Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 31 references

Influence of Critical Current Distribution on Operation, Quench Detection and Protection of HTS Pancake Coils

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A local critical-current defect in a conduction-cooled HTS pancake coil gives tens of seconds of resistive-voltage warning before thermal runaway, unlike a heater quench.

desk verdict Useful Ic,d,m concept and open-source 3D quench simulations, but the central 36.9 s vs 20 ms detection-time comparison bundles the quench cause with a 1D-to-3D change in heat flow. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.18124 v1 pith:C4XHV52Q submitted 2024-11-27 physics.acc-ph cs.CE

Mariusz Wozniak , Erik Schnaubelt , Sina Atalay , Bernardo Bordini , Julien Dular , Tim Mulder , Emmanuele Ravaioli , Arjan Verweij This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.acc-phcs.CE
keywords HTSpancakecoilscriticalcurrentdefectsquenchdetectionthermalrunawayconductioncoolingthinshellapproximationfiniteelementsimulationcoatedconductors
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

This paper uses 3D coupled electromagnetic-thermal finite-element simulations to determine how much local reduction of critical current a conduction-cooled, insulated HTS pancake coil can tolerate before thermal runaway. It introduces the minimum stable defect critical current, $I_{c,d,m}$: below that value a defect drives the coil into thermal runaway during a slow ramp to 500 A, and above it the coil reaches and holds operating conditions. The simulations show that with heat diffusion between turns switched on, 2-mm defects near the inner or outer edges remain stable even with zero local critical current, while mid-coil defects need $I_{c,d}$ around 50--58 A. The paper then compares quench detection; a defect 2 A below the stability boundary produces a resistive voltage crossing the 0.1 V threshold about 36.9 s before thermal runaway, whereas a traditional 1D heater-induced quench crosses the same threshold only 20 ms before runaway. The conclusion is that quasi-static quenches caused by realistic $I_c$ defects in conduction-cooled coils are likely to be detected in time to protect the coil, while dynamic, point-like heater quenches remain very hard to catch.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the magneto-thermal thin shell approximation (TSA) applied to the Kapton insulation between turns inside a 3D finite-element model built on the $H-\phi$ formulation. The TSA is what lets heat flow from turn to turn; when that heat-flow channel is switched off, the model reproduces the classical 1D quench-propagation picture used in minimum-quench-energy studies. A second load-bearing piece is the $J_c(B,T)$ scaling fit used to assign critical current along the conductor, and the third is the definition of the minimum stable defect critical current, $I_{c,d,m}$, the threshold below which a defect of given length and location causes thermal runaway. The resistive voltage for quench detection is computed as a post-processing quantity from a solid-conductor winding function with ideal inductive compensation, so the comparison of the 36.9 s and 20 ms warning times is a direct output of the simulation setup.

What would settle it

A conduction-cooled pancake test coil with a measured local $I_c$ reduction near the predicted stability boundary should be ramped to operating current while resistive voltage and peak temperature are recorded; if the 0.1 V crossing occurs less than a few seconds before the peak temperature reaches 200 K, or if a heater-like quench gives more than 20 ms of warning, the simulation's central contrast is contradicted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the type of quench initiator determines whether a resistive-voltage threshold can save the coil. In the 3D heat-diffusion picture, a local critical-current defect acts as a quasi-static heat source: heat spreads through the Kapton insulation to several neighbouring turns, the resistive voltage rises gradually over the current ramp, and the peak temperature reaches only about 19 K when the 0.1 V detection threshold is crossed. That threshold is crossed 36.9 s before the peak temperature enters the thermal runaway regime, so there is time to validate the signal and trigger protection. In the classical 1D picture with a quench heater, the heat stays on a fraction of one turn, the resistive voltage is created by a hot spot at about 91 K, and thermal runaway follows only 20 ms after the 0.1 V crossing. The paper therefore states that a quasi-static quench caused by a local $I_c$ defect is likely to be detected in time to prevent thermal runaway, while a transient heater-like quench leaves very little time.

Load-bearing premise

Everything rests on the effective turn-to-turn thermal conductance through the Kapton insulation in the thin shell approximation; if that conductance is too high, the predicted stability of short defects and the 36.9 s warning time are optimistic, and the paper itself notes that a bath-cooled coil could behave differently.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For a conduction-cooled insulated pancake coil, a 2-mm defect with $I_{c,d}$ at or above $I_{c,d,m}$ will not cause thermal runaway during a 40-minute ramp to 500 A; the stable margin depends strongly on where the defect sits along the conductor.
  • With 3D heat diffusion, 2-mm defects in the first and last few turns of the coil are stable even if the local critical current is zero, while defects in the middle of the coil need $I_{c,d}$ above about 50--58 A.
  • Lengthening the defect to 7 mm raises $I_{c,d,m}$ everywhere and moves the most stable position to the outer turns, where the larger turn radius gives more insulation cross-section for heat conduction.
  • Including the coil self-field shifts the required $I_{c,d,m}$ upward for inner turns and downward for outer turns, so defect acceptance criteria depend on the magnet's own field profile.
  • A resistive-voltage threshold of 0.1 V gives roughly 37 s of warning for a quasi-static defect quench but only 20 ms for a 1D heater quench; a protection system designed for one scenario may miss the other.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Inference: if the modeled turn-to-turn conductance is representative, voltage-based quench detection for conduction-cooled HTS magnets can be tuned to catch slow defect-driven events, but the same threshold is useless for fast point-like energy deposits; a distributed temperature or local-voltage diagnostic may be needed for the latter.
  • Inference: minimum quench energy measured with heaters may not be the right acceptance criterion for conduction-cooled HTS coils; using reel-to-reel $I_c$ measurements to compute $I_{c,d,m}$ maps could let manufacturers accept longer or deeper defects without over-conservative quality cuts.
  • Inference: the paper notes a different cooling regime could reverse the conclusion; the natural test is to repeat the 3D defect simulation with bath-cooling boundary conditions and see whether the 36.9 s warning shrinks to the 20 ms scale.
  • Inference: the same simulation approach could be used to design protection, for example by computing how early a 0.1 V trigger must fire to keep peak temperature below a damage limit for a range of defect sizes and locations.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

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 manuscript presents 3D coupled magnetodynamic-thermal finite-element simulations of a conduction-cooled, insulated (RE)BCO pancake coil using the open-source FiQuS tool. The authors introduce a local critical-current defect as a reduction of the Ic,0,0 parameter, compute a 'minimum stable defect critical current' Ic,d,m for various defect lengths and positions, and compare quench detection via resistive voltage for two scenarios: a 3D simulation with a local Ic defect and a 1D simulation with a heater pulse. The central claims are that 3D inter-turn heat flow dramatically increases the stability of local Ic defects, and that a defect-driven quench produces a resistive-voltage warning tens of seconds before thermal runaway, whereas a heater-induced quench in the 1D model leaves only milliseconds for detection.

Significance. The study addresses a practically important question: which critical-current defects are tolerable in HTS pancake coils, and how reliably can resistive voltage detect the resulting quenches. The use of an open-source, reproducible simulation chain (FiQuS, STEAM, GetDP) is a strength, and the qualitative distinction between slow 'quasi-static' defect-driven instabilities and fast heater-initiated transients is valuable for the quench-detection community. However, the headline quantitative comparison (36.9 s vs. 20 ms) is based entirely on simulation, with no experimental validation, and, more importantly, it changes two variables at once, so the attribution of the fast timescale to the heater mechanism is not established by the presented results.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section IV.D, Figs. 8-10] The central comparison of detection times changes both the quench cause (Ic defect vs. heater) and the thermal model (3D vs. 1D). The 1D case deliberately turns off inter-turn heat flow through the thermal thin-shell approximation (Section III.A), so the statement that a transient heater quench 'is very challenging to detect' is not supportable from this comparison alone. To attribute the 20 ms warning to the heater mechanism rather than to the absence of 3D heat spreading, the authors should either simulate a heater-induced quench in the same 3D thermal model or simulate a defect-induced quench in the 1D model.
  2. [Section IV.B, Fig. 6] The result that Ic,d,m drops to zero for turns near the terminals in the 3D case implies that even a completely non-superconducting segment of those turns is thermally stable. This is a striking claim that strongly influences the overall message that defect-driven quenches are benign. The mechanism (heat conduction to the fixed-temperature terminals) should be quantified, and the sensitivity of this result to the assumed terminal thermal boundary condition and to the Kapton thermal conductivity should be checked, since both are inputs rather than measured in this coil.
  3. [Sections III.A and IV.D] No mesh-convergence study or sensitivity analysis is reported for the quantities that carry the quantitative claims: the 36.9 s warning time, the 20 ms heater time, and the Ic,d,m values. The mesh is described as having three axial elements per conductor (Fig. 1), and the Kapton properties are taken from the STEAM material library; a brief convergence check on at least one defect case and one heater case would substantiate that the reported times are not numerical artifacts.
  4. [Section II and Section IV.D] The model assumes that a defect is purely a local reduction of Ic,0,0 without changing the n-value or the thermal/electrical properties of the conductor, and that terminal heat dissipation is negligible (a superconducting shunt). These assumptions are reasonable as a first approximation, but they should be stated explicitly as modeling limitations, especially because the n-value strongly affects the current-sharing voltage that is used for detection.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section IV.D] The text defines thermal runaway as the time when Tmax exceeds 200 K, but the caption of Fig. 8 states that the time axis is adjusted to be zero when Tmax reaches 300 K. Please harmonize the definition and the figure so the reader knows which temperature reference is used in the 36.9 s and 20 ms values.
  2. [Section IV.B, Fig. 6] The phrase 'Ic,d,m is zero' should be explained in the caption or text: it means that even a defect with zero critical current does not cause a thermal runaway under the modeled conditions, which is a non-obvious result.
  3. [Table III and Fig. 2] The Jc(B,T) fit parameters are listed without any indication of fit uncertainty or residuals. Reporting the fit range and maximum deviation would help readers judge how representative the fitted curve is for the fields and temperatures used in the simulations.
  4. [References] The text in Section III.A says FiQuS version 2024.10.3 was used, but reference [21] points to version 2024.7.0. Please update the reference or the text to match.
  5. [Section V] In the conclusion, 'the 1D heat diffusion case with the quench initiation using a heater' should be phrased as 'the heater-initiated quench in the 1D heat-diffusion model' to avoid implying that the 1D treatment is inherent to the heater-initiation mechanism.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the Ic-defect thresholds and quench-detection lead times are simulation outputs, computed from an externally fitted Jc(B,T) model rather than imposed by definition.

full rationale

The paper's central results—the minimum stable defect critical current Ic,d,m and the resistive-voltage warning times—are outputs of a 3D coupled magnetodynamic-thermal simulation, not restatements of the input assumptions. The Jc(B,T) model (Eqs. 1-4) is fitted to measured critical-current data from an external database (Victoria University of Wellington, ref. [27]), with fit parameters listed in Table III; those parameters do not encode the coil-level conclusions. The defect is introduced by modifying Ic,0,0 locally, and Ic,d,m is found by bracketing stable vs. runaway cases (e.g., 477 A stable vs. 476 A runaway in Fig. 5), so the threshold is computed, not fitted to the detection time. The 0.1 V detection threshold and 200 K runaway criterion are stated operating conventions; the resulting 36.9 s vs. 20 ms lead times are quantities derived from the simulation, not inputs. The paper's frequent self-citations ([12,13,22-25,28-30]) support the open-source FiQuS/STEAM tooling and the thin-shell approximation; the conclusions do not reduce to an unverified assertion from those citations, and the underlying Jc data are external. The paper itself flags that 'a different conclusion could be reached when the coil is bath-cooled' (Section IV.D), which is a scope limitation rather than a circular step. The IV.D comparison of a 3D defect case with a 1D heater case changes two variables at once, but that is a possible validity/confounding concern, not evidence that any quantity is defined in terms of the conclusion. No circular step can be quoted, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model rests on a fitted Jc(B,T) input and several idealizations: thin-shell insulation coupling, terminal-only conduction cooling, negligible AC losses, and a defect modeled purely as a local reduction of Ic,0,0. These are not tuned to produce the headline claim, but they are unvalidated modeling choices that affect the quantitative thresholds and lead times.

free parameters (5)
  • Ic,0,0 (critical current scaling constant) = 6098.7 A
    Fitted to measured critical current data of a Faraday Factory (Re)BCO conductor [27] and used in Eq. (2) of the Jc(B,T) model.
  • B0,0,0, Birr,0,0 = 0.5769 T, 200 T
    Fitted parameters in Eqs. (3)-(4) of the Jc(B,T) model.
  • Tc,0,0 = 85 K
    Fitted critical temperature parameter in Eqs. (3)-(4).
  • alpha, beta, gamma, q = 0.48175, 1.4, 1.45, 2.0
    Fitting exponents in the Jc(B,T) scaling law, Eqs. (1)-(4).
  • n-value = 30
    Chosen constant; defect simulations do not vary n-value, which may affect current-sharing and voltage growth.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The magneto-thermal thin shell approximation (TSA) accurately represents turn-to-turn thermal and electromagnetic coupling across the Kapton insulation.
    Used in Section III.A and [23-25]; the 3D heat diffusion results, including Ic,d,m equal to zero for near-terminal turns and the long detection lead time, depend on this approximation.
  • domain assumption The coil is cooled only by conduction through copper terminals fixed at 15 K, with no bath cooling or other heat removal.
    Sections II and III.C describe the cooling setup; the paper itself notes a different conclusion could be reached for bath-cooled coils (Section IV.D).
  • domain assumption AC losses during the current ramp are negligible and do not contribute to thermal runaway.
    Section IV.A states the minimum stable defect critical current is determined for ramp rates that do not induce substantial AC losses.
  • ad hoc to paper A defect can be modeled as a purely local reduction of the Ic,0,0 parameter, leaving the n-value and all other properties unchanged.
    Section III.E introduces a defect by locally changing Ic,0,0 in Eq. (2); real defects may alter n-value, local thermal conductivity, or be distributed over longer lengths.
  • domain assumption The Jc(B,T) scaling law (Eqs. 1-4) with the fitted parameters from one external conductor data set describes the coil's conductor.
    Section III.B fits to Faraday Factory data [27] and applies the resulting function to all turns and fields; it is not verified for the specific conductor used in the coil.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Influence of Critical Current Distribution on Operation, Quench Detection and Protection of HTS Pancake Coils." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/C4XHV52Q

@misc{pith2026241118124,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Influence of Critical Current Distribution on Operation, Quench Detection and Protection of HTS Pancake Coils},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/C4XHV52Q}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.18124}
}
read the original abstract

High-temperature superconductor (HTS) coated conductors (CC) are often wound into pancake coils with electrical insulation in-between the turns. The copper terminals are used for current injection and conduction cooling. An inherent variation of the critical current along the CC length results from its manufacturing process. This variation causes non-uniform heat generation, particularly when the coil is operated at a high fraction of the nominal critical current or when large critical current defects are present. The temperature distribution resulting from the balance between cooling and heating, in combination with the magnetic field and critical current distributions, determines whether a thermal runaway occurs. Accurately predicting the level of critical current defects that can be tolerated during conduction-cooled operation is difficult and requires a 3D coupled electromagnetic and thermal simulation. This paper presents the results of simulations that are performed with the open-source Finite Element Quench Simulator (FiQuS) tool developed at CERN as part of the STEAM framework. The 3D coupled magnetodynamic-thermal simulations are based on the H-phi formulation and use thin shell approximations, a CC homogenization and conduction-cooling. The critical current (Ic) is varied along the CC length. The effect of a single defect specified as a reduction of Ic along the CC length is investigated in terms of the coil's ability to reach and maintain the operating conditions. The Ic and length of the defect that results in a thermal runaway are analyzed in terms of defect location. In addition, a classical 1D scenario with a quench heater is studied. Both the local defect and the heater cases are compared in terms of the voltage signal available for quench detection. These cases result in very different requirements for quench detection, and their implications are discussed.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    vi w f mm i i mp s p i materials for large magnets: from wires and tapes to cables and s

    D U i i “ vi w f mm i i mp s p i materials for large magnets: from wires and tapes to cables and s ” Supercond. Sci. Technol, vol. 32, no. 5. IOP Publishing, p. 053001, Apr. 09, 2019. doi: 10.1088/1361-6668/ab06a2

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6668/ab06a2 2019

  2. [2]

    H S M C D v pm i E p

    R ssi C S “H S M C D v pm i E p ” Instruments, vol. 5, no. 1, p. 8, Feb 2021, doi: 10.3390/instruments5010008

    work page doi:10.3390/instruments5010008 2021

  3. [3]

