-3, K75 (1972).
10. J. L. Dormann, L. Bessais, and D. Fiorani, J. Phys. C 21, 2015 (1988).
11. C. A. M. Mulder, A. J. Van Duyneveldt, and J. A. Mydosh, Phys. Rev. B 23, 1384 (1981).
12. Clear evidence of a spin glass transition was found in dilute metallic alloys [e.g., Cu-Mn, R. Omari, J. Prejean, and J. Souletie, J. Phys. (Paris) 44, 1069 (1983)]
13. as well as in concentrated insulators where the frustration may be due either to a competition between ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic interactions [e.g., (Formula presented) N. Bontemps, J. Rajchenbach, R. V. Chamberlin, and R. Orbach, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 1, 54 (1986).
14. (Formula presented) E. Vincent and J. Hammann, J. Phys. C 20, 2659 (1987)]
15. or a topological frustration in presence of antiferromagnetic interactions only [e.g., (Formula presented) M. J. Gingras, C. V. Stager, N. P. Raju, B. D. Gaulin, and J. E. Gredan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 947 (1997)].
16. D. Sherrington and S. Kirpatrick, Phys. Rev. Lett. 35, 1792 (1975).
17. D. Fiorani, J. L. Tholence, and J. L. Dormann, J. Phys. C 19, 5495 (1986).
18. This effect is well known in ferrite nanoparticles and oxides. See, for instance, R. H. Kodama, Salah A. Makhlouf, and A. E. Berkowitz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 1393 (1997).
19. R. H. Kodama, A. E. Berkowitz, E. J. McNiff, Jr., and S. Foner, J. Appl. Phys. 81, 5552 (1997).
20. B. Dieny, V. S. Speriosu, S. S. P. Parkin, B. A. Gurney, D. R. Wilhoit, and D. Mauri, Phys. Rev. B 43, 1297 (1991); See also Conference Digest of the 15th International Colloquium on Magnetic Films and Surfaces, Institute for Chemical Research, Kyoto University, 1997.
21. It is interesting to note that in Ref. 14 the surface spin disorder of ferrites is explained by the sensitivity of superexchange to broken bonds. In our case the sample is metallic, but the high deformation of the boundary, also with broken bonds and a distribution of interatomic distances, should explain the coexistence of competitive interactions. A similar case has recently been analyzed in the boundary of nanocrystalline pure Fe. See, for instance, L. Del Bianco, A. Hernando, E. Bonetti, and E. Navarro, Phys. Rev. B 56, 8894 (1997).
22. G. F. Zhou and H. Bakker, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 2290 (1994).
23. Phys. Rev. Lett.G. F. ZhouH. Bakker73, 344 (1994).