Abstract
Magnetohydrodynamic generation^{1,2,3,4} is the conversion of fluid kinetic energy into electricity. Such conversion, which has been applied to various types of electric power generation, is driven by the Lorentz force acting on charged particles and thus a magnetic field is necessary^{3,4}. On the other hand, recent studies of spintronics^{5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23} have revealed the similarity between the function of a magnetic field and that of spin–orbit interactions in condensed matter. This suggests the existence of an undiscovered route to realize the conversion of fluid dynamics into electricity without using magnetic fields. Here we show electric voltage generation from fluid dynamics free from magnetic fields; we excited liquidmetal flows in a narrow channel and observed longitudinal voltage generation in the liquid. This voltage has nothing to do with electrification or thermoelectric effects, but turned out to follow a universal scaling rule based on a spinmediated scenario. The result shows that the observed voltage is caused by spincurrent^{6} generation from a fluid motion: spin hydrodynamic generation. The observed phenomenon allows us to make mechanical spincurrent and electric generators, opening a door to fluid spintronics.
Similar content being viewed by others
Main
An electron is an elementary particle which carries internal angular momentum called an electron spin. The recent development of nanotechnology has enabled spins to be used to form a new field called spintronics. Various phenomena found in spintronics originate from angularmomentum exchange between the spin and other degrees of freedom, such as magnetization^{7,8} and light polarization^{9,10,11}; so far, many degrees of freedom have been united into this angularmomentum exchange framework. However, the exchange has not been observed for the most common and ordinary carrier of angular momentum—namely, mechanical rotation of material objects.
The interaction which combines mechanical angular momentum and electron spin is called spin–rotation coupling^{12,13}. With this coupling, mechanical rotation gives rise to spin voltages and spin currents. Here, the spin voltage is the driving force for a spin current, represented by μ^{S} ≡ μ_{↑} − μ_{↓}, where μ_{↑} and μ_{↓} respectively denote the electrochemical potential for spinup and spindown electrons^{16,17}; a gradient of spin voltage drives a spin current.
To generate a gradient of spin voltage from mechanical motion, we have used flows of a liquid metal (Fig. 1a), as a gradient of mechanical rotation can easily be generated in a fluid. To describe spin voltage generation in a liquid, we expanded the angularmomentum conservation law for fluid dynamics to include angularmomentum transfer between a liquid and an electron spin. By introducing an antisymmetric stress tensor to the equation of motion for a liquid, the angular momentum of a fluid is predicted to be transferred into the electron spin (see Supplementary Information for details). The obtained equation for the spin voltage μ^{S} (the vector indicates a polarized direction) is
where λ is the spindiffusion length^{18} and ξ is related to the fluid viscosity caused by the angularmomentum transfer, which is added to the viscosity coefficient of a Newtonian fluid. The vorticity^{24}ω ≡ rot v represents local mechanical rotation of a fluid, where v is the fluid velocity (Fig. 1b). Equation (1) implies that the vorticity acts as a spincurrent source (Fig. 1c).
To detect spin voltage in a fluid, we have used the inverse spin Hall effect^{17,19,20,21,22} (ISHE). The ISHE converts a spin current into an electric field E_{ISHE} through the spin–orbit interaction of electrons. The spin current j^{S} carries the spin σ. The relationship between E_{ISHE} and j^{S} is given by
where σ_{0} and θ_{SHE} are the electrical conductivity and the spin Hall angle, respectively. By measuring E_{ISHE}, the ISHE can be used to detect a spin current precisely (see Fig. 1d).
Figure 1e shows the geometry for mechanical spincurrent generation in a cylindrical fluid channel used in the present study. In the channel, the vorticity ω is generated as a result of the viscosity near the inner wall and lies along the azimuthal direction (θ). Therefore, equations (1) and (2) predict a spatial gradient of μ^{S} along the radial direction (r) and the generation of E_{ISHE} due to the ISHE of a liquid metal along the axial direction (z).
Figure 2a shows a schematic illustration of the measurement setup. In this setup, we generate a flow of liquid metal mercury (Hg) in a cylindrical channel by applying a pulsed pressure ΔP. The channels consist of a quartz pipe and platinum (Pt) thin wires as electrodes embedded in the channel wall and electrically connected to the liquid metal via a pinhole to avoid disturbance of the fluid flow. The channel has to be an insulator for spin hydrodynamic (SHD) measurements to avoid thermoelectric effects between the channel and the liquid metal. The electrode material is chosen as Pt because of its weak chemical reactivity and its absolute thermopower being close to that of Hg; the observed relative Seebeck coefficient is S_{Hg−Pt} = + 0.06 μV K^{−1}. The inner diameter and the length of the channel (the distance between the electrodes) are denoted as φ and L, respectively. To prevent it from charging up electrically, the Hg is connected to the ground at the inlet. We measured the electric voltage difference V between the ends of the channel filled with Hg. All the measurements were performed at room temperature.
Figure 2b shows the time evolution of V measured in the liquid Hg. The liquid flow in the channel starts at time t = 0 and ends at t = Δt. A clear V signal appears when Hg is flowing, as shown in Fig. 2b. The sign of V is reversed on reversing the flow direction. This unconventional voltage behaviour is the feature predicted for the ISHE induced by a mechanical motion described above: the direction of E_{ISHE} is predicted to be reversed by reversing the ω direction or the Hg flow direction (see Fig. 1e and equation (2)).
To further examine the voltage generation, we measured V for various values of mean flow velocity, v, and for several channels with different φ and L values. v is modulated by changing ΔP; the measurement result, shown in Fig. 2c, is reproduced well by the relation for a turbulent flow in a pipe^{24}, being consistent with the fact that its Reynolds number, , satisfies the turbulent flow condition, , where ν is the kinetic viscosity. The time evolution of V shown in Fig. 2d clearly illustrates that the magnitude of V increases with increasing ΔP, or the mean flow velocity v. Figure 2e shows the friction velocity^{24} (v_{∗}) dependence of V for channels with different φ and L values. The result shows that V increases with v_{∗} but with different slopes for the different channels. Here, v_{∗} is directly related to the ω gradient in a turbulent flow: the vorticity of a turbulent flow, ω_{θ}(r), in a pipe is described^{24} by ω_{θ}(r) = v_{∗}^{2}/ν in the region close to the wall, called the viscous sublayer, with ω_{θ}(r) = v_{∗}/[κ(r_{0} − r)] elsewhere. κ is the von Kármán constant and r_{0} ≡ φ/2. The relationship between v_{∗} and v for different φ is shown in the inset to Fig. 2f, which was calculated^{24} by averaging the velocity distribution of the turbulent flow in the pipe.
In this way, different channels were found to exhibit different V behaviour. However, we predict a scaling rule on the behaviour as follows. A spin voltage can be generated from ω_{θ}(r) as a result of the spin–rotation coupling, and the spatial gradient of the spin voltage is then converted into spin currents in the liquid metal and into an electric voltage via the ISHE:
where C_{0} ≡ (4e/κℏ)((θ_{SHE}λ^{2}ξ)/σ_{0}), (≃11.6 for the present study), and δ_{0} is the thickness of the viscous sublayer (see Supplementary Information for detailed derivation). This formula predicts that r_{0}^{3}V/L exhibits a universal scaling with respect to v_{∗}r_{0}, identifying that the V signal is generated from the spin current.
In Fig. 2f, we replot all the data from Fig. 2e for different channels into a r_{0}^{3}V/L versus v_{∗}r_{0} scale. In this plot, surprisingly, all the different data collapse onto a single curve. This universal scaling behaviour is the very feature predicted above equation (3), demonstrating that the observed V signal is due to the ISHE induced by mechanically generated spin currents.
By fitting the data in Fig. 2f with equation (3), the parameter θ_{SHE}λ^{2}ξ is estimated to be 5.9 × 10^{−25} J s m^{−1}. If we assume typical magnitudes^{18,23} of θ_{SHE} and λ (θ_{SHE} ∼ 10^{−2} and λ ∼ 10^{−8} m), ξ is then estimated to be 6 × 10^{−7} J s m^{−3}, or ξ/μ ∼ 4 × 10^{−4}, where μ is the Newtonian viscosity. Here, we used parameters from ref. 24 for Hg: σ_{0} = 1.01 × 10^{6} (Ω m)^{−1}, ν = 1.2 × 10^{−7} m^{2} s^{−1} and μ = 1.6 × 10^{−3} J s m^{−3}.
We also carried out measurements on Ga_{62}In_{25}Sn_{13}(GaInSn), another chemically stable liquid metal (melting point: 5 °C), whose spin–orbit coupling may be weaker than that in Hg because all atoms comprising GaInSn are lighter than Hg. In the measurements, because an appropriate material is not available for the electrode in GaInSn, we used a special setup, called a triangle setup; the details of the setup are explained later. Figure 3a shows the ΔP dependence of v in GaInSn and Hg. The velocity of GaInSn is faster than that in Hg because of the density difference. Figure 3b, c shows v_{∗} versus V plots of GaInSn and Hg, and the time evolution of V for various values of ΔP in GaInSn, respectively. The data show that V is slightly suppressed by substituting Hg for GaInSn. Equations (1) and (2) phenomenologically indicate that the conversion from the vorticity into the voltage depends on θ_{SHE} and λ. When spin–orbit coupling decreases, θ_{SHE} decreases whereas λ tends to increase. Therefore, the effects of spin–orbit coupling on V partially compensate, resulting in the weak material dependence obtained from the GaInSn and Hg measurements. If we assume θ_{SHE}λ^{2}ξ for GaInSn to be 3.0 × 10^{−24} J s m^{−1}, equation (3) reproduces the observed V values. Here, we used parameters from ref. 25 for GaInSn: σ_{0} = 3.1 × 10^{6} (Ω m)^{−1} and ν = 2.98 × 10^{−7} m^{2} s^{−1}.
Now, we examine the possibilities of other mechanisms that might give rise to voltage signals in the present setup. First, the magnetohydrodynamic effect^{1,2,3,4} (MHD), or the effect of the Lorentz force on a liquidmetal flow caused by environmental magnetic fields, was found to be negligible; the electromotive force caused by the MHD is perpendicular to the liquid flow, and thus the voltage caused by the MHD should not depend on the length of a channel, which is contradictory to the observed signal. Also, we confirmed that the observed signal is not affected by the direction of the geomagnetic field.
Next, we examine contact electrification effects^{26,27,28,29}, or the influence of charging effects of Hg due to electrochemical interaction with a channel wall, even though the Hg is connected to the ground. A flow of charged Hg might generate electric voltage in itself. The charging effect is known to depend on the material species^{26,27,28} and roughness^{29} of the contact surface. To change the property of the contact surface, we coated the inner wall of the channel with resin and measured V using the coated channel. Resin is known to exhibit different electrification properties from quartz^{26,27}. The values of φ and L for the channel are 1.0 mm and 400 mm, respectively. The magnitude of the roughness was also changed approximately from 5 to 40 μm by the coating. As shown in Fig. 3d, the result indicates that the v_{∗} dependence of V for the resincoated channel is the same as that for the uncoated quartz channel, ruling out the contribution of the charging effect.
