Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
ABSTRACT
This review on magnetic force microscopy does not provide an exhaustive overview of the past accomplishments of the method but rather discusses the present
state of the art. Magnetic force microscopy is a special mode of noncontact operation of the scanning force microscope. This mode is realized by employing
suitable probes and utilizing their specific dynamic properties. The particular
material composition of the probes and the dynamic mode of their operation
are discussed in detail. The interpretation of images acquired by magnetic force
microscopy requires some basic knowledge about the specific near-field magnetostatic interaction between probe and sample. The general magnetostatics as
well as convenient simplifications of the general theory, which often can be used
in practice, are summarized. Applications of magnetic force microscopy in the
magnetic recording industry and in the fundamental research on magnetic materials are discussed in terms of representative examples. An important aspect for
any kind of microscopy is the ultimately achievable spatial resolution and inherent restrictions in the application of the method. Both aspects are considered, and
resulting prospects for future methodical improvements are given.
INTRODUCTION
Magnetic force microscopy (MFM) is a straightforward special mode of operation of the noncontact scanning force microscope. Shortly after the invention of
the atomic force microscope it was recognized that detection of magnetostatic
interactions at a local scale was possible by equipping the force microscope
with a ferromagnetic probe, which then could be raster-scanned across any
ferromagnetic sample. The near-field magnetostatic interaction for a typical
probe-sample configuration turns out to be fairly strong and largely independent
53
0084-6600/99/0801-0053$08.00
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
54
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
HARTMANN
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
55
the probe. This approach is, however, not preferred in reality, because a far more
sensitive detection can be realized by utilizing the dynamic properties of the
probe. An obvious characteristic describing part of these dynamic properties
is the resonant frequency of the cantilever given by
r
c
0 =
,
1.
m
with its spring constant c and its effective mass m. In order to vibrate the probe,
the cantilever may be attached to a bimorph piezoelectric plate. Alternatively,
a piezoelectric actuator can be used to excite the sample. In some applications
it is possible to externally modulate the long-range probe-sample interaction,
which also results in cantilever oscillation. The latter possibility is particularly relevant if magnetic interactions are caused by electrical driving currents.
The noncontact mode of operation involving sinusoidal excitation is frequently
called the dynamic or ac mode.
In contrast to the detection of quasistatic forces, the response of the cantilever in the dynamic mode is more complex and deserves some discussion.
If the cantilever is excited sinusoidally at its clamped end with a frequency
and an amplitude 0 , the probe tip likewise oscillates sinusoidally with a
certain amplitude , exhibiting a phase shift with respect to the drive signal
applied to the piezoelectric actuator. The deflection sensor of the force microscope monitors the motion of the probe tip provided that its bandwidth is large
enough. The latter requirement clearly favors optical deflection sensors. The
equation of motion describing the output from the cantilever sensor is given
by
0 d
2d
+ 02 (d d0 ) = 0 0 cos(t),
+
t 2
Q t
2.
where d0 is the probe-sample distance at zero oscillation amplitude and d(t) the
instantaneous probe-sample separation. Q, apart from the intrinsic properties of
the cantilever, which are the lumped effective mass and the resonant frequency,
is determined by the damping factor :
Q=
m0
,
2
3.
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
QC: KKK/arun
15:45
56
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
HARTMANN
UHV. After the usual building-up, Equation 2 leads to the steady-state solution
d(t) = d0 + cos(t + )
4.
for the forced oscillator. The amplitude of the probes oscillation is given by
0 02
.
2
2 02 + 4 2 2
= q
5.
The phase shift between this oscillation and the excitation signal amounts to
= arctan
2
.
02
6.
The above simplified formalism is based on the assumption that the oscillation
amplitude is sufficiently small in comparison with the length of the cantilever.
Obviously, the results derived so far describe only free cantilever oscillations,
e.g. oscillations at the absence of any probe-sample interaction. This means d0
is still so large that no influence of the sample on the probes oscillation can be
detected. If d0 is now decreased such that a force F affects the motion of the
cantilever then a term F/m has to be added to the left-hand side of Equation 2.
In order to consider almost all interactions that could be relevant in MFM, one
has to assume
d
,
7.
