Kittel 1949
Kittel 1949
Kittel 1949
1. Survey of Domain Theory been obtained confirm the theory in all essential aspects
1.1 Introduction and thus give one conhdence that the more complicated
1.2 The domain assumption
1.3 The origin of domains situations obtaining in polycrystalline materials may
1.4 Coercive force, hysteresis, and reversible permeability be understood, at least in qualitative terms, on the
2. Contributions to the Domain Energy basis of existing theory.
2. 1 Exchange The present paper is undertaken as a comprehensive
2.2 Magnetocrystalline (anisotropy)
review of the physical principles of domain theory and
2.3 Magnetoelastic
2.4 Magnetostatic of the crucial experiments which bear directly on the
3. The Bloch Wall foundations of the subject. The theory of the origin of
3.1 Introductory remarks domains is not treated adequately in the existing text-'
3.2 Estimate of thickness and energy of Sloch wall books on ferromagnetism; for example, none of the
3.3 180' walls in (100) plane of iron
4. Theoretical Domain Structure existing textbooks' discusses the original paper in this
4. 1 Introduction field, written by Landau and Lifshitz in 1935.
4.2 Flux closure domain configurations The organization of the present paper falls into two
5. Experimental Studies of Domains stages. There is erst an introductory survey which
5.1 Powder pattern technique
5.2 Powder pattern results describes the basic physical concepts of domain theory
6. Magnetic Properties of Small Particles in general non-mathematical terms. The ideas are then
6.1 Critical particle size for single domain behavior developed in detail in the subsequent sections of the
6.2 Coercive force of small particles
Permeability and Coercive Force
7. Initial paper.
7.1General remarks
7.2Kersten inclusion theory 1.2 The Domain Assumption
7.3Strain theory
7.4Neel magnetization Quctuation theory The essential aspects of ferromagnetism are illus-
Appendix A: Mathematical expressions for the anisotropy of trated by the implications of the following experimental
cubic crystals. fact
Appendix 8:
Magnetic interaction energy of dipoles on a cubic
It is possible to change the oner all magnetization -of a
lattice.
Appendix C: List of Symbols. suitably prepared ferromagnetic specimen from an initial
value of zero (in the absence of an applied magnetic geld)
1. SURVEY OF DOMAIN THEORY to a saturation value of the order of 1000 gauss, by the
1.1 Introduction application of a geld whose strength may be of the order
' 'N recent years there has been a major growth of the of 0.01 oersteds
Such a magnetization curve is shown in Pig. j.. The
i. body of experimental and theoretical knowledge magnetization is defined as the magnetic moment per
regarding the origin and behavior of ferromagnetic unit volume. The ordinate axis of the curve is, however,
domains. We possess now a general theoretical founda- which in this case is closely equal to 4x
Qux density,
tion for the subject, a foundation which is intellectually
times the magnetization,
satisfying and which has been verified experimentally
in considerable detail in several simple situations in ~ A Russian book has just appeared which gives a brief treat-
ferromagnetic single crystals and, in less detail, in very ment of this subject (Vonsovsky and Shur, 1948). (An alphabetic
fine ferromagnetic powders. The results which have list of all references is given at the end of this article. )
5 41
CHARLES KI TTE L
x f03 independent elementary magnetic moments. For ex-
20
ample, at room temperature a field of 0.01 oersted will
increase the magnetization of a paramagnetic salt such
as ferrous sulfate (FeS04) by about 10 ' gauss, as
12
compared with 10' gauss in the ferromagnetic specimen.
The small e8ect in the case of the paramagnetic salt is
known to be caused by thermal agitation which acts to
oppose the ordering inQuence of the applied magnetic
field. In the paramagnetic salt electively only one
magnetic moment in 10' is "oriented" by a field of
c/l
0.01 oersted, so that the distribution of magnetic
0.
moment directions remains essentially random. This
X
high degree of chaos is, as we have said, the result of
Cl 4 the predominant role played by thermal agitation in
a system where the electron magnetic moments are
independent, without important mutual interactions.
Pierre gneiss (1907) pointed out that the difficulty
caused by thermal agitation could be largely circum-
vented if one postulated in ferromagnetic materials the
-16 existence of a powerful internal "molecular" field; we
describe this now as a mutual interaction between
-20 electrons which would tend to line up the magnetic
-0.08 ~06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
H IN OERSTEDS moments parallel to one another.
FIG. 1. Magnetization curve of single crystal of silicon iron. The The required magnitude for the Weiss molecular field
8 scale is only approximate. (Williams and Shockley, 1949.) may be estimated readily. At the Curie temperature
T, the thermal energy kT. of an electron spin is of
The fact just referred to contains two significant the same order of magnitude as the interaction energy
observations: p~H J of the Inagnetic moment p~ of an electron acted
on by the effective molecular field H J . .
(a) It is possible in some cases to attain saturation magnetiza-
tion by the application of a very weak magnetic Geld. kT~= p~Hm~, (1.2. 1)
(b) It is possible for the magn. etization gf the same specimen
to be zero in zero (or nearly zero) applied 6eld. so that'
The first observation is remarkable since it is known H y= I4T./14m =10 "10'/10 "=10' oersteds. (1.2.2)
from the study of paramagnetism that the application
This is an exceedingly powerful effective held; it is
of a field of 0.01 oersted has an entirely negligible
about twenty times more intense than any actual
effect on the magnetization of a system of free and
magnetic Geld produced in a laboratory. At tempera-
tures below the Curie temperature the eBect of the
molecular field outweighs the thermal fluctuation energy
and the specimen is accordingly ferromagnetic. Mag-
netic moment orientations in paramagnetic and ferro-
magnetic materials are illustrated schematically by
Fig. 2; the variation of the saturation magnetization of
(o) (e) iron as a function of temperature is plotted in Fig. 3.
PARAMAGNETIC SALT
{OR FERROMAGNET
F ERROM AGNET
AT VERY LOW TEMPERATURE
It is known now that the origin of the molecular
ASOVE CURIE POINT) field lies in the quantum-mechanical exchange force;
another and better known manifestation of this force
is the chemical valence bond, although in the case of
the chemical bond the exchange force usually tends to
make the spins of neighboring electrons anti-parallel,
instead of parallel as in the case of ferromagnetism.
Weiss himself did not make any specific predictions
about the origin of the molecular field, but he did point
(c) {d) out that the ordinary magnetic moment interaction
FERROMAGNET FERRONIAGNET between electrons is much too weak to account for the
AT LOW TEMPERATURE JUST BELOW CURiE POINT molecular field. The magnetic held at one lattice point
FIG. 2. Orientation of magnetic moments of electrons in
paramagnetic and ferromagnetic materials. ' A list of symbols is given in Appendix C.
P H YS I CAL THEORY OF F E RROMAGNE TI C DOM A I NS
—=
p, g 10 " 0.8— ~ ~
~ ~
H= = 1000 oersteds, (1.2.3) ~4
r3 (2X 10-')' 0.6—
0'0
&ce
which is smaller than the effective molecular field H ~ 0.4-
by a factor of the order of 10 4. The magnetic moment
interaction by itself would lead to a Curie temperature 0. 2—
in the neighborhood of 0.1'K. The situation is quite
diferent in dielectric materials, as the order of magni- 0 I I I 1 I I l
I
I
I I
I I
I
I
I I
I
(Fe-Pt) to the value of 0.5 in a commercial power
I
I
I
I I g
transformer (Silicon-iron) or 0.004 in a pulse trans-
S S N N N S N S former (Supermalloy). Thus the coercive force may be
varied over a range of 5&(10 .
(a) (b) (c) 3 Yager has given a beautiful demonstration of the orientation
y~/ ~~i anisotropy in rolled iron tape by means of a microwave resonance
Y y Y
I
I I
experiment.
'r
I
4 The coercive force
H, is defined customarily with reference to
I I
the saturation hysteresis cycle (Fig. 13) as the value of the
I I magnetizing field corresponding to the point B=O; that is, it is
I
I
I the reverse field necessary to carry the induction from the satura-
A,
I I
tion value down to zero. In theoretical work, however, it is often
l
more direct to consider the coercive force as the field corresponding
I
1600 p oj
[I t
31001
[0001]
~ 1200 1200
(
FIG. 10. Magnetization curves goo]
for single crystals of Fe, Ni, and z 800 800
Co. (Honda and Kaya, 1926; 200
F1010]
Kaya, 1928.) 400 4oo
100
Ni
00 200 400 600 0 200 300 00
100 2000 4000 6000 8000
H IN OERSTKDS
The problem of the theory is to interpret the observed taining a precipitated phase are Inagnetically hard.
values of the coercivity in terms of the physical state While there is little doubt of the general correctness of
of the material and to predict methods by which the our picture there remains the question of the detailed
coercivity may be increased in magnetically hard quantitative correlation of coercivity with specific
materials and decreased in magnetically soft materials. physical factors; the examination of this question we
Several theories have been advanced (Becker, 1932; defer until Section 7.
