Flux saturation number of superconducting rings
D. V. Denisov, D. V. Shantsev, Y. M. Galperin, T. H. Johansen
arXiv:0709.1086 · 2007-09-07 · arXiv: Superconductivity
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
The distributions of electrical current and magnetic field in a thin-film superconductor ring is calculated by solving the London equation. The maximum amount of flux trapped by the hole, the fluxoid saturation number, is obtained by limiting the current density by the depairing current. The results are compare it with similar results derived for the bulk case of a long hollow cylinder [Nordborg & Vinokur, Phys. Rev. B 62, 12408 (2000)]. In the limit of small holes our result reduces to the Pearl solution for an isolated vortex in a thin film. For large hole radius, the ratio between saturation numbers in bulk and film superconductors is proportional to the square root of the hole size.
Similar papers
Superconducting thin rings with finite penetration depth
similarity 0.86Ernst Helmut Brandt & John R. Clem · 2003 · arXiv:cond-mat/0312497
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Realistic Pearl vortices in thin film superconductors
similarity 0.86Aurélien Balzli et al. · 2026 · arXiv:2604.09440
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Finite-size effect of critical penetration of Pearl vortices in narrow superconducting flat rings
similarity 0.86N. Kokubo et al. · 2019 · arXiv:1905.10753
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Fluxoid dynamics in superconducting thin film rings
similarity 0.86J. R. Kirtley et al. · 2003 · arXiv:cond-mat/0302415
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Defect formation in superconducting rings: external fields and finite-size effects
similarity 0.86D. J. Weir et al. · 2012 · arXiv:1208.3426
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Superconducting thin rings with finite penetration depth
similarity 0.86Ernst Helmut Brandt & John R. Clem
Source status unknown — claims are unverified