Domain wall motion in CoFeB Nanowire under the magnetic pulse of various length

Ahmad Yani 1), Dede Djuhana 1), Chandra Kurniawan 2)

1) Physics department, Universitas Indonesia, Depok

2) Indonesia Science Center, Tangerang

Abstract

We have carried out a micromagnetic simulation based on Landau- Lifshitz-Gilbert equation to

CoFeB nanowire under influence of magnetic field pulse. The results showed that Walker Field
(HWB) is maximum at 100 ps pulse length, then decreases steeply when the pulse length was
200 ps. As the longer pulse length, the HWB decreases gradually and it tends to be constant when
pulse length longer than 700 ps. Interestingly we found that the energy density competition
between exchange and demagnetization is influenced by the exchange length and the aspect ratio
of nanowires. We noticed that around the HWB, the demagnetization energy density drops and at
the same time the exchange energy density hikes. The domain wall structures below the Walker
Field are Transverse Wall and then change into Antivortex Wall when magnetic field strength
are greater than Walker field.

Introduction

Domain wall (DW) motion in nanowire has become interesting topic since 1999 [1],[2] because
of its potential application in memory devices [2] spintronics and fundamental theory [3].
Magnetic field [4] and current density [5], [6] is used to move DW in a nanowire. The velocity of
DW increases as the magnetic field exposed to nanowire increased until certain limit which
called "Walker Field" (HWB), then the DW velocity decrease as the field greater than H WB. The
reduction of DW velocity can be attributed to DW internal structure [7] and micromagnetic
energy density [8].

The previous research related to the field driving DW motion in nanowire shows that DW
velocity could be classified into two regimes, i.e., below HWB and above HWB. The transition
between two systems indicated by an irregular deceleration of DW motion[2], and destabilized of
DW structure[9]. The DW structure below HWB is transverse with its velocity follow
Slonczewski's equation, while DW structure above HWB was vortex with its velocity follows
Walker's equation [10]. Several strategies to move DW using magnetic field have been
investigated such as by oscillating magnetic field [11]and magnetic pulse [8], [12]. Whereas
material CoFeB is a promising candidate for memory devices and spintronics since owing to low
coercivity, high magnetic saturation [13] and Perpendicular Magnetic Anisotropy (PMA) [14].
Nevertheless a small number of researches devoted to investigate DW motion in CoFeB

1
nanowire due to magnetic pulse of different length. The objective of this research is to examine
the dynamics of DW in nanowire exposed to magnetic pulse ranging from 100 ps to 1000 ps
using micromagnetic simulation.

Methods

Dynamics of DW in CoFeB nanowire is observed by means micromagnetic simulation using

public software OOMMF [15]. Magnetic moment motion in ferromagnetic material is described
by Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert (LLG) [16] equation as follows

dM      
dt
   MxH eff 
Ms

Mx MxH eff 
( 1)
The simulated ferromagnetic materials use different size of CoFeB nanowire with the length of
2000 nm, the width of 50, 100 and 150, thickness of 2 and 4 nm. Nanowire is exposed to in-
plane magnetic pulse starting from 100 ps to 1000 ps, with the step of 100 ps. For each magnetic
pulse length, the strength of field varied ranging from 10 mT - 200 mT as illustrated as follows.

Figure 1 : Schematic diagram of micromagnetic simulation on CoFeB nanowire

exposed to the magnetic pulse

DW velocity, domain structure, and magnetization energy density are observed around H WB. The
micromagnetic parameters of CoFeB are magnetic saturation (Ms =9.57x105 A/m ), exchange
stiffness (A=13x10-12 J/m), uniaxial anisotropy (K= 3.86x105 J/m3) and damping factor ().

Result and Discussion

Initially, the head to head domain structure is placed in the middle of nanowire without an
external magnetic field for 1 ns to minimize energy. After 1 ns and 50 ps rise time a magnetic
pulse is generated, DW velocity increases as external magnetic field get higher, later, when
magnetic field are greater than certain value named Walker Field (H WB) DW velocity decreases.
DW velocity profile of various size and pulse length are represented in the graph as follows.