Kersten, 1938, 1943; Neel, 1946; Stoner and Wohlfarth, The coercive force of one type of magnetically hard
1947—48) and a certain amount of progress has been material may be understood from a quite diferent
made, although the problem is beset with the usual picture; we refer to materials composed of very small
difhculty in explaining any material property which is grains or fine powders where each particle is always
highly structure sensitive, namely, the difhculty in magnetized to saturation as a single domain. The fact
determining quantitatively the relevant physical factors that a suSciently small particle, with diameter less
— such as impurities, lattice imperfections and internal than 10 4 or 10— ' cm, is composed of a single domain is
strains. a result of domain theory which has been confirmed by
When we have understood the coercive force we will experiment. It can be shown that with such very small
be a long way towards understanding the saturation particles the formation of a domain boundary is
hysteresis loss at low frequencies, since the area energetically unfavorable: this is essentially because
enclosed by the hysteresis loop (Fig. 13) is a'pproxi- too large a proportion of the volume of a small particle
mately given by the product of the saturation induction would be contained within the wall the wall thickness —
8, times the coercive force. That is, the energy dissi- being independent of the particle size.
pated on going once around a hysteresis loop is of the If a small particle is constrained to remain as a single
order of B, H„ to within a factor of 2 to 4. We may, domain it will not be possible for magnetization changes
therefore, devote our attention to the single factor H, . and reversal to take place by means of the process of
The coercive force in "magnetically soft" (low II, ) boundary displacement which usually requires rela-
materials may be understood from the following tively weak fields; instead the magnetization of the
picture: The total energy of a given specimen may particle must rotate as a whole (Fig. 16), a process
vary depending on the position of a domain boundary, which may require large fields depending on the ani-
as a result of local variations in internal strains, sotropy energy of the material or the shape of the
impurities, crystallite dimensions, etc. ; the variation is particle: this is because we must rotate the magnetiza-
indicated schematically in I'ig. 14. In the absence of
an applied magnetic field the boundary will be situated I
I I
at some minimum position such as (A) in the figure. I
I
I
I
I
I
I
to make a large displacement to the extreme right (D) I
I
I
I
8
I
II& I/
I
I I&
I
II IR2
I ~ P
..., +~N[~pi, n
PlRt~~
J8 '-
= ~iIiill8@Q
11661
'"' Illa'
I...&2:"'"
Frc. 12. Domain structure in
silicon iron grain-
6% 6'IWk 26
' ~2 "2l~akF~ ~
II ~ a] I
polycrystalline
oriented (Williams). ()& 500)
PQ
16 ~
111 ~ m
$ lI'
P II.
'~ I.III
&I I
6 .611
0 IFVSii ---- I
. sai~
I I ggml —
P —
qII Il pP"
, 122&2
R'
II 2
—~
~
611.,
12~ '
.
I
--
~K
'%II
. I
'%P)62, ~ :.
I,. ;=;-'l:44 aSS W
~ -12'"
'1
. "62'
III' I ll1 I
!12. "I
tion over the energy hump corresponding to a direction If the small particles possess an elongated shape we
of hard magnetization. may have a high coercivity because of the anisotropy
The coercive force of fine iron particles is expected of the energy in the demagnetizing field, even if the
theoretically to be about 250 oersteds on the basis of crystalline anisotropy energy is low. That is, the
rotation opposed by the crystalline anisotropy energy, magnetization tends to line up along the long axis of
and this is of the order of the value reported by several the specimen, and a strong field may have to be applied
observers. Similarly the high coercivities of the com- to turn the magnetization through the short axis. This
pounds MnBi (IH, &12,000) snd FePt (zII, =20,000) appears to be the explanation of the high coercive force
seem to be in line with the rotation concept, with of the alloy FeCo in fine powder form; the alloy is
anisotropy energy as the tactor opposing rotation. known to have a low anisotropy energy from single
crystal measurements, so that the anisotropy energy
alone cannot explain the observations, but the shape
—Bs e6ect must be invoked.
Reversible Permeability
The extent of the range of field strength over which
the permeability is reversible is determined by the
distance through which a domain boundary may move
without passing over a peak in the curve of wall energy
vs. distance; with reference to Fig. 14, one such region
of reversible permeability is the region CAB when —
the domain boundary leaves this region it moves
irreversibly to the extreme right or extreme left of the
figure.
The reversible permeability is determined by the
irregularities of the curve of boundary energy vs.
displacement, and thus is determined by essentially
the same physical conditions as the coercive force. A
comparison of the initial permeabilities p, ~ and the
coercive force II, for a wide range of magnetic ma-
terials is shown in Fig. 17. It is seen that there is a
very close correlation, materials with high coercivities
Pro. 13. Definition of the coercive force. having low permeabilities, and vice versa.
PHYSICAL THEORY OF FERROMAGNETI C DOMAINS
Barhhagsem Eeet
Since many physicists have encountered the concept z
of domain structure only in elementary textbooks, in V
Ld
of an applied magnetic field, rather than to a complete FrG. 14. Variation in energy of specimen as a function
domain reversal. Very pronounced and continued of the position of the boundary.
Barkhausen noise has been observed attending the
motion of a single domain wall. This discovery frees and free. energy; the di8erence is important in ferro-
the subject from the difFiculties which had been raised magnetism only near the Curie point.
by the earlier interpretation; for example, the apparent The most important equations for energy density
"domain volume" of 10 ' to 10 ' cc indicated by the derived in the various parts of this section are summa-
Barkhausen eGect has no direct connection with actual rized here, for a cubic crystal:
domain volumes, which may be very much greater.
Exchange: f-= J~'Ev v' (2. 1.5)
Perroelectri c Domains
Certain dielectric crystals such as rochelle salt and Anisotropy: f&= E&(aPn2'+u2 n32+032~P) (2.2.4)
barium titanate show ferroelectric behavior — that is,
regions of spontaneous electric polarization are found, Magnetoelastic: f .= —,'XT sin28 (2.3.22)
analogous to the regions of spontaneous magnetization
in ferromagnetic crystals.
Magnetic: f „=— 2H I (for self-energy) (2.4.2)
In some crystals of barium titanate arrangements of
ferroelectric domains have been found (Matthias and
Here J
is the exchange energy integral; y is the angle
between the directions of neighboring spins S; Eq is
von Hippel, 1948), which at 6rst suggest that the
the anisotropy energy constant; cx&, o.2, n3 are the direc-
formation of ferroelectric domains is governed by
tion cosines of the magnetization vector referred to the
electrostatic energy, just as the formation of magnetic
crystal axes; X is the isotropic. magnetostriction, and 8
domains is governed by magnetostatic energy. How-
is the angle between the tension T and the magnetiza-
ever, the electrostriction in barium titanate is 10—,
tion.
which is considerably larger than the values of the
magnetostriction ( 10 ') in ferromagnetic materials.
It is therefore likely that the electrostriction will play
an important role in ferroelectric domains, along with
considerations of closure of electrical flux. There is also
the possibility of charge neutralization by means of
free charges in the atmosphere. V)
O
The saturation polarization in BaTi03 is approxi- 4J
I-
V)
ec
mately 50,000 esu. LLI
static energy, f „.
and the symbols by which we denote the corresponding
energy density are: exchange energy, f, ; anisotropy
energy, f&,. magnetoelastic energy, f,
; and magneto-
All of these terms are necessary;
commonly the omission of any one would cause pro-
found modihcations in the nature of the domain
structure. We neglect the distinction between energy
0
0 40 60
PERCEl4T COPPER BY WEIGHT
105
SUPE RMALLOY
1040 ALLOY
~ SENDUST
MUMETAL
104
~ 78 PERMALLOY
~ HYDROGEN TREATED IRON
HI PER NIK
O
i' HYPERSIL
&- 10
I-
~ S IL ICON
FIG. 17. Correlation be- d) IRON
tween the initial permea- 4J
bility and coercive force of i& IRON
a wide range of magnetic 4J NICKEL
materials. ~ 102 0
I-
Z ~ 5 lo TUNGSTEN
STEEL
RE MALLOY
10
~ VICALLOY I
AGNI CO 2
ALNICO I
&i VECTOL ITE
F ERRO —PLATINUM ~
10 10 10 1 10 10 10 10
COERC I VE FORCE, H C, IN OERSTEDS
CHARLEs KITTEL
within a domain boundary wall. In domain theory we involved in the statistical theories are reviewed by
are interested in the exchange energy only for con- Van Vleck (1945, 1947). We summarize the results of
Ggurations in which neighboring spins make small two methods here. P. R. Weiss (1948) finds by an
angles with each other, extension of the Bethe-Peierls method the results:
If we suppose that only interactions between nearest
neighbors are important for the exchange energy and
I=0.54kT, (simple cubic; spin i~) (2.1.12)
that these interactions are equal, then I= 0.34k T, (body-centered cubic; spin )
—',
(2.1.13a)
w~~= 2IS Q cos(po. 7=0.15kT, (body-centered cubic; spin 1) (2.1.13b)
i& j'
For lion,
If neighboring spins make a small angle q;;«1 with J = (0.15)(1043)k—160k, (2.1.14)
each other, then we have the important result
taking the spin as one.
Another method, used by Lifshitz' (1944), is to relate
and the exchange energy between each pair of spins is the experimental value of the constant C in the Bloch
law
Am;; —JS'y'. (2.1.6) I = Io(1 —CTl) (2.1.15)
It is often convenient to express Eq. (2.1.5) in for the temperature dependence of the saturation
another form. I et us suppose that the direction cosines magnetization at low temperatures, to the effective
'.
of the spin at lattice point r; are n, *, o.p, o., Now the
;, '
direction cosines 0. a;&, o., at the neighboring lattice
exchange integral by means of the equation (Bloch,
1931; Moiler, 1933)
point r; may be expanded in a Taylor series:
C = (0.0587/2S) (k/2SJ)'* (2.1.16)
n ;*=n, *+. (x,; (8/», ;)+y g(B/By;, )+z,, (B/Bs,;) )n, ' for a body-centered cubic structure and spin S. Now
from the measurements of Fallot (1936) we have for
iron C=3.5X10 ' so that
—
J= 205k,
On summing over nearest neighbors on a body-centered
for S=1, in fair agreement with Eq. (2. 1.14) obtained
cubic lattice with lattice constant a,
by a quite different method.
