Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T02:00:29.336Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Three Dimensional Observation of Flux Pinning Centers in Dy-doped YBa2Cu3O7-x Coated Superconductors by STEM Tomography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Volkan Ortalan ,
Miriam Herrera ,
David G. Morgan ,
Martin W. Rupich  and
Nigel D. Browning
Volkan Ortalan
Affiliation:
[email protected], University of California, Davis, Chemical Engineering and Materials Science, 1 Shields Aenue, Davis, CA, 95616, United States, 530 754 8012
Miriam Herrera
Affiliation:
[email protected], University of California-Davis, Chemical Engineering and Materials Science Department, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA, 95616, United States
David G. Morgan
Affiliation:
[email protected], University of California-Davis, Chemical Engineering and Materials Science Department, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA, 95616, United States
Martin W. Rupich
Affiliation:
[email protected], American Superconductor Corporation, Westborough, MA, 01581, United States
Nigel D. Browning
Affiliation:
[email protected], University of California-Davis, Chemical Engineering and Materials Science Department, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA, 95616, United States
Get access

Abstract

The spatial distribution of flux pinning centers in YBa2Cu3O7 (YBCO) coated conductors significantly affects the conductive properties. Nanoparticles acting as pinning centers can be intentionally introduced into the structure by chemical doping. In this study, a Dy-doped YBa2Cu3O7-x coated superconductor was investigated and the particle composition was found to be as (YsDy1-s)2Cu2O5 with s ∼0.6. A tomographic tilt series was acquired using a scanning transmission electron microscope (STEM) to determine the 3-D distribution of nanoparticles. In the investigated sample area, 71 particles were located with a particle size distribution ranging between 13 and 135 nm. The distribution uniformity and size of the particles appeared to be dependent on the grain boundary network structure. Large particles were observed to be located on grain boundaries indicating that fast grain boundary diffusion may determine the particle size.

Keywords

superconductingscanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM)metalorganic deposition
Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 1026: Symposium C – Quantitative Electron Microscopy for Materials Science , 2007 , 1026-C08-06
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2008

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

1. Chikumoto, N., Konczykowski, M., Terai, T. and Murakami, M., Superconductor Sci. & Tech. 14, 663 (2001).10.1088/0953-2048/14/9/305Google Scholar
2. Haugan, T., Barnes, P. N., Wheeler, R., Meisenkothen, F. and Sumption, M., Nature 430, 867 (2004).10.1038/nature02792Google Scholar
3. Rupich, M.W., Zhang, W., Li, X., Kodenkandath, T., Verebelyi, D. T., Schoop, U., Thieme, C., Teplitsky, M., Lynch, J., Nguyen, N., Siegal, E., Scudiere, J., Maroni, V., Venkataraman, K., Miller, D. and Holesinger, T. G., Physica C 412, 877 (2004).10.1016/j.physc.2004.02.202Google Scholar
4. Long, N., Strickland, N., Chapman, B., Ross, N., Xia, J., Li, X., Zhang, W., Kodenkandath, T., Huang, Y. and Rupich, M., Superconductor Sci. and Technol. 18, S405 (2005).Google Scholar
5. Frank, J., editor, Electron Tomography: three dimensional with the transmission electron microscope, (Plenum Publishing Corporation, New York, 1992).Google Scholar
6. Midgley, P.A., Weyland, M., Ultramicroscopy 96, 413, (2003).10.1016/S0304-3991(03)00105-0Google Scholar
7. Midgley, P. A., Weyland, M., Thomas, J. M., Johnson, B. F. G., Chem. Commun. 10, 907 (2001).10.1039/b101819cGoogle Scholar
8. Radon, J., Verh, Ber.. Sachs, K.. Leipzig, Ges. Wiss., Math. –Phys. K1. 69, 262 (1917).Google Scholar
9. Browning, N. D., Chisholm, M. F., Pennycook, S. J., Norton, D. P. and Lowndes, D. H., Physica C 212, 185 (1993).10.1016/0921-4534(93)90501-GGoogle Scholar
10. Campbell, T. A., Haugan, T. J., Maartense, I., Murphy, J., Brunke, L. and Barnes, P. N., Physica C 423, 1 (2005).10.1016/j.physc.2004.09.018Google Scholar
11. Donohoe, B. S., Mogelsvang, S., Staehelin, L. A., Methods 39, 154 (2006).10.1016/j.ymeth.2006.05.013Google Scholar