Heat dissipation due to ferromagnetic resonance in a ferromagnetic metal monitored byelectrical resistance measurement
Kazuto Yamanoi, Yuki Yokotani, and Takashi Kimura
Citation: Applied Physics Letters 107, 182410 (2015); doi: 10.1063/1.4935243
View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4935243
View Table of Contents: http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/apl/107/18?ver=pdfcov
Published by the AIP Publishing
Articles you may be interested in
Bistable control of ferromagnetic resonance frequencies in ferromagnetic trilayered dots
J. Appl. Phys. 105, 013911 (2009); 10.1063/1.3042231
Influence of interlayer magnetostatic coupling on the ferromagnetic resonance properties of lithographicallypatterned ferromagnetic trilayers
Appl. Phys. Lett. 92, 161903 (2008); 10.1063/1.2910724
Ferromagnetic resonance study of polycrystalline cobalt ultrathin films
J. Appl. Phys. 99, 08N503 (2006); 10.1063/1.2151832
Effect of conformal roughness on ferromagnetic resonance linewidth in thin Permalloy films
J. Appl. Phys. 97, 10A721 (2005); 10.1063/1.1860271
Using ferromagnetic resonance to measure magnetic moments of ultrathin films (abstract)
J. Appl. Phys. 81, 4475 (1997); 10.1063/1.364982

Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. Download to IP: 133.5.164.140 On: Tue, 23 Aug 2016
10:58:12

APPLIED PHYSICS LETTERS 107, 182410 (2015)

Heat dissipation due to ferromagnetic resonance in a ferromagnetic
metal monitored by electrical resistance measurement
Kazuto Yamanoi,1 Yuki Yokotani,1 and Takashi Kimura1,2,a)
1

Department of Physics, Kyushu University, 6-10-1 Hakozaki, Fukuoka 812-8581, Japan
Research Center for Quantum Nano-Spin Sciences, Kyushu University, 6-10-1 Hakozaki, Fukuoka 812-8581,
Japan
2(Received 19 August 2015; accepted 25 October 2015; published online 4 November 2015)
The heat dissipation due to the resonant precessional motion of the magnetization in a ferromagnetic
metal has been investigated. We demonstrated that the temperature during the ferromagnetic
resonance can be simply detected by the electrical resistance measurement of the Cu strip line incontact with the ferromagnetic metal. The temperature change of the Cu strip due to theferromagnetic resonance was found to exceed 10 K, which significantly affects the spin-current
transport. The influence of the thermal conductivity of the substrate on the heating was also investiC 2015 AIP Publishing LLC. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4935243]
gated. V

The dynamical motion of the magnetization in the ferromagnetic material under the magnetic field can be welldescribed by a phenomenological Landau-Lifshiz-Gilbert(LLG) equation.1,2 Application of the high-frequency magnetic field induces the resonant precessional motion of themagnetizations such as the ferromagnetic resonance(FMR)3–5 and spin-wave (SW) excitation.6–8 The frequency
range of these resonances in the ferromagnetic metal (FM)can be widely tuned from sub-GHz to a few 10 GHz becauseof a large gyromagnetic ratio c, where c=2p is approximately
29.2 GHz/T. Moreover, various phenomena combined withmagnetization dynamics such as spin pumping9–11 and spin
torque precession12,13 have been found recently. These properties are highly attractive for future applications in nanoelectric and telecommunication devices.6–8 Especially, since
the dynamical spin motion is found to generate the spin current via the spin pumping effect,11,15,16 considerable attention have been paid to manipulate the magnetization
dynamics in the ferromagnets. To utilize these unique spinfunctionalities in practical applications, the detailed experimental studies on the magnetization dynamics with deepening the understandings are indispensable issues.
So far, the magnetization dynamics have been mainly
investigated under the assumption of a small amplitude of
the oscillation, in which the magnetization responses can betreated by linearized LLG equation. However, this simplification becomes invalid when the large amplitude of the precessional oscillation is excited.14 The deviation from thelinearized LLG equation is also caused by the extrinsic
natures such as the magnetic inhomogeneity and structuraldefects. Moreover, it should also be noted that the dynamicalmagnetization motion produces the dissipation because of
the existence of the damping term.1,9–11 This dissipation
finally produces the heat through the direct and indirect
magnon-phonon interactions. If the heating effect due to thedissipation is non-negligibly large, the saturation magnetization and the phenomenological damping factor will bechanged, leading to the modification of the magnetizationa)t-kimu@phys.kyushu-u.ac.jp0003-6951/2015/107(18)/182410/4/$30.00

dynamics. Although the heating effect induced by the FMR
is well known as the FMR heating effect,18 the study on the
FMR heating effect has not been investigated intensively.
Especially, in the field of spintronics, there are only a few
reports about the investigation of the relationship between
spin dynamics and heat.19,20 On the other hand, recently, theinteraction between the spin and heat is found to play an important role both for the localized magnetic moment and thespin polarization of conduction electrons.21–23 Particularly,
the spin current can be produced by the temperature gradientacross the ferromagnet(F)/nonmagnet(N) interface.24
Therefore, the spin current due to the FMR heating may beconsidered in the phenomena observed in the F/N bilayer
systems in addition to the spin current induced by the spin
pumping.15–17 Thus, the precise evaluation of the FMR heating in the hybrid nanostructures is indispensable for the fundamental and technological developments of the spin
dynamics. In the present paper, we develop a simple detection method for the FMR heating effect in a patterned ferromagnetic structure with the optimized device structure inorder to minimize the spurious effects.
Our device consists of a rectangular ferromagnetic wire
covered by a thick Cu strip, which plays a role of the wave
guide for the microwave. As a ferromagnet, we use a
CoFeAl wire, which is simply fabricated by an e-gun evaporation under the base pressure of 109 Torr.25 The dimensions for the CoFeAl wire are 2 lm in width, 500 lm in
length, and 40 nm in thickness. Here, the anisotropic magnetoresistance (AMR) for the CoFeAl is 0.03% at room temperature, much smaller than the conventional FMs. The Cu
wave guide consists of large Cu pads and a narrow strip line.
Here, the dimension of the strip line is 4.5 lm in width,
450 lm in length, and 200 nm in thickness. In order to clarify
the influence of the heat, we fabricated the samples on two
kinds of the substrates with different thermal conductivities.
One is a floating-zone (FZ) Si substrate, which is widely utilized for the high-frequency and power devices and has moderate thermal conductivity. The other one is a glass substrate,
which is also often used for the high-frequency experiment
but has poor thermal conductivity. The temperature

107, 182410-1

C 2015 AIP Publishing LLC
V

Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. Download to IP: 133.5.164.140 On: Tue, 23 Aug 2016
10:58:12

182410-2

Yamanoi, Yokotani, and Kimura

evaluation during the FMR is simply carried out by the electrical resistance measurement of the Cu strip line with the FM
wire. Figure 1(b) shows the temperature dependence of theelectrical resistivity for our Cu in the range from 10 K to320 K. The resistance shows almost linear variation in thetemperature range from 50 K to 320 K. We extend this linear
relation to 400 K in order to estimate the temperature increase
from the resistance measurements. We emphasize that theelectrical resistivity for the Cu is approximately 2.3 lX cm atroom temperature, which is approximately 20 times smaller
than that for the CoFeAl. This means that the current flowing
in the FM layer of the bilayer system is negligibly small
because of the large difference in the electrical resistivity andthe film thickness. In addition, because of the large size of theCu pad, the resistance of the pad area, which is less than
0.1 X, is negligibly small compared to the Cu strip line. This
indicates that we can precisely estimate the resistance of the
strip line from the two-terminal measurement.
First, we evaluate the microwave transmission characteristic of the waveguide and the magnetization dynamics fortwo samples prepared on the different substrates from thereflection measurement (S11 ) for the Cu strip line using avector network analyzer.4,29 Here, the input microwave
power is 10 dBm and the external magnetic field is appliedalong the Cu wire direction in order to fix the precession axisof the magnetization. The spectra for each magnetic field
have been obtained by subtracting the background signal
measured at the strong magnetic field. Figures 2(a) and 2(b)show the FMR spectra for the CoFeAl fabricated on the FZSi and glass substrates, respectively. In both samples, the signal changes due to the FMR were clearly observed. The fielddependence of the resonant frequency fres is well reproducedby the Kittel formula described by the following equation:3,4
pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ
fres ¼ c l0 Hðl0 H þ MS Þ:(1)

Appl. Phys. Lett. 107, 182410 (2015)

FIG. 2. Image plots for the FMR spectra for (a) FZ-Si substrate sample and(b) glass substrate sample together with the representative spectra for various magnetic fields.

Here, l0 and MS are the vacuum permeability and the saturation magnetization, respectively. From the fitting of theKittel’s equation, the saturation magnetization can beobtained as 2.2 T, which is a reasonable value comparedwith previous reports concerning Co-Fe Alloy.26 Here, we
focus on the spectrum shape due to the FMR. The signal
change due to the FMR in the glass substrate sample issmaller than that in the FZ-Si substrate. This indicates thatthe transmission loss of the Cu strip on a glass substrate isworse than that on the FZ-Si substrate, meaning smallertransmission power for the glass substrates sample. In
addition, we point out that the resonant signature in theglass-substrate sample is broader that in the FZ-Si substrate.
Since the quantitative estimation of the damping constant is
not main subject in the present paper, we do not estimate thedamping constants for both films. However, from the spectra
shown in Fig. 2, we can easily expect that the damping constant for the glass-substrate sample is much larger than thatfor the FZ-Si-substrate sample. This is because the surface
roughness of the glass substrate is relatively large comparedto the FZ-Si substrate.27
We then measure the electrical resistance of the Cu strip
under the microwave irradiation in order to evaluate the temperature during the FMR by using a current-bias low-frequency lock-in detection technique with the bias current of
16 lA. Although the current for the resistance detection
flows in the Cu/CoFeAl bilayer system, we can neglect thevoltage drop in the FM because of much larger resistance of
the CoFeAl. Moreover, since the CoFeAl wire is locatedunderneath the Cu strip line entirely, the Cu strip line shouldbe heated by the FMR almost uniformly. Figures 3(a) and3(b) show the electrical resistances of the Cu strip on the FZSi and the glass substrates, respectively, as a function of the

FIG. 1. (a) Circuit diagram for the resistance measurement under the microwave magnetic field application together with the conceptual image of the
FMR heating. (b) Temperature dependence of the resistivity for our Cu film.

FIG. 3. Field dependences of the electrical resistances for the Cu strip lines
on (a) FZ-Si substrate and (b) glass substrate. During the resistance measurements, the microwave signal with the power of 100 mW was superimposed.

Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. Download to IP: 133.5.164.140 On: Tue, 23 Aug 2016
10:58:12

182410-3

Yamanoi, Yokotani, and Kimuraexternal magnetic field. Here, the direction of the magnetic
field is parallel to the current, corresponding to the longitudinal configuration. In both samples, we clearly see the rapid
increases of the resistance around H ¼ 98 mT, which isexactly the same as the magnetic field for the FMR at
16 GHz, as shown in Fig. 3. Therefore, this increase should
be related to the FMR. Since the resistance change due to the
AMR, which is very small as described above, provides the
opposite contribution, we can rule out the spurious effects
from the AMR. More importantly, the resistance increase forthe glass substrate is roughly 50 times larger than that for the
FZ-Si substrate. Thus, we conclude that the main contribution of the observed resistance increase is caused by the
FMR heating.18
Now, we evaluate the temperature change DT due tothe FMR. In the present system, since the heat source is the
CoFeAl wire, the temperature gradient perpendicular to the
CoFeAl/Cu junction should be induced. This perpendiculartemperature gradient may give rise to the additional signals
such as the anomalous Nernst-Ettingshausen,28 spin
Seebeck,22 and spin-dependent Seebeck effects.23 However,since the magnetic field is applied along the strip line (longitudinal configuration), we can exclude the contributions
from such spurious effects. Therefore, we assume that theobserved resistance change is mainly caused by the changeof the Cu resistivity due to the heating.
From the assumption of the linear relationship between
the resistance and the temperature shown in Fig. 1(b), we
can roughly estimate the temperature of the Cu strip line. For
example, in the inset of Fig. 4, since the resistance change is
206 mX, DT is estimated to be 8 K at the microwave powerof 100 mW. Figure 4 shows the summary of the temperature
increase due to the FMR, where DT as a function of the input
microwave power is plotted. DT shows almost linear increase
with the microwave power below 100 mW, but the slope
starts to decrease gradually above 100 mW. This deviation isprobably due to the increase in the heat dissipation rate into
other parts such as air and substrate. Even in such a large dissipation situation, DT reaches at approximately 15 K underAppl. Phys. Lett. 107, 182410 (2015)