Aw„~—2JS'a,'Q (n "Pn. ) (2. 1.8) We shaB use the value J=205k resulting from the
Bloch theory since the spin wave picture is most closely
allied with the behavior of a domain boundary wall
which may be manipulated into the form
and actually (as can be shown) leads to a value of A
&~ = 2&S'~'PL(~n ')'+ (~n ")'+ (|7n ')q (2. 1.9) independent of assumptions regarding the eBect of
interactions from other than nearest neighbors.
Sy use of the above value the constant A in Eq.
by using the fact that (2.1.11) becomes (with S= 1):
(2.1.10)
2JS' 410k
The exchange energy density becomes (taking account = 2.0&(10 ' ergs/cm. (2.1.18)
of the two atoms per unit cell and taking care not to 86X10
count interactions twice):
The measurements of Fallot (1936) indicate that for
f., = A L(V'n, )'+ (V'n, )'+ (7'ns)'], (2.1.11)
4 percent (by weight) Si-Fe one should use A 1.7 —
&(10 ' ergs/cm. This composition corresponds approxi-
where A =2JS'/a.
mately to that used by H. J. Williams in his domain
We have now obtained two useful forms for the pattern studies; it is used rather than pure iron because
exchange energy; namely Eqs. (2.1.6) and (2.1.11). crystals of
pure iron are considerably more dificult to
The next problem is to relate the value of the exchange
pl o duce.
integral Jwhich enters these equations to some experi-
mental quantity which is strongly dependent on J, 2.2 Anisotropy Energy
such as the Curie temperature or the variation of the
saturation magnetization with temperature. Here we The anisotropy energy or, as it is sometimes called,
run head on into the fact that the accurate determina- the magnetocrystalline energy of a ferromagnetic
J
tion of from thermal data presupposes the existence crystal acts in such a way that the magnetization
of an accurate statistical theory of ferromagnetism, tends to be directed along certain definite crystallo-
and this we do not possess at present. ~ Several numerical errors in the work of Lifshitz are corrected
The mathematical details of the type of calculations in the present treatment,
PHYSICAL THEORY OF FERROMAGNETIC DOMAINS 553
where odd powers of sin8 have not been included since, whence
by symmetry, the —
0 direction is equivalent magneti- —(&s +o'a
cally and crystallographically to the +0 direction; the
o'p&p+&u &i +&a &p= 2 g +&i ).
E„' are constants, independent of 0. In cobalt it is The next term is of the sixth degree: n. 'n2'a. 3'. This
actually found that a very good representation of the is as far as one usually needs to go in fitting the observa-
experimental observations is given by the erst two tions, so that for iron
terms:
f~ E~' sin'0+Ei' —
sin'tt, (2.2.2)
fx= Ei(cxq (xi +o!i cia +(xi txP)+Ego!PQ!i (xi (2.2.4)
Q.
IO0, OOO 0
I-
0
V)
200, 000
0 z
-400 -200 0 200 400 600 800 I 0OO
TEMPERATURE IN DEGREES C
0
0 100 200 300 400
TEMPERATURE IN DEGRE ES K
X I06
I2
-2 -2
"200 100 0 IOO 200 300 400 0 40 80 I20 160 200 240 280 320
TEMPERATURE IN C TEMPERATURE IN DEGREES KELVIN
Fn. 19. Temperature dependence of the principal anisotropy constants of (a) iron, (b) nickel, (c) cobalt, (d) MnBi.
the anisotropy constants, much smaller than are spontaneously gives only very small values of the
observed; (c) the anisotropy constants are found to be anisotropy —
about 10 ' of the observed values in iron
very sensitive to temperature changes, and it is not and nickel. In uniaxial crystals the dipole-dipole inter-
unusual for even the sign of the constants to change action may contribute a small amount to the ani-
between low and high temperatures. sotropy energy, but the eGect is not usually significant.
First with regard to the exchange energy: the ex- The anisotropy energy of the uniaxial crystal MnBi is
change energy operator refers only to the angle between of the order of 10' ergs/cc, while the dipole-dipole
various spins: I,
energy is only of the order of 2, or less than 10' ergs/cc.
II= —2JQS,"S; (2.2.6) Furthermore, the change in sign of the anisotropy
constant in the system of face-centered alloys of iron
and not at all to the angle between the spin and the and nickel, as shown by Fig. 18, is not intelligible in
crystal structure; that is, we may rotate the whole terms of magnetic dipole interactions.
spin system by any angle with respect to the crystal The temperature dependence of the principal ani-
structure without changing the exchange energy of the sotropy constants of iron, nickel, cobalt, and the
system. compound MnBi is shown in Fig. 19; it is seen that
The ordinary magnetic moment interaction between the variations are quite erratic and discourage any
electrons leads to too small values of the anisotropy. simple interpretation.
In Appendix 8 we prove that the magnetic dipole The origin of the anisotropy energy is believed at
moment interaction gives zero anisotropy for an un- present (Sommerfeld and Bethe, 1933; Brooks, 1940;
strained cubic lattice; allowing a cubic lattice to deform Van Vleck, 1947) to be the result of the combined
PH YSI CAL THEORY OF FERROMAGNETI C DOMAI NS 555
sects of spin-orbit interaction and the partial quench- of high permeability. For example, the permalloy and
ing of the orbital angular momentum (by inhomo- allied series of Fe-Mi alloys containing about 78 percent
geneous crystalline electric fields and by orbital ex- Ni have exceptionally high permeabilities; in the case
change interaction with neighboring atoms). In other of supermalloy the maximum permeability is of the
language, the magnetization of the crystal "sees" the order of a million. Near 75 Ni —25 Fe the magneto-
crystal lattice through the agency of the orbital motion striction also is very low: this is another requirement
of the electrons; the spin interacts with the orbital for high permeability. The exceptional properties of
motion by means of the spin-orbit coupling and the the Permalloys are attributable to the fact that both
orbital motion in turn interacts with the crystal struc- the anisotropy and magnetostriction are small for the
ture by means of the electrostatic fields and overlapping particular alloy composition.
wave functions associated with neighboring atoms in
the lattice. The theory as developed along these lines is 2.3 Magnetoelastic Energy
quite complicated, even when rather drastic approxi- The magnetoelastic energy is that part of the energy
mations are made. An excellent review of the present
of a crystal which arises from the interaction between
theoretical position is given by Van Vleck, 1947. the magnetization and the mechanical strain of the
One result which may be anticipated from the theory lattice. The magnetoelastic energy is defined to be
of anisotropy is that the magnetic anisotropy energy zero for an unstrained lattice.
will tend to be large for crystals where the lattice of
The close physical relationship which exists between
magnetic ions is of low symmetry, while the anisotropy the anisotropy and magnetostriction constants is not
energy is expected on the whole to be low for crystal revealed clearly in the standard discussions of the
lattices of high symmetry. This tentative rule is sug- in ferromagnetics. It is of the
energy relationships
gested by the fact that the anisotropy energy enters primary importance to recognize that there mill be mo
only in a higher order approximation in a cubic crystal tznear rnagnetostrzction if the anisotropy energy is inde
than in a uniaxial crystal. The observational data pendent of the state of strain of the crystal. Magneto-
support our hypothesis: the anisotropy energy of the striction occurs because the anisotropy energy depends
cubic crystals Fe and Ni is of the order of 10' ergs/cc, on the strain in such a way that the stable state of the
while it is of the order of 10' ergs/cc for the hexagonal
crystal is deformed with respect to a cubic lattice.
crystals Co and MnBi and probably also of the order That is, a crystal will deform spontaneously if to do
of 10' ergs/cc for the ordered state of the alloy FePt in so will lower the (anisotropy) energy. We proceed
which the Fe atoms by themselves form- a trigonal
now to examine the nature of the interaction between
lattice. There is considerable interest in high anisotropy magnetization and strain in cubic crystals, and to
energy in connection with the development of perma- derive energetic relationships in terms of the experi-
nent magnet materials with high coercivity.
5X105
Experirnenta/ Data on Anisotropy Energy
We review here brieAy a selection of the experimental 4'4
material on anisotropy energy; for further data and a
description of measurement methods the useful sum-
mary article by Bozorth (1937) may be consulted.
—
Iron-nickel alloys. The anisotropy constant E& at
room temperature for the face-centered (y-phase) sys-
tem Fe-Ni are plotted in Fig. 18. For pure Ni, E~ = — 3.4 V
X10' ergs/cc and E2=5.0X10' ergs/cc; for pure Fe,
Ez —4.2X10z ergs/cc and Ez 1.5X10z ergs/cc-— . V
—
Iron-cobalt alloys. Results at room temperature for
CL'
z
0
coupling constants, 81 and 82, which have more existence of magnetostriction would have no direct
fundamental signi6cance. effect on the result of the anisotropy measurement.
Now in terms of the strains we have readily However, in practice one actually measures the ani-
sotropy at contest stress, so that the lattice is allowed
st to deform under the action of magnetoelastic forces.