F = F d,
t
which, apart from the static interaction, also accounts for dynamic forces. An
example of the dynamic forces is eddy currents (7). Because F covers probesample interactions of various types, in particular spatially nonlinear ones; the
d(t) curves monitored by the deflection sensor and found according to Equation
2 may represent anharmonic oscillations. If, however, F(d ) can be substituted
by a first-order Taylor series approximation for 0 d0 , then the force microscope detects the compliance or vertical component of the force gradient F/z.
On the basis of this approximation, the cantilever behaves under the influence
of the probe-sample interaction as if it had a modified spring constant
cF = c
F
,
z
8.
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
57
1
2kT
F
,
11.
=
z min
rms 0 Q
2Q
.
0
12.
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
58
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
HARTMANN
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
QC: KKK/arun
T1: KKK
Annual Reviews
AR086-03
59
magnetic shape anisotropy, which forces the magnetization vector field near the
probes apex to predominantly align with the axis of symmetry of the probe.
On the other hand, sufficiently far away from the apex region, where the probes
cross-sectional area is almost constant, the more or less complex natural domain
structure obtained in a ferromagnetic wire is established. This domain structure depends on the detailed material properties represented by the exchange,
magnetocrystalline anisotropy, and magnetostriction energies. Lattice defects,
stresses, and the surface topology exhibit an additional influence on the domain structure. Because of this complicated situation, it is necessary to develop reasonably simplified magnetic models to describe the experimentally
observed features of magnetostatic probe-sample interaction as accurately as
possible.
Since it is generally hopelessly complicated to derive the actual magnetization vector field of the aforementioned type of probe from first principles, it
is reasonable to apply the following model (12). The unknown magnetization
vector field near the probes apex, with all its surface and volume charges, is
modeled by a homogeneously magnetized prolate spheroid of suitable dimension, while the magnetic response of the probe outside this fictitious domain
is completely neglected. The second assumption is that the dimensions and
the magnitude of the homogeneous magnetization of the ellipsoidal domain are
both completely rigid, i.e. independent of external stray fields produced by the
sample. In this way the micromagnetic problem is simplified to a magnetostatic
one.
The model allows interpretation of almost all experimental results obtained
by MFM on the basis of bulk probes. Moreover, the concept of assuming a
single prolate spheroidal domain that is magnetically effective for bulk ferromagnetic probes approaches reality surprisingly well (12). Using this pseudodomain model, the problem is now to determine the probes magnetic properties and the probe-sample magnetostatic interaction for a given experimental
situation.
The magnetostatic potential created by any ferromagnetic sample is given
by
s (r) =
1
4
d 2 s0 Ms (r0 )
|r r0 |
d 3 r0
Ms (r0 )
,
|r r0 |
13.
where Ms (r0 ) is the sample magnetization vector field and s0 an outward normal vector from the sample surface. The first two-dimensional integral covers
all surface charges created by magnetization components perpendicular to the
bounding surface, whereas the latter three-dimensional integral contains the
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
60
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
HARTMANN
volume magnetic charges resulting from interior divergences of the magnetization vector field. The stray field is then given by Hs (r) = s (r). The
magnetostatic free energy of a microprobe exposed to this stray field is
Z
Z
2 0
0
0
3 0
0
0
0
(r) = 0
d s Mp (r )s (r ) + d r r [s (r )Mp (r )] ,
14.
where s (r0 ) is given by Equation 13, and Mp (r0 ) is the magnetization vector
field of the probe. The resulting force is then given by F(r) = (r). This
ansatz is rigorously valid for any probe involving an arbitrary magnetization
field Mp (r). The first integral, taken over the complete surface of the probe,
covers the interaction of the stray field with free surface charges, whereas the
latter volume integral involves the probes dipole moment, as well as possible
volume divergences. According to the pseudodomain model, Mp (r) is divergence free, and the latter integral in Equation 14 reduces to the dipole response
exhibited by the probe.
In many cases of contrast interpretation, even further simplification of the
probes magnetic behavior yields satisfactory results. The effective monopole
and dipole moments of the probe, resulting from a multipole expansion of
Equation 14, are projected into a fictitious probe of infinitesimal size that is
located an appropriate distance away from the sample surface. The a priori
unknown magnetic moments as well as the effective probe-sample separation
are treated as free parameters to be fitted to the experimental data. This is
known as the point-probe approximation. The force acting on the probe, which
is immersed into the near-surface sample microfield, is given by
F = 0 (q + m )H,
15.
!
3
3
X
X
Hk
n j q Hj +
mk
,
16.
