The effect of bias current configuration on the performance of SQUID arrays
M. A. Gali Labarias, K. -H. Muller, E. E. Mitchell
arXiv:2303.05609 · DOI 10.1088/1361-6668/acfa7a · 2023-03-09 · Superconductor Science and Technology
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
Designing superconducting electronic devices involves a careful study of all the elements in the circuit, including the superconducting bias leads, however, the effect of the bias current leads on the performance of the device have not been previously addressed. In this work, we introduce a theoretical model for two-dimensional superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) arrays capable of simulating the response of devices with different bias current configurations. First, we compare uniformly biased and centre biased SQUID arrays by investigating the voltage versus magnetic flux response, maximum transfer function and voltage modulation depth. Then, we calculate the time-averaged fluxoid distributions for 1D and 2D centre biased arrays. Finally, we study the performance of the two bias current configurations depending on array size, screening parameter, thermal noise strength and kinetic self-inductance fraction. Our calculations reveal: (i) centre biased 1D parallel SQUID arrays present an unusual voltage response caused by the asymmetric fluxoid distribution; (ii) the optimal transfer function of centre biased arrays strongly depends on the number of junctions in parallel; (iii) the performance of centre biased arrays approaches the uniform biased ones when the number of junctions in series exceeds those in parallel; (iv) while the screening parameter and the thermal noise strength clearly affect the device performance, the kinetic self-inductance fraction seems to play only a secondary role.
Similar papers
Ultra-Highly Linear Magnetic Flux-to-Voltage response in Proximity-based Mesoscopic bi-SQUIDs
similarity 0.90Giorgio De Simoni et al. · 2021 · arXiv:2112.09421
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
The role of coupling radius in 1D and 2D SQUID and SQIF arrays
similarity 0.89Marc A. Gali Labarias et al. · 2021 · arXiv:2108.11059
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Synthetic areas spread in two-dimensional Superconducting Quantum Interference Filter Arrays
similarity 0.89Ross D. Monaghan et al. · 2026 · arXiv:2511.15020
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Modeling the Transfer Function of Two-Dimensional SQUID and SQIF Arrays with Thermal Noise
similarity 0.88M.A. Galí Labarias et al.
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Modelling the transfer function of two-dimensional SQUID and SQIF arrays with thermal noise
similarity 0.88Marc A. Gali Labarias et al. · 2021 · arXiv:2106.11439
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
High-Tc Superconducting Quantum Interference Filters (SQIFs) made by ion irradiation
similarity 0.88S. Ouanani et al. · 2016 · arXiv:1603.07592
Source status unknown — claims are unverified