Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T10:15:28.311Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Giant Magnetoresistance in As-Sputter-Deposited Au/NiFe Multilayer Thin Films

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

W. Y. Lee
Affiliation:
IBM Almaden Research Center, San Jose, CA 95120
G. Gorman
Affiliation:
IBM Almaden Research Center, San Jose, CA 95120
R. Savoy
Affiliation:
IBM Almaden Research Center, San Jose, CA 95120
Get access

Abstract

Giant magnetoresistance with low saturation fields (Hs’s) is reported in Au and permalloy (Ni0.82Fe0.18) or Co-doped permalloy multilayer thin films as-deposited on Ta-overcoated Si and glass substrates. A ΔR/R as high as 4.0% with ≈25 Oe Hs was observed at 295 K for the film consisting of 10 layers of 24 Å Au/13 Å Ni0.82Fe0.18 deposited on a 3 Å Ta-overcoated glass at 50 °C. A Hs value as low as ≈20 Oe with a 15% smaller ΔR/R has been observed for the films with a thicker (e.g., 50 Å) Ta underlayer. Magnetic hysteresis loops of these films indicate the presence of antiferromagnetic exchange coupling between the Ni0.82Fe0.18 layers. This exchange coupling is much smaller for the multilayer films without the Ta underlayer, resulting in a 6x smaller ΔR/R and lOx larger Hs observed for these films. Results of x-ray diffraction analysis indicate stronger (111) texturing for the multilayer films with a Ta underlayer, consistent with the stronger antiferromagnetic coupling between the the Ni0.82Fe0.18 layers in the film. The addition of 2–10 % Co moderately increases the ΔR/R value, but also increases substantially the Hs (up to ≈200 Oe).

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Baibich, M. N., Broto, J. M., Fert, A., Van Dau, F. Nguyen, Petroff, F., Etienne, P., Greuzet, G., Friederich, A., and Chazelas, J., Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 2472 (1988).Google Scholar
2. Binasch, G., Griinberg, P., Saurenbach, F., and Zinn, W., Phys. Rev. B39, 4828 (1989). (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Barthélémy, A., Fert, A., Baibich, M. N., Hadjoudj, S., Petrof, F., Etienne, P., Cabanel, R., Lequien, S., Van Dau, F. Nguyen, and Creuzet, G., J. Appl. Phys. 67, 5908 (1990).Google Scholar
4. Parkin, S.S.P., More, N. and Roche, K. P., Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 2304 (1990).Google Scholar
5. Huang, T. C. and Parrish, W., Advances in X-Ray Analysis 35, 137 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Parkin, S. S. P., Farrow, R. F. C., Marks, R. F., A. Cebollada, , Harp, G. R., and Savoy, R., Submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett., January 1994.Google Scholar
7. Hylton, T. L., Coffey, K. R., Parker, M. A., and Howard, J. K., Science 261, 1021 (1993).Google Scholar
8. Nakatani, R., Dei, T., and Sugita, Y., J. Appl. Phys. 73, 6375 (1993).Google Scholar