keep below H C1 increasing the field => increase H C1 “invent” new superconductors with H C1 > H C1 Nb">

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF 2011- Chicago July, 25-29 1 Magnetic Screening of NbN Multilayers Samples C. Z. ANTOINE, J. LECLERC, Q. FAMERY.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF 2011- Chicago July, 25-29 1 Magnetic Screening of NbN Multilayers Samples C. Z. ANTOINE, J. LECLERC, Q. FAMERY."— Presentation transcript:

1 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Magnetic Screening of NbN Multilayers Samples C. Z. ANTOINE, J. LECLERC, Q. FAMERY CEA, Irfu, Centre d'Etudes de Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette Cedex, France J-C. VILLEGIER, CEA, INAC, 17 Rue des Martyrs, Grenoble-Cedex-9, France G. LAMURA CNR-SPIN-GE, corso Perrone 24, Genova, Italy A. ANDREONE CNR-SPIN-NA and Dipartimento di Scienze Fisiche, Università di Napoli Federico II, Piazzale Tecchio 80, Napoli, Italy

2 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Classical theory BCS (GL) + RF : Magnetic RF field limits E acc : E acc  H RF Phase transition when magnetic H RF ~> H SH (superheating field) For Nb H SH ~1.2.H C (thermodynamic), for higher TC SC H SH ~ 0.75.H C Higher Tc => higher Hc => higher E acc But… Nb 3 Sn Nb 1.5 GHz Nb 3 Sn cavity (Wuppertal, 1985) 1.3 GHz Nb cavity (Saclay, 1999) 2 Limits in a RF cavity Bulk Nb 3 Sn cavity : relative failure High Q low field => low surface resistance => good quality material Early Q slope !!! Note : GL valid only near T C, SH model = for 1rst order transition (Type I SC) we work ~ 2-4 K, type II SC). SH model needs to be completed

3 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Theoretical Work from Gurevich : temperature correction Non linear BCS resistance at high field : quadratic variation of R BCS Vortices : normal area ~ some nm can cause “hot spots” ~ 1 cm (comparable to what is observed on cavities) At high field vortices => thermal dissipation => Quench Nb is the best for SRF because it has the highest H C1, (prevents vortex penetration) α H C1 Nb (0.17 T) α H C1 Nb 3 Sn (0.05 T) Nb 3 Sn Nb 1.5 GHz Nb 3 Sn cavity (Wuppertal, 1985) 1.3 GHz Nb cavity (Saclay, 1999) 3 High field dissipations : due to vortices ? A. Gurevich, "Multiscale mechanisms of SRF breakdown". Physica C, (1-2): p A. Gurevich, "Enhancement of RF breakdown field of SC by multilayer coating". Appl. Phys.Lett., : p P. Bauer, et al., "Evidence for non-linear BCS resistance in SRF cavities ". Physica C, : p. 51–56 Nb is close to its ultimate limits (normal state transition) avoiding vortex penetration => keep below H C1 increasing the field => increase H C1 “invent” new superconductors with H C1 > H C1 Nb

4 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Overcoming niobium limits (A.Gurevich, 2006) : Keep niobium but shield its surface from RF field to prevent vortex penetration Use nanometric films (w. d H C1 enhancement Example : NbN,  = 5 nm,  = 200 nm H C1 = 0,02 T 20 nm film => H’ C1 = 4,2 T Breaking Niobium monopoly x 200 (similar improvement expected with MgB 2 or Nb 3 Sn) high H C1 => no transition, no vortex in the layer applied field is damped by each layer insulating layer prevents Josephson coupling between layers applied field, i.e. accelerating field can be increased without vortex nucleation thin film w. high Tc => low R BCS at low field => higher Q 0 Cavity's internal surface → Outside wall  H applied H Nb Nb I-S-I-S-

5 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, High Tc nanometric SC films : low R S, high H C1 Accelerating Field E acc (MV/m) Magnetic field B (mT) Quality coefficient Q 0 In summary : take a Nb cavity… deposit composite nanometric SC (multilayers) inside Nb / insulator/ superconductor / insulator /superconductor… (SC with higher Tc than Nb) Increasing of E acc AND Q 0 !!! Nb I-S-I-S-… Good candidates : Nb 3 Sn MgB 2 NbN…

