Domain wall motion in vacuum-deposited 1200 Å- 2000 Å-thick NiFe and NiFeCo films, excited by a 0.5 ns rise time/200 ns fall time hard-axis pulse field with an easy-axis dc field, is examined with regard to coercive force, easy-axis bias, and low-frequency creep results. Both NiFe and NiFeCo films have the same threshold field characteristics despite large differences in properties. The magnitude of the hard-axis pulse field necessary to cause creep increases with increasing difference between wall coercive force and easy-axis bias. Furthermore, the average creep displacement, for a given hard-axis pulse field magnitude, versus the easy-axis bias field normalized by wall coercive force results in almost identical curves for both NiFe and NiFeCo films except for a shift related to the threshold field. This result is consistent with previous low-frequency creep data and implies that the basic mechanism of low- and high-frequency creep may be closely related. The direction of the basic wall motion depends on the spin polarity in the wall and the durection of the hard-axis pulsed field. Motion in a direction opposite to the basic motion may be produced by an esay-axis bias field of sufficient magnitude but less than then wall coercive force, which is a new and significant result. A theory based on the dynamic torque equation and nonconservative spring coercive force model has been developed to explain the high-frequency creep phenomenon. This theory qualitatively predicts the observed experimental results very well.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chow et al. (1974) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: