Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 7 minor 43 references

Larger grains in high-Tc superconductors synthesized by the solid-state reaction route

T0 review · 4 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Bigger grains, not pinning, drive a superconductor's record hysteresis.

desk verdict The synthesis route is genuinely new and the grain growth is real, but the paper's central claim that larger grains cause the high ΔM rests on a model-dependent current-loop scale that is probably too small by an order of magnitude. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.08113 v2 pith:D2XH3TQD submitted 2024-12-11 cond-mat.supr-con cond-mat.mtrl-sci

D.M. Gokhfeld , M.I. Petrov , S.V. Semenov , A.D. Balaev , I.V. Nemtsev , A.D. Vasiliev , M.S. Molokeev This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.supr-concond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords high-temperaturesuperconductorsREBCOsolid-statesynthesistop-seededmeltgrowthgrainsizemagnetizationhysteresiscriticalcurrentdensityfluxpinning
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

The paper claims that the large magnetization hysteresis $\Delta M$ of a polycrystalline REBCO superconductor comes from unusually large grains, not from better flux pinning. The authors mix a refractory NdBa$_2$Cu$_3$O$_7$ ceramic with a lower-melting TmBa$_2$Cu$_3$O$_7$ ceramic and anneal at the latter's peritectic temperature, so the Tm-based phase melts and regrows around Nd-based seed grains. The result is a long tail of grains up to 0.1 mm: only 0.4% of the grain count, but 36% of the volume. Temperature-dependent critical-current and pinning-force data match standard solid-state REBCO, so the authors attribute the several-fold increase in $\Delta M$ and the 0.167 T trapped field to the larger current-circulation scale.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing device is the peritectic-temperature contrast between two 1-2-3 compounds used as a seed-growth step: refractory NdBa$_2$Cu$_3$O$_{7-\delta}$ (peritectic 1068 °C) stays solid while TmBa$_2$Cu$_3$O$_{7-\delta}$ (peritectic 980 °C) forms a liquid that regrows around the Nd grains on slow cooling. A second element is the extraction of the current-circulation scale from loop asymmetry, $D \approx 2\lambda/[1-(\Delta M/2|M_{\max}|)^{1/3}]$ with $\lambda = 150$ nm, which turns the measured magnetization width into the intragrain critical current density $j_c = 3\Delta M/D$ and ties $\Delta M$ to grain size. The lognormal grain-size distribution from SEM (parameters A=120, σ=1.1, λ=5.5 µm) supplies the geometric counterpart: an average size of 10.4 µm, with the largest grains (up to 140 µm) carrying 36% of the volume.

What would settle it

Crush a Tm123(Nd123) pellet to a powder with grain sizes near 5 µm without re-annealing and remeasure the magnetization loop at 4.2 K and 80 K: the paper's claim predicts that $\Delta M$ falls to conventional polycrystalline values while the normalized pinning-force curve $F_p(H)/F_{p,\max}$ stays the same. A complementary check is magneto-optical imaging of the polished surface to see whether shielding currents encircle the 0.1-mm grains or only roughly 11-µm regions.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the authors' account, annealing a 20:80 vol% mixture of NdBa$_2$Cu$_3$O$_{7-\delta}$ (peritectic 1068 °C) and TmBa$_2$Cu$_3$O$_{7-\delta}$ (peritectic 980 °C) at 980 °C for one hour creates a liquid phase from the Tm compound, which then grows around the still-solid Nd compound as seed crystals during slow cooling. The product Tm123(Nd123) has an average grain size of 10.4 µm with a 0.4% tail of grains exceeding 0.1 mm, and its magnetization width $\Delta M$ is several times larger than in conventional polycrystalline REBCO and in the precursor ceramics. From the asymmetry of the hysteresis loop the authors extract a current-circulation scale $D \approx 11\,\mu$m, matching the SEM average grain size, and compute intragrain critical current densities $j_c = 3\Delta M/D$ up to about $7\times10^6$ A/cm$^2$ at 4.2 K (about $1\times10^7$ A/cm$^2$ after correcting for the 69% superconducting-phase content). Because $j_c(T)$ follows weak collective pinning and the pinning-force curve follows the same standard scaling as polycrystalline REBCO, the paper concludes that pinning is essentially unchanged and that the large grains are the main reason for the high $\Delta M$ and for the trapped field $B_{\mathrm{tr}} = 0.167$ T.

Load-bearing premise

The whole grain-size attribution rests on the loop-asymmetry estimate $D \approx 11\,\mu$m being the true scale of circulating currents; if the formula misreads the two-phase microstructure with its 30 wt% secondary phases, the inferred intragrain current density shifts and the conclusion that pinning is unchanged could fail.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Grain-size engineering alone can raise the magnetization width and trapped field of polycrystalline REBCO several-fold without altering the vortex-pinning mechanism.
  • Comparisons of $\Delta M$ between ceramic superconductors should account for grain size before invoking new pinning centres.
  • Because annealing time controls the tail of the grain-size distribution, tuning time, temperature, and precursor concentrations should push the large-grain volume fraction higher and reduce the 30 wt% secondary phases.
  • Ceramic 1-2-3 samples made this way can trap about 0.167 T at 4.2 K, above the roughly 0.1 T typical of conventional solid-state REBCO, which is relevant for trapped-field applications.
  • The intragrain critical current density of the large-grain ceramic matches standard polycrystalline REBCO, implying that the high $\Delta M$ is not evidence of stronger flux pinning.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: the same two-precursor seed strategy should transfer to other RE-123 pairs with well-separated peritectic temperatures, for example Yb/Er or Y/Nd, and could be optimized by varying the seed volume fraction and cooling rate.
  • Editorial inference: the claim would be tested directly by crushing the Tm123(Nd123) pellet back to roughly 5 µm powder and re-measuring the hysteresis loop; the grain-size hypothesis predicts that $\Delta M$ collapses to conventional values while the pinning scaling stays the same.
  • Editorial inference: if the loop-asymmetry formula underestimates the true current loop in a two-phase ceramic with 0.1-mm grains, the inferred intragrain $j_c$ would shift upward and the 'pinning unchanged' conclusion would need revisiting; magneto-optical imaging of the shielding currents across individual grains could settle this.
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 / 7 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a solid-state route in which a TmBa2Cu3O7-d ceramic is annealed for 1 h at 980 °C (above its peritectic temperature) together with 20 vol% refractory NdBa2Cu3O7-d seed grains, yielding a 1-2-3 material with grains up to ~0.1 mm (largest ~140 μm). XRD Rietveld refinement gives 68 wt% 1-2-3 phase, 18 wt% BaCuO2, and 14 wt% Tm2BaCuO5. The grain size is described by a lognormal distribution (λ = 5.5 μm, σ = 1.1; number-weighted mean 10.4 μm), with grains above 100 μm forming 0.4% of the count but, per the authors, 36% of the volume. Tc = 91.3 K. The magnetization width ΔM is several times larger than in reference polycrystalline REBCO, and the trapped field is Btr = 0.167 T at 4.2 K. Using the loop-asymmetry formula of Ref. [33] with λ = 150 nm, the authors obtain a current-loop scale D ≈ 11 μm, compute jc = 3ΔM/D (up to 7.2×10^6 A/cm² at 4.2 K), and from Dew-Hughes scaling (p = 0.8, q = 3.2 at 80 K) and an exponential jc(T) dependence conclude that the pinning mechanism is unchanged relative to standard solid-state material. The central causal claim is that the enhanced ΔM is mainly due to the increased grain size.

Significance. If the attribution holds, the paper gives a clean demonstration that in granular RE-123 ceramics the magnetization width and trapped field are set by the grain/current-loop scale rather than by stronger pinning, and the seeding route is a simple, reproducible way to grow ~0.1 mm grains by solid-state methods. The strengths are the direct measurements: SEM resolves grains up to 140 μm; Rietveld refinement quantifies the secondary phases; ΔM and Btr are measured observables; and the lognormal parameters and pinning fit parameters (jc(0), T0, p, q) are explicit, making the analysis reproducible and falsifiable. The authors also state their assumptions (Nd123 cores in the large grains; the Ref. [33] loop model) candidly. The significance is limited by the model-dependence of the attribution: D is the only bridge between measured ΔM and the conclusion 'larger grains, unchanged pinning', and its value is not yet established for a two-phase ceramic with a strongly skewed grain-size distribution.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 4 (Discussion), jc = 3ΔM/D and D ≈ 11 μm] The paper's central causal claim ('The increase in grain size in the synthesized samples is the main reason for the high values of ΔM', Abstract; 'These larger grains are responsible for the record values of ΔM', Conclusion) rests entirely on identifying the current circulation scale D ≈ 11 μm with the average grain size. For a collection of decoupled grains in the critical state, the measured ΔM is a volume-weighted sum of per-grain contributions ΔM_i ∝ jc · D_i, so the relevant scale is the volume-weighted mean grain size, not the number-weighted mean. For the reported lognormal parameters (λ = 5.5 μm, σ = 1.1, number mean 10.4 μm), the volume-weighted scale E[D^4]/E[D^3] is about 380 μm, more than an order of magnitude above 11 μm, and the paper itself states that grains above 100 μm occupy 36% of the volume. There are then two internally inconsistent possibilities. First, if the 0.1 mm grains do carry currents over their full size, D is ~10–30 times larger than 11 μm and the reported jc = 7.2×10^6 A/cm² (and the quantitative comparison with polycrystalline YBCO used to support 'pinning unchanged') is correspondingly too high by the same factor. Second, if the actual current loops are only ~11 μm, then the large grains do not contribute coherently and cannot be the stated cause of the high ΔM. The manuscript provides no evidence distinguishing these cases. Please either (i) compute ΔM with a critical-state model that sums per-grain contributions using the measured size distribution and show that the 36%-volume large-grain component accounts for the observed ΔM with the same jc as the reference materials, or (ii) provide a direct determination of the current-loop scale (e.g., magneto-optical imaging or magnetization of size-separated powders).
  2. [Sec. 4, loop-asymmetry formula D ≈ 2λ/[1 − (ΔM/2|Mmax|)^(1/3)]] The loop-asymmetry formula of Ref. [33] is imported without validation for the present material, and three specifics make this load-bearing. (a) The formula is extremely sensitive near the operating point because the denominator approaches zero as the ratio ΔM/2|Mmax| approaches unity; for example, with the loop parameters evident in Fig. 4 (ΔM ~ 30–35 emu/g, |Mmax| ~ 16–18 emu/g), a few percent change in the ratio changes D by tens of percent, yet no error bars or sensitivity analysis are given for D. (b) The formula is applied at a single field value even though ΔM varies with H, and a single D is then used for all fields and temperatures, although the effective loop scale in a granular system need not be field-independent. (c) The sample contains 32 wt% of non-superconducting phases (BaCuO2, Tm2BaCuO5) and a strongly skewed grain-size distribution, conditions under which the single-scale formula of Ref. [33] has not been tested. Because all of the 'pinning unchanged, grain size enhanced' reasoning passes through this formula, its accuracy is central to the paper's claim. Please report D with propagated uncertainty, test the formula against a full critical-state calculation using the measured grain distribution, or justify why a single-scale extraction is adequate for this two-phase ceramic.
  3. [Sec. 3 and Fig. 2b, grain-size statistics] The reported lognormal parameters and the stated volume fraction of large grains do not appear mutually consistent. Interpreting λ = 5.5 μm as the lognormal median (which is consistent with the stated number-weighted mean of 10.4 μm for σ = 1.1), the D³-weighted (volume) fraction of grains above 100 μm is about 75%, not the stated 36%, and the volume-weighted mean size is about 380 μm; moreover, about 64% of the volume would lie above the largest observed size of 140 μm. Either the fitting parameters, the '36%' figure, the weighting convention (number vs area vs volume), or the truncation of the distribution at 140 μm needs to be clarified. This matters directly, because the claim that a 0.4% count fraction of grains controls 36% of the volume is one of the two quantitative pillars of the grain-size attribution. Please report the number of SEM-counted grains, the uncertainties in the fitted parameters, the explicit functional form of the lognormal (the typeset equation is garbled in the text), and how the large-grain volume fraction was computed.
  4. [Sec. 4, Figs. 5 and 6, pinning evidence] The 'pinning mechanism is essentially the same' conclusion is the second pillar of the attribution but is itself based on thin data. The Dew-Hughes fit uses only one temperature (80 K, the only temperature at which Hirr was reached within the field range), and the discrimination among the four models in Fig. 6 is shown without error bars; over 4.2–80 K the exponential (weak collective) and power-law (δTc, δl) models are often hard to distinguish. More importantly, the quantitative comparison 'comparable values of jc' that supports 'pinning unchanged' inherits the factor-of-order-30 uncertainty in D from the first major comment. Please add uncertainty bands to jc(T) and Fp(H) propagated from D and from the ΔM measurement, and state explicitly which conclusions are shape-based (D-independent) and which are magnitude-based (D-dependent). The shape-based pinning mechanism statement may survive unchanged, but the magnitude-based comparisons need to be re-examined.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Sec. 4, text references to figures] The text cites '(Fig. 3b)' twice when referring to Mmax and Mrem; both quantities are marked on the hysteresis loop in Fig. 4, not in Fig. 3, so the figure references should be corrected.
  2. [Sec. 4 and Fig. 5 caption] The name 'Dew-Hughes' is misspelled as 'Dew-Huge' in two places; the scaling law should be attributed to Dew-Hughes.
  3. [Sec. 4, lognormal equation] The typeset lognormal distribution equation is corrupted and unreadable in the manuscript; please restore the explicit formula so that the parameters λ and σ can be interpreted unambiguously.
  4. [Sec. 4, core-shell assumption] The sentence containing 'We assume that these largest grains and have NdBa2Cu3O7-d cores' should be corrected grammatically, and the assumption itself would be substantiated by energy-dispersive X-ray (EDX) mapping across a large grain, which would strengthen the proposed seeding mechanism.
  5. [Conclusion] The phrase 'record values of ΔM among polycrystalline high-Tc superconductors' is not supported by a systematic comparison with a defined literature set; please either provide a quantitative benchmark or soften the wording.
  6. [Sec. 4, jc conversion] The conversion from magnetization (emu/g) to critical current density (A/cm²) implicitly requires a sample mass density; please state the density used in the conversion.
  7. [Sec. 2, cooling rate] The cooling rate is given as '0.5° per minute'; please specify the unit as °C/min and state whether the cooling was controlled through the peritectic range or over the full anneal.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the grain-size attribution rests on independent SEM and magnetization measurements, with the self-cited D-estimation method used as a model, not as a fitted restatement of the conclusion.

