Full text loading...
(a) Top view micrograph of device. (b) Magnetoresistance measured for the field parallel and perpendicular to the long axis of the strip. (c) Local enlarged magnetoresistance curves measured at . (d) Angular dependence of normalized switching field: Experimental data (symbols), and theoretical results based on the Kondosky model (solid line) and Stoner–Wohlfarth model (dashed line). (e) 2D mapping of the PV signal as a function of microwave frequency and applied static magnetic field at . Solid lines indicate the position of FMR.
(a) 2D mappings of dc resistance as a function of microwave power and applied static magnetic field at 0.5, 1.0, and 6.0 GHz. The background signal due to thermal heating has been removed. (b) The consistent angular dependence of normalized switching field in the presence of microwaves with different frequencies and power levels, accompanied by the theoretical results based on the Kondosky model (solid line).
(a) Switching fields as a function of microwave magnetic field . Symbols are experimental data, which follow linear relations indicated by solid lines. (b) The calculated absolute value of susceptibility and its real part and imagine part are shown as lines. The efficiency parameter (symbols) determined by linear fitting of vs are shown in symbols for comparison. (c) Deviations from linear dependence of on are found for sufficiently high . Clear saturation effects for 2.8 and 4.0 GHz appear at . The difference in the upper limits of results from the fact that the energy loss in a transmission line is strongly dependent on the microwave frequency via the skin depth. Therefore, the upper limit of at 0.5 GHz is much larger than that of at 4.0 GHz for the same output power of 24 dBm (the maximum output power at 2.8 GHz can only reach 20 dBm).
Article metrics loading...