Fd (r) = 0
x j
j=1
k=1
which is the basis for contrast modeling if the MFM is operated in the static
mode. However, the instruments are usually operated in the dynamic mode,
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
QC: KKK/arun
T1: KKK
Annual Reviews
AR086-03
61
3
3 X
X
q
0
Fd (r) = 0
ni n j
+q
H j (r)
xi
xi
i=1 j=1
#
3
X
m k
2
Hk (r) ,
+ mk
+
xi x j
xi x j
k=1
17.
which involves, apart from monopole and dipole moment components, pseup
p
dopotentials j = q/ x j and pseudocharges qki = m k / xi . q = I could,
of course, also be associated with a pseudocurrent and m = V M with
a pseudodivergence of the probe magnetization within the volume V. However, in the context of Equation 17, the component form is emphasized, and
the denotations pseudopotential and pseudocharge are thus preferred. These
pseudocontributions result from the fact that the actual magnetic response of
a real probe of finite size clearly depends on its position with respect to the
sample surface (12). This aspect has often been completely neglected in the
interpretation of MFM results. In the present context the most important consequence is that in dynamic mode MFM, it is not only the second derivatives
of the field components that contribute to the ultimately observed contrast but,
according to Equation 17, also the first derivatives, as well as the field components themselves. The number of field derivatives entering Equations 16 and
17 is reduced by H(r) = 0, leading to
Hi 2 H j
2 Hi
Hj
=
,
=
.
2
xi
x j xi
xi x j
18.
1/2
d
0
d 0 0 Hx,y,z ( + 0 , d),
19.
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
62
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
HARTMANN
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
63
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
HARTMANN
64
QC: KKK/arun
Figure 1 Electron holograms of thin film MFM probes. The scale of the images is 2.35 1.5 m.
(a) Equiphase lines for a conical probe covered by a 30-nm thick Co film; (b) a corresponding result
for a pyramidal tip covered by a 16-nm thick CoCrPt film (sample preparation, Univ. Saarbrucken;
holograms, G Matteucci, Univ. Bologna).
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
65
attacked. The result of the whole procedure is a cantilever that exposes a tiny
magnetic particle at the probes apex rather than the complete magnetic coating
(16). Scanning electron microscope images of such a cantilever are displayed
in Figure 3. The carbon tip visible there has a diameter of approximately 50 nm
and a length of 100 nm.
The advanced magnetic probes have the potential to produce a much improved lateral resolution in comparison with conventional MFM probes.
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
66
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
HARTMANN
Figure 4 shows results acquired in the dynamic mode of MFM operation with
conventional CoCrPt thin film probes and with the advanced probes consisting
of the same magnetic coating. A standard longitudinal recording medium with
two tracks of bit patterns (periodicities 1 and 2 m, respectively) was used as
a test sample. From both the appearance of the MFM images and the detailed
cross-sectional profiles, it is obvious that the advanced probes produce a much
improved lateral resolution. Not only the bit transition zones but also the grainy
structure of the recording medium are visible in great detail.
Electron-beamproduced magnetic supertips represent the state of the art.
The ultimately obtainable lateral resolution depends on the dimensions of the
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
67
Figure 4 MFM images taken on standard hard disk recording tracks of 1 and 2 m periodicity.
Image (a) was recorded with a standard MFM probe, (b) was obtained with a magnetic supertip,
and (c) and (d ) represent experimental cross-sectional profiles along the 2 m track. Panels (e) and
( f ) represent results of model calculations that account for the varying sharpness of the probes. It
is obvious that the supertips produce a much better lateral resolution, which permits resolution of
the grainy structure of the recording medium.
residual magnetic particle at the probes apex. A physical lower limit for its
dimensions arises because an ultra-small particle becomes superparamagnetic.
Technical limitations result from the resolution of the lithographic process and
from the signal-to-noise ratio that clearly drops for decreasing magnetic dimensions of the probe.
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
68
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
HARTMANN
continuously increase the areal bit density of recording devices have made MFM
the industrys most powerful method. Technical breakthroughs such as the employment of giant magnetoresistance (GMR) reading heads in hard disk drives
or the use of blue lasers in magneto-optical recording dramatically decrease
the size needed to store one bit of information. Chraracteristic dimensions are
already far below 1 m.
