← Back to search

Structure and a bond-valence-sum study of the 1-2-3 superconductors (CaxLa1−x)(Ba1.75−xLa0.25+x)Cu3Oy and YBa2Cu3Oy

O. Chmaissem, Y. Eckstein, C. G. Kuper

DOI 10.1103/PhysRevB.63.174510 · 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 present a study of the crystal structure of the 1-2-3 superconductor (CaxLa1−x)(Ba1.75−xLa0.25+x)Cu3Oy (CLBLCO). Because of the presence of both La and Ba ions in the “Ba” layer, the local symmetry of YBa2Cu3Oy (YBCO) is lost. For example, one can no longer assume that an “apical” oxygen atom always lies strictly on the line joining Cu I and Cu II ions, and a Pauling bond-valence calculation is very useful as an adjunct to the Rietveld refinement of the positions of the La and Ba ions. When a Rietveld analysis is performed allowing for the possibility that the apical oxygen atoms may be slightly displaced along the a or b direction, the bond-valence sums for both La and Ba are close to the natural oxidation states of these ions. We have also used the bond-valence-sum method to study the mean oxidation states of the Cu I and Cu II ions in both CLBLCO and YBCO. Our results for YBCO differ from some previously published results. Our main conclusion is that, while the method may be useful in finding the charge concentration on the Cu II plane, it definitely does not yield the concentration of mobileholes, nor the concentration of superconducting charge carriers.

Source-reported materials — not catalogue approval

FormulaReported Tc (K)Pressure (GPa)Type
(CaxLa1-x)(Ba1.75-xLa0.25+x)Cu3Oy

Archive — visibility unverified

Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula.

—Pressure not reportedunknown
YBa2Cu3Oy

Archive — visibility unverified

Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula.

—Pressure not reportedunknown

Similar papers