Moving antiphase boundaries using an external electric field

Abstract

Antiphase boundaries (APBs) are unique domain walls that may demonstrate switchable polarization in otherwise non-ferroelectric materials such as SrTiO3 and PbZrO3. The current study explores the possibility of displacing such domain walls at the nanoscale. We suggest the possibility of manipulating APBs using the inhomogeneous electric field of an Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM) tip with an applied voltage placed in their proximity. The displacement is studied as a function of applied voltage, film thickness, and initial separation of the AFM tip from the APB. It is established, for example, that for films with thickness of 15 nm, an APB may be attracted under the tip with a voltage of 25 V from initial separation of 30 nm. We have also demonstrated that the displacement is appreciably retained after the voltage is removed, rendering it favorable for potential applications.

Evidence of residual ferroelectric contribution in antiferroelectric lead-zirconate thin films by first-order reversal curves

“…The presence of the Rayleigh behavior in the antiferroelectric material shows the ferroelectric contribution to the permittivity since antiferroelectric domain wall movements do not exist under the action of an homogeneous electric field 22,30 . Only ferroelectric domain wall motions are taken into account by the hyperbolic law which confirms the presence of a ferroelectric phase.…”

“…In order to verify the presence of the ferroelectric phase, impedance spectroscopy has been carried allowing to see a possible increase of the permittivity when the driving electric field increases 19,20 . Only ferroelectric domain walls contribute to this increase since antiferroelectric domain wall motion cannot appear under the action of an homogeneous electric field 30 . The ferroelectric behavior is well visible since the increase on the real part of the permittivity is 9.5 %, when the electric driving field goes from 10 kV/cm to 100 kV/cm.…”

Effect of ferroelectric domain walls on the dielectric properties of PbZrO3 thin films

“…The vibrational dissipation factor (m rev ¼ e 00 f-rev /e 0 f-rev ¼ 0.14) is lower than those reported in the literature (m rev !0.35). [11][12][13][14][15][16][17] This low value can be explained not only by the low density of domain wall 22 but also by the weak interaction between domain walls due to the presence of the residual ferroelectric cluster well distributed in the material. The pinning dissipation factor (m a ¼ a f 00 /a f 0 ¼ 0.23) is, consequently, also lower than what is reported in the literature (m a !…”

“…The pinning dissipation factor (m a ¼ a f 00 /a f 0 ¼ 0.23) is, consequently, also lower than what is reported in the literature (m a ! 0.31 [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] ).…”

“…In this study, only the effects of ferroelectric domain wall movements are investigated. Antiferroelectric domain walls cannot move under the action of a homogeneous electric field 12 and do not contribute to the permittivity. Thus, no term related to the presence of antiferroelectric domain walls appears in the hyperbolic law.…”