    F Ci C i s succeeding the LHC

    B ik M B J P “F Ci C i s succeeding the LHC ” Nat. Phys., vol. 16, pp. 402–407, Apr 2020., doi: 10.1038/s41567-020-0856-2

    doi:10.1038/s41567-020-0856-2 2020

  4. [4]

    HTS Pancake Coils Without Turn-to-Turn Insulation,

    S. Hahn, D. K. Park, J. Bascunan and Y. Iwasa, "HTS Pancake Coils Without Turn-to-Turn Insulation," in IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 1592-1595, June 2011, doi: 10.1109/TASC.2010.2093492

    arXiv 2011

  5. [5]

    R mpi -to-turn loss and magnetization loss of a No-Insulation (RE)Ba2Cu3Ox high mp s p p k i

    Y W H S W Y Z Ji Z H “R mpi -to-turn loss and magnetization loss of a No-Insulation (RE)Ba2Cu3Ox high mp s p p k i ” Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 121, no. 11, Mar. 2017, doi: 10.1063/1.497859

    work page doi:10.1063/1.497859 2017

  6. [6]

    E m i vi m s i i y f conduction-cooled, no-insulated 2G-HTS coil at intermediate mp s

    A. Cubero, A. B. Núñez-Chico, R. Navarro, L. A. Angurel, and E. M í z “E m i vi m s i i y f conduction-cooled, no-insulated 2G-HTS coil at intermediate mp s ” C y i s v , p. 103070, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.cryogenics.2020.103070

    arXiv 2020

  7. [7]

    S i -induced field in non-insulated GdBCO pancake i

    D. G. Yang, K. L. Kim, Y. H. Choi, O. J. Kwon, Y. J. Park, and H. G. “S i -induced field in non-insulated GdBCO pancake i ” Supercond. Sci. Technol., vol. 26, no. 10, p. 105025, Sep 2013, doi: 10.1088/0953-2048/26/10/105025

    work page doi:10.1088/0953-2048/26/10/105025 2013

  8. [8]

    G i f wi -superconducting magnet system: field profile and field quality measurements of a layer-wound 4 REBCO i s i f S m

    C B “G i f wi -superconducting magnet system: field profile and field quality measurements of a layer-wound 4 REBCO i s i f S m ” Supercond. Sci. Technol., vol. 32, no. 7, p. 075005, May 2019, doi: 10.1088/1361-6668/ab0fa

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6668/ab0fa 2019

Show all 31 references
  1. [9]

    R - to-reel critical current measurement of coated conductors,

    S. Furtner, R. Nemetschek, R. Semerad, G. Sigl and W. Prusseit “R - to-reel critical current measurement of coated conductors,” Supercond. Sci. Technol., vol. 17, pp. S281–S284, Mar 2004, doi: 10.1088/0953- 2048/17/5/037

    2004 doi

  2. [10]

    Reel-To-Reel Critical Current Measurement of REBCO Coated Conductors,

    X. -F. Li, A. B. Yahia, G. Majkic, M. Kochat, S. Kar and V. Selvamanickam, "Reel-To-Reel Critical Current Measurement of REBCO Coated Conductors," IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 1-5, June 2017, Art no. 3800205, doi: 10.1109/TASC.2016.2640942

    2017

  3. [12]

    [Online]

    FiQuS tool. [Online]. Available: https://cern.ch/fiqus

  4. [13]

    [Online] Available: https://cern.ch/steam

    STEAM framework. [Online] Available: https://cern.ch/steam

  5. [14]

    Available: https://gitlab.cern.ch/steam/steam-material-library

    Thermal conductivity function CFUN_kKapton_v2.c. Available: https://gitlab.cern.ch/steam/steam-material-library

  6. [15]

    Available: https://gitlab.cern.ch/steam/steam-material-library

    Thermal conductivity function CFUN_CvKapton_v1.c. Available: https://gitlab.cern.ch/steam/steam-material-library

  7. [16]

    [Online]

    Python Programming Language. [Online]. Available: https://www.python.org/

  8. [17]

    [website]

    Gmsh. [website]. Available: http://gmsh.info/

  9. [18]

    Gms : -D finite element mesh generator with built-in pre- and post- p ssi f i i i s