full rationale

The paper's causal claim is that larger grains, not stronger pinning, produce the enhanced magnetization width ΔM. The evidence chain is: (i) SEM gives a lognormal grain-size distribution with number-weighted mean 10.4 μm and 36% volume fraction above 0.1 mm; (ii) magnetization loops give ΔM; (iii) loop asymmetry via the method of Ref. [33] gives D≈11 μm, quoted as coinciding with the SEM average; (iv) jc=3ΔM/D is then evaluated and its temperature dependence plus Dew-Hughes scaling are fit, yielding pinning parameters similar to standard polycrystalline REBCO. No step defines the target result into an input. D is not fitted to the SEM grain size; it is independently obtained from the loop asymmetry and only afterwards compared with the SEM scale. The jc and pinning conclusions are derived quantities, not fitted parameters renamed as predictions. The use of the author's prior Refs. [15,33] is load-bearing for the estimation procedure, but those citations supply a parameter-free model with stated assumptions (λ=150 nm, Bean-type asymmetry formula) that do not include the conclusion 'grain size causes high ΔM'; moreover D is checked against an independent structural measurement. A possible mismatch between the number-weighted D and the volume-weighted current-loop scale would be a correctness or validation concern about the model's applicability to a two-phase ceramic, not a circularity, because the paper does not construct D from ΔM to force the result. The comparison with Y0.75Nd0.25Ba2Cu3O7−δ (grain size 3.8 μm, smaller ΔM) is an external benchmark supporting the grain-size interpretation. No circular step can be exhibited from the paper's text, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

All quantitative conclusions rest on standard critical-state magnetometry, one assumed penetration depth (lambda = 150 nm), fitted lognormal and pinning parameters, and the assumption that the asymmetry-derived current scale equals the grain size. No new particles, forces, or dimensions are introduced.

