See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/286641190

Implementation of the preisach model in MATLAB

Article · January 2012

CITATION READS

1 1,674

6 authors, including:

Norbert Franz H.P. Oepen

University of Hamburg University of Hamburg
10 PUBLICATIONS   14 CITATIONS    164 PUBLICATIONS   3,227 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Dietmar Möller
Technische Universität Clausthal
182 PUBLICATIONS   416 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Center for Hybrid Nanostructures (www.chyn.de) View project

Reference View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Norbert Franz on 09 October 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Implementation Of The Preisach Model In MATLAB
Norbert Franz1*, Bernd Güde2, Andreas Meyer3, Tobias Kipp2, Hans Peter Oepen1, and Dietmar P.F. Möller2
1
Institut für Angewandte Physik, Universität Hamburg, Jungiusstraße 11, 20355 Hamburg (Germany)
2
Arbeitsbereich Technische Informatiksysteme, Universität Hamburg,
Vogt-Kölln-Straße 30, 22527 Hamburg (Germany)
3
Institut für Physikalische Chemie, Universität Hamburg, Grindelallee 117, 20146 Hamburg (Germany)

Keywords: Compact model, ferromagnetic nanostructures,
hysteresis, MATLAB, rapid prototyping.
Abstract
In the Preisach model a ferromagnetic structure is divided
into magnetic domains, each switching between two
different states. The hysteresis for a single domain is a
rectangular-shaped hysteresis loop with an upper switching
point α and a lower switching point β. The hysteresis of the
whole ferromagnet is the superposition of all loops
involved. The Preisach model comprises a weighting
function µ(α,β) for every pair (α,β) that needs to be
determined for every hysteresis curve from experimental
data a priori. From a physicist’s point of view the Preisach
model could be employed for studying ensembles of
ferromagnetic particles. The model can serve as a link
between theory and experiment in order to describe a
microscopical system by a macroscopical measurement.
From an engineer’s point of view a mathematical model for
hysteresis could serve as a compact description of a
ferromagnetic device in an electrical circuit. The case study
presented here shows how the weighting function µ(α,β) is
determined for given values of (α,β). The investigation is
carried out within the development environment MATLAB.
It is a standard available to many researchers in academia
and industry and conveniently provides all necessary
functionality.
1. INTRODUCTION
From a physicist’s point of view the Preisach model [1]
could be employed for studying ensembles of magnetic
particles by modeling energetic aspects aside the common
Stoner-Wohlfahrt model [2], which allows for a direct
comparison with experimental measurements. Even thermal
effects could be considered. In the literature this is referred
to as magnetic viscosity [3]. The Preisach model can serve
as a link between theory and experiment in order to describe
a microscopical system by a macroscopical measurement.
The Preisach model is a phenomenological model since it
does not give an explanation why the magnetization of a
single domain switches when excited. Its phenomenological
nature also implies that the Preisach model could be used to
describe any system that shows a hysteretical behavior [3].
A well-established alternative to the Preisach model is the
Jiles-Atherton model [4] that describes hysteresis for
ferromagnetic nanostructures only. From an engineer’s point
of view a mathematical model for hysteresis could serve as a
compact description for the electronic properties of
ferromagnetic nanostructures. Recently ferromagnetic
nanostructures such as spin valves or magnetic vortices have
gained attention because they overcome most drawbacks of
conventional technologies like static random-access
memory, dynamic random-access memory or Flash memory
cells [5-7]. Devices like field-effect or bipolar transistors
have been modeled through equivalent electrical circuits.
Well-known examples are the Shichman-Hodges model or
the Ebers-Moll model [8, 9]. In contrast to modeling the
behavior of a ferromagnetic device in a similar manner, the
Preisach model could yield even better performance in terms
of complexity and accuracy. Although it is one of the oldest
models for hysteresis, yet the Preisach model is hardly used
for compact modeling in circuit design.
2. MATHEMATICAL MODELING
The term hysteresis was coined Ewing [10]. In 1890 he
discovered that in electromagnets the change of
magnetization was delayed behind the change of the applied
electrical current. In 1935 Preisach noted that there existed
no theory why magnetization was inert [1]. He had
performed switching experiments and measured the
response of a ferromagnetic sample. A fraction of the
magnetization’s inertia was caused by what Preisach called
the “magnetische Nachwirkung”, or magnetic aftereffect.
Preisach identified the reason for the magnetic aftereffect to
be the Barkhausen effect: discontinuous jumps in the
magnetization of a ferromagnet during the sweep of the
applied magnetic field. Preisach concluded that a
ferromagnetic sample consisted of different domains that
were uniformly magnetized. Following this assumption each
domain can be characterized by a coercive force and a
rectangular-shaped magnetization loop. Hence, different
elementary loops may possess different widths (that is,
individual switching points α and β.). An elementary
hysteresis loop is sketched in figure 1. For each loop α ≥ β
applies. The hysteresis of the whole system is the
superposition of all elementary hysteresis loops. At this
point it is evident that Preisach’s idea may be applied to any
system beyond ferromagnetic nanostructures that shows
hysteresis. An influential work on the mathematical
modeling of hysteresis has been carried out by
Krasnosel’skiĭ and Pokrovskiĭ [11]. Both consider an
elementary hysteresis loop as a static non-linear transducer,
which they call a hysteron. On the basis of their work
Mayergoyz developed a theory of the Preisach model [3],
which in turn will be the basis for the results presented in
this article. Earlier Cross and co-workers developed a
program for applying the Preisach model to unemployment
rates using the MATLAB-like program RLAB [12]. In
contrast to physical or technical systems unemployment
rates show no saturation, that is to say no absolute
maximum and minimum exists. Cross and colleagues
assumed an equal weight of the hysterons, which might not
be a realistic assumption in physical and technical systems.
If the input signal to the hysteresis transducer is denoted as
u(t) and the output of the transducer as f(t) it follows that
+ 1 if u (t ) ≥ α