6 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Samples and H C1 issues Choice of model samples: It is easier to change parameters on samples than on cavities : Easier to get good quality layers on small surfaces Change of substrate nature : sapphire, monocrystalline Nb, polycrystalline Nb, surface preparation... Optimization of SC thickness, number of layer, etc. But ! H C1 measurement is more difficult with classical means (DC/AC). Note that H C1 DC ≤ H C1 RF ≤ H C ~ H SH => any DC or low frequency measurement is conservative compare to what is expected if RF. H C1 give an estimation of the maximum field achievable without dissipation : if I keep below H C1, I don't really have to care about what exactly H SH is, what the (complex!) behavior of vortices is, etc. Still need RF test to estimate R S /Q 0

7 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, First exp. results on high quality model samples Collaboration with J.C. Villégier, CEA-Inac / Grenoble Monocrystalline sapphire 250 nm Nb “bulk” 14 nm insulator (MgO) ~ 12 nm NbN Test sample ML Tc = K x 4 Choice of NbN: ML structure = close to Josephson junction preparation (SC/insulator compatibility) Use of asserted techniques for superconducting electronics circuits preparation: Magnetron sputtering Flat monocrystalline substrates Monocrystalline sapphire 250 nm Nb “bulk” ~ 15 nm insulator (MgO) ~ 25 nm NbN Test sample SL Tc = K Reference sample R, Tc = 8.9 K

8 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Characterization: Reference Sample R* Tc = 8.9 K Thickness (nm) Roughness (nm) Sample SL Tc = K Thickness (nm) Roughness (nm) Sample ML** Tc = K Thicknes s (nm) Roughness (nm) Nb 2501 Nb 2501 Nb 2501 MgO 141 MgO 141 MgO *** 141 NbN NbN * Sample R contains only Nb capped with a layer of NbO. Obtained by RIE etching of sample SL. ** In ML the motive MgO/NbN is repeated 4 times. *** except the external, capping layer which is 5 nm Standard characterization : material quality (collab n CEA/INAC-Grenoble) Quantum design PPMS: Tc, conductivity X Rays : low angle diffusion : Peaks/phases Identification : Monocrystalline or highly (200) textured layers Distortions :d(200) on NbN expanded: ~ 0,5 % X Rays : reflectivity: thickness and interface roughness Quantum design physical properties measurement system (PPMS):

9 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Magnetic characterization : SQUID (1) B Detection coils Sample Quartz holder B //, longitudinal moment B Detection coils Sample Oriented quartz holder B //, transverse moment Principle of measurement (5x5mm 2 samples) : Parallel and perpendicular field tested Thin films in parallel configuration (B//): 1.Strong sensitivity of M to applied field orientation (alignment should be better than 0.005°). 2. Strong transverse signal vs longitudinal => superposition of 2 signals => development of a dedicated fitting procedure was necessary

10 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, SQUID (2) : 4.5 K Nb (250 nm) : NbN (30 nm) "Elemental" layers : isotropic. H P ~ 18 mT = compatible with magnetron sputtered films No field enhancement on 30 nm NbN layer (due to full penetration of  field ?)

11 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, SQUID (3) : SL 4.5 K High quality NbN film (Tc =16.37K) Strong anisotropic behavior Longitudinal moment : Fishtail shape characteristic of layered SC H P ~ 96 mT (+ 78 mT /Nb alone) !!! Similar behavior with ML ~ “20 MV/m” !?

12 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, SQUID (4) : ML 4.5 K ML sample : 250 nm Nb + 4 x (14 nm MgO + 12 nm NbN ) Similar behavior as SL Instabilities in 1rst and 3 rd quadrant (vortices jumps ?) NbN lowest quality (Tc= 15.48K)

13 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, SQUID : ISSUES Strong screening effect observed although sample is in uniform field (!?) Edge, shape, alignment issues => is H P ~ H C1 ? Perpendicular remnant moment => what is the exact local field ? DC instead of RF : not a problem; H C1 is expected to be even higher in RF => need to get rid of edge/orientation effects => need to get local measurement !

14 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, rd harmonic measurement, coll. INFM Napoli M. Aurino, et al., Journal of Applied Physics, : p Perpendicular field : field distribution can be determined analytically. If r sample > 4 r coil : Sample ≡ infinite plate approximation Applied field : perpendicular, induction (B ) // surface (below B C1 ) Excitation/Detection coil (small/sample) Differential Locking Amplifier Local magnetometry (1)

15 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, rd harmonic measurement, coll. INFM Napoli b 0 cos  ) applied in the coil temperature ramp third harmonic signal T b0, when b0 reaches B C1 (T b0 ) series of b0 => series of transition temperature => B C1 (T)) = T/Tc Sample SL : third harmonic signal for various b0 Local magnetometry (2) increasing I = increasing B T Ci at B i

16 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Local magnetometry (3) SL sample : 250 nm Nb + 14 nm MgO + 25 nm NbN 8.90K < Tp° < 16K : behavior ~ NbN alone Tp° B C1 SL >> B C1 Nb

17 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Local magnetometry (4) Sample SL : small Nb ~Tc Nb : Nb is sensed through the NbN layer ! Since the Nb layer feels a field attenuated by the NbN layer, the apparent transition field is higher. This curve provides a direct measurement of the attenuation of the field due to the NbN layer B C1 curves for Niobium in the reference (direct measurement) and in SL (under the NbN layer).

18 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Local magnetometry (5) SL sample : 250 nm Nb + 14 nm MgO + 25 nm NbN Tp° B C1 SL >> B C1 Nb Need to extend higher field and lower temperature

19 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Local magnetometry (5) SL sample : 250 nm Nb + 14 nm MgO + 25 nm NbN Tp° B C1 SL >> B C1 Nb Need to extend higher field and lower temperature

20 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Local magnetometry (6) thermal regulation : 1.6 K

21 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Local magnetometry (7) SL sample : 250 nm Nb + 14 nm MgO + 25 nm NbN Tp° B C1 SL >> B C1 Nb Need to extend higher field and lower temperature

22 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, depositing and testing RF Cavities: IPN (Orsay) : 3GHz, LKB (Paris) : 50GHz Cavités 1.3 Saclay (what deposition technique?!) TE011, ~3 GHz IPNO 1.3 GHz Irfu Future : Depositing and testing RF cavities 50 GHz LKB

23 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Conclusions and perspectives If Gurevich approach is correct, ML structures are the only way to go beyond Nb Magnetic screening of nanometric layers seems effective even in perpendicular field An increase of first penetration field ~ 80 mT has been observed with only one 25 nm NbN layer !!! next challenges : confirm the squid data with local 2-4 K deposit sample RF cavity (conventional techniques) develop deposition techniques for “real” cavities

24 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Compléments

25 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Adjustment of coil distance glass beadwedge : 60 µmcoil glueglue + copper powder

26 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Interactions w. image vortices =>  surface barrier ! Thin films w. d multiple interactions Vortex field in a film decays over the length d/  instead of  (interaction with many images) => enhancement of H C1 et H s : → Thermodynamic critical field Hc (surface barrier for vortices disappears): → H C1, H S enhancement

27 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, SC structure optimization Deposition techniques optimization Magnetron sputtering Inac (Grenoble), Atomic Layer Deposition INP (Grenoble) Nb NbN Al 2 O 3 MgO Cu Metallic substrates more realistic): Multilayers optimization From samples to cavities : ALD involves the use of a pair of reagents Application of this AB Scheme Reforms a new surface Adds precisely 1 monolayer Viscous flow (~1 Torr) allows rapid growth No line of site requirements => uniform layers, larges surfaces, well adapted to complex shapes : cavities! up grade of existing cavities ?

28 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Bulk Nb ultimate limits : not far from here ! Cavité 1DE3 : Saclay T- DESY Film : courtoisie A.Gössel + D. Reschke (DESY, Début 2008) The hot spot is not localized : the material is ~ equivalent at each location => cavity not limited /local defect, but by material properties ?

29 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Rappels sur les principaux supras MatériauT C (K)  n (µWcm) H C (Tesla)* H C1 (Tesla)* H C2 (Tesla)* L (nm)* Type Pb7,1 0,08n.a. 48I Nb9,2220,20,170,440II Mo 3 Re15 0,430,033,5140II NbN17700,230, II V 3 Si17 II NbTiN17,535 0,03 151II Nb 3 Sn18,3200,540,053085II Mg 2 B ,430,033,5140II- 2gaps YBCO93 1,40, d-wave

30 CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF Chicago July, Coil radius Radial field repartition 200µm away from the coil


Download ppt "CEA/DSM/Irfu/SACM/LesarClaire Antoine –SRF 2011- Chicago July, 25-29 1 Magnetic Screening of NbN Multilayers Samples C. Z. ANTOINE, J. LECLERC, Q. FAMERY."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google