Full text loading...
The panels present the TMR versus field curves for the samples (LSMO)1 − x -(CFO) x with (a) x = 0.0, (b) x = 0.1, (c) x = 0.2, (d) x = 0.3, (e) x = 0.4, and (f) x = 0.5. The arrows in each panel give the direction of the magnetic field sweeping during the measurement.
(a) Plots show the magnetization (M) versus magnetic field (H) data measured at 5 K for the samples (LSMO)1 − x -(CFO) x with x = 0.1, 0.3, and 0.5. (b) M(H) curves for the samples LSMO and CFO (inset shows the highly magnified M(H) loop for LSMO near its H C ). (c) The calculated (weighted algebraic sum of the LSMO and CFO M(H) curves) and experimentally measured M(H) curves for one composition (LSMO)0.6-(CFO)0.4.
(a) Plot shows the resultant M(H) loop, extracted by subtracting the CFO magnetization from that of the composite, for LSMO inside the LSMO-CFO composite with x = 0.4. The arrows indicate the field sweeping direction. (b) For comparison, the TMR-H plot for the sample (LSMO)0.6-(CFO)0.4 ispresented. (c) The schematic shows the origin of magnetic dipolar field (HDipolar ) and its orientation with respect to the external field (H).
The plot demonstrates the tunability of TMR peak position when the TMR-H loop was measured after exposing the x = 0.3 sample to a varying magnetic field Hpinning , from 0.1 T to 2 T (as represented) and limiting the measurement field to the corresponding Hpinning . Inset shows the tunability of TMR at 300 K, for a chosen set of Hpinning values as indicated there in.
Article metrics loading...