Jia-Mian Hu1, Zheng Li, Long-Qing Chen, Ce-Wen Nan. 1. Department of Materials Science and Engineering, and State Key Lab of New Ceramics and Fine Processing, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China.
Abstract
The main bottlenecks limiting the practical applications of current magnetoresistive random access memory (MRAM) technology are its low storage density and high writing energy consumption. Although a number of proposals have been reported for voltage-controlled memory device in recent years, none of them simultaneously satisfy the important device attributes: high storage capacity, low power consumption and room temperature operation. Here we present, using phase-field simulations, a simple and new pathway towards high-performance MRAMs that display significant improvements over existing MRAM technologies or proposed concepts. The proposed nanoscale MRAM device simultaneously exhibits ultrahigh storage capacity of up to 88 Gb inch(-2), ultralow power dissipation as low as 0.16 fJ per bit and room temperature high-speed operation below 10 ns.
The main bottlenecks limiting the practical applications of current magnetoresistive random access memory (MRAM) technology are its low storage density and high writing energy consumption. Although a number of proposals have been reported for voltage-controlled memory device in recent years, none of them simultaneously satisfy the important device attributes: high storage capacity, low power consumption and room temperature operation. Here we present, using phase-field simulations, a simple and new pathway towards high-performance MRAMs that display significant improvements over existing MRAM technologies or proposed concepts. The proposed nanoscale MRAM device simultaneously exhibits ultrahigh storage capacity of up to 88 Gb inch(-2), ultralow power dissipation as low as 0.16 fJ per bit and room temperature high-speed operation below 10 ns.
Magnetoresistive random access memory (MRAM), because of its moderately fast access time
and almost unlimited endurance, has offered a tantalizing application potential as
next-generation non-volatile integrated memories1. However, mass
production of MRAMs has long been hampered by their high writing energy from
Ampère-current-induced magnetic field23. This would also cause
severe cross-talk among neighbouring cells when miniaturizing the device size for higher
storage capacity. One promising solution is to develop voltage-write MRAM devices4, that is, manipulating magnetization directly using electric voltage
rather than current. Previous proposals include integrating a spin valve5
or magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ)6 unit onto a multiferroic layer (for
example, Cr2O3
(ref. 7) or BiFeO3 (ref. 8)), and more recently using ferroelectric (FE) oxide as the tunnel
barrier as in a Fe/BaTiO3/(La,Sr)MnO3
junction9 where significant voltage control of tunnel
magnetoresistance6 was realized at rather low temperatures.
Nonetheless, no existing proposals have so far achieved low voltage, high storage
density and room temperature operation all at the same time.In this study, we illustrate a simple and new approach towards ultralow
voltage-controlled MRAMs using phase-field simulations. We show that the proposed device
is capable of achieving ultralow writing energy (less than 0.16 fJ per bit), room
temperature (or even wider range) operation and high storage density (up to 88 Gb
inch−2) all at the same time, associated with reliable
thermal stability (quality factor over 40 at T=300 K) and comparable writing
speed (sub-10 ns).
Results
Ultralow voltage-controlled MRAM device structure
Figure 1a illustrates one possible layout of a memory cell
array, which builds on planar complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor (CMOS)
platforms. As in normal MRAMs, it has a typical
1-T(transistor)/1-magnetoresistive(MR) element cell architecture (Fig. 1b), where the readout is accomplished by sensing the
resistance change of the cell. However, the most remarkable feature is its ideal
zero current, gate-controlled-write process (see Methods section for the
operation time sequence), which is fast and extremely power-efficient. There are
virtually no cross-talks among neighbouring cells. It has a simple structure,
which is easier to manufacture than conventional MRAMs, due to the absence of
extra current-carrying lines. The simplicity offers a great potential for
realizing high storage capacity. The basic building block, incorporating a spin
valve or MTJ unit onto a (011)-oriented perovskite FE (for example,
lead magnesium
niobate-lead
titanate, PMN-PT)
layer (or maybe (001)-oriented rhombohedral FE layer with spontaneous
polarization along 〈111〉 directions), is shown in Figure 1c. An external electric voltage is perpendicularly
applied to the PMN-PT
layer triggered by the connecting transistor. This produces large anisotropic
in-plane piezostrains10, which would be further imparted to its
upper magnetic-free layer and induces a 90° in-plane magnetization
rotation in the latter via the strain-mediated converse magnetoelectric
coupling1112. By operating the (011)-oriented PMN-PT layer below its FE coercive field, bistable in-plane
piezostrains can be obtained, that is, the strain states can be maintained even
when the applied voltages are switched off, as demonstrated by a permanent
magnetization switching observed recently in polycrystalline Ni thin film grown on (011)
PMN-PT13. This interesting
bistable magnetization switching should bring greater design flexibility to the
present voltage-controlled MRAM devices, that is, the non-volatility can be
achieved not only by virtue of high-quality epitaxial magnetic thin films
whereby the magnetocrystalline anisotropy serves as the potential barrier3, but also in polycrystalline and/or amorphous thin films, despite
a little lower magnetoresistance ratio due to structural imperfections in the
latter.
Figure 1
High-density MRAM operating at ultralow voltage at room temperature.
(a) Array design of the electric-field-controlled MRAM device on CMOS
platforms. The space between neighbouring cells is taken as 45 nm, which is
the typical channel length of its constituent MOS transistor. (b)
Architecture of the 1-T(transistor)/1-magnetoresistive (MR) memory unit
cell, where the writing voltage is applied between Bitline (BL)2 and
Plateline (PL) controlled by Wordline (WL) connecting to the gate of the
transistor. (c) Schematic of the basic building block, where a spin
valve or magnetic tunnel junction is integrated onto a PMN-PT layer, upon the application of a
perpendicular voltage bias controlled by the transistor. (From top to
bottom): antiferromagnetic pinning layer, a synthetic antiferromagnetic
tri-layer with a pinned layer and a reference layer separated by ultrathin
non-magnetic spacer, tunnelling barrier/non-magnetic metallic layer, the
magnetic-free layer, ferroelectric layer, and the bottom electrode. The
arrows in the MR element denote the magnetization orientations.
Compared with previous MRAM proposals789, the present
voltage-write MRAM device is actuated at an ultralow voltage, as discussed
below. Second, the strain-mediated magnetoelectric coupling offers a
straightforward way to electrically manipulate the magnetization at room
temperature, whereas the promising Fe/BaTiO3/(La,Sr)MnO3 junction9 is limited to low temperature. Moreover, our proposed
voltage-write MRAM device has a much wider operation temperature range than the
voltage-controlled MRAM that uses Cr2O3 with its Néel
temperature (TN~307 K) close to room
temperature7. Third, the perpendicular writing voltage bias
(Fig. 1c) makes it easy to integrate it with existing
CMOS platforms (Fig. 1a) to fabricate nanoscale
high-density memory devices. In contrast, multiferroic BiFeO3-based
MRAMs demonstrated so far8 require an in-plane actuation electric
field. Such a transverse actuation voltage along the in-plane direction usually
resorts to an interdigitized transducer patterning, which is typically of a
micron size14, and intrinsically prohibits high storage capacity.
This is also the case for the voltage-controlled MRAM using (001)-oriented FE
layer151617.
Working and design principles of the device
For illustration, we perform phase-field simulations of this
electric-field-controlled MRAM device by choosing a (001) Ni film as the free layer. A spin valve
comprising a synthetic antiferromagnetic layer (Fig. 1c)
is considered as the upper MR element while an MTJ is also available. An initial
uniform [010] magnetization is assumed for the Ni-free layer, which is exchange
coupled to its upper reference layer. This direction can be set by annealing the
device in a magnetic field. As described above, a perpendicular electric field
E is applied to the bottom (011) PMN-PT
layer to generate the anisotropic in-plane piezostrains13,
subsequently inducing the in-plane magnetization rotation. By solving the
Landau–Lifshitz—Gilbert (LLG) equation, both the
macroscopic magnetization states and microscopic magnetic domain structure can
be obtained (Methods section). We also performed a preliminary simulation to
study the electric-field-induced magnetization switching in Ni/PMN-PT
bilayer instead of the whole device. The simulation results agree well with
corresponding experimental results13 (Supplementary Fig. S1 and Supplementary Note 1), demonstrating that
this micromagnetic phase-field approach is valid.By further introducing the dipole coupling between the Ni-free layer and its
upper reference layer (equation (4) in Methods section),
the thickness-dependent E-induced magnetization switching in the Ni-free
layers are plotted in Figure 2a. As shown, bistable
magnetization states are exhibited at E=0, for example,
m=0.9538 and 0.0364 for the
64×64×35 nm3 Ni-free layer, corresponding to a
magnetization rotation of about 70°. This is also directly illustrated
by their magnetic vector diagrams shown in Figure 2b.
Moreover, the magnetization–E curves become gradually flatter
with the film thickness decreasing from 35 to 5 nm, along with a small increase
in the maximum magnetization rotation around 5°. This can be attributed
to the suppression of the out-of-plane magnetization component due to enhanced
demagnetization in thinner magnetic thin films, which would in turn facilitate
the in-plane magnetization rotation. The larger magnetization rotation further
leads to a broader resistance change of the spin valve, as the device resistance
is determined by the relative magnetization alignment, analytically expressed
as15,
Figure 2
Thickness-dependent switching behaviour.
(a) Electric-field-induced magnetization rotation in the Ni-free
layers with thicknesses of 35 nm (squares), 15 nm (circles) and 5 nm
(triangles), respectively. m indicates the the
normalized magnetization in the in-plane [100] direction. The lateral size
(length and width) is set as 64 nm. (b) Vector diagrams of the
bistable magnetization distributions at E=0, that is,
m=0.9538 (left) and 0.0364 (right), in the
64×64×35 nm3 Ni-free layer. (colour bar)
mz indicates the normalized magnetization in the
out-of-plane [001] direction. (c) Hysteric loops of relative device
resistance change upon the perpendicular electric fields applied to the
(011) PMN-PT layer, accompanied with the
magnetization switching in the Ni-free layers with thicknesses of 35 nm
(squares), 15 nm (circles) and 5 nm (triangles), respectively.
Here R0 denotes the device resistance with parallel
magnetization configuration in the reference and free layer, and
RMR the maximum magnetoresistance ratio, that is, the
relative device resistance change between the parallel and antiparallel
magnetization alignments. For illustration, RMR is taken as 7%
for a normal spin valve18 with giant magnetoresistance effect.
Corresponding to the greater magnetization switching, increased maximum
resistance changes are exhibited as indicated in Figure
2c. This may suggest the first design principle of such voltage-write
MRAM device: the thinner, the better. However, growing ultrathin films requires
more sophisticated processing control. Besides, the interface magnetic
anisotropy contribution may lead to additional effect on the magnetization
switching19, especially in ultrathin (several monolayers)
films20, but is not considered herein regarding the robust
magnetoelastic coupling of Ni
as well as the large piezoelectric response of PMN-PT, which should in principle produce a large
strain-mediated magnetoelectric response19. Nonetheless, based on
the results in Figure 2, 5 nm could be a well-compromised
thickness for metallic Ni-free layer deposited on the PMN-PT. In particular, the actuation electric field required for
the MRAM device is ultralow, that is, |E|<0.2 V
μm−1 (Fig.
2c).As small lateral size of the spin valve is highly desirable for pursuing high
storage density, we examine the lateral size effect of the free layer on the
E-induced magnetization switching while fixing the film thickness at
5 nm. As seen from Figure 3a, a square-shaped
magnetization−E loop is exhibited even when the lateral
size reduces to 32 nm, and hence it can be used for bistable memory
implementation. This naturally leads to the second design principle of this
E-controlled MRAM device: the smaller, the better. However, it cannot
be considered as a generalized conclusion, as the complex magnetization
distribution near the lateral edges would, to some extent, hamper the in-plane
magnetization rotation when the lateral sizes are shrunken. This is evidenced by
a moderate reduction of the maximal magnetization rotation when the lateral size
decreases from 64 to 32 nm (Fig. 3a). One may refer to the
magnetic vector diagrams in Figure 3b to compare the
different magnetization distributions near the square edges. In addition, the
deterioration of thermal stability with reduced free layer volume is another
issue that will be discussed below. On the other hand, for the free layers with
lateral size larger than 128 nm, the E-induced in-plane magnetization
rotation would be significantly cancelled out by the presence of multi-domains
(see the corresponding magnetic vector diagram in Fig. 3b)
driven by the demagnetization field in the lateral direction, and thus leads to
much smaller relative resistance changes, as indicated in Figure
3c. It should be noted that the magnetization–resistance
relationship in multi-domain-free layers might not exactly be described by equation (1), as different regions of magnetizations
(namely, the magnetic domains) could separately contribute to the resistance
change. Nevertheless, it is still rational to believe that the multi-domain-free
layer generally shows a smaller maximum resistance change than its single-domain
counterpart, except for those with very narrow lateral sizes. The latter will
also hamper the magnetization switching and the resultant resistance change as
discussed above. Thus, the Ni-free layer with a size of
64×64×5 nm3 is likely a good choice for the
experimental demonstration of such voltage-actuated MRAM device due to both
large resistance change and thermal stability factor (see Figs
3c and 4).
Figure 3
Lateral size-dependent switching behaviour.
(a) Electric-field-induced magnetization rotation in Ni layers with lateral sizes (length
and width) of 32 nm (squares), 64 nm (circles), 128 nm (up triangles) and
192 nm (down triangles), respectively. m indicates
the normalized magnetization in the in-plane [100] direction. The free layer
thickness is set as 5 nm. (b) Magnetic vector diagrams of the 5 nm
Ni-free layers with lateral sizes of (from left to right) 32, 64, 128 and
192 nm, where m=0.9032, 0.9638, 0.9253 and 0.4014,
respectively. (colour bar) mz denotes the out-of-plane
normalized magnetization component. As shown, the optimized lateral size
cannot be too big or too small, otherwise the magnetization switching would
be hampered either by formation of multi-domains or the enhanced lateral
demagnetization. (c) Hysteric loops of relative device resistance
change versus the applied electric field, accompanied with the magnetization
switching in the Ni-free layers with lateral sizes of 32 nm (squares), 64 nm
(circles), 128 nm (up triangles) and 192 nm (down triangles),
respectively.
Figure 4
Device thermal stability and maximum resistance change.
The thermal stability factor (at T=300 K) and maximum resistance
change of the present voltage-controlled MRAM device as a function of the
lateral size (length and width) of its Ni-free layer. The free layer
thickness is set as 5 nm. The dashed line shows the minimum thermal
stability requirement for a reliable non-volatility of the MRAM device.
The device thermal stability and power consumption
The thermal stability factor is defined as F/kBT,
where F=fbarrierV is the
energy barrier that separates the two stable magnetization states
(V denotes the volume of the free layer,
kB the Boltzmann constant and T the temperature set
as 300 K). To ensure a reliable non-volatility, a thermal stability factor of
higher than 40 is normally required3. While common MRAMs rely on
the intrinsic magnetic anisotropy energy (for example, the magnetocrystalline
anisotropy) to retain the magnetization state, the energy barrier mostly results
from the extrinsic elastic strain stimuli in the present proposal, which
eliminates the specific crystal structure315 requirements for
the free layer and offers more design flexibility. The potential barrier energy
fbarrier can be estimated by calculating the free energy
difference between the two stable magnetization states at E=0. Similarly,
fixing the film thickness to 5 nm, the lateral size dependence of the thermal
stability factor is given in Figure 4, with their
corresponding relative resistance changes shown for comparison. From the plots,
it can be clearly seen that the free layer with lateral sizes from 64 to 160 nm
exhibit both sufficient thermal stability and comparable resistance change,
although the latter two attributes appear not possible to be simultaneously
optimized. Nevertheless, the results indicate that Ni films with lateral sizes of between
64 and 160 nm, and thickness of about 5 nm, should be suitable for application
as the free layers of such novel MRAM devices. If further reducing the lateral
size for higher storage density, then efforts should be made to compensate the
concomitant loss of the thermal stability, as well as the reduction of the
maximum resistance change due to the hampered in-plane magnetization
rotation.As mentioned at the beginning, the ultralow power consumption, resulting from
both the inherent energy efficiency of electrical switching21 and
its ultralow actuation voltage, is the most advantageous quality of the present
ultralow electric-voltage-controlled MRAM, far superior to any other existing or
emerging MRAM technologies. Figure 2c shows such a small
E writing window from about −0.13 to 0.1 V
μm−1. That means, if using a
2-μm PMN-PT
thick layer, an ultralow voltage of about 0.26 V would be sufficient for the
device operation. This operation voltage is much lower than those reported
previously in the proof-of-concept experiments1422. For further
illustration, we estimate the writing energy as1
½PSV in terms of charging the FE
capacitor, where P, S and V denote the
remnant polarization, electrode area and the operation voltage, respectively. In
this case, an extremely low writing energy of around 0.16 fJ per bit can in
principle be obtained by taking P=30 μC
cm−2 (ref. 13),
S=0.0041 μm2 (for a 64×64
nm2 free layer electrode) and V=0.26 V. This energy
consumption is drastically lower than 70 pJ per bit for conventional MRAMs1, and even orders of magnitude lower than 0.1 pJ in the
state-of-the-art spin-transfer-torque (STT) MRAM technology23,
which is deemed as the most reachable solution for next-generation MRAMs, and is
currently under intense industrial interests.As this low actuation electric field remains below the FE coercive field of the
PMN-PT (approximately ±0.2 V
μm−1 (ref. 13)), the fatigue problem that FEs (including multiferroic
BiFeO3) typically suffer from repetitive polarization reversal
can also be greatly relieved. This should allow an effective alleviation of the
energy loss and improvement of device reliability.Furthermore, the dielectric breakdown vulnerability of the present device can be
avoided as the write operating voltage, far below the dielectric breakdown
threshold of the PMN-PT
(>10 V μm−1 (ref. 24)), is applied only on the PMN-PT
layer. This structural feature of the present device is different from that in
STT-RAMs, where the write and read current flow across the whole device and
share the same tunnel.
Writing speed and storage capacity
Another important performance attribute of the voltage-controlled MRAM device is
the writing speed, which typically takes less than 10 nanoseconds (ns) or with a
possibility of sub-1 ns (see the write-time estimation and corresponding
electric-field-induced dynamic magnetization switching in the Methods section).
This operation speed is significantly higher than conventional magnetic-write
MRAM (around 20 ns (ref. 1)), while comparable with
the STT-MRAM devices (~3 to 10 ns (ref. 25)). Finally, the fully gate voltage-controlled operation allows
a good compatibility of the present device with current CMOS platforms, opening
up possibilities for ultrahigh densities. For instance, assuming a typical
channel length of 45 nm for the bottom transistor (Fig.
1a) and the lateral size of 64 nm for the upper ME spin valve (or
MTJ)/PMN-PT heterostructure, a storage density of
around 88 Gb inch−2 can in principle be realized,
challenging traditional NAND Flash memory on mass data storage applications26. For comparison, the properties obtained in the present device
prototype are summarized in Table 1, including several
other existing room temperature non-volatile memory technologies.
Table 1
Comparison of room temperature non-volatile memory technologies.
Flash-NAND
FeRAM
MRAM
STT-RAM
SME-RAM
Storage capacity
>1 Gb
>10 Mb
16 Mb*
1 Gb†
>>1 Gb
Write time
1 ms
10 ns
20 ns
3–10 ns
<10 ns
Read time
50 ns
45 ns
10 ns
10 ns
10 ns
Write energy (pJ per bit)
>0.01
0.03
70
0.1
1.6×10−4
The proposed memory device prototype is denoted as the
strain-mediated magnetoelectric random access memory
(SME-RAM), where the estimated storage capacity, write time
and write energy are summarized below. The read time of the
present SME-RAM is assumed to be the same as conventional
MRAM and STT-RAM devices, due to their similar
magnetoresistive readout processes. FeRAM indicates the
ferroelectric random access memory. Performance parameters
of Flash-NAND, FeRAM, MRAM and STT-RAM are taken from
commercial products unless stated otherwise. Data are
adopted from refs 1, 23, 25,
41, 45, 46.
*Can be further scaled down and would possibly reach 64 MB or
128 MB (ref. 1).
†The 1-Gb STT-RAM has been
demonstrated in research laboratories and could be
industrialized in the near future (ref. 46).
Discussion
We have demonstrated a simple and new approach towards ultralow voltage-controlled
MRAMs. The present voltage-controlled MRAM device can be fabricated on CMOS
platforms, wherein the basic building block comprises of a spin valve or MTJ MR
element grown on a (011) PMN-PT layer.
Without necessarily requiring epitaxial growth of the magnetically free layer,
simply utilizing a specifically engineered FE layer with voltage-induced bistable
anisotropic in-plane piezostrains, one can realize most important attributes
required by modern MRAM technology at the same time. Therefore, we expect our
finding will stimulate future experimental and engineering efforts on developing
such an electric-voltage-controlled device, which has superiorities over the
previous device paradigms7891422. The present device proposal
represents a simple pathway to realizing high-density, low voltage-controlled MRAM
applications at room temperature, either as standalone/embedded memories or logic
circuits.
