Scanning magnetic microscopy is a new methodology for mapping magnetic fields with high spatial resolution and field sensitivity. An important goal has been to develop high-performance instruments that do not require cryogenic technology due to its high cost, complexity, and limitation on sensor-to-sample distance. Here we report the development of a low-cost scanning magnetic microscope based on commercial room-temperature magnetic tunnel junction (MTJ) sensors that typically achieves spatial resolution better than 7 µ m. By comparing different bias and detection schemes, optimal performance was obtained when biasing the MTJ sensor with a modulated current at 1.0 kHz in a Wheatstone bridge configuration while using a lock-in amplifier in conjunction with a low-noise custom-made preamplifier. A precision horizontal ( x – y ) scanning stage comprising two coupled nanopositioners controls the position of the sample and a linear actuator adjusts the sensor-to-sample distance. We obtained magnetic field sensitivities better than 150 nT/Hz 1/2 between 0.1 and 10 Hz, which is a critical frequency range for scanning magnetic microscopy. This corresponds to a magnetic moment sensitivity of 10 –14 A m 2 , a factor of 100 better than achievable with typical commercial superconducting moment magnetometers. It also represents an improvement in sensitivity by a factor between 10 and 30 compared to similar scanning MTJ microscopes based on conventional bias-detection schemes. To demonstrate the capabilities of the instrument, two polished thin sections of representative geological samples were scanned along with a synthetic sample containing magnetic microparticles. The instrument is usable for a diversity of applications that require mapping of samples at room temperature to preserve magnetic properties or viability, including paleomagnetism and rock magnetism, nondestructive evaluation of materials, and biological assays.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lima et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: