Research ArticleNo Access

Size-dependent magnetic and magnetoresistance properties of Co₂ FeGa nanowires

Heng Wei

School of Materials and Energy, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, P. R. China

Search for more papers by this author

and

Xinli Kou

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9714-1480

School of Materials and Energy, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, P. R. China

E-mail Address: kouxl@lzu.edu.cn

Corresponding author.

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793604722500333Cited by:1 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

Co₂FeGa Heusler alloy nanowires with diameters of about 30, 60 and 110 nm were prepared using a template-assisted electrochemical deposition method. We observe the different angular dependences of coercivity and remanence ratio for these samples. Magneto-transport measurements show that the 30 nm diameter Co₂FeGa nanowires has a large magnetoresistance up to −56%, which is much higher than 60 and 110 nm diameter Co₂FeGa nanowires. This is the first time that the magnetoresistance properties of Co₂FeGa nanowires were presented.

Keywords:

References

1. J. Körner et al., Sci. Rep. 7, 8881 (2017). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
2. A. Çakır et al., Phys. Status Solidi (b) 251, 2120 (2014). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
3. L. Straka et al., Sci. Rep. 8, 11943 (2018). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
4. F. Nejadsattari et al., Physica B 477, 113 (2015). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
5. P. Nehla et al., J. Alloys Compd. 776, 379 (2019). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
6. M. Sharma et al., AIP Adv. 9, 125054 (2019). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
7. H. Lu et al., J. Electrochem. Soc. 165, D813 (2018). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
8. W. Lu and C. M. Lieber, Nat. Mater. 6, 841 (2007). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
9. J. Zhang et al., Nat. Commun. 4, 2768 (2013). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
10. H. S. Park et al., Mrs Bulletin 34, 178 (2009). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
11. C. Wang et al., Chem. Mater. 22, 6575 (2010). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
12. M. Ramudu et al., Mater. Res. Express 6, 086404 (2019). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
13. P. Simon et al., Nano Lett. 16, 114 (2016). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
14. Y. Xu et al., AIP Adv. 8, 055107 (2018). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
15. G. C. Han et al., J. Appl. Phys. 93, 9202 (2003). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
16. A. Aharoni and S. Shtrikman, Phys. Rev. 109, 1522 (1958). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
17. E. H. Frei et al., Phys. Rev. 106, 446 (1957). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
18. Q. F. Liu et al., J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 260, 151 (2003). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
19. M. Gellesch et al., Cryst. Growth Des. 13, 2707 (2013). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
20. J. Garcia-Torres et al., J. Phys. Chem. C 116, 12250 (2012). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
21. H. Y. A. S. Takada, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 34, 51 (1973). Crossref, Google Scholar
22. P. A. E. Jonkers, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 247, 178 (2002). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
23. S. Allende et al., J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 355, 197 (2014). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
24. R. Moreno et al., J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 542, 168495 (2022). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
25. T. Block et al., J. Solid State Chem. 176, 646 (2003). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar