Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 44 references

Effect of spark plasma sintering on the superconducting properties of Sm-based oxypnictide

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper shows that spark plasma sintering can densify F-doped SmFeAsO to 97–98% of theoretical density, yet leaves the superconducting transition near 53 K and the critical current density only mildly improved because the same impurity…

desk verdict Solid negative result for Sm1111 processing: SPS doubles density but not Tc or Jc because impurity phases persist; worth refereeing after the density measurements are cleaned up. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.16657 v1 pith:GUACR64B submitted 2025-05-22 cond-mat.supr-con cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.str-el

Mohammad Azam , Tatiana Zajarniuk , Konrad Kwatek , Paolo Mele , Shiv J. Singh This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.supr-concond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.str-el
keywords iron-basedsuperconductorssparkplasmasinteringSmFeAsOoxypnictidecriticalcurrentdensityimpurityphasessamplefluorineevaporation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

SmFeAsO$_{0.80}$F$_{0.20}$ belongs to the 1111 family of iron-based superconductors, which has the highest transition temperatures in the class, but polycrystalline bulks are porous and contain impurity phases. The paper tests whether spark plasma sintering, a fast pressure-assisted densification method, can turn this material into a dense, high-current superconductor. It finds that SPS at 900 °C for 5–10 minutes under 45 MPa raises the relative density from about 50% to 97–98%, yet the superconducting transition stays near 53 K and the critical current density rises only from about $10^3$ to $3 \times 10^3$ A/cm². The reason, the authors argue, is that the impurity phases SmOF/Sm$_2$O$_3$ and SmAs form during initial synthesis and survive all three processing routes, so the denser sample still has the same current-blocking grain boundaries. If true, this redirects effort from densification toward phase purity in the 1111 family.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a three-way synthesis comparison on a single parent batch of SmFeAsO$_{0.80}$F$_{0.20}$: conventional ambient-pressure synthesis, high gas-pressure/high-temperature synthesis at 500 MPa, and a grid of spark-plasma-sintering runs at 600–1000 °C for 5–30 minutes at 45 MPa. The operative quantities are the relative density, computed from geometric mass/volume against a theoretical density of 7.1 g/cm³, and the critical current density from the Bean model, $J_c = 20\,\Delta m/[V a (1-a/3b)]$, applied to magnetic hysteresis loops. The decisive observational link is the impurity phases SmOF/Sm$_2$O$_3$ and SmAs, quantified by XRD and located by SEM/EDS in the microstructure; because their type and amount stay nearly constant across CSP, HP-HTS and SPS, the paper attributes the failure of densification to these current-blocking phases.

What would settle it

Measure the density of an SPS-4 pellet by Archimedes' method or gas pycnometry: if the value comes out well below 97%, the central claim that SPS nearly doubled the density is undermined. Independently, run Rietveld refinement with an internal standard on the same sample; if the SmOF/Sm$_2$O$_3$ and SmAs fractions are substantially lower than in the parent sample, the claim that SPS leaves impurities unchanged would be contradicted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that increasing sample density by spark plasma sintering is ineffective for F-doped Sm1111 because the impurity phases that limit intergrain current are not removed. SPS-processed SmFeAsO$_{0.80}$F$_{0.20}$ reaches 97–98% relative density, almost double the ~50% of conventional ambient-pressure synthesis and well above the ~58% of the 500 MPa gas-pressure route, but the best SPS samples show essentially the same onset $T_c$ (~53 K) and nearly the same critical current density (~$3 \times 10^3$ A/cm² at 0.5 T, 5 K) as the high-pressure HIP sample, with only a mild improvement over the conventional parent. X-ray diffraction and electron microscopy show roughly 4–5% SmOF/Sm$_2$O$_3$ and 2–3% SmAs in all routes. The paper contrasts this with Ba122 and Ca1144 superconductors, where SPS reduced impurity phases and raised $J_c$ by an order of magnitude, and concludes that densification helps only when the superconducting phase is pure; for Sm1111 the impurity phases neutralize the density gain.

