View
216
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
Designing a Solenoid for Low Temperature Resistance Measurements
of Nanostructures
PHYS 4300
May 15, 2009
Jon Caddell
Dr. Murphy
OutlineOutline• Motivation
• Spintronics• Weak Localization• Minimizing Spatial Variation of Resistance
• Laboratory Details• Current Experimental Setup• New Setup (add Independent Perpendicular Field)
• Modeling B Field Spatial Variation• Non-infinite Solenoid B Field Non-uniformities
• Conclusion• Optimizing Solenoid Design to Minimize Spatial
Variation of Resistance
SpintronicsSpintronics• Digital technology has two states corresponding to
logic True/False• If the parametersparameters associated with spinspin are included,
then you can double the number of logic states• Go from binary computing to four-level logic
computing(T/F T↑ /T↓ /F↑ /F↓ )
• This could boost computing power (more information stored per bit)
• InSb interesting for spintronics; need to know more about fundamental spin behavior
Fundamental Spin Behavior: Fundamental Spin Behavior: Weak Localization (no spin-orbit)Weak Localization (no spin-orbit)• Infinite number of scattering trajectories starting from origin• Subset of these trajectories lead back to the origin• Each path around, there’s also a path in the opposite
direction (time reversal invariant)
Scattering site (defect)Origin
Clockwise Clockwise (cw)(cw)
Counter- Counter- clockwise clockwise (ccw)(ccw)
e- path in disordered material
Weak Localization (cont.)Weak Localization (cont.)• Classical Probability for returning to
origin:
Pcw + Pccw = Pclasstotal
• Q.M. Probability:
Ψcw2 + Ψccw
2 + <Ψcw|Ψccw> = PQMtotal
• Probabilityclass. < ProbabilityQ.M.
Resistanceclass. < ResistanceQ.M.
• Add a Bperp field Aharonov-Bohm Effect
Ψcw picks up a phase change opposite in sign to Ψccw
<Ψcw|Ψccw> term now has less constructive interference
Constructive interference
B Field
R
Q.M.
Classical
B
(ccw)(ccw)
(cw)(cw)
Weak Localization Weak Localization →→ Weak Anti-Localization Weak Anti-Localization• IncludeInclude spin-orbit coupling Weak
Anti-Localization
• For Bperp=0, Q.M. interference term <Ψcw|Ψccw> now destructive
Resistanceclass. > ResistanceQ.M.
• Phase change, from Bperp field, as before destroys the interference
• Result Graph is inverted for spin-orbit coupling
B
Q.M.
ClassicalR
Weak Anti-Localization
B
Spin/OrbitSpin/Orbit• Looking at spin/orbit
• Orbit depends on Bperp. (Lorentz Force), F=q(v x B)
• Spin depends on Btotal (Zeeman Energy), E=g µB B
• Adding Parallel Magnetic Field
• Bperp stays the same
• But Btotal changes (Btotal=Bperp+Bparallel)
e-
v
B
F
Lorentz Force
B=0 B≠0
up and down spin at same energy level
up and down spin at different energy level
Zeeman Effect
gyromagnetic ratio Bohr magneton
So applying Bparallel separates spin from orbital motion
Weak Anti-Localization and BWeak Anti-Localization and Bllll Magnetic Field Magnetic Field• One spin energetically favorable
So applying Bparallel separates spin from orbital motion• Goal: seeing how weak anti-localization changes with
magnetic field
B=0 B≠0
up and down spin at same energy level
up and down spin at different energy level
Zeeman Effect
Q.M.