=—
Ze P P'' (2.3.12)
We consider the general expression (2.3.6) for the
energy, eliminate the strains through Eqs. (2.3.9) and
since by definition of the strains (noting particularly (2.3.10), and express the 8's in terms of the )1's, and
the definition of the shear strains used by Love): obtain finally
.
x'= (1+e. )x+-'2e y+-', e. s
y = 2egox+ (1+cog)y+2e2 z
. (2.3.13) where
I' = (E+&E)(C21'4222+422'423'+C33'al') (2.3.17)
.
s' = —e2, x+-2e„,y+ (1+e„)
s, hE= (9/4)[(cll —C12)Xioo' —2C44X111']. (2.3.18)
whence
For AE= — 5X102
7. ergs/cc, so that here E/E
—10iron
Il
b(P) =2l bl=2P+e;;P, P; '. For nickel we have AE— 2X10' ergs/cc, whence
from which Eq. (2.3.12) follows immediately. d, E/E — 10 '.
On substituting the values of the e;; given by Eqs.
(2.3.9) and (2.3.10) we have IsotroPi c Magn etostricti on
rr
strips of alternate sign. —
must not count dipoles twice the expression (2.4.6)
I when applied to self-energy effectively counts each
dipole once as a source of field and once as a magnet
in the field. The correct result is
(2.4. 7)
tension, we also have
Etti psoidal Speci men
f ,= ~'AT sin'8. (2.3.22)
Terms independent of 8 have been dropped. We shall If the specimen is in the form of an ellipsoid and is
require this expression in Section 6.2. magnetized along one of the principal axes, the self-field
is given by
2.4 Magnetostatic Energy H= —EI, (2.4.8)
We shall not give a detailed discussion of the subject where X is the demagnetizing factor. Values of are E
of magnetic energy, for this would be a rather long tabulated in useful form by Osborn (1945). Then
story, but we shall discuss several particular situations Eq. (2.4.7) becomes
of direct interest to domain theory. A more general f ,
g= 'iVI2. (2.4.9)
treatment may be found in papers by Guggenheim This relation is very useful.
(1936) and Fokker (1939).
Here we are concerned with: Distribution of Poles on a P/ane
(1) The energy of interaction of a permanent magnet We consider the magnetic field energy of coplanar
with a uniform external magnetic field: strips of alternate sign (Fig. 21). Let the plane of the
f„.
, = —I H, (2.4. 1)
strips be the (x, y) plane with the y axis parallel to the
axis of the strips; the width of a single strip is D and
per unit volume. the pole strength per unit area of strip is The mag- I.
(2) The self-energy of a permanent magnet in its netic energy per unit area is, from Eq. (2.4. 7),
own field is
f„.
, = —')I(-, H, (2.4.2) o = —(1/2) H Idk. (2.4. 10)
per unit volume, which for an ellipsoid may be written
Now the vertical or s-component of the magnetic field
(2.4.3)
directly below the plane of the strips is given by the
per unit volume, where T is the demagnetizing factor; I'ourier expansion of a square-wave of amplitude —2ml.
and for parallel strips of poles of alternating sign, The approximate solution of the Laplace equation is
o-,g = 0.8525I,'D, (2.4.4) H. = %2irIl (4/s. ) sinkx e+~'
per unit area, where D is the width of a strip. +terms in odd multiples of k] (2.4.11)
(3) The eRect of finite anisotropy energy on Eq. where k= (~/D). For the present the harmonic terms
(2.4.4), which holds only for the case of infinite ani- in the expansion will be neglected. Then
sotropy energy (completely "frozen-in" spins):
o .,=l 2/(1+tr*)](0.8525I'D) t *=1+27rI2/E (2.4.5) =4P t e"*ds(lsinkxl).
for glancing angles of the magnetization vector with
respect to the surface. The mean value of sinkxl isl
2/m. , so that
We can easily treat along similar lines the energy of in a medium of permeability (p, 1, p), subject to the
an arbitrary periodic distribution of poles on a plane. boundary condition that the diGerence in H, at the
Let p(x, y) be the surface pole density, which is sup- surface shall be equal to &4xI, sin8. Suppose that the
posed periodic in the fundamental area which is a solution for the potential problem for p 1 is y(x, s).
rectangle of sides 2~L, and 2mL, . Then p may be For the actual problem we take the potential as
expanded in a double Fourier series Ap(x, ns) for s)0 and as Ay(x, ps) for s(0.
Then the
equality of the surface charge in the two problems leads
to
p(x, y) =P PC „exp[i(mg+nq)), (2.4. 14)
An(8q/Bs), ~+pAP(8qr/Bs), 0
= 2(8q/Bs), =+, (2.4.20)
where $= /xL„&=y/L„, and
2w 2m A = 2/(n+Py). (2.4.21)
C„„=
~2J
I
' ' "'
J 0 p(,
g)e "' (2
'~m&+. ~id dg
' 415)
' ' The condition that div E=O gives
The p~-correct oe
2Ep —III, = 0, (2.4.25)
so that
The question of the energy of a pole distribution on y=HI, /2E. (2.4.26)
a plane surface is not quite as simple as it may appear
at first sight. The complication arises from the fact
Now the magnetization parallel to II is l, q, so that the
susceptibility is
that the spins are not really "frozen-in" along the
directions of easy magnetization, but can deviate from y=I, p/H=I 2/2E, (2.4.27)
these directions under the inhuence of the Geld caused
by the pole distribution. Only for extremely high values
of the anisotropy energy can the spins be considered as
frozen-in along the easy directions.
The corrections to the magnetostatic energy which
must be made on this account will depend on the
particular situation. Various situations have been dis-
cussed by Lifshitz, Keel, and Shockley. We follow the
treatment of Shockley (1948). We consider the case of
parallel strips of poles of alternating sign &I, sin0,
where the easy axis makes a small angle 8 with the
surface of the crystal, as shown in Fig. 22. The response
of the magnetization to a magnetic held may be
described by three permeabilities p, p, and p, Here
p„— 1, since the magnetization in the x-direction cannot
be increased appreciably; and p —p„by
symmetry.
The problem is first to solve for the Geld distribution FIG. 22. Model for p* calculation.
CHARLES K»TE"
l t
N N
t
I t
N t
N
, f~I'~ ~)
P/
p~
'I
I
~i~
xf &I Ill I &
6t ~p'
) a ~g
g ~
g
/'
/' //
I
I !
t
I I
;„,
The notatio P
effective p
'
'. y
cab jlity aused by an so op
p* are 46 for Fe an d 3 6 fpi Cp
' Vl-"«
the
-,l.
)or the ex
-dS-
r between
h each other;
h"p",
.ld""d
t o making a
e exchang~
t m measure
hng, h.
LOCH ~PLL
THE gL
3 1 ggtj. od&ctog" Re~ ~s angle change
. the ex ge energy between each pa'
The ter
erm h wall" denptes th transitionlayer atoms is
'
d acent doma»ins m g ed in differ- 'LV ex =ps'(v w'&)'. (3.1.2
h (1932)' ho
he total exch»g
n e energ f the line «& ] atpms is
further deve p
layer were made b y Landau an gs'po'/&. .
(3..13)
l, ,fs itz (1944 Qee l (1944a);. an Herring an d Kittel lf the tota ange o a
(t t e submitt ed correspon din g tP a rev a netization
The essentiaja]. idea the g]och wal is that e entire
. on passing throug h the wall, th en the exc an
.
change in sP' s ln directio between do ma lns mag netized
. diferent dlrirections goes «
of a line o& aatoms t h ugh a wa ll y00 atpms lin thickness
. o le not cur in one
occu pntin- is of the prder pf T 1pp, as comp d wl'th k~ f
us jump ac o atomic p lane. R ther the wall onn] y pne ato — -layer thic
j ckness ~ ~
change of direction w ill take place l way Since the etc hange
a energy pf a wa ll is inverse y
~ ~
. .
over maan y atomic p anes (F'g 23 ' The reas n fpr the prppprtip 'naltote
h. thickness q 3 13)) the wa Kq,
di,
o
dua] nature p the change 's is the fact that for a given m&gi ht sp~~~d pu t until it fjlled a siza l ep rppprtlon
' '
total c"ange spln tion the excha n g e energy is the crystal, w ere it not fpr o the restrai in g egect of th e
'
lpwer when the change is distribut' d pver many sp ins anisptropy energy, w hich ic acts to lm the wi th of t
'mit
than when the change pccurs abrup tl y'
.
translsition lay . The splns con tained within the wa]l
beh» o' be understoo eel
ex ression re largely dlrec ted away f«m
are m the ax pf ea, sy magne-t-
PHVSICAL THEORY OF FERROMAGNETIC DOMAINS
ization, so that there is a certain amount of anisotropy The total wall energy per unit area is
energy associated with the wall. The amount of ani-
sotropy energy will be roughly proportional to the
0;„=2m[JE. S'/a]'* (3.2.7)
thickness of the wall, since the thickness is a measure which in iron is of the order of magnitude
of the total volume directed away from the axes of
easy magnetization.
o=(k.T,E/a j»= [10 "10'/10 '$»
The actual thickness and energy of the transition
= 1 erg/cm'.
layer is the result of a balance between the competing It turns out that the exchange and anisotropy energy
claims of exchange energy and anisotropy energy, the contributions are equal to each other.
former tending to increase the thickness and the latter In the above estimate we have rather arbitrarily
tending to decrease the thickness. supposed that the total change in spin direction is.
shared equally by each of the E atoms on a line through
3.2 Estimate of Thickness and Enexgy
the wall; we have also used a very rough estimate of the
of Bloch Wa11
anisotropy energy of the spin system within the wall.
We proceed to make a rough order of magnitude These approximations are dispensed with in the more
estimate of the thickness and energy of a Bloch wall, exact and rigorous treatment which follows.
deferring' until later detailed treatments of specific
situations and comparison with experimental results. 3.3 180 Degree Walls in (100) Plane of Iron
Let us consider a wall parallel to the cube face of a We consider now in detail the important case of a
simple cubic lattice and separating domains magnetized wall parallel to a (001) plane of iron, separating domains
in opposite directions, as in Fig. 24. We wish to deter-
magnetized in opposite directions. The directions of
mine the thickness of the wall in terms of the number domain magnetization may be taken as [100) and
.E of atomic planes contained within the wall, and we
[100j, as shown in Fig. 24. Equivalent solutions for
wish also to determine the energy per unit surface the properties of the wall in this case were given by
area, 0-„. I.ifshitz (1944) and Neel (1944a).
The energy per unit surface area may be represented We suppose that the rotation of the spin direction on
to a good approximation as the sum of contributions passing through the wall is such that the spiv directions
from exchange and anisotropy energies: lie in the plane of the wall; this is the result for this
&w = &ex+ &anis. (3.2. 1) specific case of the more general requirement that the
normal component of the magnetization remain con-
The exchange energy is given approximately by Eq. stant through the wall, so that no poles are formed.
(3.1.3) for each line of atoms through the wall and The absence of poles is decided by considerations of
normal to the plane of the wall. There are 1/a' such minimum magnetostatic energy: it may be noted that
lines per unit area, where u is the lattice constant; the magnetostatic energy of a double layer IOOOA in
whence
„= 7r'JS'/Na'. (3.2.2)
thickness with surface pole density &I, per unit area
0
8 since
f„=(d8/ds)',
A (3.3.3)
2
o
n~= cos9, n2= sine, 0.
n3 ——
2 80
0
I- The wall energy per unit area is then
O
4J
G
2
"I 3o' [E sin'8 cos'8+A (d8/ds)'$ds, (3.3.4)
2
lal
o
Z
0
'-3 -2 -I 0 I 2 3 4
NORMALI2ED COORDINATE PERPENDICULAR TO PLANE OF WALL [g(8)+A8' jds (3.3.5)
VA/ K
FIG. 25. Variation of spin direction within a 90 Bloch wall, by setting g(8) = E sin'8 cos'8 and 8'= d8/ds.
as from L100] to [010] in the (001) plane. In Eq. (3.3.5) 8 is to be determined as a function of
s to minimize the integral on the right. %e require
the normal component of the magnetization is constant therefore that the variation 80. be identically zero for
on passing through the wall. any small variation 88:
The calculation of the properties of the wall will
6rst be carried through neglecting magnetoelastic [g'(8) 88+ 2A8'd88/ds jds = 0. (3.3.6)
energy; the eGect of the magnetoelastic energy associ-
ated with the wall will be considered subsequently.
Let 8 be the angle between the spin direction and the On integrating by parts, noting that
x-axis. The anisotropy energy density in the x, y plane 8'(d/ds) 88= (d/ds) (8'88) —88(d8'/d. ),
is then, according to Eq. (2.2.4),
and that 8'88 vanishes at both limits, we have
= E(n 'n '+nrsn '+nssnss) = E sin 8 cos'8 (3.3.2)
fry
since ns —0. The exchange energy density (Eq. (2.1.11)) 8o „= [g'(8) 2A (d8'/ds) —
j88ds= 0; (3.3.7)
f., = A[(Vn, )'y(Vn, )'+(Vn, )sj
this equation can be identically satisfied over the range
of s only if
g'(8) —2A (d8'/dz) = 0. (3.3.8)
This is the Euler equation of the problem.
Z//A/K On multiplying by 8' and integrating over s between
—~ and z, we 6nd
60
g(8) = A (d8/ds)', (3.3.9)
since 0'=0 at s= —~.
This relation shows that at
every point of the wall the local anisotropy energy
density g(8) is equal to the local exchange energy
90 90 density A(d8/ds)', it follows that in directions of high
anisotropy energy neighboring spins make larger angles
with each other than in directions of low anisotropy
energy.
From Eq. (3.3.9) we have
120
ds=+A (3.3.10)
(g(8))'
so that Eq. (3.3.5) becomes
~82
$0
IV V
0 )0-4 Z
co N C/)
LL V)
LLJ
&. tA
z
~ t9
O
x
~
Z2 0$ 10-&
LLJ
O
001 10 6
102 10 104 105 10 10
ANISQTROPY ENERGY DENSITY IN FRGS/CM
FIG. 27. Approximate dependence of wall energy and wall thickness on crystalline anisotropy energy;
exchange integral approximately as for iron. (180' wall)
which gives the result rather rough experimental value deduced by Williams,
Bozorth and Shockley (1949) based on domain pattern
o =2(EA)'*.
measurements.
Value of the Wall Energy War Tbzcumess
Now for iron A = 2.0X 10 ' ergs/cm from Eq. The thickness of the wall may be found with the
(2.1.18), while E~ —4.2X10' ergs/cc, so that help of Eq. (3.3.10):
o (Fe) =1.8 ergs/cm'. (3.3.13) ds= (A/E)-'* (3.3.14)
This is an important and basic result. Several remarks sin0 cos0
or
may be made regarding the probable reliability of this s—so
—(A/E) l log(tan8/tan8O). (3.3.15)
value for the energy of a 180 degree transition layer in
an (001) plane. Taking s'o=0 at OO=45', we have
(1) The anisotropy constant E2 is omitted because s= (A/E)'*
the associated energy term E2n&'n2'o. &' is zero in an log tan0. (3.3.16)
(001) plane. This equation is plotted in Fig. 25 for the range 0(0
(2) Neel (1944) arrives at o = 1.4 ergs/crn' for the (s. /2. The s coordinate is plotted as a multiple of the
same situation, as a result of using an estimate of the fundamental length (A/E)' which is equal to 2.3X10 '
exchange interaction constant A obtained in a different cm, or 230A, in iron. Of the 90 degrees change shown
manner (from the Curie point, using a Weiss field); on the vertical scale, 70 degrees takes place for As
any estimate of A must be regarded as somewhat — 3.5(A/E)'*, or (ds)~o =800A=280 lattice constants.
tentative, but we would like to suggest that the value The angle between successive spins is of the order of
deduced from the experimental coefFicient in the Bloch 4 degree.
T' law should be used for wall energy calculations, as However, the expression 3.3.16 does not lead to a
the physical situation in a spin wave is quite similar to convergent answer for even the approximate thickness
that in a Bloch wall. of a 180' wall; this is because the wall tends to split
(3) It will be shown below that consideration of up into two 90' walls, separated by an in6nite distance.
magnetoelastic energy has only a negligible effect on The difFiculty is somewhat 6ctitious and is removed by
the numerical value (Eq. (3.3.13)) of the wall energy in the effect of magnetostriction. A large domain can be
iron, although magnetostriction does have a profound formed at 90' between two antiparallel domains only
effect on the thickness of the wall. at the expense of a considerable magnetoelastic energy:
(4) For 3.85 percent SiFe we have approximately since each domain is elongated in the direction of its
A=1.7X10 ' ergs/cm; E=2.8X10' ergs/cc; so that magnetization the 90' domain does not freely jibe
o„=1. 4 ergs/cm'. This value is compatible with the across its boundaries with the antiparallel domains, and
CHARLES KI TTEL
E:ASY AXIS Mathematically, the effect of magnetostriction wi11
be shown to be equivalent to adding to the anisotropy
energy density (Eq. (3.3.2)) the term
(a) f. (9/4) (crt —C12))ttpp2 sin'8, (3.3.17)
where X100 is the saturation value of the longitudinal
EASY AXIS
magnetostriction in the L100j direction, and c11, c12 are
the moduli of elasticity. The proof is given here.
As a consequence of magnetostriction the part of the
crystal magnetized in the &x direction is strained by
(Eq. (2.3.9))
C11+C12
e = —81 (3.3.18)
d«ooA (cl1 C12) (cl1+ 2C12)
(c)
e»= e» —81 (3.3.19)
(Cl1 C12) (Cll+ 2C12)
Fro. 28. Stable saturated magnetic configurations. (a) Long
ellipsoid parallel to easy axis; (b) hollow rectangle with each side Here 8& is a magnetoelastic coupling constant and is
parallel to easy axis; (c} very Gne particle.
related to ) 100 by Kq. j2.3.16jj:
t',
(3.3.24)
(2/E) '*
(sin'8 cos'8+P sin'8)'
N S N S N S
P= (9/4)(c11 —C12))ttpp /E. (3.3.25)
For iron, P=2X10 ',so that the effect of mag22etoehastic
EASY
AXIS
ie irorI, is negligible.
energy on the mull energy
The solution of Eq. (3.3.24) is
(1+Pp &
sinhs(E(1+P)/2) = —
*
S S S ctn8 (3.3.26)
t. P )
I
N N N I
would be associated with a saturated magnetic con- FzG. 30. Energy of domain structure as function
Gguration. of domain width D.