2
 Figure 2 : DW velocity of each magnetic pulse at spesific strength and length. (a) nanowire 2000x50x1 nm3 (b)
nanowire 2000x50x2 nm3(c) nanowire 2000x50x4 nm3(d) nanowire 2000x100x1 nm3(e) nanowire 2000x100x2
nm3(f) nanowire 2000x100x4 nm3 (g) nanowire 2000x150x1 nm3 (h) nanowire 2000x150x2 nm3
(i) nanowire 2000x150x4 nm3
Figure2(a) to (i) show DW's velocities of 10 different pulse length against field for each size of
the nanowire. Generally, the graphs shows that DW velocity against field strength (B x) are
consisted two regimes. Firstly, when Bx is less than HWB, DW velocity increase linearly,
secondly, while Bx is larger than HWB, DW velocity decline abruptly. The peak of each curve
indicates Walker field at X-axis and maximum velocity at Y=axis. There were two peaks of 100
ps and 200 ps pulse length which their position separated from others. Furthermore, we plot H WB
over the pulse length of different sizes. The graphs are showed by figure 3.

3
 Figure 3 : (a) Plot of HWB over Pulse length for nanowires thickness=2 nm (b) Plot of HWB over Pulse length for
nanowires thickness = 4nm

Briefly, HWB decreases as pulse length get longer. Initially, when the pulse length is 100 ps, the
value HWB is around 60 mT with minimum 54 mT (l=50 nm; t=4 nm) and maximum 63 mT
(l=150 nm; t=4 nm). Deliberately, when pulse length increases to 200 ps, H WB reduces to 40%
from the previous value. While, between pulse length 300 ps and 800 ps, H WB decreases
gradually and seems to be constant at pulse length higher than 700 ps.

Initially, the CoFeB domain structure is head to head, after magnetic pulse been applied to the
nanowire, DW move in the direction of the x-axis (parallel to the length of nanowire). When the
magnetic field is less than HWB, domain structure is TW, and the velocity is constant as can be
seen in figure 6(a). Differently, when the magnetic field is greater than H WB, AVW is nucleated
at an edge of width side. Afterward, the AVW core moves to the other edge of width side, when
the AVW core has reached to the edge, being followed by reversing the direction of AVW core
motion to the other side. The illustration of the AVW core motion shown in figure 6(b). The
AVW core motion contributed to the deceleration of DW velocity, so the AVW core nucleation
can be used as Walker Breakdown indicator. Figure 6(c) shows that below H WB, nanowire DW
structure is TW and moves along x axis. The velocity of DW motion is proportional to the
applied field. The average velocity of DW motion in nanowire was 256.3 m/s when exposed to
13 mT applied field. at certain applied field called Walker Breakdown. But if applied field
higher than HWB, the velocity of DW motion decreases. The drop in DW velocities just after H WB
is caused by internal structure change as suggested by Weiser et al [10] and Kunz et. al. [17]
We observed that the reduction of HWB as the pulse get longer is related to elapsed time to
nucleate antivortex wall since pulse has been generated as shown by figure 3(c). Antivortex wall
(AVW) nucleates earlier for higher Bx and later for lower Bx. The nucleation of AVW is the
reason for decreasing DW velocity, so it corresponds with H WB. The relation of Bx and
nucleation time is found to be simple exponential. If time nucleation is less than 100 ps, the B x is
around 60 mT for all sizes. Another cases are when time nucleation is less than 200 ps, the B x is

4
between 30 mT and 40 mT. And when time nucleation is greater than 700 ps, the B x is resemble
constant for each size and the H varies for different sizes in wider range. So it can be concluded
that the decays of HWB value as the extent of pulse length is correlated with antivortex nucleation
time.