    C. Geuzaine and J. -F R m “Gms : -D finite element mesh generator with built-in pre- and post- p ssi f i i i s ” International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering , vol. 79, pp. 1309 –1331, May 2009, doi: 10.1002/nme.2579

    2009 doi

  10. [19]

    Available: http://getdp.info/

    GetDP [website]. Available: http://getdp.info/

  11. [20]

    environment for the treatment of discrete problems and its application to the finite element m

    P. Dular, C. Geuzaine, F. Henrotte, and W. Legros, “ environment for the treatment of discrete problems and its application to the finite element m ” IEEE Transactions on Magnetics , vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 3395–3398, 1998. doi: 10.1109/20.717799

    1998 doi

  12. [21]

    [Online]

    FiQuS Python package. [Online]. Available: https://pypi.org/project/fiqus/2024.7.0

    2024

  13. [22]

    p -source 3D FE quench simulation tool for no- i s i H S p k i s

    S. Atalay, E. Schnaubelt, M. Wozniak, J. Dular, G. Zachou, S. Schöps V w ij “ p -source 3D FE quench simulation tool for no- i s i H S p k i s ” Supercond. Sci. Technol., vol. 37, May 2024, art. no 065005, doi: 10.1088/1361-6668/ad3f83

    2024 doi

  14. [23]

    m i s pp xim i w s fi i m q sim i

    E S M W z i k S S öps “ m i s pp xim i w s fi i m q sim i ” Supercond. Sci. Technol., vol. 36, Mar 2023, art. no 044004, doi: 10.1088/1361- 6668/acbeea

    2023 doi

  15. [24]

    Electromagnetic Simulation of No-Insulation Coils Using H – ϕ Thin Shell Approximation,

    E. Schnaubelt, M. Wozniak, S. Schöps and A. Verweij, "Electromagnetic Simulation of No-Insulation Coils Using H – ϕ Thin Shell Approximation," IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 1-6, Aug. 2023, Art no. 4900906, doi: 10.1109/TASC.2023.3258905

    2023

  16. [25]

    Magneto-Thermal Thin Shell Approximation for 3D Finite Element Analysis of No-Insulation Coils,

    E. Schnaubelt et al., "Magneto-Thermal Thin Shell Approximation for 3D Finite Element Analysis of No-Insulation Coils," IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 1-6, May 2024, Art no. 4700406, doi: 10.1109/TASC.2023.3340648

    2024

  17. [26]

    Magnetic Field and Temperature Scaling of the Critical Current of REBCO Tapes,

    G. Succi, A. Ballarino, S. C. Hopkins, C. Barth and Y. Yang, "Magnetic Field and Temperature Scaling of the Critical Current of REBCO Tapes," IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 1-7, May 2024, Art no. 8001007, doi: 10.1109/TASC.2024.3370137

    2024

  18. [27]

    Available: https://htsdb.wimbush.eu/dataset/23536374, doi: 10.6084/m9.figshare.23536374.v4

    High-temperature superconducting wire critical current database of Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand. Available: https://htsdb.wimbush.eu/dataset/23536374, doi: 10.6084/m9.figshare.23536374.v4

  19. [28]

    Available: https://gitlab.cern.ch/steam/steam-material-library

    Critical current density function CFUN_HTS_JcFit_Succi_v2.c. Available: https://gitlab.cern.ch/steam/steam-material-library

  20. [29]

    Available: https://cern.ch/cerngetdp

    CERNGetDP version 2024.8.2. Available: https://cern.ch/cerngetdp

    2024

  21. [30]

    Available: https://cern.ch/smali

    STEAM materials library (SMaLi). Available: https://cern.ch/smali

  22. [31]

    Wi i f i s i transient magnetoquasistatic field- i i p sim i s

    S S öps H D G s m W i “Wi i f i s i transient magnetoquasistatic field- i i p sim i s ” COMPEL: The International Journal for Computation and Mathematics in Electrical and Electronic Engineering, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 2063–2083, Nov 2013, doi: 10.1108/compel-01-2013-0004

    2013 doi

  23. [32]

    V x i i f time-harmonic eddy- p ms

    s R í z V i “V x i i f time-harmonic eddy- p ms ” SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, vol. 68, no. 5, pp. 1477–1494, 2008

    2008

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.