The incentive that a given specimen has to form
domains will then depend on the magnitude of the shown in (b) for a uniaxial crystal in the form of a
demagnetizing eBects associated with a single domain rectangular cylinder.
or saturated conGguration in the specimen. For example, The area of Bloch wall is L/D per unit area of the
all of the arrangements shown in Fig. 28 are stable. crystal surface, looked at from above, The wall energy
In (a) we have a long fine prolate spheroid with a is then
direction of easy magnetization parallel to the shape
axis; for sufficiently large values of the axial ratio the per unit, surface area, where o- is the surface energy
saturated single domain configuration will have a lower density of a Bloch wall. The magnetic field energy
total energy than an arrangement with domain struc- associated with the parallel charged strips normal to
ture. That is, the decrease in magnetic energy accom- the paper is, according to Eq. (2.4.4),
panying domain structure can be in this case less than
the energy required to set up the requisite transition wm, g
—1.7I,'D
layers (Bloch walls) between domains.
per unit surface area when both top and bottom surfaces
In (b) we have a structure with four domains. There are taken into account; here I,
is the saturation magnet-
is no magnetic Geld energy here, since there are no poles
anywhere (except for a relatively trivial pole strength
ization. The variation of ~~ and x,
w D is „with
plotted in Fig. 30. For large D the magnetic field energy
on the edges of the Bloch walls). The normal component
is dominant, and for small D the wall energy is domi-
of the magnetization is continuous across the diagonal
nant.
Bloch walls shown as dotted lines, and this is the The total energy per unit surface area is
condition that there be no poles on the walls. A crystal
with the domain structure discussed here has been ~ = ~wall+ ~magq (4 1 3)
produced by Williams and Shockley (1949). ol
In (c) we have a very fine particle, with a diameter w = o„L/D+1.7I,'D, (4.1.4)
of the order of (for iron) 100A or less. Here a single
domain structure is stable because the amount of 0 +—
exchange energy required to set up a non-magnetic
configuration will exceed the magnetic energy of the
single domain configuration. This inequality is only
valid for very small dimensions. There is considerable
experimental evidence for the stability of single domain EASY
AX!.S 1(
structure in small particles, as will be discussed in a
later section.
The crystal shapes shown in Fig. 29 are, on the other
hand, favorable to domain structures along the lines
indicated, provided always that the crystals are of Xl-V-'V-~~
macroscopic dimensions. We shall consider now the
optimum slab thickness D for a domain structure as FzG. 31. Flu& closure domain configuration in uniazial crystal.
566 CHARLES KITTEL
„,
w, , = ED/2. (4.2.2)
which is of the order of
The wall energy tends to increase the domain width,
w= 2[(1 7) (1.7X10')'(2) (1)]'=7 X 10' ergs/cm'. (4.1.9) while the anisotropy energy tends to decrease the width.
Since the crystal was taken with L=1 cm, the energy The total energy is
per unit volume is of the order of 7X10' ergs/cc, w= (o L/D)+(ED/2) (4.2.3)
whereas the magnetic field energy density obtaining
with a saturated single domain structure would be of per unit area, and this is a minimum with respect to
the order of I,'=10' ergs/cc. This shows that, quali- the domain width D when
tatively, the formation of domairts has reduced the energy
(Bw/BD) = (o„L/D')+(K/2) =—
0. . (4.2.4)
of the system by a very considerable amount
If we had taken L= j.0 ' cm, as in a thin film, then The condition for the minimum is then:
the energy density of the domain structure would also
have been of the order of 10' ergs/cc, which is of the D= [2o„L/E]t (4.2.5)
same order as the magnetic energy density of the
saturated film. It becomes apparent that size plays an
important role in domain structure. FIG. 33. EGect of magnetostric-
tion on domains of closure. Dotted
curve shows on exaggerated scale
4.2 Flux Closure Domain Con6gurations the volume which would be occu-
pied by the material in a domain
It is possible to devise a domain arrangement for the of closure if the constraint exerted
rectangular slab just discussed which will have no by the rest of the crystal were
removed.
magnetic poles. Such an arrangement, first treated by
PHYSICAL THEORY OF FERROMAGNETIC DOMAINS 567
„,
6elds by electron scattering.
the superficial structure depends on the relative values
of magnetic, anisotropy and magnetoelastic energies
the other part, m, &„f, t, the local energy associated at the crystal surface.
with the outer surfaces of the crystal. We may suppose In cobalt the anisotropy energy is dominant and as
that for slab-like domains a result the Aux closure is incomplete. A typical domain
~mali=& L/D (4.2. 15) pattern obtained on a hexagonal face of a cobalt crystal
is shown in Fig. 35. L. H. Germer (1942) has confirmed
where I. is same characteristic average length, while by electron beam methods the existence of strong local
w, „~,„y„,g(D)—
i
— (4.2. 16) magnetic fields of the order of 10,000 oersteds just at
the hexagonal face of a cobalt crystal. 30 kilovolt
is some function of the slab width. The nature of the electrons scattered from a hexagonal face produce on a
dependence is determined by the structure of the photographic plate an exceedingly complex pattern
surface domains. The minimum energy occurs for the (Fig. 36) made up of curves or arcs interlaced in elabo-
slab width Do for which rate fashion. Iron and nickel crystals show no similar
phenomenon, and it may be inferred that the magnetic
(& I-/Dos)+g'(Do) =O. (4.2. 17) fields are very weak, as would be expected from domain
It is important to appreciate the fact that the arrangements in which the Aux circuit is closed inside
domain structures of most crystals fall naturally into the crystal. The results for cobalt, of course, suggest
two classifications, a superficial domain structure which that the Qux circuit is not closed inside the crystal, in
is connected with the local details of Aux closure on the this case, and this conclusion is in agreement with
crystal surfaces, and the basic domain structure running theoretical expectation.
through most of the volume of the sample. The super- In the extreme case of very high anisotropy energy
ficial structure very often assumes a highly complicated one may expect the domains to be slab-like over their
xiii
~ ~ I
" sss I IR6IBSl
goal, %! 5!Il+
Nil
II ~
, ,BllPlf)'„
;
K,
Fro. 36(b). Results obtained in scattering of electrons from the hexagonal face of a cobalt single crystal (Germer, 1942).
PH YS I CAL THEORY OF F E RROMAGN ET I C DOMAINS 569
~
~
~
particle volume as 10 "
cc, we must have a field
variation
3(1.4X10 ")(3X10')
H) (3k T/ii) = =3X10 4 oersteds
MAGNETIZATION PARALLEL TO SCRATCH (4X 10s)(10-»)
FIG. 39. Determination of the magnetization axis by in order that an appreciable density variation may
means of the scratch technique. "
occur. For a particle volume of 10 cc, corresponding
approximately to a diameter of 0.1 micron, the magnetic
is given by the Boltzmann distribution function. That
field variation must exceed 0.3 oersteds.
is, the particle density p(H) at a point where the field
Now there are field variations at the surface of a
intensity is H is related to the density p(0) where the
ferromagnetic crystal greatly exceeding 0.0003 or 0.3
field is zero by the relation
oersteds. On a crystal surface with a Aux closure
p(H, 8) = p(0) exp(liH cos8/kT), (5.1.1) domain configuration, as in Fig. 31, there will be local
fields along the lines where the plane of the Bloch walls
where 8 is the angle the magnetic moment p of the intersect the surface. As the change in spin direction
within a Bloch wall occurs in the plane of the wall, it is
evident that if we cut oG the wall, as we must do at the
crystal surface, then the spins in the wall will have a
component of magnetization normal to the crystal
surface. ' That is, there will be a line of either or 5 S
poles wherever a Bloch wall comes out on the surfaces
of the specimen. These lines of free poles produce a
magnetic field which is quite adequate for the purpose
of forming a dense line of colloid particles. As a very
crude estimate, we may consider the perpendicular
intersection of a wall with the surface of a crystal of
iron to produce a pole density I, on a strip about 10 '
cm wide, corresponding to a linear pole density
g= (1700) (10 ') =0.02 gauss/cm.
At a distance of one micron from the wall this produces
a field H= 2g(r = 2(0.02)/10 '=400 oersteds.
This estimate shows that the field intensity due to
the edge of a Bloch wall is several orders of magnitude
greater than that needed to form a dense line of colloid
particles. Actually our estimate must be corrected for
the p*-eGect discussed in Section 2.4. That is, we must
allow for the fact that the line of poles rests on perme-
able material, with permeability p*=1+2rrI.s/E. The
Fzo. 40. Drawing of colloid pattern on a (100) surface with a solution to the boundary-value problem of the field due
set of scratches parallePto the L010) axis. The magnetization is to a line of poles on a uniform permeable half-plane
parallel to L010$';.in~regions where the scratches do not appear,
and is parallel to L001j where the scratches are visible, 'gee Fig. 23,
PHYSICAL THEORY OI FERROMAGNETI C DOMAINS
20, 000
12.000
8, 000
4, 000
16,000
20, 000
0 20 40 60 80 )00
DISTANCE IN MM ON FILM
shows that the 6eld in the air is reduced with respect 5.Z. 1. 5cratch TechrIique
to the free space field by the factor 2/(1+p~), which is
In the absence of a magnetic field the direction of
equal to 0.047 for iron. The corrected field intensity
magnetization of the domains will be along the axes of
at one micron distance is about 20 oersteds, which is
still ample for the formation of a dense line of colloid easy magnetization of the crystal. In an iron crystal
there are three axes of easy magne tization, the
particles, as is actually observed.
The theory of line formation has also (Kittel, 1949b) three being mutually perpendicular and along the cube
been developed for the case of colloid particles which edges.
are not permanent magnets, but which are permeable
In interpreting a powder pattern we wish to know
the direction of magnetization in all parts of the
spheres, as is probably more often the case.
Particle concentration will also occur, and often to a pattern. We may determine the axis of the magnetiza-
tion in some important cases by what is known as the
great degree, in cases where there is not a Aux-closure
scratch technique; and the setose is then determined by
domain configuration, but where domains themselves
observing the expansion or contraction of the domain
come to an abrupt end on the crystal surface. This is
when acted on by an external magnetic 6eld parallel to
expected to occur in materials of high anisotropy energy,
and is in fact commonly found in cobalt and on a (111) the domain axis.
plane of iron.