The employment of MFM to analyze media used for longitudinal magnetic
recording has obvious advantages. MFM detects that quantity, namely the
magnetic stray field produced by the magnetized medium, which is of major importance for the recording process. Figure 5 shows that the detailed
shape of the magnetization transitions resulting from the pole-piece geometry
of the writing head can be obtained at fairly high spatial resolution. In particular, no sample preparation is necessary, and the nonmagnetic surface-protection
coating does not affect the magnetic contrast by any means. Figure 6 shows
analogous data for high-density digital audio tapes.
Figure 5 Standard MFM image of recorded tracks on a hard disk. With MFM it is possible to
analyze the sharpness of the transitions and the characteristic track profile, which are the result of
the pole-piece geometry of the writing head. The image size is 12 12 m.
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
69
Figure 6 MFM image of written tracks on a digital audio tape (DAT). The image size is 120
120 m. Even for the relatively high areal bit densities achieved, standard MFM is capable of
visualizing the most important characteristics of the recorded pattern.
Other investigations in which MFM is a useful tool include disk-failure analysis, in particular, the destructive results of head-on-crashes, which can be
investigated in great detail. Dedicated investigations also concern the reading part of the recording head. In order to detect local variations in the sensitivity of anisotropic magnetoresistance (AMR) or GMR heads, the stray
field of the MFM probe itself is used to produce a resistance change in the
read head. While the probe is raster-scanned across the sensitive area of the
head, the global resistance change is monitored as a function of the probe
position. The procedure allows precise optimization of the measuring current through the head and its polarity. In general, systematic shortcomings
occurring during head production can be detected with minimal quality control
measurements.
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
70
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
HARTMANN
MICROMAGNETIC INVESTIGATIONS
Macroscopic magnetic phenomena, usually detected by magnetometers, have
their origin in the actual topology of the involved magnetic domains and its
modification under the influence of an externally applied magnetic field. The
domains are subdivided by interdomain boundaries of a certain finite width. In
most cases this width ranges between 1 and 100 nm. For in-plane magnetized
samples, the interdomain boundaries are the only sources of the magnetic stray
field that could be externally detected by MFM, provided that the sample does
not contain inner and surface defects that usually also produce stray-field variations. In the vicinity of the interdomain boundaries, the interplay of the materialdependent energy contributions usually causes interior divergences of the magnetization vector field. Additionally, surface magnetic charges can be produced at the intersection between interdomain boundaries and sample surfaces.
In turn, if the domain magnetization has a considerable component oriented
perpendicular to the sample surface, extended surface charges determine the
exterior stray field of the sample. Numerous methods have been developed for
the analysis of magnetic microstructures (17). The advantages of MFM are that
magnetic microstructures can be imaged at fairly high lateral resolution with
a minimum amount of preparation and a maximum variety of environmental
conditions.
Samples with perpendicular magnetic anisotropy produce extended surface
charges that correspond to the upward and downward pointing domain magnetization. In this case, the near-surface stray field of the sample is directly
related to the domain topology, as shown for the example of a 500-nm thick
Tb30 Fe62Co8 film in Figure 7.
Although interdomain boundaries produce a much less extended stray field
due to their small size compared with that within domains, it is nevertheless
possible to image their topology in a routine way with state-of-the-art instruments. Figure 8 shows the example of an intersection of two 90 Bloch-type
walls with a 180 Bloch wall in an Fe bulk single crystal. Apart from the overall wall topology, even fine structures of the walls become apparent owing to
distinct differences in their stray fields. These fine structures have their origin
in the underlying global flux-closure behavior. Another interesting example
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
71
Figure 7 A 5 5 m MFM image of the natural domain arrangement in a Tb30 Fe62Co8 film with
perpendicular magnetic anisotropy. The 500-nm thick film was deposited on a glass substrate and
coated with a 100-nm thick Si3N4 film for surface protection. The surface coating does not affect
the MFM measurement but restricts the probe-sample separation.
for an internal Bloch wall structure is the subdivision of 180 walls into tilted
segments of opposite magnetization rotation. For a wall in an Fe bulk crystal
(Figure 9), the opposite chirality of the successive segments can be imaged by
MFM through the alternating positive and negative surface charges.
