Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T13:44:47.815Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An electron diffraction study of Bi2Sr2(GdxCa1−x)0.8Cu2O8+δ

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

J. Kulik ,
Y. Y. Xue ,
Y. Y. Sun  and
M. Bonvalot
J. Kulik
Affiliation:
Texas Center for Superconductivity, University of Houston, Houston, Texas 77204
Y. Y. Xue
Affiliation:
Texas Center for Superconductivity, University of Houston, Houston, Texas 77204
Y. Y. Sun
Affiliation:
Texas Center for Superconductivity, University of Houston, Houston, Texas 77204
M. Bonvalot
Affiliation:
Texas Center for Superconductivity, University of Houston, Houston, Texas 77204
Get access

Abstract

The compound Bi2Sr2(GdxCa1−x)0.8Cu2O8+δ is examined by electron diffraction for several values of x. The incommensurate modulation which has been reported for x - 0 persists for all values of x with the wave vector increasing as x increases. A secondary modulation with a wave vector equal to one-half that of the primary is observed for x  0.85. This modulation manifests itself through satellite reflections that are highly streaked normal to the (001) planes and that flank certain select positions in reciprocal space. The appearance of this secondary modulation is accompanied by a change in the average crystal structure from B-centered to F-centered orthorhombic.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 5 , Issue 8 , August 1990 , pp. 1625 - 1638
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1Hazen, R. M., Prewitt, C. T., Angel, R. J., Ross, N. L., Finger, L. W., Hadidiacos, C. G., Veblen, D. R., Heany, P. J., Hor, P. H., Meng, R. L., Sun, Y. Y., Wang, Y. Q., Xue, Y. Y., Huang, Z. J., Gao, L., Bechtold, J., and Chu, C. W., Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 1174 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2Tarascon, J. M., LePage, Y., Barboux, P., Bagley, B. G., Greene, L. H., McKinnon, W. R., Hull, G. W., Giroud, M., and Hwang, D. M., Phys. Rev. B 37, 9382 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3Liang, J. K., Xie, S. S., Che, G. C., Huang, J. Q., Zhang, Y. L., and Zhao, Z. X., Mod. Phys. Lett. B 2, 483 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4Sunshine, S. A., Siegrist, T., Schneemeyer, L. F., Murphy, D. W., Cava, R. J., Batlogg, B., van Dover, R. B., Fleming, R. M., Glarum, S. H., Nakahara, S., Farrow, R., Krajewski, J. J., Zahurak, S. M., Waszczak, J. V., Marshall, J. H., Marsh, P., Rupp, L. W., Jr., and Peck, W. F., Phys. Rev. B 38, 893 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5Subramanian, M. A., Torardi, C. C., Calabrese, J. C., Gopalakrishnan, J., Morrissey, K. J., Askew, T. R., Flippen, R. B., Chowdhry, U., and Sleight, A. W., Science 239, 1015 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6Hervieu, M., Michel, C., Domenges, B., Laligant, Y., Lebail, A., Ferey, G., and Raveau, B., Mod. Phys. Lett. B 2, 491 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7Sequeira, A., Rajagopal, H., and Yakhmi, J. V., Physica C 157, 515 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8Withers, R. L., Thompson, J. G., Wallenberg, L. R., FitzGerald, J. D., Anderson, J. S., and Hyde, B. G., J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. 21, 6067 (1988); R. L. Withers, J. S. Anderson, B. G. Hyde, J. G. Thompson, L. R. Wallenberg, J. D. FitzGerald, and A. M. Stewart, J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. 21, L417 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9Kan, X. B., Kulik, J., Chow, P. C., Moss, S. C., Yan, Y. F., Wang, J. H., and Zhao, Z. X., J. Mater. Res. 5 (4), 731 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10Zandbergen, H. W., Groen, W. A., Mijlhoff, F. C., van Tendeloo, G., and Amelinckx, S., Physica C 156, 325 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11Gao, Y., Lee, P., Coppens, P., Subramanian, M. A., and Sleight, A. W., Science 241, 954 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12Shindo, D., Hiraga, K., Hirabayashi, M., Kikuchi, M., and Syono, Y., Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 27, L1018 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13Hirotsu, Y., Tomioka, O., Ohkubo, T., Yamamoto, N., Nakamura, Y., Nagakura, S., Komatsu, T., and Matsushita, K., Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 27, L1869 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14LePage, Y., McKinnon, W. R., Tarascon, J. M., and Barboux, P., Phys. Rev. B 40, 6810 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15Hewatt, E. A., Capponi, J. J., and Marezio, M., Physica C 157, 502 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16Xue, Y. Y., Hor, P. H., Sun, Y. Y., Huang, Z. J., Gao, L., Meng, R. L., Chu, C. W., Ho, J. C., and Wu, C. Y., Physica C 158, 211 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17Torardi, C. C., Parise, J. B., Subramanian, M. A., Gopalakrishnan, J., and Sleight, A. W., Physica C 157, 115 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18Olivier, S., Groen, W. A., van der Beek, C., and Zandbergen, H. W., Physica C 157, 531 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19Lee, P., Gao, Y., Sheu, H. S., Petricek, V., Restori, R., Coppens, P., Darovskikh, A., Phillips, J. C., Sleight, A. W., and Subramanian, M. A., Science 244, 62 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20Zandbergen, H. W., Hetherington, C. J. D., and Gronsky, R. J., J. Superconductivity 1, 26 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21de Wolff, P. M., Janssen, T., and Janner, A., Acta Crystallogr. A 37, 625 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22Onoda, M., Yamamoto, A., Takayama-Muromachi, E., and Takekawa, S., Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 27, L833 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23Tarascon, J. M., Miceli, P. F., Barboux, P., Hwang, D. M., Hull, G. W., Giroud, M., Greene, L. H., LePage, Y., McKinnon, W. R., Tselepis, E., Pleizier, G., Eibschutz, M., Neumann, D. A., and Rhyne, J. J., Phys. Rev. B 39, 11587 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24 The astute reader may notice that, although g1 and g2 are indicated as perpendicular, the details of the image suggest an angle slightly less than 90°. There are two sources for the apparent distortion. The rapidly varying thickness of the sample combined with a slight misorientation of the crystal causes a small shift of the (001) fringes with thickness. Secondly, at the time the image was recorded, the projector lens of our microscope was causing distortion of the images. Accounting for these two effects, we believe the true angle to be 90°.Google Scholar
25 The presence of the glide planes is in doubt (c.f. Ref. 9).Google Scholar
26 For a simple example, see Fujiwara, K., J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 16, 11 (1957); for a general treatment, see J. M. Perez-Mato, G. Madariaga, and M. J. Tello, J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. 19, 2613 (1986).Google Scholar