Finally, we examine the influence of thermoelectric effects. We constructed the special setup shown in Fig. 4a. We call it the triangle setup. This setup allows us to completely eliminate the Seebeck voltage and to examine thermoelectric contamination in the SHD measurements. In the setup, the voltage probes consist of Hg itself, allowing the voltage to be transferred to a common location for the attachment of wiring, as shown in Fig. 4a. Therefore, thermoelectric contamination is completely removed as follows. In Fig. 4b, we show the voltage signal generated in the triangle setup filled with Hg, measured by applying a temperature difference ΔT_{H} between the ends of the fluid channel, but without flowing Hg. The maximum magnitude of ΔT_{H} is 20 K, much greater than the possible temperature difference in the liquid flow (approximately 0.1 K; see experimental results in Supplementary Information). Note, however, that no noticeable thermoelectric voltage is observed in going from a small to a large ΔT_{H}, which shows that the thermoelectric effect is completely excluded in measuring the SHD signal. In fact, as shown in Fig. 4c, d, we observed flowinduced voltage signals in the triangle setup, similar to those in the setup shown in Fig. 2a (the simple setup). Compared to this flowinduced signal in the triangle setup, the thermoelectric signal in Fig. 4b is negligibly small even in the presence of a large temperature difference, proving that both the setups work perfectly to measure the SHD signal. To confirm this we compared the flowinduced voltage signal in the triangle setup shown in Fig. 4c and that in the simple setup shown in Fig. 4d; they are similar in terms of the flow velocity dependence and the signal magnitude. All the results indicate that the voltage signal generated in the liquid flow is completely unrelated to thermoelectricity.
From the point of view of applications, the observed generation effects can be used to make an electric generator and a spin generator without using magnets. It is thus certainly worthwhile to explore the effect in various liquid metals. We anticipate that the observed phenomena will bridge the gap between spintronics and hydrodynamics.
References
Rosa, R. J. Magnetohydrodynamic Energy Conversion Ch. 4 (McGrawHill, 1968).
Alfvén, H. Existence of electromagnetichydrodynamic waves. Nature 150, 405–406 (1942).
Michiyoshi, I. & Nakura, S. Pressure drop of liquid mercury MHD power generators. J. Nucl. Sci. Technol. 9, 490–496 (1972).
Yamaguchi, H., Niu, X.D. & Zhang, X.R. Investigation on a lowmeltingpoint gallium alloy MHD power generator. Int. J. Energy Res. 35, 209–220 (2011).
Maekawa, S. (ed.) Concepts in Spin Electronics (Oxford Univ. Press, 2006).
Maekawa, S., Valenzuela, S. O., Saitoh, E. & Kimura, T. (eds) Spin Current (Oxford Univ. Press, 2012).
Slonczewski, J. C. Currentdriven excitation of magnetic multilayers. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 159, L1–L7 (1996).
Berger, L. Emission of spin waves by a magnetic multilayer traversed by a current. Phys. Rev. B 54, 9353–9358 (1996).
Ando, K. et al. Photoinduced inverse spinHall effect: Conversion of lightpolarization information into electric voltage. Appl. Phys. Lett. 96, 082502 (2010).
Kimel, A. V. et al. Ultrafast nonthermal control of magnetization by instantaneous photomagnetic pulses. Nature 435, 655–657 (2005).
Gøthgen, C., Oszwałdowski, R., Petrou, A. & Žutić, I. Analytical model of spinpolarized semiconductor lasers. Appl. Phys. Lett. 93, 042513 (2008).
Matsuo, M., Ieda, J., Saitoh, E. & Maekawa, S. Effects of mechanical rotation on spin currents. Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 076601 (2011).
Matsuo, M., Ieda, J., Harii, K., Saitoh, E. & Maekawa, S. Mechanical generation of spin current by spinrotation coupling. Phys. Rev. B 87, 180402 (2013).
Uchida, K. et al. Longrange spin Seebeck effect and acoustic spin pumping. Nature Mater. 10, 737–741 (2011).
Uchida, K., An, T., Kajiwara, Y., Toda, M. & Saitoh, E. Surfaceacousticwavedriven spin pumping in Y3Fe5O12/Pt hybrid structure. Appl. Phys. Lett. 99, 212501 (2011).
Valet, T. & Fert, A. Theory of the perpendicular magnetoresistance in magnetic multilayers. Phys. Rev. B 48, 7099–7113 (1993).
Takahashi, S. & Maekawa, S. Spin current in metals and superconductors. J. Phys. Soc. Jpn 77, 031009 (2008).
Bass, J. & Pratt, W. P. Jr Spindiffusion lengths in metals and alloys, and spinflipping at metal/metal interfaces: An experimentalist’s critical review. J. Phys. Condens. Matter 19, 183201 (2007).
Saitoh, E., Ueda, M., Miyajima, H. & Tatara, G. Conversion of spin current into charge current at room temperature: Inverse spinHall effect. Appl. Phys. Lett. 88, 182509 (2006).
Valenzuela, S. O. & Tinkham, M. Direct electronic measurement of the spin Hall effect. Nature 442, 176–179 (2006).
Kimura, T., Otani, Y., Sato, T., Takahashi, S. & Maekawa, S. Roomtemperature reversible spin Hall effect. Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 156601 (2007).
Azevedo, A., Vilela Leaõ, L. H., RodriguezSuarez, R. L., Oliveira, A. B. & Rezende, S. M. dc effect in ferromagnetic resonance: Evidence of the spinpumping effect? J. Appl. Phys. 97, 10C715 (2005).
Ando, K. et al. Inverse spinHall effect induced by spin pumping in metallic system. J. Appl. Phys. 109, 103913 (2011).
Landau, L. D. & Lifshitz, E. M. Fluid Mechanics 2nd edn, Ch. 1, 2 & 4 (ButterworthHeinemann, 1987).
Morley, N. B., Burris, J., Cadwallader, L. C. & Nornberg, M. D. GaInSn usage in the research laboratory. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 79, 056107 (2008).
Shaw, P. E. Experiments on triboelectricity. I. The triboelectric series. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 94, 16–33 (1917).
Diaz, A. F. & FelixNavarro, R. M. A semiquantitative triboelectric series for polymeric materials: The influence of chemical structure and properties. J. Electrostat. 62, 277–290 (2004).
Yarnold, G. D. The electrification of mercury indexes in their passage through tubes. Proc. Phys. Soc. 52, 196–201 (1940).
Hori, Y. & Saito, K. Effect of the surface roughness on contact charging of polypropylene with mercury. J. Inst. Electrostat. Jpn 24, 42–46 (2000).
Acknowledgements
The authors thank Y. Fujikawa, R. Iguchi, Y. Ohnuma, J. Ohe, R. Haruki, Y. Shiomi, K. Ando, M. Mizuguchi and T. Seki for valuable discussions. This work was supported by ERATOJST ‘Spin Quantum Rectification Project’, Japan, a GrantinAid for Scientific Research on Innovative Areas from MEXT, Japan, a GrantinAid for JSPS Fellows from JSPS, Japan, a GrantinAid for Young Scientists B (24740247 and 24760722) from MEXT, Japan, a GrantinAid for Challenging Exploratory Research (26610108) from MEXT, Japan, a GrantinAid for Scientific Research A (24244051 and 26247063) from MEXT, Japan, and a GrantinAid for Scientific Research C (25400337 and 15K05153) from MEXT, Japan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
R.T., M.O., K.H., H.C. and E.S. designed the experiments; R.T., M.O. and K.H. collected and analysed the data; S.O. supported the experiments; R.T., K.H., M.M., J.I. and S.T. developed the theoretical explanations; S.M. and E.S. planned and supervised the study; R.T., E.S., M.M. and J.I. wrote the manuscript; J.I. and E.S. coined the term ‘spin hydrodynamic (SHD) generation’. All authors discussed the results and commented on the manuscript.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Supplementary information
Supplementary information
Supplementary information (PDF 823 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Takahashi, R., Matsuo, M., Ono, M. et al. Spin hydrodynamic generation. Nature Phys 12, 52–56 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys3526
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys3526
This article is cited by

A spin–rotation mechanism of Einstein–de Haas effect based on a ferromagnetic disk
Frontiers of Physics (2024)

Hydrodynamics, spin currents and torsion
Journal of High Energy Physics (2023)

Topological or rotational nonAbelian gauge fields from EinsteinSkyrme holography
Journal of High Energy Physics (2021)

Generation of Effective Field Gradient and Spin Current by a Flow of Liquid Helium3
Journal of Low Temperature Physics (2021)

Spintronic devices for energyefficient data storage and energy harvesting
Communications Materials (2020)