IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MAGNETICS, VOL. MAG-19, NO.

5 , SEPTEMBER 1983 2183

FERROMAGNETICHYSTERESIS

D.C. J i l e s and D.L. Atherton

Department of Physics
Queen's University
Kingston,Ontario K7L3N6
Canada
It was n o t u n t i l many y e a r s l a t e r that t h e i n t e r -
Abstract p r e t a t i o n of c h a n g e s i n m a g n e t i s a t i o n i n terms of
domain w a l l motion w a s g i v e n by Kersten [7,81 and
An e q u a t i o n d e s c r i b i n g t h e i n i t i a l m a g n e t i s a t i o n
curve and hysteresis loops of f e r r a n a g n e t i c materials
Becker and Doring [ 91 . The motion of domain walls
i n a f e r r m a g n e t i s impeded by t h e e x i s t e n c e of
has been derived theoretically based on a mean f i e l d
defects in the solid, which c a u s e t h e d a n a i n walls
approximation. The m u t u a li n t e r a c t i o no ft h em m e n t s
t o remainpinned t o t h e d e f e c t s u n t i l s u f f i c i e n t
i s expressed as a c o u p l i n g c o e f f i c i e n t and a r e s t r a i n i n g
energy has been provided t o break away from t h e p i n n i n g
f o r c e on t h e m o t i o n of t h e domain walls, caused by t h e
s i t e , u s u a l l y by i n c r e a s i n g t h e a p p l i e d f i e l d , a l t h o u g h
pinning of t h e walls a t d e f e c t sites, i s expressed as
a l t e r n a t i v e l y t h e samplecould be s t r e s s e d t o cause
a p i n n i n gc o e f f i c i e n t . The r e s u l t i n ge q u a t i o n of State changes in the energy required t o overcome t h e d e f e c t
f o r t h e model i s a f i r s t o r d e r l i n e a r d i f f e r e n t i a l
and henceneeded t o breakfromthepinning s i t e . The
equationincorporatingthe twoparameters and a s c a l i n g pinning ofdomain walls t h e r e f o r e p r e s e n t s a r e s t r a i n -
parameter h which r e p r e s e n t s t h e r a t i o o f t h e c o u p l i n g
i n g f o r c e which i n h i b i t s c h a n g e s i n m a g n e t i s a t i o n , a n d
t o t h e two f i e l d s H and M.
when c o n s i d e r i n g t h e a g g r e g a t e e f f e c t , b e h a v e s much as
a frictional force.
Introduction
I n t h e m a j o r i t y of a p p l i c a t i o n s of f e r r a n a g n e t i c Let the density of pinning s i t e s be n p e r u n i t
volume and t h e a v e r a g e p i n n i n g e n e r g y p e r s i t e be E
materials, t h e m a g n e t i c p r o p e r t i e s aTe most convenient- P'
ly expressed as magnetisation curves or hysteresis Then t h e t o t a l e n e r g y l o s t a g a i n s t p i n n i n g , per u n i t
volume swept o u t by a domain wall, w i l l be n.Ep , and
l o o p s .I nt h ep r e s e n tp a p e r a model of t h e h y s t e r e s i s
behaviour of a ferromagnet i s presented based on a hence
mean f i e l d a p p r o x i m a t i o n .
- =oss
dEl
n . Ep .A
The i d e a s of Maxwell [ l ]a n d Ewing [ 2 ] concerning dx
t h e m u t u a l i n t e r a c t i o n s of the magnetic moments were
a p p l i e d t o l a r g e numbersof moments and henceformulated where A i s t h e a r e a of a p a r t i c u l a r domain wall and
i n t o a mathematical theory of paramagnetism by Langevin x i s t h ed i s t a n c et h r o u g h which it i s moved. The
[31 . The methodof Langevin w a s thenused by Weiss [41 change i n magnetisation i s p r o p o r t i o n a l t o t h e volume
w i t h s l i g h t m o d i f i c a t i o n s and a p p l i e d t o groups of swept o u t by t h e moving domain w a l l , dM = A.dx , and
s t r o n g l y i n t e r a c t i n g moments whichhe c a l l e d domains. theref ore,
Although t h e Weiss t h e o r y r e q u i r e s t h e a s s u m p t i o n of
an u n r e a l i s t i c a l l y h i g h i n t e r n a l f i e l d , a n d is there-
f o r e o n l y a phenomenolcgical theory nevertheless it d
- E=l o s s
can be used as t h e b a s i s f o r a n e q u a l l y phenomenologi- dM
c a l modelof h y s t e r e s i s i n which t h e p h y s i c a l l y i n t e r -
p r e t a b l e p a r a m e t e r s may be d e t e r m i n e d e m p i r i c a l l y . where k (= nEp) i s a c o n s t a n t .
The t o t a l e n e r g y s u p p l i e d t o t h e f e r r o m a g n e t may
MutualMagnetic Interactions. The CouplingCoefficient be s p l i t i n t o two terms, t h e e n e r g y d i s s i p a t e d a g a ' i n s t
Consideringonlytheinteractions of a system of p i n n i n g ( h y s t e r e s i s loss) and t h e change i n energy
mments with the field B_ = po(M_ f 5) s u c h t h a t t h e due t o t h e change i n m a g n e t i s a t i o n of t h e s o l i d which
energy of a moment m i s E = l e a d st ot h e Langevin may be c o n s i d e r e d r e v e r s i b l e .
equation [31 f o r t h e f i e l d depgndence of the magnetisa- Under a n a p p l i e d f i e l d H t h e domain walls are
t i o n M. However Weiss [ 4 ] d i s c o v e r e dt h a tt h ef i e l d a c t e d upon by a f o r c e which t e n d s t o move them i n
experFenced by a ferromagnet could not be expressed by such a way t h a t t h e b u l k m a g n e t i s a t i o n a p p r o a c h e s
the classical gbut rather as an effective field % i t s a n h y s t e r e t i cv a l u e .I nt h ea b s e n c e of pinning
given by ge = po(H_ f ab-) .
Replacing B_ i n t h e Langevin t h i s e n e r g y i s r e v e r s i b l e a n d so
equation with B, g i v e s t h e Weiss mean f i e l d e q u a t i o n