f (t ) = γ αβ [u (t )] =  k if
β ≤ u (t ) ≤ α , (1)
− 1 if
 u (t ) ≤ β
≥ α0 all hysterons have switched to +1. This situation is
called the positive saturation. In negative saturation all
hysterons have switched to −1. Starting in saturation yields a
well-defined state to begin with. Following Mayergoyz’s
notation we denote with S+(t) the set of pairs (α',β') for
which γα'β' = +1. This set may change over time. Accordingly
S−(t) represents the set of pairs (α',β') for which γα'β' = −1. It
follows that:
f(t) = ∫∫ µ(α, β)dααd − ∫∫ µ(α, β)dααd . (3)
S+ (t) S− (t)
Starting in positive saturation yields S−(t) = T and S+(t) = ∅.
If then an upsweep is performed to the value u(t) = α' the
border L(t) between S−(t) and S+(t) is a horizontal line within
the Preisach plane. Any downsweep of the input signal
corresponds to a vertical line in the Preisach plane. For a
complete sweep of the input signal L(t) is a step function,
see figure 2. More details on the shape of L(t) can be found
in Ref. [3].

where the operator γαβ denotes the hysteresis transducer that

is applied to the input u(t) and k ∈ {+1,−1} denotes the
previous state of f(t). The operators can be interpreted as
relays with two possible configurations, "up" and "down".
From this intuitive definition it is clear that a hysteresis
transducer acts like a memory cell and that the current
output value depends on the previous input history. Summed
up over all hysterons in the system, the function f(t) can be
written as

f(t) = ∫∫ µ(α, β)γαβ [u(t)]dααd ,

α≥ β
(2)
where µ(α,β) is the not yet specified weighting function,
sometimes also referred to as the Preisach function. Before
using the Preisach model, the weighting function has got to
be extracted from measured data. Similar to a neural
network, the hysterons have got to be conditioned before an
unknown input can be applied. The weighting function can
be seen for example as a means to reflect the density of
hysterons switching at the same switching points and
therefore the weighting function can provide insights on the
composition of magnetic domains within the ferromagnetic
sample. The function µ(α,β) is defined over the range of
pairs (α,β). Each pair corresponds to a certain hysteron.
Already in his article Preisach suggested to interpret this
relation geometrically. All pairs (α, β) can be plotted in a
plane formed by α and β. Sometimes this plane is referred to
as the Preisach plane; it is shown in figure 2. Since α ≥ β
applies, all pairs (α,β) lie within a triangle T. If the input u(t)
Figure 1. Sketch of a rectangular-shaped hysteresis loop.
The input is u(t) and the output is f(t) = ± 1. At an input u(t)
≥ α f(t) is equal to +1, whereas if u(t) ≤ β f(t) = −1. The
arrows indicate the two possible sweeps, up (from negative
saturation to positive saturation) and down (from positive
saturation to negative saturation).
An important feature of a hysteresis transducer is the so-
called wiping-out property. Each local maximum wipes out
the pairs (α',β') whose α-coordinates are less than the local
maximum. Accordingly each local minimum wipes out all
pairs (α',β') whose β-coordinates are greater than the local
minimum. An important prerequisite for the implementation
of the Preisach model is the following definition from Ref.
[3]. It is assumed that we begin in (negative) saturation. The
input u(t) is then increased up to u(t) = α'. The
corresponding output value is denoted as fα'. This value lies
on a curve that is referred to as a major loop for the
upsweep, because the sweep began in saturation. If a sweep
does not start in saturation, the current output value depends
on the previous history. When the output value of the
hysteresis transducer is fα' and the input is afterwards
decreased down to a value u(t) = β', the corresponding
output value is denoted as fα'β'. This definition indicates that
a downsweep on a minor loop is performed, since the
maximum of the input on this loop is α'. Mayergoyz
introduces another function
F(α ' , β' ) =
1
2
( )
f α' − f α' β' = ∫∫ µ(α, β)dααd , (4)
T(α ', β' )
with T(α'β') being the triangle that is added to S−(t) and
subtracted from S+(t) during the downsweep from u(t) = α'
to u(t) = β'.
Figure 2. Sketch of the Preisach plane. An upsweep from
negative saturation up to α1 is performed followed by a
downsweep down to β1. Negative saturation occurs if the
input u(t) ≤ β0 and positive saturation if the input u(t) ≥ α0.
All points lie within the triangle T, since α ≥ β applies. A
symmetrical hysteresis is assumed, because β0 = α0. The
border between the sets S−(t) and S+(t) is a horizontal line
for an upsweep of u(t) and a vertical line for a downsweep.
Accordingly one finds for the downsweep from positive
saturation to negative saturation F(α0,β0) = ∫∫T µ(α,β) dαdβ,
where T as before is the limiting triangle of the Preisach
plane (see also figure. 2). One can switch from a
downsweep to an upsweep by exchanging the coordinates α
and β. Following Mayergoyz’s suggestion for the
downsweep, S+(t) is divided into n trapezoids Qk with n
being the number of vertices (α,β) during the sweep of u(t):
n(t)
∫∫ µ(α, β)dααd = ∑
k =1
∫∫ µ(α, β)dααd . (5)
S +(t) Qk (t)
Each trapezoid is the difference of two neighboring triangles
T(Mk,mk−1) and T(Mk,mk). Mk is the local maximum of both
triangles; mk and mk−1 are the respective local minima. For k
= 1 m0 = β0. It directly follows that
n(t)
∑
k =1
∫∫ µ(α, β)dααd = F(M k ,mk −1 ) − F(M k ,mk ) . (6)
Qk (t)
The n-th minimum is equal to u(t). The situation is similar
for an upsweep of u(t). More details can be found in Ref.
[2].
3. CASE STUDY – HYSTERESIS IN AN
ENSEMBLE OF MAGNETIC NANOPARTICLES
We now consider a planar system of nanometer-sized
ferromagnetic dots having a perpendicular anisotropy with
respect to the surface [13]. The question now is if a
measured hysteresis of such an ensemble could be
reconstructed by the Preisach model, assuming a
superposition of symmetrical hysterons. Magnetic
nanometer-sized dots were fabricated on the basis of an
optimized perpendicular film (Cap - Pt4 nm/Co1.3 nm /)1x.
Optimized self-organized Fe-cores act as a shadow mask
during the structuring process via an argon-plasma
sputtering technique under vacuum conditions. The dots are
perpendicular to the sample’s surface.
Figure 3. Image of the ensemble of particles for the case
study. The image has been recorded with a scanning
electron microscope (SEM). Only dots which do not
interfere with the image-boundaries were used to determine
the median diameter. The median diameter of the dots is 24
nm and the median distance between neighboring dots is 30
nm. The length scale at the bottom on the right-hand side
(white bar) is 100 nm.
The optimized perpendicular anisotropy provides a higher
thickness of the Co layer, which in turn gives a higher
magneto-optical signal and a better signal to noise ratio,
respectively. The optimized Fe-cores provide a long range
order and a narrow size distribution with a median diameter
of 24 nm and a median distance of 30 nm. Thus they can be
interpreted as a very closely packed hexagonal system. After
the structuring process, the magnetic film between the dots
is completely removed except for the remaining film
shadowed by the Fe-cores. Figure 3 shows an SEM image of
the sample for which we determined the weighting function
µ(α,β).
Figure 4. Sketch of the alternating coil-current I(t)=u(t)
with a decreasing positive amplitude plotted against time in
arbitrary units.
The magnetic characterization performed through the polar
Magneto-optic Kerr effect (MOKE) with an alternating and
decreasing magnetic field is expressed in terms of a coil
current, see figure 4. The magnetic field acting on the
ensemble can be calculated with a conversion factor of 51
mT/A.
Figure 5. Input function (coil current) for the major loop in
our case study plotted against time in arbitrary units.
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Each first order reversal curve (FORC) in figure 6 is
characterized by a fixed α' value meaning the loop is
switched to fα' at α'. Following Mayergoyz’s notation, this
maximum value would be denoted as Mk. Decreasing the
field with u(t) towards β'=β0 (= mk) causes the loops to
switch down. Then f(t) = – F(α0, β0 ) . The wiping out
property of this measurement implies that only the initial
state at k = 0 and the local maxima Mn affect the present f(t)
f(t) = − F(α 0 , β0 ) + 2(F(M n , β0 ) − F(M n ,u(t)) . (7)
With the given set of FORCs in figure 6 it is now possible to
evaluate the weighting function µ(α',β') numerically. A
twofold differentiation of Eq. 4 yields
1 ∂ fα ' β '
2
µ (α ' , β ' ) = . (8)
2 ∂β ' ∂α '
The above mentioned rate fα'β' depends on local maxima α'
or Mk. A further differentiation over all FORCs with respect
to these α' at fixed β' values yields the values for µ(α',β').
The implementation was realized by applying the gradient
function on a 137 x 298 matrix fα'β', along the dimension α'
and β'. The triples (µ α'β',α',β') allow for a comparison with
the measured hysteresis. Eq. 7 and its counterpart for
increasing fields provide the basis of the numerical
implementation of the Preisach model (see Ref.[2]).
Accordingly the MATLAB code splits into two while loops.
For a decreasing input after a local maximum Mn or α' is
passed, the sum of µ α'β'-weighted hysterons according to β(t)
≥ u(t < tn) is subtracted until a local minimum mn or β' at the
field reversal is reached. By an increasing input u(t), the
sum of µ α'β'-weighted hysterons according to α(t) ≤ u(t) is
added to the local minimum mn-1 of the foregoing minor
loop.
Figure 6. Normalized polar rotation as the system’s
response f(t) of an ensemble of magnetic perpendicular
nanometer-sized particles triggered by the input u(t) plotted