Load-bearing premise

The central comparison depends on the geometric densities in Table 3, computed from mass and measured pellet dimensions and normalized to a theoretical density of 7.1 g/cm³, being accurate without quoted uncertainty, and on the XRD-derived impurity fractions being accurate enough to show that the impurity content is essentially unchanged across the three methods.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For F-doped Sm1111, densification alone is not a viable route to higher critical current; synthesis efforts should target removal of SmOF/Sm$_2$O$_3$ and SmAs before or during sintering.
  • The optimal SPS window for this composition is 900 °C for 5–10 minutes at 45 MPa; longer times or 1000 °C drive off fluorine and lower $T_c$.
  • The success of SPS in Ba122 and Ca1144 does not transfer automatically to the 1111 family, because in those materials SPS reduced impurity phases whereas here it does not.
  • Practical conductors based on SmFeAs(O,F) will require phase-pure starting material; applying high-pressure or SPS methods to already-impure bulks will not unlock the expected density benefit.
  • Higher temperature or longer SPS dwell times should be avoided for fluorine-doped 1111 compounds since volatile fluorine loss begins to degrade the superconducting transition.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the paper is right, the next bottleneck for Sm1111 wires and tapes is not porosity but impurity-free grain boundaries; a direct transport-current measurement across individual grain boundaries would test whether SmOF/SmAs are indeed the blocking phases.
  • A natural extension the authors do not run is to purify the SmFeAs(O,F) powder before SPS, for example by removing the impurity phases or by an alternate low-temperature synthesis route; their argument predicts that $J_c$ should then scale with density.
  • Quantitative EDS or WDS measurement of fluorine in the 1000 °C SPS samples could confirm the claimed ~2 K drop in $T_c$ from fluorine evaporation and give a quantitative relation between fluorine loss and transition temperature, which the lattice-parameter shifts only suggest indirectly.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports a systematic study of spark plasma sintering (SPS) parameters for polycrystalline SmFeAsO0.80F0.20, comparing the resulting bulks with samples made by conventional ambient-pressure synthesis (CSP) and high-pressure, high-temperature synthesis (HP-HTS). The authors find that SPS at 900 °C for 5–10 min produces the best superconducting properties, with a density claimed to reach 97–98% of the theoretical value, a superconducting transition temperature near 53 K, and a critical current density of about 3 × 10^3 A/cm^2, only marginally higher than the ~10^3 A/cm^2 of the CSP parent but comparable to the HP-HTS sample. The central negative claim is that the near-doubling of sample density does not improve superconductivity because the same impurity phases (SmOF/Sm2O3 and SmAs) persist regardless of synthesis route; the authors contrast this with Ba122 and Ca1144, where SPS removes impurities and increases Jc by an order of magnitude.

Significance. If the central claim is correct, the paper provides a useful negative result for iron-based superconductor processing: densification alone does not improve the superconducting performance of Sm1111 when impurity phases block grain boundaries. The work has practical value for wire and tape development and is one of the few systematic SPS studies of the 1111 family. The paper is also commendable for comparing three synthesis routes on the same composition and for presenting transport, magnetic, and microstructural data that are internally consistent. The main significance is, however, tempered by the reliance on unvalidated density numbers and single-sample measurements, which are load-bearing for the headline conclusion and need to be strengthened.

major comments (4)
  1. [Experimental details and Table 3] The central density claims are load-bearing but are based on simple geometric mass/volume measurements normalized to a theoretical density of 7.1 g/cm^3 from reference [35], with no stated uncertainty. The paper's own lattice parameters (a = 3.928(7) Å, c = 8.497(9) Å, Z = 2) imply an X-ray density of about 7.5 g/cm^3 for SmFeAsO0.80F0.20, not 7.1 g/cm^3. Renormalizing Table 3 with 7.5 g/cm^3 lowers the parent from ~50% to ~47%, SPS-3 from ~92% to ~87%, and SPS-4 from ~97% to ~91%. The qualitative density contrast may survive, but the specific claims of '97–98%' density and 'almost doubled density' are not robust without Archimedes measurements, helium pycnometry, or at least an uncertainty analysis of the dimensional method.
  2. [Table 1] Table 1 lists the first-step synthesis for SPS-7 and SPS-8 as '1000 °C, 45 h, ambient pressure', whereas all other samples, including the parent, are listed with a first step at 900 °C for 45 h. The text and Table 2 state that all samples share the same parent starting material. This inconsistency means that SPS-7 and SPS-8 are not directly comparable to the other SPS samples; their lower Tc and inferred fluorine loss could arise from the different first-step synthesis rather than from the SPS sintering temperature. Please correct the table or explain the intended processing history.
  3. [Microstructural analysis and Table 3] The text in §3 states that 'These observations corroborate the calculated density of 97-98% for these SPS-3 and SPS-4 samples', but Table 3 lists SPS-3 as ~92% and SPS-4 as ~97%. The abstract likewise says SPS 'increases the sample densities up to 97-98%', which is not true for SPS-3. This internal inconsistency weakens the precision of the headline number and needs to be reconciled.
  4. [Figure 5(b), Figure 6(e), and Table 4] The conclusion that Jc improves only 'marginally' or 'slightly' under SPS rests on comparisons of values that differ by factors of 2–3 (10^3 to 3 × 10^3 A/cm^2), with one sample per synthesis condition and no error bars. Given possible sample-to-sample variation in polycrystalline 1111 materials, the claimed distinction between a 'slight increment' and 'no significant enhancement' is not quantitatively supported. Reporting multiple samples per condition or at least an uncertainty estimate for the Bean-model calculation is needed to make the comparison meaningful.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Table 4] The abstract states a transition temperature of ~54 K for CSP and HP-HTS, while Table 4 lists ~53 K for the CSP sample and ~52 K for the HP-HTS/HIP sample. Please harmonize these numbers.
  2. [Table 4] Table 4 gives the SPS Sm1111 Tc as ~51 K, but the optimal SPS-3 and SPS-4 samples have Tc ~53 K in Figures 4–6. The table should specify which SPS sample it represents, otherwise the comparison with Ba122 and Ca1144 is misleading.
  3. [Section 6] The text refers to 'HIP-1' in the discussion of room-temperature resistivity, but the sample is named HIP throughout the paper; this is likely a typo.
  4. [Table 3 and Section 1] Impurity fractions are given as approximate values from XRD with no refinement details or uncertainties. Percentages such as '4-5%' and '6-7%' are used to support the claim that impurity content is unchanged, but no Rietveld or reference-intensity-ratio procedure is described. At minimum, the estimation method should be stated.
  5. [Figure 5(a)] The magnetization normalization is performed using the value at 10 K. Please state explicitly that this is an arbitrary normalization and that the FC/ZFC curves are not absolute susceptibilities, since the reported negative FC moment is discussed as evidence of vortex pinning.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central density-versus-Tc/Jc/impurity comparison rests on independent in-paper measurements with no fitted inputs, and the self-citations are non-load-bearing background.

full rationale

The central argument is an experiment-to-comparison chain, not a fit or a model, and no step defines one quantity in terms of another and then presents it as a prediction. Relative density is mass/volume normalized to the external theoretical value 7.1 g/cm3 from Johnston (ref [35]); the skeptic's concern that the paper's own lattice parameters (a = 3.928(7) Å, c = 8.497(9) Å) imply an X-ray density nearer 7.5 g/cm3 and hence lower absolute percentages (SPS-3/SPS-4 dropping from 97-98% toward 92%), together with the text-versus-Table 3 '97-98%' versus '92%' discrepancy, are normalization-accuracy and internal-consistency risks, not circularity, because one constant is applied to every sample and the density ordering SPS >> HIP > Parent survives renormalization. Tc is read from independent resistivity and magnetization curves, Jc is computed from measured M-H loops with the parameter-free Bean formula Jc = 20 Δm/Va(1-a/3b), and impurity fractions come from XRD phase analysis, so no fitted input is later renamed a prediction and no output feeds back into the density estimate. The self-citations that occur ([5], [6], [13], [15], [18], [19], [32], [33]) are background rather than load-bearing: the x = 0.2 composition choice cites ref [6] but is independently echoed by external ref [7] and does not drive the central claim, and the HP-HTS baseline from ref [19] is re-prepared and re-measured in this paper ('we also prepared HIP bulk using the optimized synthesis conditions of 900 °C for 1 hour at 500 MPa using the HP-HTS method [18], as previously reported elsewhere [19]'). The conclusion that increased density is ineffective in the presence of impurity phases follows directly from these independent in-paper measurements (Table 3, Figures 4-5), so the derivation chain is self-contained.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no free parameters or new entities. Its conclusions rely on standard assumptions about the Bean model, the theoretical density of Sm1111, and semi-quantitative XRD impurity analysis.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Bean critical state model applies to these polycrystalline bulks, so Jc = 20 Δm/[V a (1 - a/3b)] yields the bulk critical current density.
    Invoked in Section 5 (Magnetic properties) to convert M-H loops to Jc. The model assumes uniform field penetration and ignores demagnetization and grain decoupling effects.
  • domain assumption The theoretical density of SmFeAsO is 7.1 g/cm3 (reference [35]), used to convert measured mass/volume densities to relative densities.
    The paper uses this value in Table 3; if the actual theoretical density of the F-doped phase differs, relative densities shift.
  • domain assumption XRD peak intensities and profile analysis from PDF4+ 2024 database reliably quantify the SmOF and SmAs impurity fractions to about 1%, as reported in Table 3.
    The comparison of impurity levels across synthesis methods underpins the claim that impurity phases are unchanged; the paper does not report Rietveld refinement or uncertainty.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Effect of spark plasma sintering on the superconducting properties of Sm-based oxypnictide." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GUACR64B

@misc{pith2026250516657,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Effect of spark plasma sintering on the superconducting properties of Sm-based oxypnictide},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GUACR64B}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.16657}
}
read the original abstract

We optimize the superconducting properties of Sm-based oxypnictide (Sm1111: SmFeAsO0.80F0.20) by using the Spark Plasma Sintering (SPS) technique under various synthesis conditions, including heating temperatures ranging from 600 to 1000 {\deg}C for durations of 5 to 30 minutes at the applied pressure of 45 MPa. All prepared bulks are characterized by structural and microstructural analysis as well as transport and magnetic measurements to conclude our findings. SmFeAsO0.80F0.20 bulks are also prepared using the conventional synthesis process at ambient pressure (CSP) and the high gas pressure and high temperature (HP-HTS) methods at 500 MPa, which exhibit a superconducting transition temperature (Tc) of ~54 K. Interestingly, the SPS process of SmFeAsO0.80F0.20 increases the sample densities up to 97-98% and confirms the optimized synthesis conditions of 900{\deg}C for 5-10 min; however, the increased sintering temperature or duration reduces Tc due to the possible evaporation of lighter elements, particularly fluorine. Furthermore, the SPS technique is unable to reduce the observed impurity phases for the Sm1111, which is similar to the CSP and HP-HTS processes. A slight increment in the Jc by the SPS process is observed due to the enhancement of sample density. A comparative analysis of Sm1111 superconductors prepared by SPS is performed with CSP and HP-HTS processes, suggesting that an increased sample density is ineffective on the superconducting properties in the presence of the impurity phases. This finding can be beneficial for the fundamental and applied research of iron-based superconductor (FBS).

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.16657 by the authors.

Figure 7
Figure 7. Interestingly, the SPS method reduces the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_7.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [35]

    The puzzle of high temperature su perconductivity in layered iron pnictides and chalcogenides

    Johnston DC. The puzzle of high temperature su perconductivity in layered iron pnictides and chalcogenides. Adv Phys. 2010;59:803-61

    work page 2010

  2. [1]

    Iro n-based layered superconductor La[O 1-xFx]FeAs (x = 0.05-0.12) with Tc = 26 K

    Kamihara Y, Watanabe T, Hirano M, Hosono H. Iro n-based layered superconductor La[O 1-xFx]FeAs (x = 0.05-0.12) with Tc = 26 K. J. Am. Chem. Soc 2008;130:3296-329

    work page 2008

  3. [2]

    Research and prospects of iron -based superconductors

    Ren ZA, Zhao ZX. Research and prospects of iron -based superconductors. Adv. Mater 2000;21:4584-4592

    work page 2000

  4. [3]

    High-temperature superco nductivity in iron-based materials

    Paglione J, Greene RL. High-temperature superco nductivity in iron-based materials. Nature Physics 2010;6:645-658

    work page 2010

  5. [4]

    Potentials of iron-based supercon ductors for practical future materials

    Shimoyama JI. Potentials of iron-based supercon ductors for practical future materials. Supercond. Sci. Tech. 2014;27:044002

    work page 2014

  6. [5]

    Sturza MI

    Singh SJ. Sturza MI. Bulk and single crystal gr owth progress of iron-based superconductors (FBS): 1111 and 1144. Crystal 2022;12:20

    work page 2022

  7. [6]

    Transition temperature and upper critical field in SmFeAsO 1-xFx synthesized at low heating temperatures

    Singh SJ, Shimoyama J, Yamamoto A, Ogino H, Ki shio K. Transition temperature and upper critical field in SmFeAsO 1-xFx synthesized at low heating temperatures. IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity 2013;23:2239352

    work page 2013

  8. [7]

    Phase diagram and superconductivity at 58.1 K in α-FeAs-free SmFeAsO 1-xFx

    Fujioka M, Denholme SJ, Ozaki T, Okazaki H, Deg uchi K, Demura S, Hara H, Watanabe T, Takeya H, Yamaguchi T, Kumakura H, Taka no Y. Phase diagram and superconductivity at 58.1 K in α-FeAs-free SmFeAsO 1-xFx. Supercond. Sci. Tech. 2013; 26:085023

    work page 2013

Show all 44 references
  1. [8]

    Sup erconductivity in co-doped SmFeAsO’, Supercond Sci Technol 2008;21:115016

    Qi Y, Gao Z, Wang L, Wang D, Zhang X, Ma Y. Sup erconductivity in co-doped SmFeAsO’, Supercond Sci Technol 2008;21:115016

    2008

  2. [9]

    Effects of Mn and Ni doping on the superconductivity of SmFeAs(O,F)

    Singh SJ, Shimoyama J, Yamamoto A, Ogino A, Kis hio K. Effects of Mn and Ni doping on the superconductivity of SmFeAs(O,F). Physica C 2013;494:57-61

    2013

  3. [10]

    Effects of phosphorus doping on the superconducting properties of SmFeAs(O,F)

    Singh SJ, Shimoyama SJ, Yamamoto A, Ogino H, Kishio K. Effects of phosphorus doping on the superconducting properties of SmFeAs(O,F). Physica C 2016;504:1923

    2016

  4. [11]

    Ir doping-induced superconductivity in the SmFeAsO system

    Yong LC, Cheng CH, Cui YJ, Zhang H, Zhang Y, Y ang Y, Zhao Y. Ir doping-induced superconductivity in the SmFeAsO system. Journal of the American Chemical Society 2009:31,10338-10339

    2009

  5. [12]

    Revisiting the Electron-Doped SmFeAsO: Enhanced Superconductivity up to 58.6 K by Th and F Codoping’, Chinese Physics Letters 2017;34:077401

    Wang XC, Yu J, Ruan B, Pan B, Mu Q, Liu T, Zha o K, Chen G, Ren Z. Revisiting the Electron-Doped SmFeAsO: Enhanced Superconductivity up to 58.6 K by Th and F Codoping’, Chinese Physics Letters 2017;34:077401

    2017

  6. [13]

    Significant enhancement of the intergrain coupling in lightly F-doped SmFeAsO superconductors

    Singh SJ, Shimoyama J, Yamamoto A, Ogino H, Ki shio K. Significant enhancement of the intergrain coupling in lightly F-doped SmFeAsO superconductors. Supercond. Sci. Tech. 2013;26:065006

    2013

  7. [14]

    Iron-based superconductors : Current status of materials and pairing mechanism

    Hosono H, Kuroki K. Iron-based superconductors : Current status of materials and pairing mechanism. Physica C 2015;514:399-422. 22

    2015

  8. [15]

    High-pres sure growth effect on the properties of high-Tc iron-based superconductors: A short review

    Singh P, Manasa M, Azam M, Singh SJ. High-pres sure growth effect on the properties of high-Tc iron-based superconductors: A short review. Cryogenics 2025;147:104028

    2025

  9. [16]

    Superconductivity at 55 K in Iron-Based F-Doped Lay ered Quaternary Compound Sm[O 1-xFx]FeAs

    An RZ, Wei L, Jie Y, Wei Y, Xiao-Li S, Cai Z, Can C, Li DX, Ling S, Fang Z, Xian Z. Superconductivity at 55 K in Iron-Based F-Doped Lay ered Quaternary Compound Sm[O 1-xFx]FeAs. Chin. Phys. Lett. 2008;25:2215

    2008

  10. [17]

    Superconductivity in the iron-based F-doped layered quaternary compound Nd[O 1 - xFx]FeAs

    Ren Z, Yang J, Lu W, Yi W, Shen X, Li Z, Che G , Dong X, Sun L, Zhou F. Superconductivity in the iron-based F-doped layered quaternary compound Nd[O 1 - xFx]FeAs. EPL 2008;82:57002

    2008

  11. [18]

    High Gas Pressure and High- Temperature Synthesis (HP-HTS) Technique and Its Im pact on Iron-Based Superconductors

    Azam M, Manasa M, Morawski A, Cetner T, Singh SJ. High Gas Pressure and High- Temperature Synthesis (HP-HTS) Technique and Its Im pact on Iron-Based Superconductors. Crystals 2023;13:1525

    2023

  12. [19]

    High-pr essure growth effects on the superconducting properties of Sm-based oxypnict ide superconductors

    Azam M, Manasa M, Zajarniuk T, Diduszko R, Pal asyuk T, Cetner T, Morawski A, Jastrz ębski C, Szewczyk A, Wierzbicki M, Singh SJ. High-pr essure growth effects on the superconducting properties of Sm-based oxypnict ide superconductors. Ceramics International 2025;51: 13734-13751

    2025

  13. [20]

    Single crystals of LnFeAsO 1-xFx (Ln = La, Pr, Nd, Sm, Gd) and Ba 1- xRbxFe2As2: Growth structure and superconducting pro perties

    Karpinski J, Zhigadlo ND, Katrych S, Bukowski Z, Moll P, Weyeneth S, Keller H, Puzniak R, Tortello, Daghero D, Gonnelli R, Aprile IM, Fasano Y, Fischer, Rogacki K, Batlogg B. Single crystals of LnFeAsO 1-xFx (Ln = La, Pr, Nd, Sm, Gd) and Ba 1- xRbxFe2As2: Growth structure and ...

