| Literature DB >> 26608230 |
Nicolas Locatelli1, Abbass Hamadeh2, Flavio Abreu Araujo3, Anatoly D Belanovsky4,5, Petr N Skirdkov4,5, Romain Lebrun1, Vladimir V Naletov1,2,6, Konstantin A Zvezdin4,5,7, Manuel Muñoz8, Julie Grollier1, Olivier Klein2, Vincent Cros1, Grégoire de Loubens2.
Abstract
Due to their nonlinear properties, spin transfer nano-oscillators can easily adapt their frequency to external stimuli. This makes them interesting model systems to study the effects of synchronization and brings some opportunities to improve their microwave characteristics in view of their applications in information and communication technologies and/or to design innovative computing architectures. So far, mutual synchronization of spin transfer nano-oscillators through propagating spinwaves and exchange coupling in a common magnetic layer has been demonstrated. Here we show that the dipolar interaction is also an efficient mechanism to synchronize neighbouring oscillators. We experimentally study a pair of vortex-based spin transfer nano-oscillators, in which mutual synchronization can be achieved despite a significant frequency mismatch between oscillators. Importantly, the coupling efficiency is controlled by the magnetic configuration of the vortices, as confirmed by an analytical model and micromagnetic simulations highlighting the physics at play in the synchronization process.Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26608230 PMCID: PMC4660301 DOI: 10.1038/srep17039
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Scheme of our coupled STNOs system.
Two spin valve nanopillars with 2R = 200 nm diameter separated by a distance L = 100 nm. Each pillar contains a NiFe(4 nm)/Cu(10 nm)/NiFe(15 nm) spin valve (NiFe = Ni81Fe19) and a vortex is present in each 15 nm NiFe layers. The current is injected in parallel into the two pillars.
Figure 2(a) Power spectrum map versus perpendicular field measured on Sample #1, in a case when vortices have opposite core polarities. The injected current through the two pillars is I = 50 mA. Insert shows evolution of frequencies versus field for the non-synchronized oscillators and their predicted linear evolution. Power spectra obtained at (b) 0.5 kOe and (c) 0.7 kOe, before (b) and after (c) synchronization is achieved.
Figure 3Power spectrum maps versus perpendicular field measured on Sample #2, in a case when vortices have opposite polarities (a) and when vortices have identical polarities (b). The injected current is I = 35 mA.
Figure 4(a) Illustration of the synchronized motion of the two auto-oscillating vortices cores, and of their net in-plane magnetizations (black arrows), for the cases of identical polarities (left) and opposite polarities (right) during one period. The sign of the associated dipolar coupling energy Wint is also given. (b) Predicted evolution of the dipolar coupling energy Wint versus part of oscillation period for identical (blue) and opposite polarities (red). The dotted lines show the average interaction energy in both cases.
Figure 5Average interaction energy versus interpillar distance extracted from micromagnetic simulations for the case of two identical synchronized oscillators with radii R = 100 nm, when vortices have identical polarities (blue line and filled squares) and opposite polarities (red line and open squares).