Localized micromagnetic perturbation of domain walls in magnetite using a magnetic force microscope

Applied Physics Letters

Volumn 69, Issue 22, 1996, Pages 3426-3428

  Foss, Sheryl ^a   Proksch, Roger ^a,b   Dahlberg, E Dan ^a   Moskowitz, Bruce ^a   Walsh, Brian ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^b ST OLAF COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0001369153     PISSN: 00036951     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1063/1.117281     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Y. Martin and H. K. Wickramasinghe, Appl. Phys. Lett. 50, 1455 (1987).
2. For a recent review, K. Babcock, M. Dugas, S. Manalis, and V. Elings, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 355, 311 (1995).
3. U. Hartmann, J. Appl. Phys. 64, 1561 (1988).
4. H. J. Mamin, D. Rugar, J. E. Stern, R. E. Fontana, Jr., and P. Kasiraj, Appl. Phys. Lett. 55, 318 (1989).
5. W. Rave, L. Belliard, M. Labrune, A. Thiaville, and J. Miltat, IEEE Trans. Magn. 30, 4473 (1994).
6. M. R. Scheinfein, J. Unguris, D. T. Pierce, and R. J. Celotta, J. Appl. Phys. 67, 5932 (1990).
7. A. Aharoni and J. P. Jakubovics, J. Appl. Phys. 73, 6498 (1993).
8. S. Müller-Pfeiffer, M. Schneider, and W. Zinn, Phys. Rev. B 49, 15745 (1994).
9. M. Rührig, S. Porthun, and J. C. Lodder, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 65, 3224 (1994).
10. J. R. Barnes, S. J. O'Shea, and M. E. Welland, J. Appl. Phys. 76, 418 (1994).
11. S. Manalis, K. Babcock, J. Massie, V. Elings, and M. Dugas, Appl. Phys. Lett. 66, 2585 (1995).
12. W. Williams, V. Hoffmann, F. Heider, T. Göddenhenrich, and C. Heiden, Geophys. J. Int. 111, 417 (1992).
13. R. Proksch, S. Foss, and E. D. Dahlberg, IEEE Trans. Magn. 30, 4467 (1994).
14. B. J. Wanamaker and B. M. Moskowitz, Geophys. Res. Lett. 21, 983 (1994).
15. V. Hoffmann, R. Schäfer, E. Appel, A. Hubert, and H. Soffel, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 71, 90 (1987).
16. Ö. Özdemir and D. Dunlop, Geophys. Res. Lett. 20, 1835 (1993).
17. A. E. LaBonte, J. Appl. Phys. 40, 2450 (1969).
18. M. R. Scheinfein, J. Unguris, J. L. Blue, K. J. Coakley, D. T. Pierce, and R. J. Celotta, Phys. Rev. B 43, 3395 (1991).
19. S. Xu and D. Dunlop, Geophys. Res. Lett. (in press).
20. Q. Zhong, D. Inniss, K. Kjoller, and V. Elings, Surf. Sci. 290, L688 (1993); R. Giles, J. P. Cleveland, S. Manne, P. K. Hansma, B. Drake, P. Maivald, C. Boles, J. Gurley, and V. Elings, Appl. Phys. Lett. 63, 617 (1993).
21. Q. Zhong, D. Inniss, K. Kjoller, and V. Elings, Surf. Sci. 290, L688 (1993); R. Giles, J. P. Cleveland, S. Manne, P. K. Hansma, B. Drake, P. Maivald, C. Boles, J. Gurley, and V. Elings, Appl. Phys. Lett. 63, 617 (1993).
22. Y. Martin, C. C. Williams, and H. K. Wickramasinghe, J. Appl. Phys. 61, 4723 (1987).
23. Nanoprobe™ SPM tips coated with a magnetic thin film from Digital Instruments, Santa Barbara, CA.
24. R. Proksch, G. Skidmore, E. D. Dahlberg, S. Foss, J. Schmidt, C. Merton, B. Walsh, and M. Dugas, Appl. Phys. Lett. 69, 2599 (1996).
25. H. J. Mamin, D. Rugar, J. E. Stern, B. D. Terris, and S. E. Lambert, Appl. Phys. Lett. 53, 1446 (1988).
26. S. Foss, R. Proksch, and E. D. Dahlberg, J. Magn. Soc. Jpn. 19, 135 (1995).
27. For the profile measurements, the cantilever was parallel to the wall so that the major in-plane component of the tip magnetization (imposed by the tilt of the cantilever) was parallel to the wall. The sample was rotated 180° under the tip to effectively reverse only the x component (perpendicular to the wall) of the tip magnetization. Profiles measured with opposite tip magnetization components in the x direction were identical, indicating that the profile measurement was due mainly to tip magnetization in the z direction.
28. 4 DWs. This also verified that differences between opposite polarity profiles were not due to partial switching of the tip magnetization.
29. These profiles are the average of 20 line scans measured successively while alternating scan direction above the same line. Profiles scanned in opposite directions were identical.
30. S. Foss, B. Moskowitz, R. Proksch, and E. D. Dahlberg, J. Geophys. Res. (to be submitted); A similar effect in an MFM study of Fe was described by M. Schneider, S. Müller-Pfeiffer, and W. Zinn, J. Appl. Phys. 79, 8578 (1996).
31. S. Foss, B. Moskowitz, R. Proksch, and E. D. Dahlberg, J. Geophys. Res. (to be submitted); A similar effect in an MFM study of Fe was described by M. Schneider, S. Müller-Pfeiffer, and W. Zinn, J. Appl. Phys. 79, 8578 (1996).
32. Definition of the DW center was different for each type of profile measurement: however, care was taken to remain over the same area of the DW before and after the tip magnetization was reversed using topographical features. Also as profiles were measured repeatedly over the same line, a measure of the lateral drift with time was made and accounted for in aligning the two profiles for calculation of the difference profile.
33. P. Grütter, Th. Jung, H. Heinzelmann, A. Wadas, E. Meyer, H.-R. Hidber, and H.-J. Güntherodt, J. Appl. Phys. 67, 1437 (1990).