← Back to search

Exploring of point-contact spectra of Ba1-xNaxFe2As2 in the normal and superconducting state

Yu. G. Naidyuk, O. E. Kvitnitskaya, S. Aswartham, G. Fuchs, K. Nenkov, S. Wurmehl

arXiv:1402.7233 · DOI 10.1103/PhysRevB.89.104512 · 2014-02-28 · Physical Review B

T1theoretical8 citations

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 study of derivatives of current-voltage I(V) characteristics of point-contacts (PCs) based on Ba{1-x}Na{x}Fe2As2 (x=0.25) in the normal and superconducting state. The detailed analysis of dV/dI(V) data (also given in Appendix A) shows that the thermal regime, when temperature increases with a voltage at a rate of about 1.8 K/mV, is realized in the investigated PCs at least at high biases V above the superconducting (SC) gap Δ. In this case, specific resistivity ρ(T) in PC core is responsible for a peculiar dV/dI(V) behavior, while a pronounced asymmetry of dV/dI(V) is caused by large value of thermopower in this material. A reproducible zero-bias minima detected on dV/dI(V) at low biases in the range \pm(6--9)mV well below the SC critical temperature T_c could be connected with the manifestation of the SC gap Δ. Evaluation of these Andreev-reflection-like structures on dV/dI(V) points out to the preferred value of 2Δ/kT_c \approx 6. The expected second gap features on dV/dI(V) are hard to resolve unambiguously, likely due to impurity scattering, spatial inhomogeneity and transition to the mentioned thermal regime as the bias further increases. Suggestions are made how to separate spectroscopic features in dV/dI(V) from those caused by the thermal regime.

Source-reported materials — not catalogue approval

FormulaReported Tc (K)Pressure (GPa)Type
Ba0.65Na0.35Fe2As2

Archive — visibility unverified

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

30Pressure not reportedunknown

Similar papers