Figure 4 : Domain wall structure of CoFeB nanowire(2000x150x4 nm3) under influence of magnetic pulse (a) the
DW progress at exposure of field strength below Walker Breakdown (b) DW progress at exposure of field strength
above Walker Breakdown (c) DW structures at the end pulses (d) Vortex nucleation time vs pulse strength

The study of DW dynamics can be associated with energy density [8], [7]. During the
investigation of DW motion and domain structure in the nanowire, we also noticed the exchange
energy and demagnetization energy below and above Walker field as suggested by Han et al.
[18] and Djuhana et al. [8]. The energy density of CoFeB nanowire micromagnetic simulation
when exposed to 1000 ps length magnetic pulse showed by figure 4.(a), (b) and (c). The figures
show the energy density of different width nanowire; they are (a) 50 nm, (b) 100 nm and (c) 150
nm. All figures show that exchange energy density didn't alter much because of thickness

5
change, while demagnetization energy density alter up to twice due to thickness change from 2
nm to 4 nm. We observed that the exchange energy density domination occurs when nanowire
size is 2000x50x2 nm3 and 2000x100x2 nm3, otherwise the demagnetization energy density
dominates over exchange energy density. Previous research by Djuhana et. al. [18] report that
demagnetization energy density dominates the energy system on Py, Co and Ni. We saw from
the report that the larger exchange length or the thinner nanowire will give smaller gap between
demagnetization energy density and exchange energy density. So in the case of CoFeB nanowire
which demagnetization energy density less or almost similar to the exchange energy density, we
suspect that the exchange length of CoFeB (4.75 nm) which is more than twice larger than the
thickness and the width are the one reasons. In agrement with our presumption which suspect
thickness, width and exchange length effect the competition between exchange and
demagnetization energy density, DeJong and Liversey [19] calculated demagnetization energy
density analytically in uniformly magnetized strip by using formula which contain volume and
aspect ratio (thickness/width) contribution, meanwhile exchange energy density is influenced by
exchange length [19] and cell size [20]

Figure 5 : Interplay between demagnetization energy density and exchange energy density of various sizes CoFeB
nanowire when exposed to 1000 ps magnetic pulse length (a) 2000x50x(2;4) nm3 (b)2000x100x(2;4) nm3 (c)
2000x150x(2;4) nm3

Conclusion

We conducted a micromagnetic simulation of 2000 nm CoFeB nanowire length with different

thickness (2 nm and 4 nm) and different width (50 nm, 100 nm, and 150 nm) under magnetic
pulse which its length ranging from 100 ps to 1000 ps. The greatest value of Walker Field is
occurs when pulse length was 100 ps, and decrease as pulse is getting longer. The H WB stays the
same value after pulse length is longer than 700 ps. The domain structure below H WB is
Transverse wall, while above HWB the domain structure is antivortex wall (AVW). Initially,
AVW nucleated at the one edge of the x-y plane, then move to the opposite edge while
oscillating. The AVW nucleation time is closely related to H WB of different pulse lengths. We

6
presume that the competition between exchange energy density and demagnetization energy
density is influenced by the exchange length and aspect ratio of nanowires.