Numerous important applications of magnetic materials depend on device
configurations involving lithographically structured magnetic thin films. In
this field the main task is to image the domain topology at a particularly
small scale given by the dimensions of the respective thin film elements. An
example of such an application is given in Figure 10. Arrays of polycrystalline Permalloy dots deposited on Si/SiO2 substrates were prepared by X-ray
lithography. The diameter of the dots is 1 m and the thickness 50 nm. The
nearest-neighbor distance (Figure 10a) is 1 m and is decreased to 100 nm
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
72
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
HARTMANN
(Figure 10b). The respective MFM images show that the dots obviously exhibit
a heterogeneous magnetic structure. However, that structure is totally disordered for the larger interdot separation (Figure 10a), whereas for the smaller
lattice constant (Figure 10b), a magnetic superlattice is clearly visible (18). The
MFM analysis clarifies the manifestation of the interdot magnetostatic coupling
and the resulting domain closure configuration.
In general, the inverse problem of deducing a concrete arrangement of inner
and surface magnetic charges from the overall stray field they produce is not
solvable. MFM can, however, be used to compare the experimentally detected
stray-field variation of a micromagnetic object with that obtained from certain
model calculations. Thus it is frequently possible to at least classify the magnetic object under investigation. One such example is the analysis of different
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
73
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
HARTMANN
74
QC: KKK/arun
Figure 10 Arrays of 50-nm thick Permalloy dots of 1 m diameter. The nearest-neighbor spacing
is 1 m in (a) and 100 nm in (b). Although the domain walls within the dots are randomly oriented
for the larger dot spacing (a), all walls are aligned for the smaller one in (b).
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
75
Figure 11 MFM results and model calculations for domain boundaries in Fe films for two film
thicknesses. The experimental results have been obtained under UHV conditions. Comparison
between experimental and theoretical results clearly confirms that a 90 Neel wall is present for
the 10-nm film, whereas a 90 Bloch wall is present for the 80-nm film.
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
76
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
HARTMANN
Figure 12 MFM image displaying the ripple structure in a 10-nm thick Fe film close to a 90 Neeltype boundary observed under UHV conditions. The deduced wavy alignment of the magnetization
is indicated in the bottom of the image.
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
77
Figure 13 Complex domain arrangement in a 10-nm thick Fe film observed by MFM under UHV
conditions: (a) shows the experimental result, which is composed of numerous high-resolution
images; the deduced magnetization orientations are shown in (b); (c) shows the modeled wall
contrast, which is constructed from the magnetic charge of the individual walls.
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
78
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
HARTMANN
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
Figure 14 A sequence of 100 100 -m MFM images taken on YSmBiGaFe garnet film of 4.5 m thickness in a varying
external field. The soft magnetic film has perpendicular anisotropy. A complete series of images can be used to obtain a local
hysteresis loop of the sample.
P1: SAT/tah/spd
T1: KKK
AR086-03
79
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
80
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
HARTMANN
Figure 15 Sequence of MFM images showing the pinning and nucleation of domains at a structural
Co + 15 A
Pt) multilayer film with perpendicular anisotropy. The image size
defect in a 5 (4 A
is 7 7 m. The structural defect is marked and the sequence starts with the upper left image and
is terminated with the lower right image.
P1: SAT/tah/spd
15:45
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
P2: KKK/vks
Figure 16 7.5 7.5 m MFM images showing the internal reconstruction of a subdivided 180
Bloch wall in an Fe single crystal upon the application of an in-plane field. The magnetization
component perpendicular to the sample surface in the individual wall segments is indicated. The
external field causes motion of the wall to the left and, at the same time, a downward motion of the
transition between the adjacent wall segments.
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
82
QC: KKK/arun
T1: KKK
Annual Reviews
AR086-03
HARTMANN
and the related motion of Bloch lines can be an important contribution to the
coercivity of certain materials (17). However, microscopic processes at this
scale are not well understood.
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
83
Figure 17 UHV MFM data obtained for two adjacent domain boundaries in a 10-nm thick Fe
film: (a) shows the wall topology; (b) represents the cross-sectional variation of the wall stray field
at the indicated position when increasing the probe-sample separation from 50 to 250 nm; (c) displays some selected cross-sectional profiles at five different values of probe-sample separation.
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
84
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
HARTMANN
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
85
Figure 19 A 25 25 m MFM image obtained with a magnetic supertip on the garnet film
shown in Figure 18. The image has been taken at continuously decreasing probe-sample separation,
starting with 200 nm at the bottom of the image. At the top of the image a mechanical contact
between probe and sample had been obtained. The supertip does not cause any perturbation of the
sample magnetization.
any sample perturbation until mechanical contact between probe and sample is
achieved.
