Micromagnetic Simulation of Walker Breakdown Shifting by a Sub-nanosecond Magnetic

Pulse in CoFeB Nanowire

The effect of magnetic length pulse to Walker breakdown field in CoFeB Nanowire

Ahmad Yani 1), Dede Djuhana 1,*), Candra Kurniawan 1,2)

1)
Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Indonesia,
Kampus Baru UI Depok 16424, Indonesia
2)
Research Center for Physics, Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI), Puspiptek Office Area
Serpong 14314, Indonesia

*Corresponding Email: dede.djuhana@sci.ui.ac.id

Abstract

In this paper, the Micromagnetic simulation based on Landau- Lifshitz-Gilbert (LLG) equation
has been successfully applied to CoFeB nanowire which exposed to by sub-nanosecond magnetic
pulse of with pulse-length between 100 ps to 1000 ps. The results show It is found that the
Walker Breakdown fField (HWB) reached the highest value at 100 ps pulse length, then decreased
steeply until the when the pulse length is 4200 ps. As In the longer pulse pulse-length, the HWB
Walker field decreased gradually and finally tend to be constant when pulse length is 800 ps.
Interestingly we It is found observed that below the HWB, the exchange energy density is greater
larger than the demagnetization energy density in the wider nanowirewhen the nanowire size are
2000x50x2 nm3 and 2000x100x2 nm3 below the Walker field. The two nanowire sizes are the
lowest surface area to volume ratio among others.

Keywords: micromagnetics, walker breakdown, domain wall, magnetic pulse, CoFeB nanowire

Introduction

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

The previous research related to the field driving DW motion in nanowire showed that DW
velocity can be classified into two regimes i.e. below HWB and above HWB. The transition
between two regimes indicated by there are two characteristics can be observed above the HWB
value, which are the irregular deceleration of DW motion [2], and destabilized of DW structure
[9]. The DW structure below HWB is has a transverse structure with its velocity follows
Slonczewski's equation, while DW structure above HWB is the vortex wall is nucleated with and
its velocity follows Walker's equation [10]. Several strategies to move DW using magnetic field
have been investigated such as by injecting an oscillating magnetic field [11] dan or a magnetic
pulse [7][8], [12]. Whereas material The CoFeB materials is one of the promising candidate for
memory devices and spintronics since owing to low cooercivity, high magnetic saturation [13]
and Perpendicular perpendicular Mmagnetic Aanisotropy (PMA) [14]. Nevertheless, there are
only small number of research devoted to investigate DW motion in CoFeB nanowire.

In this work, The objective of this research is to investigate the dynamics of DW in CoFeB
nanowire exposed to sub-nanosecond magnetic pulse ranging from 100 ps to 1000 ps will be
investigated using by means of micromagnetic simulation. The DW velocity, Walker field and
energies included in the system will also be discussed systematically.

Methods
We have systematically performed a micromagnetic simulation, by public software, OOMMF
[15] [xx] to investigate the effect of magnetic length pulse to the Walker breakdown field in
CoFeB nanowire based on Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert (LLG) equation [16][xx]. The length of
nanowire L was fixed 2000 nm, the width w was were varied of 50, 100, and 150 nm, and the
thickness t were 1, 2, and 4 nm. The magnetic length pulse was varied from 100 ps ns to 1000 ps
was variedor 1 ns with the variation of the magnetic strength. The CoFeB material parameters
are The material parameter consisted of the magnetization saturation M s  9.57 10 Am , the
5 -1

12
exchange stiffness A  13 10 Jm and the anisotropic constant K  3.86 10 Jm . The cell
-1 5 -3

size was set to be 2  2  t nm where t related to the thickness with the damping constant α of
3

0.05.
The geometry of CoFeB nanowire and the magnetic pulse profile was are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Geometry and magnetic pulse profile of the CoFeB nanowire with a transverse wall in
the center of the wire initially.
sDynamics 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-Lifsitz-Gilbert (LLG) [16] equation as follows

dM      
dt
   MxH eff 
Ms
 
Mx MxH eff
( 0)
The simulated ferromagnetic materials are diferent size of CoFeB nonowire with length of 2000
nm, 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. In each magnetic pulse
length, the strength of field varied ranging from 10 mT - 200 mT as ilustrated below

Figure 1 : Schematic diagram of micromagnetic simulation on CoFeB nanowire

exposed to magnetic pulse

DW velocity, domain structure and magnetization energy density are observed arond H WB. The
micromagnetic parameters consist of magnetic saturation (Ms), exchange stiffness (A), uniaxial
anisotropy (K) and damping factor (). The value of each parameter are listed in table below
Tabel 1. Table 1 CoFeB micromagnetic parameters [17]
Ms 9.57x105 A/m
A 13x10 -12 J/m
K 3.86x105 J/m3
 0.05

Result and discussion

Initially head to head domain structure is placed in the middle of nanowire without external
magnetic field relaxed for 1 ns in order to reach minimize energy minimization. After 1 ns and
Then the sub-nanosecond magnetic pulse was injected with 50 ps of rise time a magnetic pulse is
generated. It is observed that the DW velocity increases as external the magnitude of external
magnetic field get higherincreased., hHowever, the DW velocity is abruptly decreased at certain
magnetic field for magnetic field above certain value named called as Walker Breakdown Field
(HWB) DW velocity decreases. The correlation between HWB values with nanowire size
geometry and length of magnetic pulse are presented in Figure 2. DW velocity profile of various
size and pulse length are represented in the graph below
Figure 2 :. The DW velocity profiles of at the specific field strength and pulse length with
geometrical size variation, each magnetic pulse at spesific strength and length. (a) nanowire
2000×x50×x2 nm3, (b) nanowire 2000×x50×x4 nm3, (c) nanowire 2000×x100×x2 nm3, (d)
nanowire 2000×x100×x4 nm3, (e) nanowire 2000×x150×x2 nm3, (f) nanowire 2000×x150×x4
nm3.

Figure 2. (a) to (f) show DW's velocities of 10 different pulse length againts field for each size
of nanowire. Generally, the graphs Figure 2 shows the increasing of DW velocity as magnetic
field strength higherincreased., then after reaching certain value named Walker field (HWB), the
velocity decrease. Peaks of each curves imply HWB at x-axis and maximum velocity at y-axis.
There are two peaks belong to 100 ps and 200 ps pulse length which positioned away from the
others. Thereupon, we plot HWB over pulse length aside sizes.

Figure 3. : Plot of The HWB profiles at different magnetic pulse length for over Pulse length (a)
thicknesst =2 nm (b) Thickness t = 4nm.
Roughly It can be seen from Figure 2 that the HWB decreases as pulse length get longerincreased.
Initially wWhen the injected pulse length of 100 ps, the value HWB value are around 60 mT with
minimum from 54 mT (at lw = 50 nm; t = 4 nm) and maximum to 63 mT (at lw = 150 nm; t = 4
nm). Deliberately when When the pulse length increased to 200 ps, HWB values reduced up to
40% from the previous than the shorter pulse length value. Furthermore, While between at the
pulse length range from 300 ps to 800 ps, HWB decreased gradually and tend to be constant at
pulse length higher than 800 ps. Initially when pulse length=100 ps, HWB is at the highest value
among others. Then it decrease abruptly from pulse length 100 ps up to 300 ps. Afterward, H WB
tend to head around certain value since pulse length 400 ps until 800 ps. Finally HWB unchanged
from 800 ps to 1000 ps.
The study of DW dynamics can be assocsiated to the energy density [7][8], [8][7]. We notice It is
known that the exchange energy and demagnetization energy tend a different behavior around
the below and above Walker field when we investigate the motion and domain structure of the
wall as suggested by Han et. al [18] and Djuhana et. al [7][8] . Below HWB, the demagnetization
energy density prevail upon is higher than the exchange energy density at almost all sizes except
2000×x50×x2 nm3 and 2000×x100×x2 nm3 nanowires. Specifically at 2000x100x2 nm3, the
demagnetization energy and exchange energy densities are close together. Exchage energy
densities dominate over demagnetization energy at all sizes after H WB. Transverse-wall structure
is observed conserved below the HWB in all sizes of CoFeB nanowire, while and the antivortex-
wall structure is observedb above the HWB. According to C. Bran et. al., that the transverse
structure minimized the exchange energy, while the vortex structure minimized the
demagnetization energy [17][18]. Interestingly, demagnetization energy is lower than exchange
energy but its structure being observed is transverse at 2000x50x2 nm3. The surface to volume
ratio (SA:V) of 2000x50x2 nm3, 2000x100x2 nm3 and 2000x150x2 nm3 nanowires are 1.04x109 ,
1.02x109 and 1.01x109 consecutively. In the field applied below HWB, The lower SA:V the
bigger difference between demagnetization energy density and exchange energy density or the
higher SA:V the smaller the difference between them. When SA:V exceed 1,02x10 9 /m,
exchange energy density overstep demagnetization energy density. The explanation of this
phenomena can be associated with previous findings. Bharati Panighary et. al. found that
magnetiezation decreases when the size of ZnO nanorod increases [18][19] and Jianping Xu et.
al. found that surface to volume ratio (SA:V) of ZnO nanorod decreases resulting in the decrease
of surface related ferromagnetism [19][20]. While the size of nanoparticle is inversely of SA:V,so
when SA:V is high or particle is small, the exchange energy dominate otherwise demagnetization
energy is govern the magnetization [20][21].

Figure 4 :. Interplay between The profile of demagnetization energy density and exchange
energiesy density of on various different sizes of CoFeB nanowires when exposed to by 1000 ps
length of magnetic pulse length (a) 2000x50x2 nm3 (b) 2000x50x4 nm3 w = 50 nm, (cb)
2000x100x2 nm3 (d) 2000x100x4 nm3 w = 100 nm, and (ec) 2000x150x2 nm3 (f) 2000x150x4
nm3w = 150 nm.

Position and velocity of DW during magnetic pulse is active since 1.05 ns can be seen in the
figure 5. In the regime below HWB, suppose 20 mT, DW can travel up to 195-210 nm. While
DW velocities of simulated material are in the range of 195-210 m/s. DW width tend to be
constant at all material simulated with the smallest is 16.5 nm and the highest is 17 nm.
However DW motion at 70 mT applied magnetic pulse which is greater than HWB show different
patern for each width of nanowire. In 50 nm width nanowire, DW move linearly for the first 200
ps after magnetic pulse is generated, followed by an antivortex nucleation at the bottom edge
then it move to the top edge whilst go back and forth. Antivortex wall (AVW) reach at the top
edge after 200 ps move along z-axis, then AVW move along x-axis at constant velocity for 200
ps. Later AVW move along z-axis again while osscilate in x-axis. The description of the DW
motion in terms of position and velocity can be seen at picture 45. The position graph of 50 nm
width nanowire show there is a tilted line followed by a plateu, then tilted line again and a plateu
at the end. Between two adjacent plateaus or in the time interval 1.2 ns to 1.4 correspond to
metastable state where exchange energy tend to be stable and AVW is nucleated from the bottom
edge then move to upper edge whilst go back and forth. This result analogous to what have
studied by Kunz et al. [21][22] and Kunz et. al. [22][23]. Besides in 100 nm width nanowire, the
structure initially TW for the first 280 ps and move at average velocity of 200 m/s, afterward
AVW is nucleated at the bottom edge then move to the top edge. AVW then move along x-axis
at average speed of 50 m/s while oscilate paralel to x-axis. The third patern is motion in 150
width nanowire, at the begining, TW move linearly until AVW is nucleated at the the bottom
edge 200 ps after magnetic field pulse was generated. Then AVW move up to 200 nm almost
linearly at average velocity of of ????, but DW velocity slow down in the interval of 1.3 ns - 1.5
ns and 1.8 ns - 2.0 ns.

Figure 5 :. The DW motion profiles of CoFeB nanowire in terms of position and velocity (a)
width 50 nm (b) Width 100 nm (c) Width 150 nm
The Domain structure of CoFeB nanowires when they were applied by magnetic pulse below
HWB are Transverse wall (TW) and when they were applied by magnetic pulse above H WB are
Antivortex wall (AVW) as showed in Figure 6. When the injected field larger than HWB
2000x50x2 nm3 nanowire is applied to the nanowire by with magnetic pulse of 100 ps length,
AVW strart being is nucleated from the bottom edge at H=55 22 mT. This is parallel to the
patern of velocity curve shown by image 2.a - 2.f. When length of pulse is 800 ps, domain
structure of nanowire being applied by magnetic pulse less than HWB (HWB= 21 mT) is TW, then
AVW is formed at the bottom edge when H=22 mT.

Figure 6. : Domain wall structure evolution of CoFeB nanowire under influence of sub-
nanosecond magnetic pulse (a) The development of AVW as increasing field (b) The
development of AVW as time elapsed
Conclusion
The Micromagnetic simulation based on Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert (LLG) equation has been
successfully applied to CoFeB nanowire which exposed by sub-nanosecond magnetic pulse with
pulse-length between 100 to 1000 ps. It is found that the Walker Breakdown field (HWB) reached
the highest value at 100 ps pulse length, then decreased steeply until the pulse length is 400 ps.
In the longer pulse-length, the HWB decreased gradually and tend to be constant when pulse
length is 800 ps. BesidesOn the other hand, the HWB change shifting is less sensitive over the
thick variation than the width variation. We have simulated 2000 nm CoFeB nanowire of
different thickness (2 nm and 4 nm) and width (50 nm, 100 nm and 150 nm) under magnetic
pulse of different length micromagnetically. The results show that Walker field is the highest
value when 100 ps pulse length is applied then decrease sharply for the longer pulses length. H WB
tend to be constant when pulse length is longer than 700 ps. Transverse-wall structure is
conserved below the HWB in all sizes of CoFeB nanowire, while the antivortex-wall structure is
observed above the HWB. Besides, HWB change less over thick variation than width variation.
Generally, the reduction of pulse length to 100 ps has been increased the H WB value up to 400%
compared to the 1 ns pulse length. Under aplied field 100 ps pulse length the H WB is in range of
60 mT - 63 mT. While under 800 ps - 1000 ps pulse length, HWB is between 15 mT - 20 mT.
When magnetic pulse is below HWB, the structure is TW otherwise AVW. The Interplay
competition between exchange energy density and demagnetization energy density ies is are
correlated to the DW motion and wall DW structure evolution by the surface to volume
ratioSA:V of CoFeB nanowire.

References
[1] 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.
[2] 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.
[3] 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.
[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] 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.
[8] 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.
[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] M. J. Donahue and D. G. Porter, “OOMMF User’s Guide, Version 1.0,” National
Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, Interagency Report NISTIR 6376,
Sep. 1999.
[16] T. L. Gilbert, “Classics in Magnetics A Phenomenological Theory of Damping in
Ferromagnetic Materials,” IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 3443–3449, Nov. 2004.
[17] C. Bran et al., “Direct observation of transverse and vortex metastable magnetic domains
in cylindrical nanowires,” Phys. Rev. B, vol. 96, no. 12, p. 125415, Sep. 2017.
[18] B. Panigrahy, M. Aslam, D. S. Misra, M. Ghosh, and D. Bahadur, “Defect-Related
Emissions and Magnetization Properties of ZnO Nanorods,” Adv. Funct. Mater., vol. 20, no.
7, pp. 1161–1165, 2010.
[19] J. Xu et al., “Effect of surface-to-volume ratio on the optical and magnetic properties of
ZnO nanorods by hydrothermal method,” J. Alloys Compd., vol. 648, pp. 521–526, Nov.
2015.
[20] M. Kläui and C. A. F. Vaz, “Magnetization Configurations and Reversal in Small
Magnetic Elements,” in Handbook of Magnetism and Advanced Magnetic Materials,
American Cancer Society, 2007.
[21] Andrew Kunz, J. Appl. Phys., vol. 99, p. 08G107, 2006.
[22] Andrew Kunz, Eric C, Breitbach, and Andy J. Smith, “Antivortex dynamics in magnetic
nanostripes,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 105, p. 07D502, 2009.
[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] Gabriel D. Chaves-O’Flynn, Georg Wolf, Daniele Pinna, and Andrew D. Kent,
“Micromagnetic study of spin transfer switching with a spin polarization tilted out of the free
layer plane,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 117, no. 17D705, 2015.
[18] C. Bran et al., “Direct observation of transverse and vortex metastable magnetic domains
in cylindrical nanowires,” Phys. Rev. B, vol. 96, no. 12, p. 125415, Sep. 2017.
[19] B. Panigrahy, M. Aslam, D. S. Misra, M. Ghosh, and D. Bahadur, “Defect-Related
Emissions and Magnetization Properties of ZnO Nanorods,” Adv. Funct. Mater., vol. 20, no.
7, pp. 1161–1165, 2010.
[20] J. Xu et al., “Effect of surface-to-volume ratio on the optical and magnetic properties of
ZnO nanorods by hydrothermal method,” J. Alloys Compd., vol. 648, pp. 521–526, Nov.
2015.
[21] M. Kläui and C. A. F. Vaz, “Magnetization Configurations and Reversal in Small
Magnetic Elements,” in Handbook of Magnetism and Advanced Magnetic Materials,
American Cancer Society, 2007.
[22] Andrew Kunz, J. Appl. Phys., vol. 99, p. 08G107, 2006.
[23] Andrew Kunz, Eric C, Breitbach, and Andy J. Smith, “Antivortex dynamics in magnetic
nanostripes,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 105, p. 07D502, 2009.