the microwave power of 200 mW. This is sufficiently large
for the thermal manipulation of the spin current.21–23 We
also emphasize that the estimated temperature corresponds
to the average temperature of the Cu strip line. Since the system is connected to the large Cu pad and the radio-frequency(RF) probe which play roles of the large thermal basses, thehuge heat flow into the outside should exist. Moreover, as
mentioned before, the temperature distribution in the vicinityof the CoFeAl/Cu interface is inhomogeneous. These indicate that the realistic temperature change of the ferromagnet
is much higher than DT estimated from the present
measurement.
Finally, we discuss about the resistance curve as a function of the external magnetic field. If we carefully see theshape of the resistance curve, the curve slightly shows asymmetric dependence with respect to the resonant field. The
reason for the asymmetry in the field dependence of the resistance is not clear at moment. However, since the real partof the magnetic susceptibility shows the anti-symmetric
Lorentz curve,29,30 the origin of the asymmetry should be
related to it. One of the possible reasons is the impedancechange of the waveguide due to the resonance. We used a
RF signal generator as the microwave source in the measurements. Therefore, the input microwave power depends on
the impedance of the strip line.4 Since the inductance of the
waveguide reflects the real part of the magnetic susceptibility, the transmission power into the strip line also shows thefield dependence similar to the inductance. Another possibility is due to the eddy current loss in the FM strip,31 which
also should reflect the real part of the magnetic susceptibility. These two effects explain the small asymmetry observedin the field-dependence of the resistance qualitatively.
In short, we have developed a relatively simple way toevaluate the heat dissipation due to the magnetization dynamics. We showed that the temperature change due to the
FMR can be detected by the electrical resistance change of
the Cu strip and found that a nonlinear relationship between
the temperature change due to the FMR and the input microwave power. The temperature change due to the FMR isfound to reach an approximately 13 K under the microwave
power of 200 mW. This is sufficiently a large value forinducing the spin-heat dynamic effects. Considering the factthat our detecting temperature corresponds to the steadystate temperature, we expect that a thermal flow induced by
the magnetization dynamics can play a dominant role in thephenomena with the magnetization dynamics.
This work was partially supported by Grant-in-Aid for
Scientific Research on Innovative Area, “Nano Spin
Conversion Science” (26103002) and for Scientific Research(S)(25220605).
1

T. L. Gilbert, Phys. Rev. 100, 1243 (1955).
Spin Dynamics in Confined Magnetic Structures, edited by B. Hillebrands
and A. Thiaville (Springer, 2006).
3
C. Kittel, Phys. Rev. 73, 155 (1948).
4
T. J. Silva, C. S. Lee, T. M. Crawford, and C. T. Rogers, J. Appl. Phys. 85,7849 (1999).
5
M. V. Costache, S. M. Watts, M. Sladkov, C. H. van der Wal, and B. J.
van Wees, Appl. Phys. Lett. 89, 232115 (2006).
6
M. P. Kostylev, A. A. Serga, T. Schneider, B. Leven, and B. Hillebrands,
Appl. Phys. Lett. 87, 153501 (2005).
2

FIG. 4. Temperature change due to the FMR heating of the CoFeAl on theglass substrate as a function of the input microwave power. The inset shows
the representative field dependence of the resistance with the definition of
DR. The scale bar of the inset is 0.1 X.

Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. Download to IP: 133.5.164.140 On: Tue, 23 Aug 2016
10:58:12

182410-4
7

Yamanoi, Yokotani, and Kimura

K. Sekiguchi, K. Yamada, S.-M. Seo, K.-J. Lee, D. Chiba, K. Kobayashi,
and T. Ono, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 017203 (2012).
8
K. Yamanoi, S. Yakata, T. Kimura, and T. Manago, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys.,
Part 1 52, 083001 (2013).
9
S. Mizukami, Y. Ando, and T. Miyazaki, Phys. Rev. B 66, 104413 (2002).
10
Y. Tserkovnyak, A. Brataas, and G. E. W. Bauer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88,
117601 (2002).
11
B. Heinrich, Y. Tserkovnyak, G. Woltersdorf, A. Brataas, R. Urban, andG. E. W. Bauer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 187601 (2003).
12
S. I. Kiselev, J. C. Sankey, I. N. Krivorotov, N. C. Emley, R. J.
Schoelkopf, R. A. Buhrman, and D. C. Ralph, Nature 425, 380–383(2003).
13
M. Tsoi, A. G. M. Jansen, J. Bass, W.-C. Chiang, V. Tsoi, and P. Wyder,Nature 406, 46–48 (2000).
14D. Isaak, MayergoyzGiorgio BertottiClaudio Serpico Nonlinear
Magnetization Dynamics in Nanosystems (Elsevier, 2008), ISBN: 978-008-044316-4.
15
E. Saitoh, M. Ueda, H. Miyajima, and G. Tatara, Appl. Phys. Lett. 88,
182509 (2006).
16
J.-C. Rojas-Snchez, N. Reyren, P. Laczkowski, W. Savero, J.-P. Attan, C.
Deranlot, M. Jamet, J.-M. George, L. Vila, and H. Jaffrs, Phys. Rev. Lett.
112, 106602 (2014).
17
O. Mosendz, V. Vlaminck, J. E. Pearson, F. Y. Fradin, G. E. W. Bauer, S.
D. Bader, and A. Hoffmann, Phys. Rev. B 82, 214403 (2010).
18
N. Yoshikawa and T. Kato, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 43(42), 425403(2010).

Appl. Phys. Lett. 107, 182410 (2015)
19

F. L. Bakker, J. Flipse, A. Slachter, D. Wagenaar, and B. J. van Wees,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 167602 (2012).
T. An, V. I. Vasyuchka, K. Uchida, A. V. Chumak, K. Yamaguchi, K.
Harii, J. Ohe, M. B. Jungfleisch, Y. Kajiwara, H. Adachi, B. Hillebrands,
S. Maekawa, and E. Saitoh, Nat. Mater. 12, 549–553 (2013).
21
G. E. W. Bauer, E. Saitoh, and B. J. van Wees, Nat. Mater. 11, 391–399(2012).
22
K. Uchida, S. Takahashi, K. Harii, J. Ieda, W. Koshibae, K. Ando, S.
Maekawa, and E. Saitoh, Nature 455, 778–781 (2008).
23
A. Slachter, F. L. Bakker, J-P. Adam, and B. J. van Wees, Nat. Phys. 6,
879–882 (2010).
24
M. Johnson and R. H. Silsbee, Phys. Rev. B 35, 4959 (1987).
25
S. Hu, H. Itoh, and T. Kimura, NPG Asia Mater. 6, e127 (2014).
26
C. Bilzer, T. Devolder, J.-V. Kim, G. Counil, C. Chappert, S. Cardoso, and
P. P. Freitas, J. Appl. Phys. 100, 053903 (2006).
27
S. Mizukami, Y. Ando, and T. Miyazaki, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., Part 1 40,
580 (2001).
28
S. Y. Huang, X. Fan, D. Qu, Y. P. Chen, W. G. Wang, J. Wu, T. Y. Chen,
J. Q. Xiao, and C. L. Chien, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 107204 (2012).
29
G. Counil, J.-V. Kim, T. Devolder, C. Chappert, K. Shigeto, and Y. Otani,
J. Appl. Phys. 95, 5646 (2004).
30
A. Azevedo, R. O. Cunha, F. Estrada, O. Alves Santos, J. B. S. Mendes, L.
H. Vilela-Leo, R. L. Rodrguez-Surez, and S. M. Rezende, Phys. Rev. B
92, 024402 (2015).
31
J. R. Truedson, K. D. McKinstry, P. Kabos, and C. E. Patton, J. Appl.
Phys. 74(4), 2705 (1993).
20

Reuse of AIP Publishing content is subject to the terms at: https://publishing.aip.org/authors/rights-and-permissions. Download to IP: 133.5.164.140 On: Tue, 23 Aug 2016
10:58:12