In the case of one-grain system, the best performance for
corresponds to the media with high soft and hard layers
magnetization mostly due to the additional shape anisotropy. The media
with low magnetization hard layer and high
magnetization soft layer is unfavorable for small and intermediate
exchange but has the best performance for completely coupled system. As
could be noticed here, the best performance in the case of
multigrain systems corresponds clearly to the case of small
magnetization soft and hard layers. However, this combination is
benefited from the inclusion of the saturation magnetization in the
denominator of the figure of merit. More than
of the
exchange is necessary in this case in order to maximize the figure
of merit. The behavior in all the cases does not reach saturation.
The difference in the best media for multigrain and one grain systems
stresses the importance of performing realistic granular simulations to
obtain the parameters that optimize the composite media.
![]() |
||
|
We can also evaluate the media performance using a different figure
of merit that normalize the quantity to the parameters of the hard
layer:
(see Fig. 3.42). Both figures of merit are equivalent for
single media. This way, we compare the bilayer with a hard phase grain
(with the same volume than the hard phase in the bilayer) that switches
coherently.
From this new point of view, the combination that obtains the largest
figure of merit is
and
in both
multigrain and one-grain cases.
Finally, there is an intrinsic limitation in the optimization of two
quantities only based on their ratio. The obtained set of parameter can
optimize one of the magnitudes, while the other could have an
unrealistic value. Additionally, the way the figure of merit is
constructed could favor one or another material parameter combination
and give different final conclusion. The two figures of merit of this
section favor the combinations with small saturation magnetization in
the hard layer, partially, because its presence in the denominator.
Figs. 3.32, 3.33 and 3.38 represent a better picture of
the media performance because they represent energy barriers and
coercivity in real units. These values should be optimized to get in
real units the switching fields below and energy barriers higher than
.