Methods
Operation time sequence of the device
As seen in Figure 5a, the write voltage bias is applied
between the Bitline (BL2) and the plateline (PL), which is controlled by the
Wordline (WL) connecting to the gate of transistor. Corresponding writing time
sequence is shown in Figure 5b. While to read, the sensing
current (Isen) travels through the transistor and the MR
element from BL2 to BL1, to generate the high and low output voltages, that
is,
Figure 5
Device operation illustration.
(a) Cell array image of the voltage-controlled MRAM device. BL, PL and
WL stands for bitline, plateline and wordline, respectively. (b)
Illustration of writing time sequence. The state '1' is written at the time
stage 't2', where the voltages in BL2 and PL are in high
and low level, respectively. Writing a '0' (corresponding to the dash dot
line in the row BL2) is accomplished at the time stage
't3' in a similar manner, but the BL2 and PL are in
reverse polarities.
where RMOS is the resistance of the transistor;
Rhigh and Rlow denote the bistable
resistance states of the MR element resulting from the voltage-induced
magnetization switching in the magnetic-free layer. The reference current
(Iref) is set to a specific value so that the
corresponding reference voltage (VR) is ideally between
Vhigh and Vlow.
Introduction to the phase-field method
In the phase-field approach, the magnetic domain structure is described by the
spatial distribution of the local magnetization vectors
M=Mm=M
(m, m,
m), where M and
m (i=x, y, z)
represent the saturation magnetization and the direction cosine, respectively.
The temporal evolution of the magnetization configuration and thus the domain
structure is governed by the LLG equation, that is,where γ0 and α are the gyromagnetic
ratio and the damping constant, respectively, and H the
effective magnetic field, given as Here
μ0 denotes the vacuum permeability, and
Ftot is the total free energy of the magnetic-free
layer,where Fmc, Fms, Fex and
Felas are the magnetocrystalline anisotropy,
magnetostatic, magnetic exchange and elastic energy, respectively.
Fdip describes the ferromagnetic-type dipole coupling
between the free layer and its upper reference layer, given as for an initial [010] magnetization;
Hdip is the effective interlayer dipole coupling field
taken as 40 Oe for illustration (see more discussions on the influence of
Hdip in Supplementary Fig. S2 and Supplementary Note 2). The magnetostatic energy Fms
can be written as,where H denotes the stray field arising from the long-range
magnetization interactions in the system, given as being the average magnetization field). To incorporate the influence
of the specific sample geometric size, a finite-size magnetostatic boundary
condition is used for obtaining Fms, with the demagnetization
factors N in the magnetostatic energy calculated numerically27. The mathematical expressions of Fmc and
Fex for cubic ferromagnets are the same as those given in
refs 11 and 27.The elastic energy Felas can be written as,where e is elastic strain,
c the elastic stiffness tensor and
ɛ the total strain that can be
represented as the sum of homogenous and heterogeneous strains following
Khachaturyan's mesoscopic elastic theory28,The heterogeneous strain η is defined in
such a way so that , and the homogeneous strain
describes the macroscopic shape change of
the magnetic thin film. Specifically, and
, namely, the homogeneous strains along
the two in-plane crystal axes, can be expressed as,Here and denote the
contribution from the piezoelectric transformation of the bottom PMN-PT layer, which we directly use the experimental data
reported in ref.13 as the input. We also assume
that the PMN-PT layer is much thicker than the upper
magnetic film to ensure a full strain transfer29.
