MENU
  • Scitation Home
SUBMIT YOUR ARTICLE

Thank you

For your interest in the Applied Physics Letters

Check for updates on crossmark
Prev Next
No Access
Published Online: 08 March 2019
Accepted: February 2019

Large negative uniaxial magnetic anisotropy in highly distorted Co-ferrite thin films

Appl. Phys. Lett. 114, 092408 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5064845
Takeshi Tainosho1, Jun-ichiro Inoue1, Sonia Sharmin1, Masaki Takeguchi2, Eiji Kita1, and Hideto Yanagihara1,3,a)
more...View Affiliations
ABSTRACT
The strain induced magnetic anisotropy (MA) of epitaxial Co-ferrite (CFO) thin films grown on MgAl2O4(001) (MAO) by reactive sputtering was studied. These films underwent large tetragonal compressive strain due to the lattice mismatch between the substrates and films, resulting in tetragonalities of up to −0.04. Scanning transmission electron microscopy observation combined with fast Fourier transform analysis revealed that the lattice distortion monotonically relaxed with the increasing film thickness. Unlike the CFO(001) films on MgO(001) substrates, a magnetically enhanced layer exists at the interface between CFO and MAO. A large negative uniaxial MA energy of −5.9 MJ/m3 was confirmed for the thinnest film of 12.9 nm at 300 K by magneto-torque measurements. The induced uniaxial anisotropy decreased with the increasing film thickness owing to misfit relaxation. The magneto-elastic (ME) constant, which was determined by a fitting line for films with different thicknesses and therefore different tetragonalities, was 0.15±0.01 GJ/m3. This result is consistent with the value of 0.14 GJ/m3 for the bulk and suggests that the framework of the phenomenological ME theory for CFO is valid for a wide range of tetragonalities, at least up to −0.04. Our results also indicate that the misfit engineering of CFO thin films has great potential in inducing enhanced uniaxial MA.
This work was supported by the Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST) under Collaborative Research Based on Industrial Demand “High Performance Magnets: Towards Innovative Development of Next Generation Magnets.” A part of this work was supported by NIMS microstructural characterization platform as a program of “Nanotechnology Platform” of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT), Japan.

REFERENCES

  1. 1. G. H. O. Daalderop, P. J. Kelly, and M. F. H. Schuurmans, Phys. Rev. B 44, 12054 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.44.12054, Google ScholarCrossref
  2. 2. J. C. Slonczewski, Phys. Rev. 110, 1341 (1958). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.110.1341, Google ScholarCrossref
  3. 3. R. M. Bozorth, E. F. Tilden, and A. J. Williams, Phys. Rev. 99, 1788 (1955). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.99.1788, Google ScholarCrossref
  4. 4. Y. Suzuki, G. Hu, R. B. B. van Dover, and R. J. J. Cava, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 191, 1 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-8853(98)00364-3, Google ScholarCrossref
  5. 5. N. Somaiah, T. V. Jayaraman, P. A. Joy, and D. Das, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 324, 2286 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmmm.2012.02.116, Google ScholarCrossref
  6. 6. M. L. Lee, E. A. Fitzgerald, M. T. Bulsara, M. T. Currie, and A. Lochtefeld, J. Appl. Phys. 97, 011101 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1819976, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  7. 7. C. L. Canedy, H. Li, S. P. Alpay, L. Salamanca-Riba, A. L. Roytburd, and R. Ramesh, Appl. Phys. Lett. 77, 1695 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1308531, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  8. 8. B. Schulz and K. Baberschke, Phys. Rev. B 50, 13467 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.50.13467, Google ScholarCrossref
  9. 9. G. Hu, J. H. Choi, C. B. Eom, V. G. Harris, and Y. Suzuki, Phys. Rev. B 62, 779 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.62.R779, Google ScholarCrossref
  10. 10. F. Eskandari, S. B. Porter, M. Venkatesan, P. Kameli, K. Rode, and J. M. D. Coey, Phys. Rev. Mater. 1, 074413 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.1.074413, Google ScholarCrossref
  11. 11. H. Yanagihara, K. Uwabo, M. Minagawa, E. Kita, and N. Hirota, J. Appl. Phys. 109, 07C122 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3566079, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  12. 12. T. Niizeki, Y. Utsumi, R. Aoyama, H. Yanagihara, J. Inoue, Y. Yamasaki, H. Nakao, K. Koike, and E. Kita, Appl. Phys. Lett. 103, 162407 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4824761, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  13. 13. S. A. Chambers and S. A. Joyce, Surf. Sci. 420, 111 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0039-6028(98)00657-8, Google ScholarCrossref
  14. 14. C. F. Chang, Z. Hu, S. Klein, X. H. Liu, R. Sutarto, A. Tanaka, J. C. Cezar, N. B. Brookes, H.-J. Lin, H. H. Hsieh, C. T. Chen, A. D. Rata, and L. H. Tjeng, Phys. Rev. X 6, 041011 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.6.041011, Google ScholarCrossref
  15. 15. M. Foerster, M. Iliev, N. Dix, X. Martí, M. Barchuk, F. Sánchez, and J. Fontcuberta, Adv. Funct. Mater. 22, 4344 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.201200257, Google ScholarCrossref
  16. 16. A. Lisfi, C. M. Williams, L. T. Nguyen, J. C. Lodder, A. Coleman, H. Corcoran, A. Johnson, P. Chang, A. Kumar, and W. Morgan, Phys. Rev. B 76, 054405 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.76.054405, Google ScholarCrossref
  17. 17. C. Gatel, B. Warot-Fonrose, S. Matzen, and J. B. Moussy, Appl. Phys. Lett. 103, 092405 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4819178, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  18. 18. H. Yanagihara, Y. Utsumi, T. Niizeki, J. Inoue, and E. Kita, J. Appl. Phys. 115, 17A719 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4864048, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  19. 19. W. Eerenstein, T. T. M. Palstra, T. Hibma, and S. Celotto, Phys. Rev. B 66, 201101 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.66.201101, Google ScholarCrossref
  20. 20. W. Eerenstein, L. Kalev, L. Niesen, T. T. M. Palstra, and T. Hibma, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 258-259, 73 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-8853(02)01109-5, Google ScholarCrossref
  21. 21. M. Matsumoto, S. Sharmin, J. Inoue, E. Kita, and H. Yanagihara, IEEE Trans. Magn. 53, 2503604 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2017.2731970, Google ScholarCrossref
  22. 22. H. Miyajima, K. Sato, and T. Mizoguchi, J. Appl. Phys. 47, 4669 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.322398, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  23. 23. J. Inoue, H. Yanagihara, and E. Kita, Mater. Res. Express 1, 046106 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/1/4/046106, Google ScholarCrossref
  24. 24. J. Inoue, T. Niizeki, H. Yanagihara, H. Itoh, and E. Kita, AIP Adv. 4, 027111 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4866279, Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  25. 25. X. Zhang, S. Meng, D. Song, Y. Zhang, Z. Yue, and V. G. Harris, Sci. Rep. 7, 44193 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/srep44193, Google ScholarCrossref
  26. 26. C. Kittel, Phys. Rev. 73, 155 (1948). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.73.155, Google ScholarCrossref
  27. 27. M. Sagawa, S. Fujimura, H. Yamamoto, Y. Matsuura, and S. Hirosawa, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. Part 1 57, 4094 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.334629, Google ScholarScitation
  1. Published under license by AIP Publishing.

Article Metrics

Views
516
Citations
Crossref 10
Web of Science
ISI 8

Altmetric

Please Note: The number of views represents the full text views from December 2016 to date. Article views prior to December 2016 are not included.