ClassicalR
Weak Anti-Localization
OutlineOutline• Motivation
• Spintronics• Weak Localization• Minimizing Resistance Spatial Variation
• Background• Current Experimental Setup• New Setup (add Independent Perpendicular Field)
• Modeling B Field Spatial Variation• Non-infinite Solenoid B Field Non-uniformities
• Conclusion
Current SetupCurrent Setup
Large SolenoidLarge Solenoid
Sample HolderSample Holder
Cryostat Cryostat casingcasing
SampleSample
Current Experimental SetupCurrent Experimental Setup• Need a Magnetic Field for experiment• Already got one• Want to change B parallel and B
perpendicular separately• Need field to be spatially UNIFORM
Bperp.
Bperp.Bparallel
New Method
Future SetupFuture Setup• Low Temp.• NO power dissipation• Superconducting
I
I
I
I
Bz = Bperp.
new magnet
Bx = B// existing magnet
y
z
x
y
x
~1 Tesla
~10 mT
Manufacturability, Economics, Environmental, SafetyManufacturability, Economics, Environmental, Safety
• Manufacturability• Materials: order off-the-shelf NbTi wire, machine the
coil form and wind coil ourselves, pot in standard epoxy
• Constraints: solenoid must fit inside 2” diameter larger solenoid (limits length and diameter), wire diameter from what is commercially available
• Economics• Coil design and construction in-house to avoid
outside custom work• Environmental
• No power dissipation since coil is superconducting; materials recyclable (except epoxy) and non-toxic
Manufacturability, Economics, Environmental, SafetyManufacturability, Economics, Environmental, Safety
• Safety – Cryogenic Temp.• Quench Protection
P=VI=0 superconducting, I<Ic
P=VI≠0 non-superconducting, I>Ic
Power dissipation → boil He (liquid → gas)Expands x700• Quench valve, open to relieve over-pressure
• Air content
• Air 22% O2 if a quench, lots of He, O2 content drop
Evacuate room.
OutlineOutline• Motivation
• Spintronics• Weak Localization• Minimizing Resistance Spatial Variation
• Background• Current Experimental Setup• New Setup (add Independent Perpendicular Field)
• Modeling B Field Spatial Variation• Non-infinite Solenoid B Field Non-uniformities
• Conclusion
Modeling, Exploit SymmetryModeling, Exploit Symmetry• Biot-Savart Law for Current Loop• Stack rings, approximate Solenoid• For center plane of Solenoid,
Radial components of B cancel• Only have to consider spatial variation
of Axial B Field to evaluate, Bz
Biot-Savart Law
Sum vectors
radial comp. cancelB
Plane of sample
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0N ormalized R adius
8101214161820
B Fie ld T
Finding Spatial BFinding Spatial Bzz Distribution, Single Loop Distribution, Single Loop• Integrate to find B
• Symmetry, Integrate half, x 2• Involves Elliptical Integrals
• B Increases Radially!
Biot-Savart Law
rR
dl
θ
Integrate theta 0 → π
Modeling SolenoidModeling Solenoid• Method A: Summing
stacked current loopsUses Elliptical Integrals
Elliptic Integral of the first kind
Elliptic Integral of the second kind
Modeling SolenoidModeling Solenoid• Method B: Solenoid
ModelUses Legendre
Polynomials
Previous citation &
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8alpha
8.10
8.15
8.20
8.25
8.30
mTB z E llip tic S o l. B lu e, P o lyn o m ial S o l. R ed
Comparing Method A to Method BComparing Method A to Method B• Know answer for infinite solenoid B=µ I N / L• Method A correct• Method B required effort
Compare with many loopsClose agreement, w/factor 0.1
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8alpha
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
0.55
mTB z E llip tic S o l. B lu e, P o lyn o m ial S o l. R ed
Comparing Method A to Method BComparing Method A to Method B• Compare in single loop limit• Close agreement, w/factor 0.1
α = normalized radius
Modeling SolenoidModeling Solenoid• Method B
• Spatial Variation for short and long coils
Radial Dependence
B
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8alpha
8.10
8.15
8.20
8.25
8.30
mTB z Lo n g S o len o id
Normalized Radius
4% variation
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8alpha
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
0.55
mTB z Lo n g S o len o id
Normalized Radius
140% variation
Bz – Short Solenoid
Change of B over sample areaChange of B over sample area
B Field
Strong B
Weak B
• Want sample to have spatially uniform B Field
• Need to find tolerance for ΔB
B Field
Steps=0.013 T
Transition From B to Conductivity• Now know B(r,I)• σ(B), need σ(r,I)
B Field
σ
Finding Acceptable Finding Acceptable ΔΔB(r)B(r)• Recall Weak Anti-Localization Signal• Conductivity σ(B) → but B(r,I) → σ(r,I)
I, current
r, radius
σ, conductivity
I, current
r, radius
∂σ/ ∂r
B Field
σ
Finding Acceptable Finding Acceptable ΔΔB(r)B(r)• 3% variation of B acceptable• Data fit uses up to B(I = 2 Amps)• Sample only in center of coil
I, current
r, radius
∂σ/ ∂r
I, current
r, radius
∂σ/ ∂r
Finding Acceptable Finding Acceptable ΔΔB(r)B(r)• 3% variation of B acceptable• Coil is within tolerance
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8alpha
8.10
8.15
8.20
8.25
8.30
mTB z Lo n g S o len o id
4% variation
1 2 3 4 5coil diameter, 0 , 5cm
7.5
8.0
8.5
9.0
9.5B z mT
I 4 A mps, C enter, L ength 5cm , W ire dia . 0.0753cm
5 10 15 20 25 30length , 0 , 5cm
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008B z TeslaI 4 A mps, C enter, W ire dia . 0.0753, C oil dia . 3cm
0.08 0.09 0.10 0.11 0.12w ire diameter, .065, .125cm
0.00600.00650.00700.00750.00800.0085
B z TeslaI 4 A mps, C enter, L ength 5cm , C oil dia .3cm
1 2 3 4 5 6coil diameterlength , 0 , 10cm
0.005
0.010
0.015
0.020B z TeslaI 4 A mps, C enter, W ire dia . 0.0753cm
Trends of Field on CenterTrends of Field on Center
B(coil dia.) B(length)
B(wire dia.) B(coil dia.&length coupled)
Bz(coil dia.,length,wire dia.), Fixed IBz(coil dia.,length,wire dia.), Fixed Imax.max.
B field D=0.2cmL=4.996cm
D=0.3cmL=4.991cm
D=0.4cmL=4.984cm
D=0.5cmL=4.975cm
wire diameter0.033cm
51.2mT 55.7mT 51.8mT 44.1mT
0.043cm 34.9mT 39.5mT 39.0mT 35.0mT
0.054cm 25.0mT 28.9mT 29.8mT 28.0mT
0.0643cm 19.3mT 22.7mT 23.9mT 23.2mT
0.0753cm 15.3mT 18.1mT 19.5mT 19.3mTB
D = Coil Diameter
L = Coil Length
ConclusionConclusion• Steps
• Mathematica Routine to model B Field• Optimize Field by minimizing B variations• Design superconducting coil
• Future Steps• Build superconducting coil• Test at cryogenic temperatures (4.2K)• Perform Measurements
ReferencesReferencesSources for Formulas: Elliptical Integral, Legendre
Polynomial from:• SOME USEFUL INFORMATION FOR THE
DESIGN OF AIR-CORE SOLENOIDS by D.Bruce Montgomery and J. Terrell., published November, 1961, under Air Force Contract AF19(604)-7344.
• Dimensionless Prefactor from:• THE DESIGN OF POWERFUL
ELECTROMAGNETS: Part II. The Magnetizing Coil, by F. Bitter, published December 1936, R.S.I. Vol. 7
• Current Setup pictures courtesy of Ruwan Dedigama
Acknowledgements• Dr. Murphy, Capstone Advisor• Ruwan Dedigama, Graduate Student• Dilhani Jayathilaka, Graduate Student
Recommended