| Literature DB >> 30591845 |
Alexander Gaul1, Daniel Emmrich2, Timo Ueltzhöffer1,3, Henning Huckfeldt1, Hatice Doğanay4, Johanna Hackl4, Muhammad Imtiaz Khan4, Daniel M Gottlob4, Gregor Hartmann1, André Beyer2, Dennis Holzinger1, Slavomír Nemšák4,5, Claus M Schneider4, Armin Gölzhäuser2, Günter Reiss6, Arno Ehresmann1.
Abstract
Background: The application of superparamagnetic particles as biomolecular transporters in microfluidic systems for lab-on-a-chip applications crucially depends on the ability to control their motion. One approach for magnetic-particle motion control is the superposition of static magnetic stray field landscapes (MFLs) with dynamically varying external fields. These MFLs may emerge from magnetic domains engineered both in shape and in their local anisotropies. Motion control of smaller beads does necessarily need smaller magnetic patterns, i.e., MFLs varying on smaller lateral scales. The achievable size limit of engineered magnetic domains depends on the magnetic patterning method and on the magnetic anisotropies of the material system. Smallest patterns are expected to be in the range of the domain wall width of the particular material system. To explore these limits a patterning technology is needed with a spatial resolution significantly smaller than the domain wall width.Entities:
Keywords: exchange bias; helium ion microscopy; ion bombardment induced magnetic patterning; magnetic domains; magnetic nanostructures
Year: 2018 PMID: 30591845 PMCID: PMC6296425 DOI: 10.3762/bjnano.9.276
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Beilstein J Nanotechnol ISSN: 2190-4286 Impact factor: 3.649
Figure 5Simulated distribution of the energy transfer by ionization per ion. The positions of layer borders are indicated by black lines. (a) Energy loss A as a function of the penetration depth z. (b) Spatial energy transfer distribution in the xz-plane with the ion beam at a lateral width of x = 0 nm and the surface position at z = 0 nm. (c) Beam diameter db(z) characterized by the 2σ value of the Gaussian electronic energy loss profile.
Figure 6Definition of . is the angle between the domain wall (DW) normal vector and the local unidirectional EB-anisotropy directions of the non-bombarded () and bombarded () parallel-stripe domains.
Figure 1Phase contrast MFM images of engineered parallel-stripe domains. Magnetic domains with antiparallel magnetization orientation have been observed at an MFM tip height of 80 nm as a function of , the angle between unidirectional anisotropy and DW normal vector, indicated in the bottom right corner of the images. The white lines are cross sections of the signal along a stripe at a y-position of 3 μm averaged over 100 nm of width. Arrows mark the local directions of the unidirectional anisotropies of the bombarded (B) and non-bombarded (NB) stripes. The red circle is highlighting the position of a Bloch point.
Figure 2XMCD signal images of engineered parallel domain stripes. Magnetic domains with antiparallel magnetization orientations have been analyzed in dependence on . Black arrows mark the directions of the set unidirectional anisotropies in bombarded (B) and non-bombarded (NB) regions. The orientation of sensitivity () is indicated by the top right black arrow. Red ellipses highlight sign inversions in the DW signal, with the corresponding Bloch points at the margins. White arrows denote cross sections shown in panels (g–i) (position increasing along arrow direction). Black solid lines in panels (g–i) represent measurements with sensitivity perpendicular to () (a–c) and red dash dotted lines those with (d–f). Note that the XMCD signal corresponds to cos α where α is the angle between and .
Figure 3Phase contrast MFM signal of domains with stepwise decreased nominal widths and hh and tt magnetization orientations. The measurement height was set to 100 nm. The white line indicates a cross section of the phase contrast signal along a stripe at a y-position of 6 μm averaged over 4 μm width. The black boxes above the measurement data highlight the position of the different areas containing set stripe patterns with widths of 5 μm, 2 μm, 1 μm, 500 nm, 200 nm and 100 nm.
Figure 4Two-dimensional engineered magnetic domain patterns. (a–d) Phase contrast MFM images in 80 nm height of engineered magnetic patterns with stepwise decreased edge length d = 10 μm (largest domain: either left-most or right-most), 7.5 μm, 5 μm, 2.5 μm, 2 μm and 1 μm. (e–h) Calculated phase contrast from the simulations in panels (i–l). Black arrows indicate the local direction of the unidirectional anisotropy in panels (a–h). (i–o) Simulated magnetization distributions from micromagnetic simulations in OOMMF. Colors depict the local xy-magnetization angle where 0° represents the initial EB direction pointing to the left, positive angles imply counterclockwise rotation. (m–o) Magnified view on the smallest domain structures from panels (i–l). Arrows indicate the direction (orientation) and relative value (length) of the local magnetic moment.