Nonexistence of a substitutional Y1−xBixBa2Cu3O7−y superconducting ceramic, and a criterion for elemental substitution

R. Cloots; A. Rulmont; P. A. Godelaine; C. Hannay; A. Dang; H. Bougrine; H. W. Vanderschueren; J. Gasiot; M. Ausloos

doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.45.2519

← Back to search

Nonexistence of a substitutional Y1−xBixBa2Cu3O7−y superconducting ceramic, and a criterion for elemental substitution

R. Cloots, A. Rulmont, P. A. Godelaine, C. Hannay, A. Dang, H. Bougrine, H. W. Vanderschueren, J. Gasiot, M. Ausloos

DOI 10.1103/PhysRevB.45.2519 · Physical Review B

T1

Active bibliographic source — not scientific approval

Bibliographic access preserves source history; it does not approve extracted materials or validate reported claims. Review warnings on each occurrence separately.

Abstract

We have resolved disagreements in the literature concerning the existence or not of a substitutional ceramic phase Y1−xBixBa2Cu3O7−y. We show through synthesizing various phases and analyzing them with various techniques that bismuth does not substitute at yttrium sites. We indicate what phases are formed, in particular YBiBa2O6. We have used x-ray-diffraction data, as well as thermally stimulated luminescence, to identify impurity phases. We show that a criterion on substitutional order can be derived from x-ray intensity-line ratios. We have analyzed the bismuth catalysis and sintering effect. We report Tc shifts but indicate why they cannot be easily correlated to oxygen content. Microstructure and electrical properties are examined from the point of view of sintering-temperature conditions.

Source-reported materials — not catalogue approval

Formula	Reported Tc (K)	Pressure (GPa)	Type
YBa2Cu3O7 Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula.	90	Pressure not reported	unknown