Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T07:44:09.253Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Magnetization on Vicinal Ferromagnetic Surfaces

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

D. Zhao ,
Feng Liu ,
D.L. Huber  and
M.G. Lagally
D. Zhao
Affiliation:
MS&E Department, University of Wisconsin-Madison, WI53706 SRC, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706
Feng Liu
Affiliation:
MS&E Department, University of Wisconsin-Madison, WI53706
D.L. Huber
Affiliation:
SRC, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706
M.G. Lagally
Affiliation:
MS&E Department, University of Wisconsin-Madison, WI53706
Get access

Abstract

Using Ising model Monte Carlo simulations, we show a strong dependence of surface magnetization on surface miscut angle. For ferromagnetic surfaces, when surface spin exchange coupling is larger than that of the bulk, the surface magnetic ordering temperature decreases, toward the bulk Curie temperature, with increasing miscut angle; when surface spin exchange coupling is smaller than that of the bulk, a crossover behavior occurs: at low temperature, the surface magnetization decreases with increasing miscut angle; at high temperature, the reverse is true.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 475: Symposium M – Magnetic Ultrathin Films, Multilayers, and Surfaces – 1997 , 1997 , 519
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Falicov, L.M. et al, J. Mater. Res. 5, 1299 (1990).Google Scholar
2. Wang, C.S., and Freeman, A.J., Phys. Rev. B 24, 4364 (1981);Google Scholar
Krakauer, H., Freeman, A.J., and Wimmer, E., Phys. Rev. B, 28, 610 (1983).Google Scholar
3. Jepsen, O., Madsen, J., and Andersen, O.K., Phys. Rev. B 26, 2790 (1982).Google Scholar
4. Liu, Feng, Press, M.R., Khanna, S.N., and Jena, P., Phys. Rev. B 39, 6914 (1989).Google Scholar
5. Landau, D.P., in Monte Carlo Methods in Statistical Physics, edited by Binder, K. (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1979), pp. 337–355.Google Scholar
6. Merikoski, J., Timonen, J., Manninen, M., and Jena, P., Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 938 (1991).Google Scholar
7. Rau, C. and Eichner, S., Phys. Rev. B 34, 6347 (1986).Google Scholar
8. Weller, D., Alvarado, S.F., Gudat, W., Schröder, K., and Campagna, M., Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 1555 (1985).Google Scholar
9. Tang, H., Weller, D., Walker, T.G., Scott, J.C., Chappert, C., Hopster, H., Pang, A.W., Dessau, D.S., and Pappas, D.P., Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 444 (1993).Google Scholar
10. Mills, D.L., Phys. Rev. B 3, 3887 (1971);Google Scholar
Binder, K. and Hohenberg, P., Phys. Rev. B, 6, 3461 (1972).Google Scholar
11. He, Y.-L. and Wang, G.-C., J. Appl. Phys. 76, 6446 (1994).Google Scholar
12. We have done extensive tests to assure that the conclusions we have reached are not affected by the finite sample size. For consistency, we choose to present all results for a sample of 20×20×20 sites.Google Scholar
13. Zhang, F., Thevuthasan, S., Scaletter, R.T., Singh, R.R., and Fadley, C.S., Phys. Rev. B 51, 12468(1995).Google Scholar
14. de Heer, W.A., Milani, P., and Châtelain, A., Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 488 (1990).Google Scholar
15. Mcllroy, D.N., Waldfried, C., Li, D., Bader, S.D., Huang, D.-J., Johnson, P.D., Sabiryanov, R.F., Jaswal, S.S., and Dowben, P.A., Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 2802 (1996).Google Scholar
16. In deriving eqn. (2), the interaction between a surface spin and bulk spin is calculated as the geometric average of those betweentwo surface spins and two bulk spins, as we did in the actual simulations. We have tested that the crossover will also appear at the extreme case when the interaction between a surface spin and a bulk spin is treated as equal to that between two bulk spins.Google Scholar