Mitigation of Magnetic Flux Trapping in Superconducting Electronics Using Moats
Rohan T. Kapur, Sergey K. Tolpygo, Alex Wynn, Pauli Kehayias, Adam A. Libson, Collin N. Muniz, Michael J. Gold, Justin L. Mallek, Danielle A. Braje, Jennifer M. Schloss
arXiv:2602.18345 · 2026-05-20
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
Magnetic flux (vortex) trapping remains a major obstacle to very large scale integration in superconducting electronics. Moats -- etched regions in circuit layers placed in ground planes and around critical circuitry -- offer a simple passive approach to sequester flux. Here, we systematically examine the effectiveness of moat arrays in superconducting niobium films as a function of geometry (size, shape, and density) and background magnetic field. By measuring the vortex expulsion field, we estimate the flux saturation number and flux trapping temperature for a range of geometries. We find that many moat designs effectively sequester flux in magnetically shielded environments (< 1 $μ$T), with high-aspect-ratio rectangular "slit" moats providing the strongest mitigation at minimal area cost. However, our measurements show that moats alone do not eliminate flux trapping in non-ideal films, as vortices can preferentially pin at material defects. These results provide design guidance for flux mitigation in superconducting integrated circuits and highlight the need for combined optimization of circuit geometries and materials.
Source-reported materials — not catalogue approval
| Formula | Reported Tc (K) | Pressure (GPa) | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nb Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | — | Pressure not reported | unknown |
| NbN Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | — | Pressure not reported | unknown |
| NbTiN Archive — visibility unverified Source-occurrence policy only; no material identity or catalogue acceptance is inferred from the formula. | — | Pressure not reported | unknown |
Similar papers
Elimination of Flux Trapping in Superconducting Circuits in Ambient Magnetic Fields
similarity 0.86Rohan T. Kapur et al. · 2026 · arXiv:2606.27415
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Vortices in superconductors with a columnar defect: finite size effects
similarity 0.86Edson Sardella et al. · 2004 · arXiv:cond-mat/0406400
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Reproducible Operating Margins on a 72,800-Device Digital Superconducting Chip
similarity 0.85Quentin P. Herr et al. · 2015 · arXiv:1510.01220
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Determining interface dielectric losses in superconducting coplanar waveguide resonators
similarity 0.84Wayne Woods et al. · 2018 · arXiv:1808.10347
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Towards the discovery of high critical magnetic field superconductors
similarity 0.84Benjamin Geisler et al. · 2026 · arXiv:2601.21044
Source status unknown — claims are unverified
Study of Magnetic Field Resilient High Impedance High-Kinetic Inductance Superconducting Resonators
similarity 0.84Camille Roy et al. · 2025 · arXiv:2503.13321
Source status unknown — claims are unverified