Electron-doping dependence of the anisotropic superconductivity in BaFe$_{2-x}$Ni$_{x}$As$_2$
Zhaosheng Wang, Tao Xie, E. Kampert, T. Förster, Xingye Lu, Rui Zhang, Dongliang Gong, Shiliang Li, T. Herrmannsdörfer, J. Wosnitza, Huiqian Luo
arXiv:1510.06660 · DOI 10.1103/PHYSREVB.92.174509 · 2015-10-22 · 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 upper critical field ($H_{c2}$) in superconducting BaFe$_{2-x}$Ni$_{x}$As$_2$ single crystals has been determined by magnetotransport measurements down to 0.6 K over the whole superconducting dome with $0.065 \leqslant x \leqslant 0.22$, both for the inter-plane ($H \parallel c$, $H_{c2}^{c}$) and in-plane ($H \parallel ab$, $H_{c2}^{ab}$) field directions in static magnetic fields up to 16 T and pulsed magnetic fields up to 60 T. The temperature dependence of $H_{c2}^{ab}$ follows the Werthamer-Helfand-Hohenberg (WHH) model incorporating orbital and spin paramagnetic effects, while $H_{c2}^{c}(T)$ can only be described by the effective two-band model with unbalanced diffusivity. The anisotropy of the upper critical fields, $γ(T)=H_{c2}^{ab}/H_{c2}^{c}$ monotonically increases with increasing temperature for all dopings, and its zero-temperature limit, $γ(0)$, has an asymmetric doping dependence with a significant enhancement in the overdoped regime, where the optimally doped compound has the most isotropic superconductivity. Our results suggest that the anisotropy in the superconductivity of iron pnictides is determined by the topology of the Fermi surfaces together with the doping-induced impurity scattering.
Source-reported materials — not catalogue approval
| Formula | Reported Tc (K) | Pressure (GPa) | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| BaFe1.9Ni0.1As2 Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | 20 | Pressure not reported | unknown |
| BaFe1.935Ni0.065As2 Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | — | Pressure not reported | unknown |
| BaFe1.925Ni0.075As2 Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | — | Pressure not reported | unknown |
| BaFe1.915Ni0.085As2 Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | — | Pressure not reported | unknown |
| BaFe1.908Ni0.092As2 Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | — | Pressure not reported | unknown |
| BaFe1.904Ni0.096As2 Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | — | Pressure not reported | unknown |
| BaFe1.9Ni0.1As2 Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | — | Pressure not reported | unknown |
| BaFe1.892Ni0.108As2 Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | — | Pressure not reported | unknown |
| BaFe1.88Ni0.12As2 Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | — | Pressure not reported | unknown |
| BaFe1.85Ni0.15As2 Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | — | Pressure not reported | unknown |
| BaFe1.82Ni0.18As2 Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | — | Pressure not reported | unknown |
| BaFe1.8Ni0.2As2 Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | — | Pressure not reported | unknown |
| BaFe1.78Ni0.22As2 Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | — | Pressure not reported | unknown |
Similar papers
Electron doping dependence of the anisotropic superconductivity in BaFe2−xNixAs2
similarity 0.95Zhaosheng Wang et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Doping evolution of the anisotropic upper critical fields in the iron-based superconductor Ba1−xKxFe2As2
similarity 0.92M. A. Tanatar et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Temperature-doping phase diagrams for Ba(Fe1-xTMx)2As2(TM=Ni, Cu, Cu / Co) single crystals
similarity 0.92N. Ni et al. · 2010 · arXiv:1006.3193
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Anisotropy of the upper critical field in a Co-doped BaFe2As2 single crystal
similarity 0.92M. Kano et al. · 2009 · arXiv:0904.1418
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Doping evolution of the anisotropic upper critical fields in iron-based superconductor BaKFeAs
similarity 0.91M. A. Tanatar et al. · 2017 · arXiv:1711.10094
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Measurements of the superconducting fluctuations in optimally-doped BaFeNiAs under high magnetic fields: Probing the 3D anisotropic Ginzburg-Landau approach
similarity 0.91R. I. Rey et al. · 2014 · arXiv:1406.5829
Source status unknown — claims are unverified