2004Geophysical Journal InternationalRequires access

Angular dependence of the switching field and implications for gyromagnetic remanent magnetization in three-axis alternating-field demagnetization

Karen Nørgaard Madsen

Open publisher page 10 citations

Abstract

The critical field for reversing the magnetic moment of a single-domain (SD) grain, the switching field, is a function of the angle between the field and the grain's easy axis of magnetization. The functional relationship derived for coherent reversal, i.e. spins reversing in unison, differs from that of various incoherent mechanisms and of domain wall movement in multidomain (MD) grains. Due to the angular dependence of the switching field, uniaxial alternating-field (AF) demagnetization is less efficient than AF demagnetization with tumbling of the sample. The difference was determined for synthetic and natural rock samples carrying anhysteretic and rotational remanent magnetizations (ARM and RRM respectively). These types of remanence were chosen to activate dominantly SD grains, and their magnitudes relative to saturation isothermal remanent magnetization (SIRM) are discussed in relation to magnetic grain size. For the samples studied, data indicated that the majority of remanence carriers cannot be associated with the Stoner—Wohlfarth model for coherent reversal. In contrast, incoherent reversal or domain wall movement largely explains the observed lag. Based on the angular dependence of switching field corresponding to these models, the acquisition of gyromagnetic remanent magnetization (GRM) during three-axis demagnetization is discussed. In particular it is shown theoretically that the method of Dankers and Zijderveld fails to eliminate completely the effect of GRM in three-axis demagnetization.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The critical field for reversing the magnetic moment of a single-domain (SD) grain, the switching field, is a function of the angle between the field and the grain's easy axis of magnetization. The functional relationship derived for coherent reversal, i.e. spins reversing in unison, differs from that of various incoherent mechanisms and of domain wall movement in multidomain (MD) grains. Due to the angular dependence of the switching field, uniaxial alternating-field (AF) demagnetization is less efficient than AF demagnetization with tumbling of the sample. The difference was determined for synthetic and natural rock samples carrying anhysteretic and rotational remanent magnetizations (ARM and RRM respectively). These types of remanence were chosen to activate dominantly SD grains, and their magnitudes relative to saturation isothermal remanent magnetization (SIRM) are discussed in relation to magnetic grain size. For the samples studied, data indicated that the majority of remanence carriers cannot be associated with the Stoner—Wohlfarth model for coherent reversal. In contrast, incoherent reversal or domain wall movement largely explains the observed lag. Based on the angular dependence of switching field corresponding to these models, the acquisition of gyromagnetic remanent magnetization (GRM) during three-axis demagnetization is discussed. In particular it is shown theoretically that the method of Dankers and Zijderveld fails to eliminate completely the effect of GRM in three-axis demagnetization.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 10 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The critical field for reversing the magnetic moment of a single-domain (SD) grain, the switching field, is a function of the angle between the field and the grain's easy axis of magnetization. The functional relationship derived for coherent reversal, i.e. spins reversing in unison, differs from that of various incoherent mechanisms and of domain wall movement in multidomain (MD) grains. Due to the angular dependence of the switching field, uniaxial alternating-field (AF) demagnetization is less efficient than AF demagnetization with tumbling of the sample. The difference was determined for synthetic and natural rock samples carrying anhysteretic and rotational remanent magnetizations (ARM and RRM respectively). These types of remanence were chosen to activate dominantly SD grains, and their magnitudes relative to saturation isothermal remanent magnetization (SIRM) are discussed in relation to magnetic grain size. For the samples studied, data indicated that the majority of remanence carriers cannot be associated with the Stoner—Wohlfarth model for coherent reversal. In contrast, incoherent reversal or domain wall movement largely explains the observed lag. Based on the angular dependence of switching field corresponding to these models, the acquisition of gyromagnetic remanent magnetization (GRM) during three-axis demagnetization is discussed. In particular it is shown theoretically that the method of Dankers and Zijderveld fails to eliminate completely the effect of GRM in three-axis demagnetization.

Key concepts: Remanence, Demagnetizing field, Magnetization, Condensed matter physics, Natural remanent magnetization, Single domain, Rock magnetism, Coercivity

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Angular dependence of the switching field and implications for gyromagnetic remanent magnetization in three-axis alternating-field demagnetization — Research Paper | ScholarLens