free parameters (8)
  • lognormal amplitude A = 120
    Fitted to the SEM grain size histogram (Fig. 2b); used to compute the lognormal distribution and the 36% volume fraction of grains above 0.1 mm, which underlies the grain-size attribution.
  • lognormal width sigma = 1.1
    Fitted to the SEM grain size histogram; shapes the size distribution and the large-grain tail.
  • lognormal median lambda = 5.5 micrometers
    Fitted to the SEM grain size histogram; the stated average grain size is 10.4 micrometers, close to the current-loop scale D used in the jc estimate.
  • effective penetration depth lambda = 150 nm
    Assumed in the loop-asymmetry formula to estimate the current circulation scale D. A different lambda would shift D and hence the inferred jc, affecting the 'same pinning' comparison.
  • Dew-Hughes exponent p = 0.8
    Fitted to Fp(H) at 80 K; used to identify the pinning mechanism as similar to standard polycrystalline REBCO.
  • Dew-Hughes exponent q = 3.2
    Fitted to Fp(H) at 80 K together with p; the fit supports the pinning-mechanism conclusion.
  • weak collective pinning prefactor jc0 = 8.7e6 A/cm2
    Fitted to the temperature dependence of the maximum jc; the choice of exponential model is used as evidence for weak collective pinning.
  • weak collective pinning energy temperature T0 = 20 K
    Fitted parameter in jc(T) = jc0 exp(-T/T0); used to conclude the pinning mechanism is unchanged.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Critical-state relation jc = 3 Delta M / D applies to intragrain currents in polycrystalline superconductors.
    Section 4: used to convert hysteresis width Delta M into critical current density. This is standard Bean-type critical-state modeling, not derived in the paper.
  • domain assumption The current circulation scale D is given by the asymmetry formula D approximately 2 lambda / (1 - (Delta M / (2 |Mmax|))^(1/3)) from [33].
    Section 4: the formula from the authors' prior work is assumed valid for this material; it produces D about 11 micrometers, close to the SEM average grain size.
  • domain assumption Demagnetizing effects are negligible for the cuboid polycrystalline sample.
    Section 2: the authors state demagnetization is inconsiderable for polycrystalline superconductors [15]; if wrong, Delta M and hence jc would be distorted.
  • domain assumption A single peak in dM/dT at Tc = 91.3 K indicates a single unified superconducting phase.
    Section 3 and Discussion: the inference is used to treat the sample as one superconducting phase; two phases with close Tc values could produce a similar single peak.
  • domain assumption Dew-Hughes scaling Fp(H) ~ (H/Hirr)^p (1 - H/Hirr)^q describes the pinning force at 80 K.
    Section 4: standard empirical scaling law [36] used to classify pinning from Fp(H) at one temperature; p and q are fitted.
  • domain assumption The set of four pinning models in Fig. 6 (delta-Tc, delta-l, strong correlated, weak collective) is complete enough to identify the mechanism by the best fit.
    Section 4: the paper selects the exponential weak-collective-pinning curve by visual fit; if the true mechanism is outside the model set, the conclusion 'essentially the same pinning' could be wrong.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Larger grains in high-Tc superconductors synthesized by the solid-state reaction route." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/D2XH3TQD

@misc{pith2026241208113,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Larger grains in high-Tc superconductors synthesized by the solid-state reaction route},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/D2XH3TQD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.08113}
}
read the original abstract

Solid-state synthesis is widely used in exploratory research to study various structural modifications that affect the properties (critical temperature, critical current density, irreversibility field, etc.) of superconductors. The popularity of this method is due to its relative simplicity and availability of the necessary equipment. Combining solid-state synthesis and top-seeded melt growth allows us to increase the grain size in a Tm- and Nd-based 1-2-3 superconductor. Samples with a grain size up to 0.1 mm have been obtained. X-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy and magnetization measurements have been used for investigating this superconducting material. The magnetization width {\Delta}M has increased significantly in the synthesized samples. However the temperature dependence of the intragrain critical current density and the pinning force scaling give evidences that the pinning mechanism in the obtained superconductor is essentially the same as in polycrystalline superconductors synthesized by standard solid-state technology. The increase in grain size in the synthesized samples is the main reason for the high values of {\Delta}M.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

  1. [33]

    Gokhfeld, The circulation radius and critical current density in type II superconductors, Tech

    D.M. Gokhfeld, The circulation radius and critical current density in type II superconductors, Tech. Phys. Lett. 45 (2019) 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1063785019010243

    work page doi:10.1134/s1063785019010243 2019

  2. [1]

    Palau, F

    A. Palau, F. Valles, V. Rouco, M. Coll, Z. Li, C. Pop, B. Mundet, J. Gazquez, R. Guzman, J. Gutierrez, X. Obradors, T. Puig, Disentangling vortex pinning landscape in chemical solution deposited superconducting YBa2Cu3O7−x films and nanocomposites, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 31 (2018) 034004. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6668/AAA65E

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6668/aaa65e 2018

  3. [2]

    S. Eley, A. Glatz, R. Willa, Challenges and transformative opportunities in superconductor vortex physics, J. Appl. Phys. 130 (2021) 050901. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0055611. 9

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0055611 2021

  4. [3]

    Goyal, R

    A. Goyal, R. Kumar, H. Yuan, N. Hamada, A. Galluzzi, M. Polichetti, Significantly enhanced critical current density and pinning force in nanostructured, (RE)BCO-based, coated conductor, Nat. Commun. 2024 151. 15 (2024) 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-50838-4