    2009

  14. [21]

    High-pressure flux growth, structural, and superconducting properties of LnFeAsO (Ln = Pr, Nd, Sm) single crystals

    Zhigadlo ND, Weyeneth S, Katrych S, Moll PJ, R ogacki K, Bosma S, Puzniak R, Karpinski J, Batlogg B. High-pressure flux growth, structural, and superconducting properties of LnFeAsO (Ln = Pr, Nd, Sm) single crystals. Phys Rev B 2012;86:214509, 2012

    2012

  15. [22]

    Materials 2017

    Olevsky EASpark-Plasma Sintering and Related F ield-Assisted Powder Consolidation Technologies. Materials 2017. https://doi.org/10.3390/books978-3-03842-383-6

    2017 doi

  16. [23]

    Review of spark plasma sintering process

    Kumar DB, Babu BS, Aravind Jerrin KM, Joseph N, Jis s A. Review of spark plasma sintering process. IOP Conf. Ser : Mater. Sci. Eng 2020;993:012004

    2020

  17. [24]

    Spark plasma sintering of aluminium composites-a review

    Oliver UC, Sunday AV, Ikechukwu Christain EI, Elizabeth MM. Spark plasma sintering of aluminium composites-a review. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2021;112:1819-1839

    2021

  18. [25]

    Progress of spark plasma sintering ( SPS) method, systems, ceramics applications and industrialization

    Tokita M. Progress of spark plasma sintering ( SPS) method, systems, ceramics applications and industrialization. Ceramics 2021; 4: 160-198

    2021

  19. [26]

    Superconductor-in-an-Hour: Spark Plasma Synthesis of Co- and Ni-Doped BaFe 2As 2

    Zaikina JV, Kwong MY, Baccam B, Kauzlarich SM. Superconductor-in-an-Hour: Spark Plasma Synthesis of Co- and Ni-Doped BaFe 2As 2. Chemistry of Materials 2018;30: 8883-8890

    2018

  20. [27]

    E nhanced critical current density in K-doped Ba122 polycrystalline bulk superconductors via fast densification

    Tokuta S, Hasegawa Y, Shimada Y, Yamamoto A. E nhanced critical current density in K-doped Ba122 polycrystalline bulk superconductors via fast densification. iScience 2022;25:03992. 23

    2022

  21. [28]

    Synthesis of CaKFe 4As 4bulk samples with high critical current density using a spark plasma sintering technique

    Ishida S, Naik SP, Tsuchiya Y, Mawatari Y, Yo shida Y, Iyo A, Eisaki H, Kamiya Y, Kawashima H, Ogino H. Synthesis of CaKFe 4As 4bulk samples with high critical current density using a spark plasma sintering technique. S upercond. Sci. Technol. 2020; 33:094005

    2020

  22. [29]

    Synthesis and superconductivity in spark plasma sintered pristine and graphene-doped FeSe 0.5 Te 0.5 ’, Nanotechnol Rev 2015;4:411-417

    Puneet P, Podila R, He J, Rao M, Howard A, C ornell N, Zakhidov AA. Synthesis and superconductivity in spark plasma sintered pristine and graphene-doped FeSe 0.5 Te 0.5 ’, Nanotechnol Rev 2015;4:411-417

    2015

  23. [30]

    Ambient/low pressure synthesis and fast densification to achieve 55K Tc superconductivity in NdFeAsO 0.75 F0.25

    Kursumovic A, Durrell JH, Chen SK, MacManus-Dr iscoll JL. Ambient/low pressure synthesis and fast densification to achieve 55K Tc superconductivity in NdFeAsO 0.75 F0.25 . Supercond. Scien. Technol. 2010;23:025022

    2010

  24. [31]

    Synthesis of c-axis textured CaKFe 4As 4 superconducting bulk via spark plasma texturing technique

    Ishida S, Kamiya Y, Tsuchiya Y, Naik PK, Mawat ari Y, Iyo A, Yoshida Y, Eisaki H, Kawashima K, Ogino H. Synthesis of c-axis textured CaKFe 4As 4 superconducting bulk via spark plasma texturing technique. Journal of Al lys and Compounds 2023;961:171093

    2023

  25. [32]

    Antimony Doping Effect on the Superconducting Prope rties of SmFeAs(O,F)

    Azam M, Manasa M, Zajarniuk T, Diduszko R, Cet ner T, Morawski A, Singh SJ. Antimony Doping Effect on the Superconducting Prope rties of SmFeAs(O,F). IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity 2024;34:3343328

    2024

  26. [33]

