| Literature DB >> 31289344 |
Xiaohan Chen1,2, Lei Chen3,4, Yue Wang1,2, Long Wu1,2, Xiaoyu Liu1, Linxian Ma1, Zhen Wang5,6,7.
Abstract
The superconducting device of multiple Josephson junctions in arrays has increasingly attracted interest in both applications and fundamental research. The challenge of array integration and scaling is a wide concern. The present study investigated superconducting devices of multiple niobium three-dimensional nano-bridge junctions (3D-NBJs) in parallel. We fabricated evenly and unevenly spaced devices of three to six 3D-NBJs in parallel. We measured the critical current as a function of the magnetic field and voltage to magnetic field transfer function of each device. The derivative of voltage with respect to the magnetic field at the sensitive point increased linearly with the number of junctions. A maximal derivative of 97.3 V/T was achieved by our device with six unevenly spaced junctions in parallel. Furthermore, we carried out numerical simulations on devices of three and four junctions in parallel using the current-phase relation of a single 3D-NBJ. The CPR was determined by comparing the measured and simulated magnetic flux modulations of nano-SQUID. Qualitative agreement between the numerical simulation and experimental measurement suggests that it is possible to use 3D-NBJs to build SQUID arrays or SQIFs with high integration density.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31289344 PMCID: PMC6616350 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-46425-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1SEM images of eight devices of 3D nano-bridge junctions in parallel with (A–D) three to six evenly spaced 3D-NBJs and (E–H) three to six unevenly spaced 3D-NBJs.
Figure 2(a–h) Critical current I as a function of the applied magnetic field B of Dev. A–H. The critical current I of each device is normalized to the critical current of a single 3D-NBJ I.
Figure 3(a–h) B-to-V transfer functions of Dev. A–H, respectively. The insets of (e–h) show the wider magnetic field range.
Corresponding values of the zero-field critical current I, critical current of a single 3D-NBJ I, bias current I used to measure the V-to-B transfer function, and the screen parameter 2LI/Ф for each device.
| Dev.# | evenly spaced | unevenly spaced | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | |
|
| 74 μA | 66 μA | 44.5 μA | 60 μA | 168 μA | 560 μA | 429 μA | 106 μA |
|
| 12 μA | 13.2 μA | 11.1 μA | 20 μA | 28 μA | 112 μA | 107 μA | 35 μA |
|
| 70 μA | 62 μA | 42 μA | 58 μA | 168 μA | 555 μA | 420 μA | 105 μA |
| 0.267 | 0.293 | 0.247 | 0.444 | 0.622 | 2.489 | 2.378 | 0.778 | |
Figure 4Maximum value of dV/dB as a function of N. The black squares and red circles respectively represent evenly spaced and unevenly spaced devices.
Figure 5(a) Circuit diagram of N 3D-NBJs in parallel; (b) numerical simulation of the critical current as a function of the applied magnetic field of a device with two NBJs in parallel (SQUID); (c) numerical simulation of the critical current as a function of the applied magnetic field of a device with three NBJs in parallel spaced evenly and (d) spaced unevenly; (e) numerical simulation of the critical current as a function of the applied magnetic field of a device with four NBJs in parallel spaced evenly and (f) spaced unevenly.
Figure 6Magnetic flux modulation depth ΔI/I as a function of the screen parameter β. Blue squares and red dots are respectively measurements and simulation results. The top inset shows the CPR calculated using the model described in reference[28] and the parameter l/ξ = 3.4. The bottom inset shows the SEM image of a SQUID made from 3D-NBJs.