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-024-50838-4 2024

  5. [4]

    Wang, M.J

    G. Wang, M.J. Raine, D.P. Hampshire, How resistive must grain boundaries in polycrystalline superconductors be, to limit Jc?, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 30 (2017) 104001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6668/aa7f24

    work page doi:10.1088/1361-6668/aa7f24 2017

  6. [5]

    Öztürk, İ

    A. Öztürk, İ. Düzgün, M. Başoğlu, S. Çelebi, Comparative investigation on magnetic behavior of partial rare earth element (Re: Lu, Yb, and Dy) substituted Y0.5Re0.5BCO (123) superconductors, J. Supercond. Nov. Magn. 33 (2020) 583–590. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10948-019-05233-2

    work page doi:10.1007/s10948-019-05233-2 2020

  7. [6]

    Pęczkowski, P

    P. Pęczkowski, P. Zachariasz, C. Jastrzębski, J. Piętosa, E. Drzymała, Ł. Gondek, On the superconductivity suppression in Eu1−xPrxBa2Cu3O7−δ, Materials. 14 (2021) 3503. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14133503

    work page doi:10.3390/ma14133503 2021

  8. [7]

    Pessoa, M.J

    A.L. Pessoa, M.J. Raine, D.P. Hampshire, D.K. Namburi, J.H. Durrell, R. Zadorosny, Successful production of solution blow spun YBCO+Ag complex ceramics, Ceram. Int. 46 (2020) 24097–24101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2020.06.188

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ceramint.2020.06.188 2020

Show all 43 references
  1. [8]

    Algarni, E

    R. Algarni, E. Hannachi, Y. Slimani, M.A. Almessiere, F. Ben Azzouz, Flux pinning mechanisms of (YBa2Cu3Oy-d)1−x/(Dy2O3)x superconductors (x=0.1 and 0.5 wt%), Ceram. Int. 47 (2021) 6675–6682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2020.11.007

    2021 doi

  2. [9]

    Gadzhimagomedov, D.K

    S.K. Gadzhimagomedov, D.K. Palchaev, Z.K. Murlieva, M.K. Rabadanov, M.Y. Presnyakov, E. V. Yastremsky, N.S. Shabanov, R.M. Emirov, A.E. Rabadanova, YBCO nanostructured ceramics: Relationship between doping level and temperature coefficient of electrical resistance, J. Phys. Ch...

    2022

  3. [10]

    Raghavan, N.D

    A. Raghavan, N.D. Arndt, N. Morales-Colón, E. Wennen, M. Wolfe, C.O. Gandin, K. Nelson, R. Nowak, S. Dillon, K. Sahebkar, R.F. Need, Superconductivity in compositionally complex cuprates with the YBa2Cu3O7-x structure, Phys. Rev. Mater. 8 (2024) 024801. https://doi.org/10.1103...

    2024 doi

  4. [11]

    Richards, H.A

    L.E. Richards, H.A. Hoff, P.K. Aggarwal, Grain growth of high Tc YBa2Cu3O7-x, J. Electron. Mater. 22 (1993) 1233–1239. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02818066

    1993 doi

  5. [12]

    Yakinci, D.M

    Z.D. Yakinci, D.M. Gokhfeld, E. Altin, F. Kurt, S. Altin, S. Demirel, M.A. Aksan, M.E. Yakinci, Jc enhancement and flux pinning of Se substituted YBCO compound, J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Electron. 24 (2013) 4790–4797. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10854-013-1476-8

    2013 doi

  6. [13]

    Peczkowski, P

    P.M. Peczkowski, P. Konieczny, E.M. Dutkiewicz, C. Jastrzebski, P. Zachariasz, E. 10 Drzymala, A. Zarzycki, D. Bocian, Physico-chemical properties of ceramic high- temperature superconductors with an approximate average radius of rare earth ion(-s) obtained by a solid-state sy...