The scratch technique may be understood by refer-
We have shown that large local concentrations of ence to an (001) surface of an iron crystal. The preferred
colloid particles occur on the faces of ferromagnetic axes are parallel to [100] and [010]. If we make a
specimens. These concentrations may be observed under fine scratch on the surface parallel to [100], we shall
an optical microscope, when the specimen is suitably get colloid deposition on the scratch from domains
illuminated. parallel to [010], but the scratch will not collect
colloid particles from domains parallel to [100]. That
5.2 Selection of Results of Powder Pattern Work is, colloid collects when the magnetization crosses the
We discuss now some of the results which have scratch, but not when the magnetization is parallel to
emerged from powder pattern studies. We shall treat the scratch. The situation is made clear by Fig. 39.
these three topics: It is the leakage Qux that attracts the colloid particles,
1. Determination of direction of magnetization by scratch and there is no leakage when the magnetization is
technique (Williams, 1947) parallel to the scratch.
2. Correlation between magnetization changes and boundary A drawing of a domain pattern demonstrating the
displacement {Williams and Shocl~ley, 1949)
3. Dagger blade domains around cavities and crystal imper- effect is shown in Fig. 40, which was obtained by
&ections (Williams, 1947). Williams (1947).
'sa Ij I te ;:--~l]E;-
«y-r ~
mgj
'
-' '"
Im Its
:.y
':;:?~
.
:,
'%LQ4'j'''""''"""""i~ywiiij'j" i'i%'.
""'::««» "'ll?iiPii ~i SISs
„.
IK
. %!F ?l?
«'?" "-'.
I I!
I I
,.c;8
J I SII II '.
I IQg ?H «?. s
«
t" . j~::;:::::, :::-:':::::::::.
:::;. :.
'::::3:.
'
5" ~~"'~""'-':.:"~:;:::::::::,
-.,
:::::, )P!. ','««ll ,":::,
im'
159
' -'
'-ltL-'~~ .p'A
, ~
l, ~m
b
~
~ I
I le '
l'
''ll
«l
J
i':::i?rJ' II-.m': . &.
l' '?
?u?' ~ o. I I +
r«. :;. I ~
l:,.
l?«
~r?I?'y. J
' 'i ' l l
?l'«: ~
4 t.'
IIJ
jj ss r I .'««?5'
8 IISI' ~ l
' s
'.
. ~ «?
iud 8'l~l K:-'::=:-:::=-.
"-':::&l
.9 I rj
~::::':::::.
:k::~&, ~.
M I Sl I554cm
FIG. 42. Domain structure around cavities: the structure in the left-hand drawing was predicted by Neel (1944b) on energy
considerations; the predicted pattern was found experimentally by Williams (1947).
5.Z. Z, Correlation betzeem 3Eagnetisatioe Charges aed form around the cavity, with a reduction in the total
Boundary Di sP/acemeut energy. The Keel structure has the effect of distributing
the poles along the curved portions of the boundaries.
In Fig. 11 we have given a sketch of the simple As the domain elongates the magnetostatic energy
domain structure found by Williams and Shockley decreases and the wall energy increases, and that
(1949) in a single crystal of iron (containing a small structure occurs for which the sum of the two energies
amount of silicon). Reversal of the magnetization is a minimum.
circuit shown in Fig. 11 (a) proceeds by the formation Williams (1947) has found domain patterns of the
and movement across the crystal of the Bloch wall expected type around holes in a silicon iron crystal.
shown in (b) in the form of a rectangle. The rectangle Measurement of the ratio of length to width of the
expands or contracts in size according to the relative Weel domains offers a possible experimental method for
amounts of Aux carried clockwise or counterclockwise. determining 0. , the surface energy density of a Bloch
If the wall shown goes straight through the crystal, wall. Values estimated in this way are of the correct
then we would expect to find a linear relationship order of magnitude.
between the change of magnetization and the displace-
ment of the Bloch wall relative to the side of the crystal. 6. MAGNETIC PROPERTIES OF
This result is verified by the measurements shown in SMALL PARTICLES
Fig. 41. This experiment must be considered as one of If the specimen is cooled from above the Curie point
the most fundamental experiments in the field of in field-free space, it is a matter of common observation
ferromagnetism, as it shows that there is a direct that the demagnetized state is the stable state in large
proportionality between wall displacement and net Aux. ferromagnetic crystals. In the demagnetized state
the domains are oriented so that the magnetic Aux
5.Z.3. Domain Structure Around Cavities
circuit lies almost entirely within the specimen, and the
Noel (1944b) pointed out that the presence of a overall magnetic moment of the specimen is approxi-
cavity in the magnetic material included in a domain mately zero.
will give rise to a considerable amount of magnetostatic As the dimensions are diminished, the relative contri-
energy because of the formation of E and S poles on butions of the various energy terms to the total domain
opposite faces of the cavity. He suggested that a local energy are changed, and surface energies become more
domain structure such as that shown in Fig. 42 would important than volume energies. The surface of the
PH YSI CAL THEORY OF F ERROMAGNETI C DOMA I NS 573
actual materials have not been discussed adequately. The energy here is largely in the form of exchange
The single domain behavior of small particles prom- energy. Consider the spins on a circular ring of radius
ises to be of great practical importance in connection r. There are 2~r/u spins on the ring, where u is the
with materials for permanent magnets. This is because length of a side of the unit cell. The total change in
of the very high values of the coercive force which it is angle in going around once is 2x, so that the angle y
possible to obtain with single domains. between successive spins is
Similarly, single domain behavior is expected in very q =u/r, (6.1.3)
thin films (Kittel, 1946), and experimental evidence for and
this is suggested by the recent work of Origo and Pizzo (1/2) J(u/r)2(2irr/u) = vr Ju/r,
w„;„~= (6.1.4)
(1948) on the Barkhausen effect in thin films of Fe, Ni,
and Co. They find that the Barkhausen eGect disap- by Eq. (2.1.5), with S=1. Now consider the sphere
made up of circular cylinders (Fig. 44), each one unit
pears when the thickness of the films is reduced to
10 ' cm, in good agreement with the theoretical value
cell in thickness. The number of rings in a cylinder is
(2/u)(R' — r')«, so that
of the critical thickness for single domain behavior.
w i — r2)«/r, —
2' J(R— 2
(6.1.5)
6.1 Critical Particle Size for Single
Domain Behavior
We shall consider a small spherical ferromagnetic
w, „i„„, = (2m J/u)
~B
[(R' —r')«/rjdr
particle of radius R; it is supposed for the sake of =(2%rJR/u)DB(2R/u) —1j (6.1.6)
concreteness that the particle is a single crystal. We
or, per unit volume,
are interested first of all in the critical particle size for
which the energy of the single domain configuration is
lower than the energy of configurations in which there
.
f, = (3/2) (J/uR') )le(2R/u) —1]. (6.1.7)
This energy density depends on the size of the sphere.
is a domain structure tending towards Qux closure.
The energy density of the saturated single domain
con6guration is in the form of magnetostatic energy,
and is equal to, from Eq. (2.4.3),
coercive force of fine particles of Fe, Co, and Ni, as I'IG. 46. Coercive force in an iron particle due to anisotropy of
calculated for various mechanisms. shape, as a function of the axial ratio of the particle.
6.2. 1 Coercive Force Resulting from Magnetocrystalline usually oriented at random. In this case Neel (1947a)
Anisotropy has shown that for cubic crystallites oriented at random
the coercive force for the average hysteresis loop is
The anisotropy energy density in a uniaxial crystal
may be written, to the first order, (H, )~„=0.
64K/I, (6.2. 10)
fx=Ki sli18, (6.2. 1) for E&0. This is about 160 oersteds for iron. If we
assume the same factor for cobalt, which is uniaxial,
according to Eq. (2.2.2); 8 is the angle between the we get (H, )~„=2500oersteds.
crystal axis and the direction of magnetization. The
magnetic energy density is, for an applied magnetic 6.Z. Z Coercive Force Resulting from Anisotropy
field Ho parallel to the crystal axis, of Particie Shape
f„.
, =HpI, cos8 (6.2.2) We suppose that the particle is in the shape of a
prolate spheroid. We restrict the discussion to the case
where the choice of sign was made to correspond to a
field direction opposite to the projection of magnetiza-
tion on the crystal axis (Fig. 45).
The total energy is
f=Ki'sin'8+HpI, cos8 (6.2.3)
and is a minimum with respect to 0 when e= 0 0-
Bf/88=0=2Ki'sin8cos8 —HpI, sin8 (6.2.4)
or
Hp=(2Ki'/I, ) cos8 (6.2.5)
which is a maximum (and therefore equal to the
coercive force) when 8=0. Thus,
H, =2Ki'/I, . (6.2.6) e =90' 0-
This result also applies to the case of cubic crystals
if the field is applied along a $001$ direction. For a
small 8 the anisotropy energy is
fK=K18 (6.2.7)
according to Eq. (A.3). The total energy is
f=Ki8'+HpI, cos8, (6.2.8) e =45' 0-
which is a minimum with respect to 8 when
8f/88=0=2Ki8 HpI sin8— 0
which, in the limit 0=0, gives H
H, =2Ki/I, (6.2.9) 2rrIS
Pro. 47. Magnetization curves for elongated particles, for the
applied field parallel, perpendicular, and at 45' to the long axis
In actual samples of powder materials the grains are of the particle.
