| Literature DB >> 26213531 |
Eun-Mi Choi1, Thomas Fix1, Ahmed Kursumovic1, Christy J Kinane2, Darío Arena3, Suman-Lata Sahonta1, Zhenxing Bi4, Jie Xiong4, Li Yan4, Jun-Sik Lee5, Haiyan Wang6, Sean Langridge2, Young-Min Kim7, Albina Y Borisevich8, Ian MacLaren9, Quentin M Ramasse10, Mark G Blamire1, Quanxi Jia4, Judith L MacManus-Driscoll1.
Abstract
Highly strained films of BiFe0.5Mn0.5O3 (BFMO) grown at very low rates by pulsed laser deposition were demonstrated to exhibit both ferrimagnetism and ferroelectricity at room temperature and above. Magnetisation measurements demonstrated ferrimagnetism (TC ∼ 600K), with a room temperature saturation moment (MS ) of up to 90 emu/cc (∼ 0.58 μB /f.u) on high quality (001) SrTiO3. X-ray magnetic circular dichroism showed that the ferrimagnetism arose from antiferromagnetically coupled Fe3+ and Mn3+. While scanning transmission electron microscope studies showed there was no long range ordering of Fe and Mn, the magnetic properties were found to be strongly dependent on the strain state in the films. The magnetism is explained to arise from one of three possible mechanisms with Bi polarization playing a key role. A signature of room temperature ferroelectricity in the films was measured by piezoresponse force microscopy and was confirmed using angular dark field scanning transmission electron microscopy. The demonstration of strain induced, high temperature multiferroism is a promising development for future spintronic and memory applications at room temperature and above.Entities:
Keywords: BiFeO3; BiMnO3; ferrimagnetism; ferroelectric; multiferroic
Year: 2014 PMID: 26213531 PMCID: PMC4511393 DOI: 10.1002/adfm.201401464
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Adv Funct Mater ISSN: 1616-301X Impact factor: 18.808
Scheme 1Summary of the target fabrication and film growth conditions explored and phases obtained.
Table of samples representative of the range of very slow growth conditions (for optimized films), as well as standard and slow growth conditions, together with saturation magnetic moment values measured and magnetic measurements performed
| Film no. | Growth rate [nm/pulse] | TS [°C] | Substrate (FWHM of | Thickness [nm] | Magnetic moment at RT and 3 kOe [emu/cc] | Measurements |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10−4 | 640 | (001)STO (0.019) | 30 | 90 | SQUID, VSM, XMCD, PNR, EELS |
| 2 | 10−4 | 640 | (001)Nb:STO (0.023) | 33 | 60 | SQUID, VSM, PFM |
| 3 | 10−4 | 640 | (001)Nb:STO (0.022) | 70 | 50 | SQUID, VSM |
| Many films | 10−1 | 600 | (001)STO | 40–300 | 0 | VSM |
| 4 | 10−2 | 650 | (001)STO (0.020) | 120 | 10 | SQUID, VSM |
| 5 | 10−2 | 650 | (001)STO | 30 | 0 | VSM |
Film5 shows a pyramidal structure of spinel Bi1-δ(Mn1-xFex)2O4 in atomic force microscopy/TEM. Only a diamagnetic background from the substrate is observed in magnetic measurement.
Figure 2Strain effect on the magnetic properties of BFMO films: a) Magnetic hysteresis (M – H) curves in the range of -5 ≤ H ≤ 5 kOe at RT with the field applied in the sample plane for Film2 (black square) and Film3 (red square). b) The relationship between c-axis lattice parameter (open squares), FWHM of ω-rocking curves (red squares) and film thickness. c) Normalized in-plane M – T curves of Film2 and Film3. The magnetic transition temperatures of Film2 and Film3 are > 600 K and ∼500 K, respectively. d) Schematic illustration for disordered BiFe0.5Mn0.5O3 structure and various combinations of B-O-B(B′) bond.
Figure 1Comparison of thin and thick BFMO films: a) X-ray diffraction (XRD) spectra (θ – 2θ scan) for Film 2, 3 and 4. b) ω-rocking curves of the (002) diffraction peaks of Film2 (30 nm thick), Film3 (60 nm thick) and Film4 (120 nm thick). c) Reciprocal space map (RSM) around the (103) reflections of Nb:STO of Film2.
Figure 3X-ray magnetic circular dichroism (XMCD) and spin polarized neutron reflectivity (PNR) for BFMO on STO (Film1): a) XMCD spectra of Film1 at the Fe L edge (lower panel) and Mn L edge (upper panel) at 300 K in total electron yield mode (TEY) after pulsing at 9.5 kOe for Film1. b) Fe (black) and Mn (red) L edge XMCD (TEY) vs applied magnetic field at 300 K for Film1. c) Spin polarized neutron reflectivity (PNR) measured for Film1 at room temperature at an in-plane saturating field of 3 kOe. The inset shows the structural and magnetic SLD profile.
Figure 4Electron energy loss spectroscopy (EELS) analysis of BFMO on STO (Film1): a) ADF STEM image of the sample area for the analysis. b–e) EELS intensity distributions of Fe L, Mn L, O K, and Ti L edges, respectively. f) Averaged profiles of the respective EELS signals across the interface (marked by solid line). g,h) Valence state maps of Mn and Fe at the part of BFMO film. The maps were obtained by EELS intensity ratios of the respective Mn and Fe L edges.
Figure 5The ferroelectric properties of BFMO on Nb:STO (Film2): a) Leakage current density vs electric field of Film2 measured at RT where the positive contact is applied to the Pt electrode. b) Amplitude and c) phase of the PFM signal as a function of bias voltage. A slight shift towards negative electric field is caused by the use of different contacts on each side (Nb:STO and Pt). d,e) PFM phase contrast scan on Film2 after -20 V writing (10 × 10 μm2), +10V rewriting (6 × 6 μm2) and –20V rewriting (2 × 2 μm2) at RT before and after 24 h, respectively.
Figure 6Polarization mapping by atom position quantification: a) Atomic resolution ADF STEM image of [100] oriented BFMO film on STO sample analyzed for polarization behavior. Inset: enlarged ADF STEM image in false color and atomic model to illustrate atom position quantification. b,c) Out-of-plane (dz) and in-plane (dy) displacement maps of B-site cations in BFMO thin film. d) Line profiles averaged over vertical rows of the maps (b – green and c-red). Dotted lines in each figure indicate the position of the interface between BFMO and STO substrate.