    2019 doi

  7. [14]

    Gokhfeld, S

    D.M. Gokhfeld, S. V. Semenov, I. V. Nemtsev, I.S. Yakimov, D.A. Balaev, Magnetic ion substitution and peak effect in YBCO: the strange case of Y1–xGdxBa2Cu3O7–δ, J. Supercond. Nov. Magn. 35 (2022) 2679–2687. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10948-022- 06317-2

    2022 doi

  8. [15]

    Gokhfeld, On Estimating the Critical Current Density in Polycrystalline Superconductors Synthesized by Solid-State Method, J

    D.M. Gokhfeld, On Estimating the Critical Current Density in Polycrystalline Superconductors Synthesized by Solid-State Method, J. Supercond. Nov. Magn. 36 (2023) 1089–1092. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10948-023-06575-8

    2023 doi

  9. [16]

    Blanco-Gutiérrez, M.J

    V. Blanco-Gutiérrez, M.J. Torralvo-Fernández, M.A. Alario-Franco, Particle size effect on the superconducting properties of YBa2Cu3O7−x particles, Dalt. Trans. 46 (2017) 11698–11703. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7DT01974B

    2017 doi

  10. [17]

    Landau, J.B

    I.L. Landau, J.B. Willems, J. Hulliger, Detailed magnetization study of superconducting properties of YBa2Cu3O7-x ceramic spheres, J. Phys. Condens. Matter. 20 (2008) 095222. https://doi.org/10.1088/0953-8984/20/9/095222

    2008 doi

  11. [18]

    Gokhfeld, D.A

    D.M. Gokhfeld, D.A. Balaev, I.S. Yakimov, M.I. Petrov, S.V. Semenov, Tuning the peak effect in the Y1−xNdxBa2Cu3O7−δ compound, Ceram. Int. 43 (2017) 9985–9991. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CERAMINT.2017.05.011

    2017 doi

  12. [19]

    Gokhfeld, S

    D.M. Gokhfeld, S. V. Semenov, K.Y. Terentyev, I.S. Yakimov, D.A. Balaev, Interplay of Magnetic and Superconducting Subsystems in Ho-Doped YBCO, J. Supercond. Nov. Magn. 34 (2021) 2537–2543. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10948-021-05954-3

    2021 doi

  13. [20]

    Erdem, M.B

    U. Erdem, M.B. Turkoz, G. Yıldırım, Y. Zalaoglu, S. Nezir, Refinement of fundamental characteristic properties with homovalent Er/Y partial replacement of YBa2Cu3O7−y ceramic matrix, J. Alloys Compd. 884 (2021) 161131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2021.161131

    2021

  14. [21]

    Krasilnikov, L.G

    A.S. Krasilnikov, L.G. Mamsurova, V.P. Oleshko, N.G. Trusevich, L.G. Shcherbakova, A.A. Vishnev, Effective magnetic grain size and its influence on the intragrain critical current in YBaCuO polycrystals, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 7 (1994) 638. https://doi.org/10.1088/0953-2048/7/9/004

    1994 doi

  15. [22]

    Bykov, K.Y

    A.A. Bykov, K.Y. Terent’ev, D.M. Gokhfeld, N.E. Savitskaya, S.I. Popkov, M.I. Petrov, Superconductivity on interfaces of nonsuperconducting granules La2CuO4 and La1.56Sr0.44CuO4, J. Supercond. Nov. Magn. 31 (2018) 3867–3874. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10948-018-4668-x. 11

    2018 doi

  16. [23]

    Ba3Cu5O8

    N.A. Kalanda, V.M. Trukhan, S.F. Marenkin, Phase transformations in the systems Y2BaCuO5-“Ba3Cu5O8” and Y2BaCuO5-BaCuO2, Inorg. Mater. 38 (2002) 597–603. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015817603375

    2002 doi

  17. [24]

    Petrov, S.I

    M.I. Petrov, S.I. Popkov, K.Y. Terent’ev, A.D. Vasil’ev, Forming high-temperature superconducting layers at the interfaces between nonsuperconducting phases, Tech. Phys. Lett. 46 (2020) 1004–1007. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1063785020100247

    2020 doi

  18. [25]

    Iida, N.H

    K. Iida, N.H. Babu, Y. Shi, D.A. Cardwell, Seeded infiltration and growth of large, single domain Y–Ba–Cu–O bulk superconductorswith very high critical current densities, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 18 (2005) 1421. https://doi.org/10.1088/0953-2048/18/11/002

    2005 doi

  19. [26]

    Namburi, Y

    D.K. Namburi, Y. Shi, D.A. Cardwell, The processing and properties of bulk (RE)BCO high temperature superconductors: current status and future perspectives, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 34 (2021) 053002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6668/ABDE88

    2021 doi

  20. [27]

    Abulaiti, Y

    A. Abulaiti, Y. Wan-Min, A novel interior seed addition to improve the levitation force and the trapped field of multi-seeded YBCO bulk superconductors, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 36 (2023) 115010. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6668/ACF88C