ɛ0 is the biaxial residual strain resulting from
the lattice and/or thermal mismatch. For a polycrystalline magnetic film
deposited at room temperature, ɛ0 almost equals
zero; while for an epitaxial film, it depends on the specific substrate as well
as the growth condition30. Note that
ɛ0 should exert no influence on the in-plane
magnetization rotation (Supplementary
Fig. S3 and Supplementary Note
3), although it does have effects on the specific magnetic domain
structure in the free layer31. Here it is taken as
−0.5% for illustration. represents the
stress-free strain describing the stress-free deformation of a cubic ferromagnet
associated with the local magnetization change,where λ100 and λ111 are
the magnetostrictive constants. By further considering a mixed boundary
condition for the film-substrate system32,
Felas can be calculated by combining Khachaturyan's
theory28 with the Stroh's formalism of anisotropic
elasticity33.The temporal evolution of the local magnetization and thus the domain structures
are obtained by numerically solving the LLG equation using the semi-implicit
Fourier spectral method34. To illustrate the Ni-free layer with a
size of 64×64×35 nm3, the magnetic film is
discretized into a three-dimensional array of cubic cells of
64Δx×64Δy×35Δz,
with the grid size Δx=Δy=Δz=1
nm in real space accordingly. A three-dimensional finite-size boundary condition
is considered to calculate the geometric-size-related magnetostatic anisotropy
energy as mentioned above. By varying the simulation zone size and/or the grid
size, magnetic-free layers with different geometric sizes (for example,
thickness and lateral size, see Figs 2 and 3) can then be treated. Each simulation starts with an initial [010]
magnetization distribution accordingly and proceeds for long enough time to
ensure a stabilized magnetization distribution, with a normalized time step
Δτ=0.01. The Landau, elastic and magnetic
parameters used for simulation are described in the literature1135.
Write-time estimation
Such electric-field-controlled MRAM device can at least allow a sub-10 ns
writing, which is much faster than conventional magnetic-field-switched MRAM
(about 20 ns (ref. 1)) and comparable with practical
STT-MRAM devices (about 3–10 ns (ref. 25). First, based on LLG equation, the average magnetization
switching time is estimated as about 0.95 ns for magnetic-free layers with
various lateral sizes (the thickness is set as 5 nm likewise), typically allows
a GHz operation frequency. The details about such electric-field-induced dynamic
switching will be shown below.The dynamic parameters used in LLG equation are:Damping constant: α=0.038 (experimental measurement for 5 nm
Ni films36).Gyromagnetic ratio:
γ=−2.42×105
m (A s)−1 (using g=2.21 from ref. 36).However, there are other factors that can affect practical writing speed such as
the time the PMN-PT layer produces the piezostrain (that
is, the electric polarization switching time with the associated strain), and
the time for the strain transfer across the Ni/PMN-PT
interface (we tentatively do not consider the influence of buffer layer that
might be required for epitaxial growth) and getting its mechanical
equilibrium.For the first part, note that polarization normally switches much faster than the
magnetization (the switching time is usually below 10 ns (ref. 37). That is also the reason why a FeRAM takes less time
to write information compared with common MRAMs (see Table
1). Moreover, it is worth noting that there is no full polarization
reversal in the PMN-PT
layer in our case, as the actuation electric field (−0.13 to 0.1 V
μm−1) remains below the FE coercive
field (approximately ±0.2 V μm−1
(ref. 13)), which further reduces the switching
time. Also for a given polarization distribution, one can assume that the FE
layer undergoes piezoelectric deformation and reaches its mechanical equilibrium
almost instantaneously, as the mechanical relaxation of an elastic field is even
faster than that of a polarization38.Moreover, it should also be noted that although higher actuation electric field
bias could lead to faster electric polarization switching in the FE layer to
some extent, the overall device switching speed would not be significantly
enhanced due to the inherent piezostrain-induced magnetization switching.
Specifically, the maximal remnant piezostrain at zero electric field
(E=0) almost remains stable when the write E-field is increased
from 0.13 to 0.2 V μm−1 (ref. 13). This feature is quite different from normal STT-RAM
devices where faster switching could be facilitated by imposing higher operating
voltage, while unavoidably exhibits higher vulnerability to dielectric break
down as well.As for the pizeostrain transfer time τ, we give a rough
estimation on this short time span39,where d1 and d2 are the thicknesses; and
v1 and v2 the velocity of sound in the
FM and FE layer, respectively. For illustration, assuming d1=5
nm (the Ni film thickness),
d2=2 μm for the PMN-PT layer and
v1≈v2=3,000 m
s−1 (it is well known that the speed of sound
varies from substance to substance, but generally it travels very fast in
solids, say, about 5,120 m s−1 in iron at 293 K), then we have
τ≈0.67 ns. Note that we have considered the
stress wave that covered the whole device system, but the effective mechanical
coupling is more likely to be confined in a closer vicinity of the interface,
which means the strain transfer time could be even shorter. Overall, although
the practical strain mediation situation could be far more complex than the
simple model described above (such as the influences of the mechanical resonance
frequency, and the Resistor-Capacitor time constant associated with charging the
FE capacitor, see related discussion in ref. 40),
it is rational to consider the stress to be applied almost instantaneously to
the FM film40.Thus in total, the theoretical writing time of such electric-field-controlled
MRAM device can be estimated to be about 1.62 (=0.95+0.67) ns, well within a 10
ns range required by future applicable MRAM technologies41. This
result is comparable with the results reported for other related device
proposals with similar strain-mediated electric-write procedure, such as
multiferroic logic4042 or nanowire memory43
devices, which use either Terfenol-D40 (Ni (ref. 42)) particles, or FeGa (ref. 43)
nanowires attached to a commercial Pb(Zr,Ti)O3 layer, all with an
estimated operation time less than 10 ns.