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
86
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
HARTMANN
for sufficiently strong field variations. Individual flux quanta have been detected
on superconductors. The spatial resolution is, however, not sufficient to detect
details of the magnetization rotation within interdomain boundaries. On the
basis of adequate model calculations, it is at least possible to distinguish between different wall types and to deduce other micromagnetic features hardly
accessible to many analysis methods. The stray field produced at a local scale
by MFM probes can be used to induce magnetoresistance on suitable devices.
It can, on the other hand, seriously perturb the magnetization of a sample.
MFM is a well-established method with well-known limitations and shortcomings. For the future it cannot be expected that dramatic breakthroughs will
happen, e.g. in improving the resolution or sensitivity by an order of magnitude
or more. However, special areas of application, such as low-temperature MFM
and/or MFM under UHV conditions, will become further developed and easier
to perform. Even in these exotic fields commercial instruments will be available. For standard applications under ambient conditions, technical improvements will allow MFM to be used under fairly high externally applied magnetic
fields. An increasing availability of easy-to-use dedicated commercial instruments will ultimately make MFM a widely distributed standard method accessible to anyone involved in the research and technical application of magnetic
phenomena.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author thanks U Memmert and AN Muller (University of Saarbrucken) for
supplying most of the beautiful images. Part of the work presented here has
been supported by the German Research Association (SFB 277).
Visit the Annual Reviews home page at
http://www.AnnualReviews.org
Literature Cited
1. Martin Y, Wickramasinghe HK. 1987.
Appl. Phys. Lett. 50:145557
2. Goddenhenrich T, Hartmann U, Anders
M, Heiden C. 1988. J. Microsc. 152:527
36
3. Goddenhenrich T, Lemke H, Hartmann U,
Heiden C. 1990. Appl. Phys. Lett. 56:2578
80
4. Rugar D, Mamin HJ, Guethner P, Lambert
SE, Stern JE, et al. 1990. J. Appl. Phys.
68:116983
5. Grutter P, Mamin HJ, Rugar D. 1992. In
Scanning Tunneling Microscopy II, ed. R
Wiesendanger, HJ Guntherodt, pp. 151
207. Heidelberg: Springer
P1: SAT/tah/spd
P2: KKK/vks
15:45
QC: KKK/arun
Annual Reviews
T1: KKK
AR086-03
87
CONTENTS
What Next for Departments of Materials Science and Engineering? M. C.
Flemings
Modern Resonant X-Ray Studies of Alloys: Local Order and
Displacements, G. E. Ice, C. J. Sparks
Magnetic Force Microscopy, U. Hartmann
Skutterudites: A Phonon-Glass-Electron-Crystal Approach to Advanced
Thermoelectric Materials Research, G. S. Nolas, D. T. Morelli, Terry M.
Tritt
Scanning SQUID Microscopy, John R. Kirtley, John P. Wikswo Jr.
COMBINATORIAL MATERIALS SYNTHESIS AND SCREENING:
An Integrated Materials Chip Approach to Discovery and Optimization of
Functional Materials, X.-D. Xiang
Surface Roughening of Heteroepitaxial Thin Films, Huajian Gao,
William D. Nix
Nanocrystalline Diamond Films, Dieter M. Gruen
Heat Conduction in Novel Electronic Films, Kenneth E. Goodson, Y.
Sungtaek Ju
Applications of Ultrasound to Materials Chemistry, Kenneth S. Suslick,
Gareth J. Price
Electrophoretic Deposition of Materials, Omer O. Van der Biest, Luc J.
Vandeperre
Kelvin Probe Force Microscopy of Molecular Surfaces, Masamichi
Fujihira
Spin-Tunneling in Ferromagnetic Junctions, Jagadeesh S. Moodera,
Joaquim Nassar, George Mathon
Characterization of Organic Thin Film Materials with Near-Field
Scanning Optical Microscopy (NSOM), P. F. Barbara, D. M. Adams, D.
B. O'Connor
Two-Dimensional Dopant Profiling by Scanning Capacitance Microscopy,
C. C. Williams
Scanning Thermal Microscopy, A. Majumdar
1
25
53
89
117
149
173
211
261
295
327
353
381
433
471
505