against the input current. 137 minor loops starting from the
initial state of negative saturation (m0 = β0 = – 6 A) up to
damped amplitudes MK = α' were measured.
Synthesis of the major loop: If we assume non-interacting
particles, this leads to non shifted hysterons in contrast to
the hysteron shown in figure 1, which shows the particular
case of a strong mean field Hi = (αi + βi) / 2 > 0. Then the
resulting coercive fields can be calculated by Hc.i = (αi − βi)
/ 2 > 0 [14]. Here the index i denotes the i-th loop from the
measurement. Hi would vanish for αi = −βi. With the given
set of values µ i(α.i, βi) (Preisach plane not shown), and a
triangular-shaped input u(t), we are now able to prove this
assumption and recalculate the major loop with our
MATLAB program, see figures 6 and 7.
Figure 7. Modeled hysteresis (gray solid line) and the
measured major loop (black solid line) plotted against input
function (coil current). The black dashed line is the
symmetrized measured major loop.
Figure 7 shows a relative good agreement towards higher
fields. Some deviations however can be attributed to the
asymmetrical (measured) major loop in contrast to the
symmetrical recalculated loop using the Preisach model. For
a comparison, the symmetrization of the measured major
loop (by calculating its median) is inserted into the figure.
The higher slope near 51 mT (1 A) in figure 7 can be
explained by some bilayer mask areas which shadow the
whole underlying magnetic layer. After the structuring
process, the remaining magnetic clusters exceed the
magnetic single domain size (SD). Thus, the formation of
magnetic domain walls is energetically more favored,
leading to reduced stray fields and coercive fields.
Accordingly to its portion to the signal a resulting jump
occurs. Some deviations can also be attributed to the fact
that the Preisach model does not take account interactions of
hysterons. In this case the assumption of zero mean fields is
no longer applicable, because these hysterons are shifted to
higher or lower fields by Hi. Thus, a higher/lower external
field is needed to initiate the switching process. This
assumption is substantiated in figure 3, which shows very
closely packed particles. Taking a look at the Preisach plane
and its off-diagonal elements can give more insights on the
particle behavior.
The work presented here is a first attempt to describe the
switching behavior of particle systems like in figure 3. The
switching behavior is studied on the basis of the
experimentally obtained Preisach function µ(α,β) and its
integration in the numerical Preisach model. Further
investigations regarding to possible correlation effects, i.e.
particle interactions, which could be determined from µ(α,β)
are necessary. A sketch of the Preisach plane and the
MATLAB code will be provided on request. Considering
the symmetry of the particle system, it is obvious to mirror
the FORCs in figure 6 leading to an enhanced Preisach
plane.
References
[1] Preisach, F. 1935. “Über die magnetische
Nachwirkung.” in Zeitschrift für Physik A Hadrons
and Nuclei, 94, no. 5, (May):277–302.
[2] Stoner, E.C., and E.P. Wohlfarth. 1948. “A
Mechanism of Magnetic Hysteresis in Heterogeneous
Alloys.” in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal
Society A: Physical, Mathematical and Engineering
Sciences, 240, no.826:599–642.
[3] Mayergoyz, I.D. 1991. Mathematical Models of
Hysteresis. Springer, New York.
[4] Jiles, D., and Atherton, D. 1983. “Ferromagnetic
Hysteresis.” in IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, 19,
no. 5:2183–2185.
[5] Prinz, G.A. 1998. “Magnetoelectronics.” in Science,
1998, 282, no. 5394:1660–1663.
[6] Chappert, C.; Fert, A.; and Van Dau, F. 2007. “The
Emergence of Spin Electronics in Data Storage.” in
Nature Materials, 2007, 6:813–823.
[7] The International Technology Roadmap for
Semiconductors. Emerging Research Devices 2009
[Online]. Available:
http://www.itrs.net/Links/2009ITRS/Home2009.htm,
last checked 10. November 2011.
[8] Shichman, H., and D.A. Hodges. 1968. “Modeling
and Simulation of Insulated-Gate Field-Effect
Transistor Switching Circuits.” in IEEE Journal of
