Journal of Electronic Materials | 2021
Comparative Investigation of the Effect of Titanium Oxide Nanoparticles on Some Superconducting Parameters of Y3Ba5Cu8O18±δ and Y1Ba2Cu3O7−δ Composites
Abstract
Two distinctive superconducting compounds, Y3Ba5Cu8O18±δ\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$\\hbox {Y}_3\\hbox {Ba}_5\\hbox {Cu}_8\\hbox {O}_{18\\pm \\delta }$$\\end{document} (denoted as Y358) and Y1Ba2Cu3O7-δ\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$\\hbox {Y}_1\\hbox {Ba}_2\\hbox {Cu}_3\\hbox {O}_{7-\\delta }$$\\end{document} (denoted as Y123), doped with varying (0.00 wt.%, 0.30 wt.% and 0.50 wt.%) amounts of titanium (TiO2\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$_2$$\\end{document}) nanoparticles were synthesised by the solid-state reaction technique. For analysis of the microstructures and morphological arrangements of the synthetic compounds, x-ray diffraction (XRD), energy-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDX) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) were used. The XRD patterns revealed that lattice parameters a and b for both of the pure specimens Y358 and Y123 are almost identical, but lattice parameter c in the case of Y358 is approximately three times longer than Y123. The SEM images showed different inter-growth crystals when comparing the doped samples to the pure ones. The EDX graphs showed suitable amounts of compositional components in the samples. Superconducting transition temperatures of Tconset\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$T_\\mathrm{c \\ onset}$$\\end{document}, Tczero\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$T_\\mathrm{c\\ zero}$$\\end{document} and TCPeak\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$T_\\mathrm{C}^\\mathrm{Peak}$$\\end{document} were calculated by electrical resistivity ρ(T)\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$\\rho (T)$$\\end{document} measurements. At 0 K, the critical current density Jc(0)\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$J_\\mathrm{c}(0)$$\\end{document}, critical magnetic field Bc(0)\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$B_\\mathrm{c}(0)$$\\end{document}, lower critical magnetic field Bc1(0)\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$B_\\mathrm{c1}(0)$$\\end{document} and higher critical magnetic field Bc2(0)\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$B_\\mathrm{c2}(0)$$\\end{document} were evaluated by excess conductivity analysis for pure and TiO2\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$_2$$\\end{document} nanoparticle-doped YBCO samples. In terms of application and properties of superconductivity, these data show that the superconducting parameters of the Y358 sample with insertion of 0.50 wt.% nanoparticles (TiO2\\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \\usepackage{amsmath} \\usepackage{wasysym} \\usepackage{amsfonts} \\usepackage{amssymb} \\usepackage{amsbsy} \\usepackage{mathrsfs} \\usepackage{upgreek} \\setlength{\\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \\begin{document}$$_2$$\\end{document}) were affected to a greater degree than the other samples in this series. These results were compared both with each other and with other material additions to Y358 and Y123.