    2023 doi

  21. [28]

    Balaev, Y

    A.D. Balaev, Y. V. Boyarshinov, M.M. Karpenko, B.P. Khrustalev, Automated vibration magnetometer with superconducting solenoid, Prib. Tekh. Eksp. 3 (1985) 167

    1985

  22. [29]

    Murakami, N

    M. Murakami, N. Sakai, T. Higuchi, S.I. Yoo, Melt-processed light rare earth element-Ba- Cu-O, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 9 (1996) 1015–1032. https://doi.org/10.1088/0953- 2048/9/12/001

    1996 doi

  23. [30]

    Theuss, H

    H. Theuss, H. Kronmüller, Magnetic properties of Y1-xGdxBa2Cu3O7-δ polycrystals, Physica C. 242 (1995) 155–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-4534(94)02404-9

    1995 doi

  24. [31]

    Petrov, D.M

    M.I. Petrov, D.M. Gokhfeld, S.V. Semenov, I.V. Nemtsev, Solid-phase synthesis and properties of a large-grain high-temperature superconductor based on thulium and neodymium, Tech. Phys. Lett. 50 (2024) 11–14. https://doi.org/10.61011/PJTF.2024.17.58573.19956

    2024

  25. [32]

    Yamashita, Y

    A. Yamashita, Y. Shukunami, Y. Mizuguchi, Improvement of critical current density of REBa2Cu3O7-δ by increase in configurational entropy of mixing, R. Soc. Open Sci. 9 (2022) 211874. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.211874

    2022 doi

  26. [34]

    Baumann, Y

    J. Baumann, Y. Shi, A.R. Dennis, J.H. Durrell, D.A. Cardwell, The influence of porosity on the superconducting properties of Y –Ba–Cu–O single grains, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 36 (2023) 085020. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6668/ACE480. 12

    2023 doi

  27. [35]

    Eisterer, S

    M. Eisterer, S. Haindl, M. Zehetmayer, R. Gonzalez -Arrabal, H.W. Weber, D. Litzkendorf, M. Zeisberger, T. Habisreuther, W. Gawalek, L. Shlyk, G. Krabbes, Limitations for the trapped field in large grain YBCO superconductors, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 19 (2006) 530–536. https:/...

    2006 doi

  28. [36]

    Dew-Hughes, Flux pinning mechanisms in type II superconductors, Philos

    D. Dew-Hughes, Flux pinning mechanisms in type II superconductors, Philos. Mag. 30 (1974) 293–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/14786439808206556

    1974 doi

  29. [37]

    Kramer, Scaling laws for flux pinning in hard superconductors, J

    E.J. Kramer, Scaling laws for flux pinning in hard superconductors, J. Appl. Phys. 44 (1973) 1360–1370. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1662353

    1973 doi

  30. [38]

    Sandu, Pinning-force scaling and its limitation in intermediate and high temperature superconductors, Mod

    V. Sandu, Pinning-force scaling and its limitation in intermediate and high temperature superconductors, Mod. Phys. Lett. B. 26 (2012) 1230007. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217984912300074

    2012 doi

  31. [39]

    Griessen, Wen Hai-Hu, A.J.J

    R. Griessen, Wen Hai-Hu, A.J.J. Van Dalen, B. Dam, J. Rector, H.G. Schnack, S. Libbrecht, E. Osquiguil, Y. Bruynseraede, Evidence for mean free path fluctuation induced pinning in YBa2Cu3O7 and YBa2Cu4O8 films, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72 (1994) 1910–

    1994

  32. [40]

    Nelson, V.M

    D.R. Nelson, V.M. Vinokur, Boson localization and correlated pinning of superconducting vortex arrays, Phys. Rev. B. 48 (1993) 13060. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.48.13060

    1993 doi

  33. [41]

    Blatter, M

    G. Blatter, M. V. Feigel’man, V.B. Geshkenbein, A.I. Larkin, V.M. Vinokur, Vortices in high-temperature superconductors, Rev. Mod. Phys. 66 (1994) 1125–1388. https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.66.1125

    1994 doi

  34. [42]

    T. Puig, J. Gutiérrez, A. Pomar, A. Llordés, J. Gzquez, S. Ricart, F. Sandiumenge, X. Obradors, Vortex pinning in chemical solution nanostructured YBCO films, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 21 (2008) 034008. https://doi.org/10.1088/0953-2048/21/3/034008

    2008 doi

  35. [1913]

    https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.72.1910

    1910 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.