Solid-State Circuits, 1968, 3, vol.3:285–289.
[9] Ebers, J.J., and J.L. Moll. 1954. “Large-Signal
Behavior of Junction Transistors.” in Proceedings of
the IRE, 42, vol.12:1761–1772.
[10] The New Encyclopædia Britannica in 30 volumes.
1981. Micropædia, Ready reference and index, Vol.
3: Colemani – Exclusi. 15. ed., Encyclopaedia
Britannica Inc., Chicago, 1020/1021.
[11] Krasnosel’skiĭ, M.A., and A.V. Pokrovskiĭ. 1989.
Systems with Hysteresis. Springer, New York.
[12] Cross, R.; Darby, J.; Ireland, J.; Piscitelli, L. 1999.
 “Hysteresis and Unemployment: A Preliminary
Investigation” [Online]. Proceedings of the Fifth
International Conference Computing in Economics
and Finance '99 of the Society for Computing in
Economics, Available:
http://ideas.repec.org/p/sce/scecf9/721.html, last
checked: 10. November 2011.
[13] Fischer, S.; Salcher, A.; Kornowski, A.; Weller, H.;
Förster, S. 2011. “Completely Miscible
Nanocomposites.” in Angewandte Chemie
International Edition, 50:7811–7814.
[14] Pike, C., and A. Fernandez. 1999. “An investigation
of magnetic reversal in submicron-scale Co dots
using first order reversal curve diagrams.” in Journal
of Applied Physics 85, no. 9, (May): 6668–6676.
* to whom correspondence should be addressed. A sketch of
the Preisach plane and the MATLAB code will be provided
on request. Email: nfranz@physnet.uni-hamburg.de.
Phone: +49 40 42838 2908, Fax: +49 40 42838 6368.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Dr. Moritz Bubeck for the help on
implementing the LabView measurement setup and Dr.
Nikolai Mikuszeit for the fruitfull discussion about the
Preisach model.
Biographies
Norbert Franz received his Diplom-Ingenieur
degree at the University of Applied Science
FH-Wedel in 2001 and his Diplom-Physiker
degree from the University of Hamburg,
Hamburg, Germany in 2006. He is currently
working on finalizing his Ph.D. thesis in the area of
nanomagnetism in the group of Professor H. P. Oepen. His
main research interests are the design and
simulation/identification of ferromagnetic structures. His
email address is nfranz@physnet.uni-hamburg.de.
Andreas Meyer works as an Assistant
Professor at the Institute for Physical
Chemistry of the University of Hamburg,
Germany. His research fields are
nanostructured surfaces, polymer composites
and self-assembly. He is expert in x-ray
scattering and worked for a long time at the synchrotron
radiation facility HASYLAB. A special focus of his work
lies on the analytical technique grazing incidence small
angle x-ray scattering (GISAXS). His email address is
andreas.meyer@chemie.uni-hamburg.de.
Tobias Kipp received his Diplom-Informatiker
degree from the University Hamburg in 2010.
His area of interest is Reconfigurable
Computing including the data-oriented program
paradigm and hardware design. His email
address is kipp@informatik.uni-hamburg.de.
Hans Peter Oepen is a Professor of Physics
and head of the research group “Surface
Physics” at the Institute of Applied Physics of
the University of Hamburg. His email address
is oepen@physnet.uni-hamburg.de.
Dietmar P.F. Möller is a Professor of
Computer Science and Head of Computer
Engineering at the Faculty of Mathematics,
Informatics and Natural Sciences of the
University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
His research interests span aviation systems, computational
modeling and simulation, e-learning, embedded computing
systems, maritime systems, medical technology, mobile
autonomous systems, multimodal transportation and
logistics, nanotechnology and virtual and augmented reality.
His homepage is www.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/TIS/.

Bernd Güde received his Diplom-Informatiker

degree from the University of Hamburg,
Hamburg, Germany in 2007. He finished his
Ph.D. thesis in June 2011 and is currently
working as a post-doc in the research group of
Professor Möller at the University of Hamburg, Hamburg,
Germany. His current research interests are the modeling
and simulation of ferromagnetic devices and the design of
logic devices based on compact models for ferromagnetic
devices. His email address is guede@informatik.uni-
hamburg.de.

View publication stats