On the accuracy of FFT based magnetostatic field evaluation schemes in micromagnetic hysteresis modeling

Micromagnetic hysteresis models for large, bulk like samples are useful for the identification of relations between microscopic material properties and macroscopic magnetic behavior. To bridge the gap between the nanometer space scale of the micromagnetic theory and the large sample dimensions, time and memory efficient numerical schemes are needed. In micromagnetic computations, fast Fourier transforms (FFTs) have been widely adopted to speed up magnetostatic field computations. In this paper, two FFT schemes are compared. The first scheme evaluates the magnetostatic field directly starting from the magnetization and has a large accuracy, while in the second scheme the magnetostatic field is derived from the scalar magnetic potential resulting in a reduced accuracy but also in a CPU time reduction for a magnetostatic field evaluation to 65% and a reduction of memory requirements to 55%. The influence of the low accuracy evaluations on the simulated macroscopic hysteresis behavior is studied. Therefore, comparison is made with the influence of thermal effects in hysteresis simulations. It is found that the resulting changes in macroscopic hysteresis behavior are of the same order of magnitude as the ones obtained when thermal fluctuations are taken into account in the high accuracy computations.

[1]  M. d’Aquino,et al.  Geometrical integration of Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation based on the mid-point rule , 2005 .

[2]  S. W. Yuan,et al.  Fast adaptive algorithms for micromagnetics , 1992 .

[3]  M. Schabes,et al.  Magnetostatic interaction fields for a three-dimensional array of ferromagnetic cubes , 1987 .

[4]  Michael J. Donahue,et al.  COMPARISON OF MAGNETOSTATIC FIELD CALCULATION METHODS ON TWO-DIMENSIONAL SQUARE GRIDS AS APPLIED TO A MICROMAGNETIC STANDARD PROBLEM , 1999 .

[5]  K. Fabian,et al.  Magnetic states of small cubic particles with uniaxial anisotropy , 1998 .

[6]  D. Berkov Numerical simulations of quasistatic remagnetization processes in fine magnetic particle systems , 1996 .

[7]  O. Bottauscio,et al.  Finite-Difference and Edge Finite-Element Approaches for Dynamic Micromagnetic Modeling , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics.

[8]  Michael J. Donahue,et al.  Exchange energy formulations for 3D micromagnetics , 2004 .

[9]  H. Kronmüller,et al.  Micromagnetism and the Microstructure of Ferromagnetic Solids , 2003 .

[10]  William H. Press,et al.  The Art of Scientific Computing Second Edition , 1998 .

[11]  A. Hubert,et al.  Optimizing stray field computations in finite-element micromagnetics , 1994 .

[12]  B. Van de Wiele,et al.  Fast Semianalytical Time Integration Schemes for the Landau–Lifshitz Equation , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics.

[13]  M. Donahue A VARIATIONAL APPROACH TO EXCHANGE ENERGY CALCULATIONS IN MICROMAGNETICS , 1998 .

[14]  F. A. Seiler,et al.  Numerical Recipes in C: The Art of Scientific Computing , 1989 .

[15]  J. W. Brown Thermal Fluctuations of a Single-Domain Particle , 1963 .

[16]  Luc Dupré,et al.  Influence of space discretization size in 3D micromagnetic modeling , 2008 .

[17]  Comparison of Finite-Difference and Finite-Element Schemes for Magnetization Processes in 3-D Particles , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics.

[18]  Luc Dupré,et al.  Fast numerical three-dimensional scheme for the simulation of hysteresis in ferromagnetic grains , 2007 .

[19]  A. Hubert,et al.  Solving Micromagnetic Problems. Towards an Optimal Numerical Method , 1993 .

[20]  Amikam Aharoni,et al.  Demagnetizing factors for rectangular ferromagnetic prisms , 1998 .

[21]  Sam Palmer,et al.  Magnetic domains , 2012, Journal of High Energy Physics.