No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Critical Current Studies of Flux Trapping in Superconducting Lead
1.J. J. Winter, J. T. Breslin, and H. A. Leupold, J. Appl. Phys. 40, 3862 (1969).
2.G. K. Gaule, K. Schwidtal, J. T. Breslin, R. L. Ross, and J. J. Winter, Proc. Tenth Int. Conf. Low Temp. Phys. 11B, 357 (1967).
3.G. K. Gaule, J. T. Breslin, and J. J. Winter, J. Appl. Phys. 39, 2686 (1968).
4.G. K. Gaule, J. J. Winter, and J. T. Breslin (unpublished).
5.W. DeSorbo, Rev. Mod. Phys. 36, 90 (1964), wherein a related effect is found in type III superconductors.
6.We define our as that producing a voltage of 0.004 μV.
7.H. Levy and P. P. M. Meincke, Appl. Phys. Lett. 14, 387 (1969), define their critical current as that producing a voltage of
8.C. C. Chang and J. B. McKinnon, Phys. Lett. 27A, 414 (1968). “The appearance or not of the “peak effect” in type II superconductors depends on the choice of voltage used as a criterion for the appearance of resistance.” Although the peak effect referred to in this quotation is not the same as ours, we include the reference to illustrate the importance of voltage criteria in investigations of this type.
9.P. S. Swartz and H. R. Hart, Jr., Phys. Rev. 137, A818 (1965). These authors defined the critical transport current as that current producing a voltage drop of 1.4 μV/cm. (In some of our experiments this criterion would have obscured the position of the current peak after it was shifted).
10.D. Schoenberg, Superconductivity (Cambridge U.P., New York, 1960), p. 36.
11.In a magneto‐optics study of flux trapping in lead, analogous results were obtained: W. DeSorbo and W. A. Healy, Cryogenics 4, 257 (1964);
11.and W. DeSorbo, Gen. Elec. Res. Lab., Rept. No. 64‐RL‐3812M, 1964.
12.R. Hecht, RCA Rev. 24, 453 (1964).
13.A. B. Pippard, Proc. Roy. Soc. (London) A248, 97 (1955).
14.H. C. Hitchcock, Rev. Mod. Phys. 36, 61 (1964).
15.R. S. Kaeser and E. Ambler, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 37, 173 (1966).
16.D. E. Mapother (private communication).
17.J. D. Livingston (private communication).
18.R. I. Gayley, Cryogenics 7, 215 (1967).
19.Donald L. Schweitzer and M. Garber, Phys. Rev. 160, 348 (1967).
20.In Ref. 1 we attributed the flux trapping beyond the of lead to an “impurity” (a small blob of Jensen A‐9 solder). At first it seemed unlikely that this material, described by its distributor as basically a lead‐tin solder (the English manufacturer declined to divulge more detailed information), could have such a high Finally, a spectrographic analysis showed it to be approximately 15 Sn/30Pb/50 Bi. A solder of similar composition, but having a somewhat lower melting point, was found by Warren2 to have an at 1.3°K and a of 8.68°K. This would explain the flux trapping to fields above 3900 G and the enormous flux capacity.
21.W. H. Warren, Jr. and W. G. Bader, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 40, 180 (1969).
Article metrics loading...
Full text loading...
Most read this month
Most cited this month