Home Search Collections Journals About Contact us My IOPscience

Essential factors for the critical current density in superconducting MgB2: connectivity and flux

pinning by grain boundaries

This content has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text.

2008 Supercond. Sci. Technol. 21 015008

(http://iopscience.iop.org/0953-2048/21/1/015008)

View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more

Download details:

IP Address: 216.165.126.139
This content was downloaded on 02/10/2015 at 01:03

Please note that terms and conditions apply.

IOP PUBLISHING SUPERCONDUCTOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Supercond. Sci. Technol. 21 (2008) 015008 (7pp) doi:10.1088/0953-2048/21/01/015008

Essential factors for the critical current

density in superconducting MgB2:
connectivity and flux pinning by
grain boundaries
Teruo Matsushita1,3 , Masaru Kiuchi1 , Akiyasu Yamamoto2 ,
Jun-ichi Shimoyama2 and Kohji Kishio2
1
Faculty of Computer Science and Systems Engineering, Kyushu Institute of Technology,
680-4 Kawazu, Iizuka 820-8502, Japan
2
Department of Applied Chemistry, University of Tokyo 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku,
Tokyo 113-8586, Japan

E-mail: matusita@cse.kyutech.ac.jp

Received 10 August 2007, in final form 4 October 2007

Published 27 November 2007
Online at stacks.iop.org/SUST/21/015008

Abstract
Electrical connectivity and flux pinning strength of grain boundaries are essential factors in
determining the critical current density in superconducting polycrystalline MgB2 . The effect of
these factors is quantitatively investigated for a series of MgB2 bulk samples prepared by
various methods. The electrical connectivity is evaluated using the percolation model and the
obtained electrical connectivity is used for the estimation of the residual resistivity of
superconducting MgB2 grains. The elementary pinning force of grain boundaries is evaluated
using the theoretical result of Yetter et al based on the electron scattering mechanism with the
residual resistivity. It is found that the critical current density is approximately proportional to
the product of the electrical connectivity, the elementary pinning force of grain boundaries and
the reciprocal grain size. This confirms that the critical current density is dominantly determined
by the electrical connectivity and the flux pinning strength of grain boundaries. The flux pinning
property in MgB2 under the condition of full electrical connectivity is compared with that in
Nb3 Sn. The obtained result shows that the flux pinning ability of pure MgB2 is comparable to
or even higher than that of Nb3 Sn, indicating a much higher potential in carbon-doped MgB2 .
This proves that the MgB2 is a promising superconductor for practical applications.

1. Introduction
The superconducting transport property in polycrystalline
MgB2 is free from the weak link problem which seriously
influences high temperature superconductors, and it is
empirically known that grain boundaries are dominant pinning
centers in this superconductor. In addition, the product of
the condensation energy density and the coherence length,
to which the elementary pinning force is in proportion, is
comparable to that of commercial Nb3 Sn [1]. However, the
pinning force by grain boundaries is significantly lower than
that in Nb3 Sn [2]. Recently Katsura et al [3] showed that the
maximum pinning force density of B4 C doped and nondoped
3 Author to whom any correspondence should be addressed.
samples fabricated by the usual in situ method was about 1.6
and 0.5 GN m−3 , respectively, for the reciprocal grain size
of 4.3 μm−1 at 20 K. These values are much lower than the
maximum pinning force density of Nb3 Sn at 4.2 K [2], even
if the temperature-dependent factor is taken into account. The
small pinning force in MgB2 seems to be partly attributed to
deteriorated electrical connectivity by porosities and insulating
oxide layers.
The correlation between such a small critical current
density and the electrical connectivity in MgB2 was discussed
by Rowell [4]. Rowell defined the connectivity as
ρg
K = , (1)
ρ

0953-2048/08/015008+07$30.00 1 © 2008 IOP Publishing Ltd Printed in the UK

Supercond. Sci. Technol. 21 (2008) 015008 T Matsushita et al

Table 1. Specifications of MgB2 bulk samples.

Sample P Tc Bc2 (20 K) (T) Dg (μm) K
Bulk1 0.438 38.2 12.3 0.153 0.050
Bulk2 0.480 38.1 10.1 0.196 0.090
Bulk3 0.583 38.7 9.8 0.197 0.202
Bulk4 0.709 38.8 10.1 — 0.289
Bulk5 0.766 38.9 9.4 0.097 0.374
Bulk6 0.869 38.6 9.0 — 0.478

where ρ = ρ(300 K)−ρ(40 K) is the phonon term electrical

resistivity and ρg is the corresponding value for a pure single
crystal of good quality. Rowell assumed 4.3 μ cm observed
by Eltsev et al [5] for ρg and discussed that porosities and
insulating oxide layers which cover grains may significantly
deteriorate the connectivity and also the critical current density.
For a detailed quantitative discussion on the deterioration
of the critical current density, it is needed to exactly determine
the connectivity. However, the validity of such a discussion
is based on the reliability of the assumed value of ρg which
is used in the estimation of the connectivity. In addition, it
is also desirable to evaluate how each origin, the porosities
and the insulating oxide layers on grain surface, influences the
connectivity.
For these purposes we proposed the new analysis method
with the aid of the percolation model for the resistivity of
a series of samples made from the same starting materials
but with different packing density, and it was shown that this Figure 1. High resolution field emission scanning electron
method provides successfully not only the connectivity but also microscopy (FE-SEM) images for the fractured surface of Bulk1 (a)
the information on ρg and the fraction of grains covered with and Bulk2 (b). The fractured surface was coated with a thin layer of
insulating layers [6]. The merit of this analysis method is that it platinum.
can be used also for C-doped samples or samples synthesized
at low temperatures with larger ρg values. In addition the
correct estimation of the connectivity allows us to determine shown in table 1. Figure 1 shows the microstructure of the
the residual resistivity inside grains. This is quite helpful in samples observed by SEM. Although fine grain structure was
characterization of the superconductor. In fact, the electron obtained for Bulk1, Bulk2, Bulk3 and Bulk5 samples, any
mean free path, which is an important quantity in determination detailed grain structure was not obtained for Bulk6 by SEM
of the pinning force of grain boundaries, can be estimated as observation. The reason why the grain structure is invisible
will be shown later. is not clear. In the case of Bulk4, the mean size of observed
In our previous paper [6] it was shown that the grains is about a few micrometers and is about one order of
connectivity is the main factor which determines the critical magnitude larger than other samples. This grain size seems to
current density. In addition, the typical connectivity of in situ be too large, considering the fabrication condition. Each grain
bulk samples is about 10%, indicating that the connectivity might be composed of very fine subgrains. Here, the effective
is significantly deteriorated by porosities and insulating oxide grain size, Dg = dg3 /dg2 , is defined, where dg is the grain
layers. However, it was found that the critical current density size and   represents the statistical average. As will be shown
was not proportional to the connectivity. This suggests that later the pinning force density is predicted to be proportional to
some other factors may influence the critical current density. 1/Dg . The specifications of these samples are given in table 1.
In this paper this problem is discussed from the viewpoint of
flux pinning by grain boundaries. 3. Results and discussion

2. Experimental details
The polycrystalline MgB2 samples were made from the same
starting magnesium and amorphous boron powders and the
packing factor, P , was systematically changed in the range of
0.44–0.87 using different methods of synthesis. The details
of the samples are described in the previous paper [6]. These
samples have almost the same critical temperature, Tc , as
The critical current density of the samples at 20 K, which was
represented in [6], is shown in figure 2 again for convenience.
The critical current density, Jc , increases monotonically
with increasing packing factor, P . Figure 3 represents the
relationship between the connectivity, K , and Jc in a self-field.
It is found that these are strongly correlated with each other
but not in a proportional relationship. This indicates that other
factors which influence Jc may exist.

2
Supercond. Sci. Technol. 21 (2008) 015008 T Matsushita et al

8 10

8
6
7

4 5

3
2
2

0 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
K

Figure 2. Magnetic field dependences of critical current density Jc at Figure 3. Relationship between the critical current density Jc in the
20 K for the polycrystalline MgB2 bulks with different packing self-field and the connectivity K .
factors.

Table 2. Residual resistivity (ρ0 ), electron mean free path (l ), GL

coherence lengths estimated from l and Bc2 (ξ and ξ ∗ ) at 20 K,
Superconducting tunneling current through thin oxide impurity parameter (αi ) and pinning force of grain boundary
layers may be one of the reasons, since Jc seems to have a normalized by the value of sample Bulk1 ( f pn ).
finite value even in the limit of zero connectivity. However,
ρ0 l ξ (20 K) ξ ∗ (20 K)
it is very difficult to expect that superconducting current can
Sample (μ cm) (nm) (nm) (nm) αi f pn
tunnel through relatively thick oxide layers which have been
observed even by SEM [7]. A difference in the grain size Bulk1 5.55 16.6 5.38 5.18 0.344 1.00
may also influence Jc . Here we focus on the pinning by grain Bulk2 5.08 18.2 5.43 5.71 0.312 0.95
Bulk3 2.44 37.8 5.76 5.80 0.151 0.66
boundaries based on the mechanism of electron scattering. Bulk4 1.46 63.2 5.92 5.71 0.090 0.48
The pinning factors which influence Jc are the grain size Bulk5 0.79 117.5 6.06 5.92 0.048 0.30
and the elementary pinning force of grain boundaries for Bulk6 2.00 46.1 5.82 6.05 0.123 0.58
the case of grain boundary pinning. Here the elementary
pinning force is firstly estimated using the theoretical result
with material parameters and then the dependence on the grain the relationship for the one-gap superconductor can be used.
size will be discussed based on the obtained result. Hence, ξ(T ) which can be estimated from Bc2 is used. In
The elementary pinning force depends on the impurity this case, the relationship between ξ(0) and αi is necessary.
parameter of the superconductor [8, 9]: The present samples are classified in a category of fairly
clean superconductors. However, there is no useful formula
0.882ξ0 which correctly describes the relationship. That is, Goodman’s
αi = , (2)
l formula [11] deviates from experiments in the clean limit, and
where ξ0 is the BCS coherence length and l is the electron mean in Welch’s formula [12] the change in ξ(0) with αi is larger
free path. There are some methods to estimate the electron than experiments around αi  1. The formula given by Yetter
mean free path l from the residual resistivity ρ0 = Kρ(40 K). et al [9] explains experimental results on Nb. However, this
Among them we choose formula is not easy to express ξ(0) as a function of αi . Hence,
we propose a new formula:
vF
l= , (3)
0 ωpl
2
ρ0 0.67ξ0
ξ(0) = . (4)
(0.80 + αi0.80 )0.37
−1
where vF = 4.8 × 10 m s is the Fermi velocity [10]
5

and ωpl = 5.02 eV is the plasma frequency [10]. The
reason for the above choice is that this provides suitable
values of l and a good correlation between Ginzburg–Landau
(GL) coherence length, ξ(T ), estimated from l and that from
the upper critical field, Bc2 , with a suitable value of the
BCS coherence length, ξ0 , as will be shown later. The
obtained values are given in table 2. For the evaluation
of ξ0 the superconducting energy gap seems to be useful.
However, MgB2 has two energy gaps and it is not clear if
In figure 4 various formulae are compared with experimental
results on Nb. It can be seen that the present formula fits well
with experiments for αi < 3. Such a relationship has been
investigated only for Nb. However, the same relationship is
also assumed for MgB2 and this formula is used in the analysis.
The GL coherence length ξ ∗ estimated from Bc2 at 20 K
is given in table 2. The BCS coherence length ξ0 is adjusted
so that the GL coherence length ξ obtained from equation (4)
with the estimated value of l coincides with ξ ∗ . Figure 5 shows

3
Supercond. Sci. Technol. 21 (2008) 015008 T Matsushita et al

0.8

6 6
0.7 6
2
5 3 5
3 2
4
0.6 4
1
ξ(0) / ξ0

0.5
5 1

0.4

0.3

4
0.2
10-2 10-1 100 101
αi

Figure 5. Comparison of GL coherence lengths at 20 K estimated

Figure 4. Relationship between the GL coherence length at 0 K from the electron mean free path (ξ ) and from the upper critical field
(ξ(0)) and the impurity parameter (αi ). The solid, dotted and (ξ ∗ ).
dot–dash curves represent the present formula, the formula by Yetter
et al [9] and Welch’s formula [12], respectively. Open circles and
solid squares are experimental results on Nb [9] and present MgB2
samples (ξ ∗ ), respectively. of αi by the electron scattering by grain boundaries is small,
resulting in a weak force.
Another important factor is the grain size, which gives
the comparison of these GL coherence lengths at 20 K with the the effective number density of pinning centers. Consider the
assumptions of ξ0 = 6.45 nm and the temperature dependence region of volume V in which superconducting grains of the
of ξ : ξ(20) = 1.34ξ(0) ( Bc2 (0) = 1.80 Bc2 (20)). It is size dgi (i = 1, 2, . . . , N ) are contained. If the pinning force
found that the agreement is satisfactory. The obtained value of of grain boundaries per unit length of parallel flux line is fˆp ,
ξ0 = 6.45 nm is much smaller than the value, 14 nm, estimated the direct summation model derives the pinning force density
from the larger energy gap of the σ -band with the Fermi in this volume as
 N fˆ d 2
p gi
velocity. This disagreement may be due to the anisotropic two- Fp = , (5)
gap superconductivity in MgB2 . However, the physical reason i=1
V af
is not clear. where af is the flux line spacing. Using the relationship:
The relationship between the GL coherence length
estimated from Bc2 and the impurity parameter estimated from 
N
dg3i = V, (6)
l for six MgB2 samples is compared with that of Nb in figure 4. i=1
Although the data are fairly scattered and the range is not as
wide as that for Nb, the tendency is approximately similar. the pinning force leads to
Thus, the present theoretical analysis is considered to be valid. fˆp
If experimental data are accumulated over a much wider range, Fp = , (7)
Dg a f
the detailed information on the superconductivity in MgB2
will be clarified. The obtained impurity parameter is listed in where Dg is the effective grain size defined by
table 2.

N 
N
Yetter et al [9] numerically calculated the pinning force of Dg = dg3i dgi e 2 . (8)
a unit area of a grain boundary as a function of αi based on i=1 i=1
the mechanism of electron scattering when the flux line lattice
This is the well-known reciprocal grain size dependence.
parallel to the boundary crosses it in a reduced magnetic field
The superconducting properties of MgB2 is close to that of
of b = B/Bc2 = 0.1, 0.5 and 0.9. Here we will estimate
Nb3 Sn. Hence, the relationship between Jc (or the pinning
the pinning force at b = 0.1, since the observed critical
force density) and Dg seems to be approximately the same
current density is not appreciably influenced by the flux creep
between these superconductors. This speculation is based
at such low field. In [9] the superconducting parameters of on the fact that the elastic properties of the flux line lattice
Nb for which the pinning force was calculated were not given. are approximately the same. Figure 6 shows the relationship
Hence, only the relative force can be discussed here. Thus, the between the maximum flux pinning force density, Fpmax , in
theoretical pinning force of a grain boundary normalized by the Nb3 Sn at 4.2 K and the reciprocal grain size. The solid line
value of sample Bulk1 ( fpn ) is given in table 2. It can be seen in figure 6 represents
that the pinning force of other samples is considerably small.
That is, these samples are fairly clean and the variation rate f (Dg ) = C Dg−1 (9)

4
Supercond. Sci. Technol. 21 (2008) 015008 T Matsushita et al

4 0.5
5
5

0.4 5
3
4

0.3
3
1 2

2 0.2
2
3 3
1
1 0.1
2

1
0 0 0
0 0.2 0.4
K

Figure 6. Reciprocal grain size dependence of the maximum pinning Figure 7. Relationship between the electrical connectivity and the
force density of Nb3 Sn at 4.2 K (open square; left) and the normalized critical current density in the same flux pinning condition
compensated critical current density of MgB2 at b = 0.1 and 20 K at b = 0.1 at 20 K.
(solid circle; right). The line represents equation (9).
5
−3
with C = 0.451 × 10 N m for Fpmax in Nb3 Sn [2]. To
4
5
discuss the reciprocal grain size dependence of Jc of MgB2 , it 4
is necessary to compensate the effect of the degradation due
to the poor electrical connectivity and to normalize the flux
pinning strength of the samples. Jc of MgB2 normalized by 3
K f pn at b = 0.1 and at 20 K is plotted as a function of Dg−1
in figure 6 for comparison, where the solid line in figure 6
represents equation (9) with C = 0.330 × 104 A m−2 for 2
Jc /K f pn in MgB2 . It can be found that the proportionality 3
approximately holds between Jc and Dg−1 . 2
Since the effect of flux pinning is known for the pinning 1 1
force of grain boundaries and their effective number density,
the dependence of Jc only on the electrical connectivity, K , can
0
be discussed. If the simple pinning model that Jc is determined
only by the grain boundary flux pinning and the electrical
connectivity is assumed, equation (7) is predicted to lead to
Figure 8. Critical current density at b = 0.1 and 20 K versus the
K C f pn product of the essential factors for the critical current density.
Jc (b = 0.1) = (10)
Dg

with C f pn = ( fˆp /Baf )b=0.1 . Hence, this simply leads to
Jc /K f pn = f (Dg ) as figure 6 shows. Now the normalized
critical current density is defined as follows:
Jc
Jcn = . (11)
f pn f (Dg )
This gives the Jc value normalized by the factors of grain
boundary flux pinning, i.e. the pinning force and the effective
number density of pinning centers. If the simple flux pinning
model described by equation (10) holds for the present series
of samples, Jcn is expected to be equal to K . The relationship
between Jcn and K is shown in figure 7. It is found that Jcn
is approximately proportional to K , indicating that Jc also
reduces to zero when K reduces to zero. This result seems to be
natural, since it is not realistic that superconducting tunneling
current flows through thick insulating oxide layers. That is, if
the pinning property is the same, Jc is expected to be simply
proportional to K .
The above discussion clarifies that the electrical connec-
tivity and the number density and the elementary pinning force
of pinning centers are important factors for the critical current
density. Figure 8 shows that the product of these factors can
reproduce the observed critical current density correctly,
demonstrating that equation (10) holds correct.
Firstly it is necessary to enhance the electrical connectivity
for the improvement of the critical current density in MgB2 .
The packing factor in in situ samples measured by Katsura
et al [3] is about 50% and hence the connectivity in these
samples is estimated to be as small as 10%. This shows that
the critical current density in the non-doped superconductors
would be comparable to that in Nb3 Sn, if the full connectivity is

5
Supercond. Sci. Technol. 21 (2008) 015008
achieved. This shows that MgB2 is a promising superconductor
for applications.
In addition the flux pinning by grain boundaries is also a
key factor for the achievement of high critical current density.
For this purpose it is desirable to reduce the grain size to a
sufficient level and to enhance the flux pinning strength of grain
boundaries by making the superconductor dirty.
Here, it seems to be important to discuss the flux pinning
strength of grain boundaries in MgB2 in more detail. It is
not easy to generally apply the theoretical result of Yetter
et al for the elementary pinning force of grain boundaries
in Nb to that in MgB2 , since it is fairly difficult to assume
typical superconducting parameters for Nb. For example, the
Ginzburg–Landau parameter, κ , changes widely from sample
to sample. Hence, this theoretical result is not suitable for
correct evaluation of the pinning ability of superconducting
MgB2 , although it seems to be useful for relative comparison of
the same superconductor as used in this paper. For this reason
the theoretical result of Zerweck [8] is used here. In the theory
the elementary pinning force of grain boundary per unit length
of a parallel flux line for a superconductor with αi  0.34,
which is comparable to sample Bulk1, is predicted as
B ξ0 2
fˆp = 0.115 c , (12)
μ0
which amounts to 0.43 × 10−4 N m−1 at 20 K. In the above
Bc = 0.27 T [1] and ξ0 = 6.45 nm are used. The pinning force
density takes a maximum at about B = 1 T (af = 48.9 nm)
in Bulk1. Substitution of fˆp , af and Dg into equation (7)
leads to 5.75 GN m−3 . Hence, the expected maximum pinning
force density in Bulk1 is 0.28 GN m−3 , taking account of the
connectivity K = 0.05. This value is about a quarter of the
observed result, 1.2 GN m−3 . This disagreement seems to be
caused by the underestimation of the elementary pinning force
in Zerweck’s theory.
Here the flux pinning characteristics in MgB2 is compared
with that of Nb3 Sn. In figure 6 the critical current density of
MgB2 at b = 0.1 at 20 K in the ideal case of K = 1 is directly
compared with the maximum pinning force density of Nb3 Sn
at 4.2 K. The enhancement factor of the maximum pinning
force density in MgB2 is evaluated when the temperature is
decreased from 20 to 4.2 K. The condensation energy density
and the irreversibility field are expected to approximately
increase by factors of 2.9 and 2.0, respectively. The pinning
force density depends approximately on the magnetic field
as B 1/2 up to the magnetic field at which the pinning force
density takes the maximum value, and this magnetic field
is proportional to the irreversibility field due to the scaling
property. Hence, the maximum pinning force density is
expected to increase by a factor of 2.9 × 21/2 = 4.0. Thus,
the maximum pinning force density in MgB2 at 4.2 K can
be expressed by equation (9) with C = 1.32 × 104 N m−3 .
This value is 2.9 times as large as that in Nb3 Sn at the
same temperature. Therefore, it can be said that the flux
pinning strength in MgB2 is superior to that in Nb3 Sn. In
fact, the maximum pinning force density of sample Bulk1 is
about 1.2 GN m−3 at 20 K. Hence, this value is expected
to be increased by a factor of 20 by achievement of the full
6
T Matsushita et al
connectivity and by a factor of 4 by reducing the temperature,
resulting in 96 GN m−3 at 4.2 K, which dramatically exceeds
the maximum pinning force density in Nb3 Sn.
Here the reason why the flux pinning in MgB2 is stronger
than that in Nb3 Sn is discussed. This can be partly attributed to
larger values of Bc and ξ0 which affect the flux pinning force in
equation (12). That is, a linear extrapolation of Bc (T ) to 4.2 K
leads to 0.60 T [1] and ξ0 is 6.45 nm, which are larger than
Bc = 0.50 T [1] and ξ0 = 5.0 nm [8] in Nb3 Sn. The difference
in these values contributes to the higher pinning ability in
MgB2 by a factor of 1.86. The remaining difference may be
brought about by a larger numerical factor in equation (12),
probably due to the larger impurity parameter in MgB2 . A
proof of such superior pinning properties in MgB2 can be found
in very high Jc values in thin films [13].
For confirmation of the present conclusion and a more
exact understanding of the flux pinning properties in MgB2
it is required to carry out a systematic research on a series
of samples with different grain sizes but with the same
connectivity.
One of the important results in this paper is that the
pinning force of grain boundaries can be further improved
by making the superconductor dirty, and this is supported by
the theoretical prediction of the electron scattering pinning
mechanism. Since pure MgB2 samples are fairy clean, a
remarkable enhancement of the pinning force can be expected.
This speculation is consistent with the significant improvement
of the maximum pinning force density by C-addition [3]. In
addition, the C-addition also contributes indirectly to the flux
pinning through the enhancement of the irreversibility field
which is assisted by the enhancement of the upper critical
field [14]. This is helpful for the improvement of the critical
current density at high fields. Since the condition of C-doping
is not yet optimized from both aspects, there is a large room
for further improvement of the flux pinning property in MgB2 .
Thus, it can be concluded that MgB2 is a superconducting
material with very high potential for applications.
4. Conclusions
Based on the analysis using the percolation model proposed
in our previous paper, the electrical connectivity of porous
MgB2 bulk superconductor can be successfully estimated. This
makes it possible to clarify the relationship between the critical
current density and the electrical connectivity. It was found
that the critical current density increased monotonically with
increasing electrical connectivity. However, the critical current
density was not proportional to the connectivity, but seemed to
have a finite value even in the limit of zero connectivity. This
might suggest a superconducting tunneling current through
insulating oxide layers. In order to clarify the reason for the
deviation from the proportional relationship the effect of flux
pinning on the critical current density was investigated.
The obtained electrical connectivity was also effective for
estimation of the correct residual resistivity in superconducting
grains from the observed resistivity at 40 K. This information
enabled us to estimate the electron mean free path, an
important parameter in determination of the elementary
Supercond. Sci. Technol. 21 (2008) 015008
pinning force of grain boundaries by the electron scattering
mechanism. With the aid of a new formula which relates the
electron mean free path to the Ginzburg–Landau coherence
length, the BCS coherence length was estimated so that a good
agreement is obtained between the GL coherence length led
from the electron mean free path and that led from the upper
critical field.
The impurity parameter was determined using the new
formula and the elementary pinning force of grain boundaries
was estimated with the aid of theoretical calculations by Yetter
et al for each sample. It was found that the elementary pinning
force was not the same but was likely to have a larger value for
the sample with the lower electrical connectivity.
Thus, the critical current density was corrected assuming
that the conditions of flux pinning, i.e. the elementary pinning
force of grain boundaries and the grain size, were the same for
all the samples in order to figure out the relationship between
the critical current density and the electrical connectivity. The
corrected critical current density was almost in proportion
to the electrical connectivity, suggesting that there was no
contribution from the superconducting tunneling currents
through insulating oxide layers. At the same time it was shown
that the critical current density was determined by the electrical
connectivity, the flux pinning strength of grain boundaries and
the reciprocal grain size. This discussion clarifies that the
electron scattering mechanism works in the flux pinning by
grain boundaries in MgB2.
Taking account of the temperature dependence of
the maximum pinning force density with the electrical
connectivity, the maximum pinning force density in sample
Bulk1 is expected to reach 96 GN m−3 at 4.2 K, if the full
connectivity is realized. This value exceeds that in Nb3 Sn
with the same grain size. It can be concluded that the flux
pinning ability in MgB2 is higher than that in Nb3 Sn. The
present samples are fairly clean superconductors and hence
there is potential for the strengthening of the flux pinning
T Matsushita et al
force by making the superconductor dirty. One method is the
doping of C atoms, which has been proved to be effective
in improving the critical current density. Thus, MgB2 is a
promising superconducting material, and the densification to
increase the connectivity and the optimization of the impurity
parameter with C-addition is needed.
Acknowledgment
The authors would like to thank S Ohtsuka (University of
Tokyo) for the technical support in FE-SEM analysis.
References
[1] Matsushita T 2006 Flux Pinning in Superconductors
(Berlin: Springer) p 431
[2] Scanlan R M, Fietz W A and Koch E F 1975 J. Appl. Phys.
46 2244
[3] Katsura Y, Yamamoto A, Iwayama I, Ueda S, Shimoyama J,
Horii S and Kishio K 2005 J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 43 119–22
[4] Rowell J M 2003 Supercond. Sci. Technol. 16 R17–27
[5] Eltsev Y, Lee S, Nakao K, Chikumoto N, Tajima S,
Koshizuka N and Murakami M 2002 Phys. Rev. B
65 140501
[6] Yamamoto A, Shimoyama J, Kishio K and Matsushita T 2007
Supercond. Sci. Technol. 20 658–66
[7] Jiang J, Senkowicz B J, Larbalestier D C and Hellstrom E H
2006 Supercond. Sci. Technol. 19 L33–6
[8] Zerweck G 1981 J. Low Temp. Phys. 42 1–9
[9] Yetter W E, Thomas D A and Kramer E J 1982 Phil. Mag. B
46 523–37
[10] Brinkman A, Golubov A A, Rogalla H, Dolgov O V, Kortus J,
Kong Y, Jepsen O and Andersen K 2002 Phys. Rev. B
65 180517(R)
[11] Goodman B B 1966 Rep. Prog. Phys. 29 445
[12] Welch D O 1985 IEEE Trans. Magn. MAG-21 827–30
[13] Kang W N, Choi E M, Kim H J, Kim H J and Lee S I 2003
Physica C 385 24–30
[14] Kiuchi M, Mihara H, Kimura K, Haraguchi T, Otabe E S,
Matsushita T, Yamamoto A, Shimoyama J and
Kishio K 2006 Physica C 445–448 474–7