    Copper doping effects on t he superconducting properties of Sm-based oxypnictides ,

    Azam M, Manasa M, Zajarniuk T, Palasyuk T, Did uszko R, Cetner T, Morawski A, Jastrzebski C, Wierzbicki M, Wi śniewski A, S. J. Singh, “Copper doping effects on t he superconducting properties of Sm-based oxypnictides , ”J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 2024;107: 6806-6820

    2024

  27. [34]

    Fe(Se,Te) Thin Fi lms Deposited through Pulsed Laser Ablation from Spark Plasma Sintered Targets

    Iebole M, Braccini V, et al. Fe(Se,Te) Thin Fi lms Deposited through Pulsed Laser Ablation from Spark Plasma Sintered Targets. Materials 2024, 2594

    2024

  28. [36]

    Local structural distortions and their role in Superconductivity in SmFeAsO 1−x Fx superconductors

    Ingle F, Priolkar KR, Pal A, Awana A, Emura S. Local structural distortions and their role in Superconductivity in SmFeAsO 1−x Fx superconductors. Supercond. Sci. Technol. 2014; 27:075010

    2014

  29. [37]

    The effect of exceptionally high fluorine doping on the anisotrop y of single crystalline SmFeAsO 1- xFx’, Appl

    Fujioka M, Denholme SJ, Tanaka M, Takeya H, Ya maguchi T, Takano Y. The effect of exceptionally high fluorine doping on the anisotrop y of single crystalline SmFeAsO 1- xFx’, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2014;105:10260

    2014

  30. [38]

    Magnetization of high-field supercond uctors

    Bean CP. Magnetization of high-field supercond uctors. Rev. Mod. Phys.1985;36:31

    1985

  31. [39]

    Flux pinning mechanisms in type II superconductors

    Dew-Hughes D. Flux pinning mechanisms in type II superconductors. Philosophical Magazine 1974;30:293-305. doi: 10.1080/14786439808206556

    1974 doi

  32. [40]

    Supercond Sci Technol 2013;26:074003

    Weiss JD, Jiang J, Polyanskii AA, Hellstrom EE , Mechanochemical synthesis of pnictide compounds and superconducting Ba 0.6 K0.4 Fe 2As 2 bulks with high critical current density. Supercond Sci Technol 2013;26:074003. 24

    2013

  33. [41]

    Diduszko, Ce tner T, Morawski A, Wi śniewski A, Singh SJ

    Manasa M, Azam M, Zajarniuk T, R. Diduszko, Ce tner T, Morawski A, Wi śniewski A, Singh SJ. Enhancement of Superconducting Properties of Polycrystalline CaKFe4As4 by High-Pressure Growth. IEEE Transactions on Appli ed Superconductivity 2024;34, 345821

    2024

  34. [42]

    Evidence for electromagnetic granularity in the polycrystalline iron-based superconductor

    Yamamoto A, Jiang J, Tarantini C, Craig N, P olyanskii E, et al. Evidence for electromagnetic granularity in the polycrystalline iron-based superconductor. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2008;92:252501

    2008

  35. [43]

    Combined microstructural and magneto-optical study of current flow in polycrystalline forms of Nd and Sm Fe-oxypnictides

    Kametani F, Polyanskii AA, Yamamoto A, Jiang J , Hellstrom E, Gurevich A, Larbalestier DC, Ren ZA, Yang J, Dong XL, Lu W and Zhao ZX. Combined microstructural and magneto-optical study of current flow in polycrystalline forms of Nd and Sm Fe-oxypnictides. Supercond. Sci. Techn...

    2009

  36. [44]

    Yamamoto A

    Iida K, Hänisch J. Yamamoto A. Grain boundary characteristics of Fe-based superconductors.Supercond. Sci. Technol. 2020;33:04300 25 Table 1: List of the synthesis conditions and sample code for SmFeAsO 0.80 F0.20 bulks prepared by CSP, HP-HTS and SPS processes. Sample Synthesi...

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.