M = Ms [cot.(
Po m_ - (E f (YE)
kT >- Po
kT

- (E + ab-1 where f (x) is the Langevin function and the parameter

- = U kT
h and a are such t h a t , h ' d n and
a
- --
a -
-
kT . from
where s o l u t i o n s of t h i s e q u a t i o n f o r v a r i o u s v a l u e s of equation (1).
t h ep a r a m e t e r sa r e shown i n f i g 1.
If there is a n y h y s t e r e s i s loss then
D m i n Wall Motion: The PinningCoefficient
Most of the early workers in ferromagnetism con-
sidered that the hysteresis properties o f t h e s e mat-
e r i a l s were due t o a kind of f r i c t i o n a l r e s i s t a n c e .
These i d e a s c a n be t r a c e d back t o Weber [ 51 and and differentiating with respect to Be g i v e s t h e
Maxwell 11 b u t seem t o havebeenduemainly to b a s i c d i f f e r e n t i a l e q u a t i o n of t h e model
Weidemann [61 .A t t h e t i m e of Wiedmann's work t h e
understanding of magnetism was a t a f a r more p r i m i t i v e
s t a t e than today IThe conceptofmagneticdomains was
unknown and he w a s concerned with "molecular magnetic
d i p o l e s " whose r o t a t i o n i n t o t h e f i e l d d i r e c t i o n was Examples f o r d i f f e r e n t v a l u e s of t h e p a r a m e t e r s
envisaged as b e i n g i n h i b i t e d by a kind of v i s c o u s are given in fig. 2 and 3 showing t h e g e n e r a t i o n of
friction .
0018-9464/83/0900-2183$01.00 0 1983 IEEE
2184