576 CHARLES Kl r rEL
I. O of a long circular cylinder; here
THFORETICAL
CURVE
H, = 2prI, = 8,/2. (6.2. 13)
08 Values of the theoretical maximum H, for several
materials on the basis of the shape eAect are listed
below. These values do not consider interaction eGects,
06
9u ~ = EXPERIMENTAL POINTS FROM which are discussed later.
x GUILLAUD S DATA ON Mn Bi. USING
Hc = 20 000 dp = 9.0 MICRON S
~
Matenal Max. H, (oersteds)
U
0.4 Fe 10)700
Co 8, 800
Ni. 3, 150
0.2
The nature of the magnetization curves when the
shape e8ect is predominant is shown in Fig. 47, where
0
curves are given for the applied field parallel, perpen-
0 10 '12
dicular and at 45' to the long axis of the particle.
dp d
Stoner and Wohlfarth (1948) have shown that for
FIG. 48. Comparison of Guillaud's data on MnBi with theo- particle axes distributed in random orientations, the
retical lower limit to coercive force, H„as
function of particle average coercive force is given by
diameter d.
(H, )g, = 0.48(1V(—cVp) I, (6.2. 14)
where the applied magnetic field Hp is parallel to the
so that the above estimates should be reduced by
long axis of the spheroid, but opposite to the original
about one-half where the orientation is random.
direction of the magnetization.
Neel (1947b) has considered the case when the axial
Let N p denote the demagnetizing factor of the prolate ratio c/a of the prolate spheroid is nearly unity:
spheroid in the direction of the major axis, and let N~
denote the demagnetizing factor in any direction at c/8= 1+s.
right angles to the long axis. YVe have Np&N~, . for a
long circular cylinder Np=0 and N& —2m,. for a sphere
Here we have, by manipulating the analytical expres-
sions for the demagnetizing factors,
Ão= 1Vc=47r/3.
The energy is cVg —lIt'p=8v e/5 (6.2. 15)
f„„= (1/2)I, '(Xp cos'8+Nq sin'8)+HpI. cos8 (6.2. 11) so that, from Eq. (6.2. 13),
where the first term is the energy of the demagnetizing H, 87reI/5— (6.2. 16)
field and the last term is the magnetic energy due to
the applied field Hp. The energy is a minimum with
If the directions of the major axis are distributed at
random, Neel finds by graphical calculations that the
respect to 0 when
average coercive force is reduced by the factor 0.48,
Bf/88=0=I, '(X~ Np) cos8 sin8 —HpI, sin8. so that
0=0 and
(H, )g„—
0.48(8v./5) eI, (6.2.17)
The coercive force corresponds to is equal to
which gives (H.)g, = 4100e for iron.
H. = P~ —&o)I' (6.2. 12)
6.Z.3 Coercive Force Resulting from Longitudinal Stress
Values of the
coercive force calculated for iron
(I, =1700) using this equation are plotted in Fig. 46 The magnetoelastic energy density is (for isotropic
as a function of the axial ratio of the prolate spheroid. magnetostriction), according to Eq. (2.3.22),
The coercive force is a maximum for the limiting case f,= ssXT sin'8, (6.2. 18)
where X is a magnetostriction constant and T is the
applied stress. The total energy density in an applied
field Hp parallel to the stress is
I „p
i[
~
f= sPXT sin'8+HI, cos8, (6.2. 19)
which is a minimum with respect to 0 when
fz, I'
Bf/88=0=3XT cos8 sin8 —HI, sin8,
or, for 0=0,
H, = 3XT/I„ (6.2.20)
FH;. 49. Initial stage of magnetization reversal by formation of
Bloch transition wall of width 8. as was given by Stoner and Wohnarth. Where the
PHYSICAL THEORY OF FERROMAGNETIC DOMAINS
It
~A
been given by Kittel (1948), using a model (Fig. 49) FIG. 50. Approximate upper limit to particle diameter for
which applies to spherical particles of high anisotropy manifestations of single domain behavior.
material.
We consider a small sphere magnetized to saturation; is given by
when the field H, is applied it is supposed that a
D= do/2 = 12o/Ia . '
(6.2. 23)
domain wall forms as shown in Fig. 49. In this position
the energy balance is given approximately by the This relation is plotted in Fig. 50; the coordinates
equation calculated for Fe, Co, Xi, and MnBi have been plotted
=H, I, (m'p 8/8)+iI as short lines, so as to suggest the approximate nature
o(~p /4) U(5/2d). (6.2.21)
of the calculation. The particle diameter calculated
Here 0- is the surface energy density of a Bloch wall, from Eq. (6.2.23) may be considered as an approximate
p is the wall diameter, and 8 is the wall thickness; U is upper limit for pronounced manifestations of single
the volume of the sphere. The term on the left approxi- domain behavior. The relation assumes a high aniso-
mates the energy of formation of the wall; the first tropy energy, so that it is not really applicable to nickel
term on the right approximates the magnetic energy of and iron.
the wall material in the applied field H„while the
second term on the right is a crude estimate on dimen- 1000
sional grounds of the change in the magnetic self-energy
PRESSED PONDER
of the sphere. 70 Fe-30 C0
Using the geometrical relation p'=48d, we may write
Eq. (6.2.21) in the form 800
H, /H;=1 —(d/d, ),
where H, "=2o/8I, and do
— 4o/I
2. 2
Now, from th. e 0
600
theory of the Bloch wall, o (EkT,/u) and &
P'
K
have been considered in connection with the theory of LLI
10
coercive force. F. Bloch first suggested that inhomo- z ~ 0.3(HC)
geneous internal strains might play a role in determining zV 0 g
the resistance to boundary motion, and this idea was
3
developed by Kondorsky (1937) and Kersten (1938).
The theory of the effect of aggregates or inclusions of
foreign atoms was developed by Kersten (1943). An
1
important criticism and extension of both of these 0.3 3 10 30 100
PERCENT EXCESS COPPER
theories has been put forward by Neel (1946), who
stresses the part played by the demagnetizing energy FIG. 56. Coercive force of iron with heterogeneous inclusions of
precipitated copper, as a function of the excess of copper over
resulting from magnetization variations produced by and above the solubility limit 0.5 percent Cu at 600'C (after
both internal strains and inclusions. Kersten).
CHARLES KI TTEL
and the half-width 8 of the boundary wall, which is of
the order of o /E, where E is the anisotropy energy.
(a) Then
H, = (K'/I, ) (8/d) n*. (7.2.6)
This is derived on the supposition that the inclusion
diameter d is much greater than the wall thickness 6.
We may, to a rough approximation, suppose that the
maximum value of II, will occur when b=d, so that
I
Hp
(b)
Kersten gives
(H, ) „= (K/I, )n*. (7.2. 7)
j
SIBLEE
j
x
(H, ) ..=2.5(E/I, )ni; (7.2.8)
these values are plotted in Fig. 56 and are compared
-i I R REVERSIBLE with the experimental values of H, for iron with
REVER-
precipitated copper.
FIG. 57. Wall displacement in presence of a sinusoidal
stress distribution (Kersten). Initial Permeability orI, the Iecllsioe Model
The initial susceptibility xo is given by
Consideration of Fig. 55 shows that the wall energy
is given by gp = (dI/dx)/(dH/dx) . (7.2.9)
s' —m L(d'/4)
—x'j The magnetization change AI associated with the
o(x) =op boundary shift Ax between oppositely magnetized do-
$2
mains is given by
for j x~ &d/2. Taking the derivative, dZ = 2I,Phx/s (7.2.10)
(do/dx) = 2ops x/ss (7.2.2) where P=s/h; here ls is the average thickness of a
so that domain. From Eqs. (7.1.1) and (7.2.2),
(do/dx) .. =oped/s'. H = (1/2I, ) (do/dx) = 7r(o./I, ) (x/s'), (7.2. 11)
By combining Eqs. (7.1.2) and (7.2.3), the coercive = pr(o/I, ) (dx/s') = 27r(K/I, ) (h/s')dx
force is found to be dH (7.2. 12)
~ ~
If we write Eq. (A. 1) in terms of a polar angle g and an azi- for a face-centered cubic lattice, where
muthal angle q, then (Neel, 1944)
3 ' 1 5l4
f~ = Xi(sin'g —' sin4g —8 sin
—, g cos4q) (A.4) S=-z,
(Pym'+n')"' (P+m'+n')'f'
2
(B 7)
when the polar axis is a cube side; and
For b.c.c., S =0.4; while for f.c.c., S = 0.6. We have
/ E(-; ='3+ 't '3 —3
3 i '3 3g (A 3)
which is body-centered,
Calculated: B3= —0.7X10' ergs/cc;
then for iron,
B2=0.5X10' ergs/cc
when the polar axis is a body diagonal; finally, Observed: B3= —2.9X10' ergs/cc; B2 10.' ergs/cc
—
6 4X—
fx 'E= 3$(1
—, —4 sin'8+4 sin48)+ (6 sin'8 —4 sin48)sinsq and for nickel, which is face-centered,
—3 sin48 sin422$ (A.6)
Calculated: B3 = —0.04X 10" ergs/cc; B2 = 0.03 X 10' ergs/cc
when the polar axis is a face diagonal. The azimuthal angle q is Observed: B3= 6.2 X10" ergs/cc; B2=9.0 X10' ergs/cc.
referred to a cube edge.
The comparison of calculated with observed values demonstrates
APPENDIX B the inadequacy of dipole-dipole interactions.