. References

[1] T. One, H. Miyajima, K. Shigeto, K. Mibu, N. Hosoito, and T. Shinjo, “Propagation of a Magnetic
Domain Wall in a Submicrometer Magnetic Wire,” SCIENCE, vol. 284, no. 5413, pp. 468–470, Apr.
1999.
[2] G. S. D. Beach, C. Nistor, C. Knutson, M. Tsoi, and J. L. Erskine, “Dynamics of field-driven domain-
wall propagation in ferromagnetic nanowires,” Nat. Mater., vol. 4, p. 741, Sep. 2005.
[3] H. Szambolics, J.-Ch.Toussaint, A.Marty, I.M.Miron, L.D.Buda, and Prejbeanu, “Domain wall
motion in ferromagnetic systems with perpendicular magnetization,” J. Magn. Magn. Mater., vol.
321, pp. 1912–1918, 2009.
[4] N. L. Schryer and and L. R. Walker, “The motion of 1800 domain walls in uniform dc magnetic
fields,” J Appl Phys, vol. 45, p. 5406, 1974.
[5] H. Kohno and G. Tatara., “Theoretical Aspects of Current- Driven Magnetization Dynamics,” in
Nanomagnetism and Spintronics, Teruya Shinjo, Ed. Elsevier B.V., 2009, pp. 189–230.
[6] Luc Thomas and Stuart Parkin, “Current Induced Domain-wall Motion in Magnetic Nanowires,” in
Handbook of Magnetism and Advanced Magnetic Materials, vol. 2, Helmut Kronm¨uller and Stuart
Parkin, Ed. JohnWiley & Sons, Ltd., 2007.
[7] J.-Y. Lee, K.-S. Lee, S. Choi, K. Y. Guslienko, and S.-K. Kim, “Dynamic transformations of the
internal structure of a moving domain wall in magnetic nanostripes,” Phys. Rev. B, vol. 76, no. 18, p.
184408, Nov. 2007.
[8] D. Djuhana, A. Manaf, A. Sumarta, Mardona, and D.-H. Kim ., “Dynamic micromagnetic simulation
of domain wall around the Walker breakdown in ferromagnetic nanowires driven magnetic pulse,”
AIP Conf. Proc. 1589, vol. 262, no. 2014.
[9] “Domain wall mobility, stability and Walker breakdown in magnetic nanowires.”
[10] Wieser, Robert, Nowak, Ulrich, and Usadel, Klaus-Dieter, “Domain wall mobility in nanowires :
Transverse versus vortex walls,” Phys. Rev., vol. 69, no. 6, pp. 1095–3795, 2004.
[11] K.-W. Moon, D.-H. Kim, C. Kim, D.-Y. Kim, S.-B. Choe, and C. Hwang, “Domain wall motion
driven by an oscillating magnetic field,” J. Phys. Appl. Phys., vol. 50, no. 12, p. 125003, Feb. 2017.
[12] Z. Z. Sun and J. Schliemann, “Fast DomainWall Propagation under an Optimal Field Pulse in
Magnetic Nanowires,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 104, no. 037206, Jan. 2010.
[13] M. Ciureanu et al., “Magnetic properties of electrodeposited CoFeB thin films and nanowire arrays,”
Electrochimica Acta, vol. 50, pp. 4487–4497, 2005.
[14] Y. Zhang, W. S. Zhao, D. Ravelosona, , J.-O. Klein, , J. V. Kim, and C. Chappert., “Perpendicular-
magnetic-anisotropy CoFeB racetrack memory,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 11, no. 093925, 2012.
[15] Andre´ Thiaville and Yoshinobu Nakatani, “Micromagnetics of Domain-Wall Dynamics in Soft
Nanostrips,” in Nanomagnetism and Spintronics, Teruya Shinjo., Ed. Elsevier B.V., 2009, p. 231.
[16] A. P. Guimaraes, Principles of nanomagnetism. Berlin: Springer, 2009.
[17] Andrew Kunz, Eric C, Breitbach, and Andy J. Smith, “Antivortex dynamics in magnetic
nanostripes,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 105, p. 07D502, 2009.
[18] D. Djuhana, D. C. C. Oktri, and D. H. Kim, “Micromagnetic Simulation on Ground State Domain
Structures of Barium Hexaferrite (BaFe12O19),” Adv. Mater. Res., vol. 896, pp. 414–417, 2014.
[19] M. D. DeJong and K. L. Livesey, “Analytic theory for the switch from Bloch to N\’eel domain wall
in nanowires with perpendicular anisotropy,” Phys. Rev. B, vol. 92, no. 21, p. 214420, Dec. 2015.
[20] M. J. Donahue and R. D. McMichael, “Exchange energy representations in computational
micromagnetics,” Hysteresis Model. Micromagnetism, vol. 233, no. 4, pp. 272–278, Jun. 1997.