Hans Fangohr

Bio: Hans Fangohr is an academic researcher from University of Southampton. The author has contributed to research in topics: Magnetization & Vortex. The author has an hindex of 32, co-authored 219 publications receiving 3917 citations. Previous affiliations of Hans Fangohr include European XFEL & Max Planck Society.

Skyrmion-skyrmion and skyrmion-edge repulsions in skyrmion-based racetrack memory

Abstract: Magnetic skyrmions are promising for building next-generation magnetic memories and spintronic devices due to their stability, small size and the extremely low currents needed to move them. In particular, skyrmion-based racetrack memory is attractive for information technology, where skyrmions are used to store information as data bits instead of traditional domain walls. Here we numerically demonstrate the impacts of skyrmion-skyrmion and skyrmion-edge repulsions on the feasibility of skyrmion-based racetrack memory. The reliable and practicable spacing between consecutive skyrmionic bits on the racetrack as well as the ability to adjust it are investigated. Clogging of skyrmionic bits is found at the end of the racetrack, leading to the reduction of skyrmion size. Further, we demonstrate an effective and simple method to avoid the clogging of skyrmionic bits, which ensures the elimination of skyrmionic bits beyond the reading element. Our results give guidance for the design and development of future skyrmion-based racetrack memory.

A Systematic Approach to Multiphysics Extensions of Finite-Element-Based Micromagnetic Simulations: Nmag

Abstract: Extensions of the basic micromagnetic model that include effects such as spin-current interaction, diffusion of thermal energy or anisotropic magnetoresistance are often studied by performing simulations that use case-specific ad-hoc extensions of widely used software packages such as OOMMF or Magpar. We present the novel software framework "Nmag" that handles specifications of micromagnetic systems at a sufficiently abstract level to enable users with little programming experience to automatically translate a description of a large class of dynamical multifield equations plus a description of the system's geometry into a working simulation. Conceptually, this is a step towards a higher-level abstract notation for classical multifield multiphysics simulations, similar to the change from assembly language to a higher level human-and-machine-readable formula notation for mathematical terms (FORTRAN) half a century ago. We demonstrate the capability of this approach through two examples, showing 1) a reduced dimensionality model coupling two copies of the micromagnetic sector and 2) the computation of a spatial current density distribution for anisotropic magnetoresistance (AMR). For cross-wise validation purposes, we also show how Nmag compares to the OOMMF and Magpar packages on a selected micromagnetic toy system. We, furthermore, briefly discuss the limitations of our framework and related conceptual questions

Ground state search, hysteretic behaviour and reversal mechanism of skyrmionic textures in confined helimagnetic nanostructures

Abstract: Magnetic skyrmions have the potential to provide solutions for low-power, high-density data storage and processing. One of the major challenges in developing skyrmion-based devices is the skyrmions’ magnetic stability in confined helimagnetic nanostructures. Through a systematic study of equilibrium states, using a full three-dimensional micromagnetic model including demagnetisation effects, we demonstrate that skyrmionic textures are the lowest energy states in helimagnetic thin film nanostructures at zero external magnetic field and in absence of magnetocrystalline anisotropy. We also report the regions of metastability for non-ground state equilibrium configurations. We show that bistable skyrmionic textures undergo hysteretic behaviour between two energetically equivalent skyrmionic states with different core orientation, even in absence of both magnetocrystalline and demagnetisation-based shape anisotropies, suggesting the existence of Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya-based shape anisotropy. Finally, we show that the skyrmionic texture core reversal dynamics is facilitated by the Bloch point occurrence and propagation.

Megahertz serial crystallography

Abstract: The new European X-ray Free-Electron Laser is the first X-ray free-electron laser capable of delivering X-ray pulses with a megahertz inter-pulse spacing, more than four orders of magnitude higher than previously possible. However, to date, it has been unclear whether it would indeed be possible to measure high-quality diffraction data at megahertz pulse repetition rates. Here, we show that high-quality structures can indeed be obtained using currently available operating conditions at the European XFEL. We present two complete data sets, one from the well-known model system lysozyme and the other from a so far unknown complex of a β-lactamase from K. pneumoniae involved in antibiotic resistance. This result opens up megahertz serial femtosecond crystallography (SFX) as a tool for reliable structure determination, substrate screening and the efficient measurement of the evolution and dynamics of molecular structures using megahertz repetition rate pulses available at this new class of X-ray laser source.

Thermal stability and topological protection of skyrmions in nanotracks

Abstract: Magnetic skyrmions are hailed as a potential technology for data storage and other data processing devices. However, their stability against thermal fluctuations is an open question that must be answered before skyrmion-based devices can be designed. In this work, we study paths in the energy landscape via which the transition between the skyrmion and the uniform state can occur in interfacial Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya finite-sized systems. We find three mechanisms the system can take in the process of skyrmion nucleation or destruction and identify that the transition facilitated by the boundary has a significantly lower energy barrier than the other energy paths. This clearly demonstrates the lack of the skyrmion topological protection in finite-sized magnetic systems. Overall, the energy barriers of the system under investigation are too small for storage applications at room temperature, but research into device materials, geometry and design may be able to address this.

I and i

Abstract: There is, I think, something ethereal about i —the square root of minus one. I remember first hearing about it at school. It seemed an odd beast at that time—an intruder hovering on the edge of reality. Usually familiarity dulls this sense of the bizarre, but in the case of i it was the reverse: over the years the sense of its surreal nature intensified. It seemed that it was impossible to write mathematics that described the real world in …

Phd by thesis

Abstract: Deposits of clastic carbonate-dominated (calciclastic) sedimentary slope systems in the rock record have been identified mostly as linearly-consistent carbonate apron deposits, even though most ancient clastic carbonate slope deposits fit the submarine fan systems better. Calciclastic submarine fans are consequently rarely described and are poorly understood. Subsequently, very little is known especially in mud-dominated calciclastic submarine fan systems. Presented in this study are a sedimentological core and petrographic characterisation of samples from eleven boreholes from the Lower Carboniferous of Bowland Basin (Northwest England) that reveals a >250 m thick calciturbidite complex deposited in a calciclastic submarine fan setting. Seven facies are recognised from core and thin section characterisation and are grouped into three carbonate turbidite sequences. They include: 1) Calciturbidites, comprising mostly of highto low-density, wavy-laminated bioclast-rich facies; 2) low-density densite mudstones which are characterised by planar laminated and unlaminated muddominated facies; and 3) Calcidebrites which are muddy or hyper-concentrated debrisflow deposits occurring as poorly-sorted, chaotic, mud-supported floatstones. These

The design and verification of Mumax3

Abstract: We report on the design, verification and performance of mumax3, an open-source GPU-accelerated micromagnetic simulation program. This software solves the time- and space dependent magnetization evolution in nano- to micro scale magnets using a finite-difference discretization. Its high performance and low memory requirements allow for large-scale simulations to be performed in limited time and on inexpensive hardware. We verified each part of the software by comparing results to analytical values where available and to micromagnetic standard problems. mumax3 also offers specific extensions like MFM image generation, moving simulation window, edge charge removal and material grains.

The design and verification of MuMax3

Abstract: We report on the design, verification and performance of MUMAX3, an open-source GPU-accelerated micromagnetic simulation program. This software solves the time- and space dependent magnetization evolution in nano- to micro scale magnets using a finite-difference discretization. Its high performance and low memory requirements allow for large-scale simulations to be performed in limited time and on inexpensive hardware. We verified each part of the software by comparing results to analytical values where available and to micromagnetic standard problems. MUMAX3 also offers specific extensions like MFM image generation, moving simulation window, edge charge removal and material grains.