f a m i l i e s of m a j o r h y s t e r e s i s l o o p s as t h e f i e l d References
amplitude kax i s i n c r e a s e d .F u r t h e r m o r et h e model
1. Maxwell, J . C . , " E l e c t r i c i t y and Magnetism,
canbeextended t o i n c l u d e minor loops (assymmetric
Clarendon,Oxford1873.
l o o p s ) a s shown i n f i g s . 4 and 5 .
2. Ewing, J . A . , P h i l . Mag ., 5 , 205,1890.
Conclusions
3. Langevin, M . , Ann de Chem. e t Phys., 5 , 70, 1905.
A phenomenological modelof magnetic hysteresis
4. Weiss, P. J. dePhysique, 6 , 661,1907.
w a s proposed by Weiss andFreudenreich I101 and l a t e r
byPreisach [ll) whereby a ferromagnet was considered 5. Weber, W., "Abhand. d e r Kg. Sachs-Gesellschaft
t o be composed of elementary domains each ofwhich derWissens",572, 1852.
had two p o s s i b l e m a g n e t i s a t i o n states p a r a l l e l o r
6. Wiedemann, G., P h i l . Mag., 52,July1886.
antiparalleltothefield. The model was f u r t h e r
r e f i n e d by Neel [12]. I n t h i s model t h e domains of 7. Kersten, M., VroblemderTechnischerMagnetisier-
t h e model f e r r a n a g n e t c a n be c l a s s i f i e d i n t o p h a s e s ungskurve",SpringerVerlag,1938.
where a l l domains with the same o r i e n t a t i o n a r e con- Kersten, M., 'GrundlagenTheoriederFerromagnet-
8.
s i d e r e d t o belong t o onephase.This allows thermo- i s c h e r H y s t e r e s e und d e r K o e r z i t i v k r a f t " , H i r z e l ,
dynamic a n a l y s i s of t h e m a g n e t i c p r o p e r t i e s w i t h o u t
undue c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e s p a t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of
1943 .
t h e domains. 9. Becker, R . andDoring, W., "Ferromagnetismus",
The p r e s e n t model also d i s p e n s e s w i t h t h e n e e d Springer-Verlag , 1939.
f o r a knowledge of t h e s p a t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e 10. Weiss, P. andFreudenreich, J., Arch.Sci., 42,
d i f f e r e n t domain o r i e n t a t i o n s .I n s t e a d it t r e a t s 449,1916.
t h e problem as a s t a t i s t i c a l thermodynamic d i s t r i b u -
t i o n o f a l a r g e number of d o m a i n s w i t h d i f f e r e n t 11 - Preisach, F., 2. Physik, 94, 277,1935.
o r i e n t a t i o n s . It i s based on a m o d i f i c a t i o n of t h e Neel, L., J . dePhys. Rad., 5, 241, 1944-
12.
Weiss mean f i e l d model i n which t h e c h a n g e s i n mag-
n e t i s a t i o n due t o t h e motion of domain walls under
an applied field are accounted for and i n p a r t i c u l a r
the hindrance posed by pinning s i t e s i n t h e s o l i d
is taken into consideration in the final equation.

M/MS
M/MS
:.O BS 2.51 TESLA 0.8 BS -- 2.51
25. 1 k
TESLA
GAUSS
25. 1 k GAUSS
MS= 2000 kh/M US- 2000 kA/M
a= 700 kA/K a= 700 kA/M
wp = 0
io= 50

H kh/M
1 : : : : I

-10 I 10
(-125 De)
-20 20
(+SO 00)
fiQ.1

Fig 1 S o l u t i o n s of equation 1 f o rv a r i o u sv a l u e s
of t h ep a r a m e t e r s . The equation i s expressed
i nt h e form, '?-= c o t h
PIS
M+A €3
(-) - (
M+AH
a)
The s o l u t i o n s r e p r e s e n t t h e a n h y s t e r e t i c
curves.
-as 1

fig. 2

Fig. 2 S o l u t i o n s of t h e model e q u a t i o nf o rt h eg i v e n
values of the parameters.
 2185

M/MS
1.0 8s
- 25.1
" 2.51 TESLA
k GAUSS

fig. 3

-1.0 1
Fig. 3 E x p e r i m e n t a l l yd e t e r m i n e dh y s t e r e s i sl o o p for
a sample of 1% manganese s t e e l . fig. 5

ffi -.- 2.51 TESLA

2!i. 1 k GAUSS

M/W
1.0 BS -- 2.51
25.1
TESLA
k GAUSS

H kA/M
-i

/
I H kA/M

Fig. 4
-1. c

fig. L

s o l u t i o n s of t h e model e q u a t i o nf o rt h eg i v e n
v a l u e s of t h e p a r a m e t e r s .

Fig. 6
-1.

fig 6
i
s o l u t i o n s of t h em o d i f i e de q u a t i o n
minor h y s t e r s i s l o o p s .
showing