The combination of phase-field model with micromagnetic simulation here in this
paper allows us to go beyond the previous macro-spin model used for
single-domain magnets4042. Indeed, the free layer does not
always behave as a single macro-spin when the lateral sizes exceed a certain
critical value (possibly around 128 nm, see Fig. 3b). For
illustration, Figure 6a shows the time-dependent
electric-field-induced magnetization switching processes in
64×64×5 and 224×224×5 nm3
Ni-free layers, where the films are in single-domain and multi-domain states,
respectively. As seen, the dynamic magnetization switching process exhibit a
typical processional rotation feature (see the fluctuations of
m in Fig. 6a after
t=0.77 ns, governed by LLG equation) in single-domain
64×64×5 nm3
Ni films. By contrast, the
224×224×5 nm3
Ni films present a much
flatter magnetization switching by virtue of domain-wall motion (see the
illustrations in Fig. 6b), which is common in multi-domain
magnetic thin films44. Note that the normalized magnetization
m does not eventually turn to unity due to the
cancelling out of the magnetic vectors along the [100] direction.
(a) Time-dependent electric-field-induced magnetization switching in
64×64×5 (squares) and 224×224×5
nm3 (circles) Ni-free layers, corresponding to the higher
remnant m at E=0 (see Fig.
3a). For simplicity, the piezoelectric stress is considered to be
applied to the Ni film
instantaneously. (b) Snapshots of the magnetization vector diagrams
in 64×64×5 nm3 (top) and
224×224×5 nm3 (bottom) Ni-free layers at
(from left to right) t=0.13, 0.64, 0.90 and 1.02 ns, respectively.
The arrows and the dashed curves are the eye guides for the coherent
magnetization rotation and domain-wall motion processes in single-domain
64×64×5 and multi-domain 224×224×5
Ni films,
respectively.
Author contributions
J.M.H. conceived and performed the simulations. J.M.H., Z.L. and C.W.N. designed the
device structure. C.W.N. and L.Q.C. directed the work. J.M.H., L.Q.C. and C.W.N.
co-wrote the paper. All contributed to the analysis.
Additional information
How to cite this article: Hu, J.-M. et al. High-density
magnetoresistive random access memory operating at ultralow voltage at room
temperature. Nat. Commun. 2:553 doi: 10.1038/ncomms1564 (2011).
Authors: S A Wolf; D D Awschalom; R A Buhrman; J M Daughton; S von Molnár; M L Roukes; A Y Chtchelkanova; D M Treger Journal: Science Date: 2001-11-16 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: S Ikeda; K Miura; H Yamamoto; K Mizunuma; H D Gan; M Endo; S Kanai; J Hayakawa; F Matsukura; H Ohno Journal: Nat Mater Date: 2010-07-11 Impact factor: 43.841
Authors: T Maruyama; Y Shiota; T Nozaki; K Ohta; N Toda; M Mizuguchi; A A Tulapurkar; T Shinjo; M Shiraishi; S Mizukami; Y Ando; Y Suzuki Journal: Nat Nanotechnol Date: 2009-01-18 Impact factor: 39.213
Authors: J-M Hu; L Shu; Z Li; Y Gao; Y Shen; Y H Lin; L Q Chen; C W Nan Journal: Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci Date: 2014-01-13 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: D E Parkes; L R Shelford; P Wadley; V Holý; M Wang; A T Hindmarch; G van der Laan; R P Campion; K W Edmonds; S A Cavill; A W Rushforth Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2013 Impact factor: 4.379