Test Driven Development: By Example

Abstract: From the Book: “Clean code that works” is Ron Jeffries’ pithy phrase. The goal is clean code that works, and for a whole bunch of reasons: Clean code that works is a predictable way to develop. You know when you are finished, without having to worry about a long bug trail.Clean code that works gives you a chance to learn all the lessons that the code has to teach you. If you only ever slap together the first thing you think of, you never have time to think of a second, better, thing. Clean code that works improves the lives of users of our software.Clean code that works lets your teammates count on you, and you on them.Writing clean code that works feels good.But how do you get to clean code that works? Many forces drive you away from clean code, and even code that works. Without taking too much counsel of our fears, here’s what we do—drive development with automated tests, a style of development called “Test-Driven Development” (TDD for short). In Test-Driven Development, you: Write new code only if you first have a failing automated test.Eliminate duplication. Two simple rules, but they generate complex individual and group behavior. Some of the technical implications are:You must design organically, with running code providing feedback between decisionsYou must write your own tests, since you can’t wait twenty times a day for someone else to write a testYour development environment must provide rapid response to small changesYour designs must consist of many highly cohesive, loosely coupled components, just to make testing easy The two rules imply an order to the tasks ofprogramming: 1. Red—write a little test that doesn’t work, perhaps doesn’t even compile at first 2. Green—make the test work quickly, committing whatever sins necessary in the process 3. Refactor—eliminate all the duplication created in just getting the test to work Red/green/refactor. The TDD’s mantra. Assuming for the moment that such a style is possible, it might be possible to dramatically reduce the defect density of code and make the subject of work crystal clear to all involved. If so, writing only code demanded by failing tests also has social implications: If the defect density can be reduced enough, QA can shift from reactive to pro-active workIf the number of nasty surprises can be reduced enough, project managers can estimate accurately enough to involve real customers in daily developmentIf the topics of technical conversations can be made clear enough, programmers can work in minute-by-minute collaboration instead of daily or weekly collaborationAgain, if the defect density can be reduced enough, we can have shippable software with new functionality every day, leading to new business relationships with customers So, the concept is simple, but what’s my motivation? Why would a programmer take on the additional work of writing automated tests? Why would a programmer work in tiny little steps when their mind is capable of great soaring swoops of design? Courage. Courage Test-driven development is a way of managing fear during programming. I don’t mean fear in a bad way, pow widdle prwogwammew needs a pacifiew, but fear in the legitimate, this-is-a-hard-problem-and-I-can’t-see-the-end-from-the-beginning sense. If pain is nature’s way of saying “Stop!”, fear is nature’s way of saying “Be careful.” Being careful is good, but fear has a host of other effects: Makes you tentativeMakes you want to communicate lessMakes you shy from feedbackMakes you grumpy None of these effects are helpful when programming, especially when programming something hard. So, how can you face a difficult situation and: Instead of being tentative, begin learning concretely as quickly as possible.Instead of clamming up, communicate more clearly.Instead of avoiding feedback, search out helpful, concrete feedback.(You’ll have to work on grumpiness on your own.) Imagine programming as turning a crank to pull a bucket of water from a well. When the bucket is small, a free-spinning crank is fine. When the bucket is big and full of water, you’re going to get tired before the bucket is all the way up. You need a ratchet mechanism to enable you to rest between bouts of cranking. The heavier the bucket, the closer the teeth need to be on the ratchet. The tests in test-driven development are the teeth of the ratchet. Once you get one test working, you know it is working, now and forever. You are one step closer to having everything working than you were when the test was broken. Now get the next one working, and the next, and the next. By analogy, the tougher the programming problem, the less ground should be covered by each test. Readers of Extreme Programming Explained will notice a difference in tone between XP and TDD. TDD isn’t an absolute like Extreme Programming. XP says, “Here are things you must be able to do to be prepared to evolve further.” TDD is a little fuzzier. TDD is an awareness of the gap between decision and feedback during programming, and techniques to control that gap. “What if I do a paper design for a week, then test-drive the code? Is that TDD?” Sure, it’s TDD. You were aware of the gap between decision and feedback and you controlled the gap deliberately. That said, most people who learn TDD find their programming practice changed for good. “Test Infected” is the phrase Erich Gamma coined to describe this shift. You might find yourself writing more tests earlier, and working in smaller steps than you ever dreamed would be sensible. On the other hand, some programmers learn TDD and go back to their earlier practices, reserving TDD for special occasions when ordinary programming isn’t making progress. There are certainly programming tasks that can’t be driven solely by tests (or at least, not yet). Security software and concurrency, for example, are two topics where TDD is not sufficient to mechanically demonstrate that the goals of the software have been met. Security relies on essentially defect-free code, true, but also on human judgement about the methods used to secure the software. Subtle concurrency problems can’t be reliably duplicated by running the code. Once you are finished reading this book, you should be ready to: Start simplyWrite automated testsRefactor to add design decisions one at a time This book is organized into three sections. An example of writing typical model code using TDD. The example is one I got from Ward Cunningham years ago, and have used many times since, multi-currency arithmetic. In it you will learn to write tests before code and grow a design organically.An example of testing more complicated logic, including reflection and exceptions, by developing a framework for automated testing. This example also serves to introduce you to the xUnit architecture that is at the heart of many programmer-oriented testing tools. In the second example you will learn to work in even smaller steps than in the first example, including the kind of self-referential hooha beloved of computer scientists.Patterns for TDD. Included are patterns for the deciding what tests to write, how to write tests using xUnit, and a greatest hits selection of the design patterns and refactorings used in the examples. I wrote the examples imagining a pair programming session. If you like looking at the map before wandering around, you may want to go straight to the patterns in Section 3 and use the examples as illustrations. If you prefer just wandering around and then looking at the map to see where you’ve been, try reading the examples through and refering to the patterns when you want more detail about a technique, then using the patterns as a reference. Several reviewers have commented they got the most out of the examples when they started up a programming environment and entered the code and ran the tests as they read. A note about the examples. Both examples, multi-currency calculation and a testing framework, appear simple. There are (and I have seen) complicated, ugly, messy ways of solving the same problems. I could have chosen one of those complicated, ugly, messy solutions to give the book an air of “reality.” However, my goal, and I hope your goal, is to write clean code that works. Before teeing off on the examples as being too simple, spend 15 seconds imagining a programming world in which all code was this clear and direct, where there were no complicated solutions, only apparently complicated problems begging for careful thought. TDD is a practice that can help you lead yourself to exactly that careful thought.