Practical considerations on the use of J c (B,θ) in numerical models of the electromagnetic behavior of HTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNICAL PHYS

Transcription

1 Practical considerations on the use of J c (B,θ) in numerical models of the electromagnetic behavior of HTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNICAL PHYS Francesco Grilli and Víctor M. R. Zermeño Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Institute for Technical Physics, Germany francesco.grilli@kit.edu KIT University of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg and National Laboratory of the Helmholtz Association

2 Motivation Given a tape with known I c (B,θ), how can we calculate the effective critical current of devices (cables, coils) made of that tape? Picture sources: Univ. Houston Daibo et al /TASC

3 Example: Roebel cable Source: Univ. Houston Source: CERN Tape, I c =340 A 77 K, self-field Strand, I c =150 A 10-strand cable, I c =? 10 x 150 = 1500 A? No, 1000 A! 33 % self-field reduction We need a tool to predict this value! 3

4 Let s start from the model for calculating I C. The model solves Ampere s law in terms of A 1 µ A = J 4 In the asymptotic limit t from Faraday s equation E = A E = V t V In the 2-D approximation, the scalar variable E represents the voltage drop (per unit length) must be constant in each conductor Superconductor simulated with power-law resistivity E = E c J c J B ( ) J c J B ( ) Reference: Zermeno et al SuST n 1

5 How does the model work? Inversion of the E-J relationship n 1 J = J c B J J E = E c J c ( B) J c ( B ) P = E E E c ( ) P If I a is the transport current flowing in the i-th conductor, one has E c 1 n 1 I a = P i J c Ω i ( B)dΩ i P i = I a J ( c B) dω i Ω i And the voltage drop per unit length E i in the i-th conductor 5 E i = E c P i P n 1

6 Test of the model against experimental data 6

7 Main features of the Roebel cables assembled at KIT 3 designs: 10, 17, 31 strands, transposition length 126, 226, 426 mm 12 mm tapes from two manufacturers: SuperOx and SuperPower 3 sizes x 2 manufacturers = 6 cables in total Length: 2.5 x transposition length 7

8 How to define the critical current of a Roebel cable? 2-D calculation Two possible criteria: Source: Nii et al SuST Current at which E=E c in at least one conductor (MAX criterion) MAX 2. Current at which E AVG =E c (AVG criterion) AVG 8

9 The starting tapes have very different I c (B,θ). θ B 9

10 The in-field behavior determines the cable s I c. Sample (31 strands) Measured I c SuperOx 2747 A 3999 A SuperPower 2264 A 4247 A (# of strands) x (I c of the strands) B (T) 10

11 Measured and computed I c values agree within 9 % cable s I c SuperOx SuperPower number of strands For SuperOx, the sample used for J c (B,θ) was a below-average one. Statistics on I c of 20 strands SuperOx: mean=140 A,σ=10 A SuperPower: mean=147 A, σ=7 A J c (B,θ) measured on a tape. The calculated I c of the strand is: SuperOx: A SuperPower: A For SuperPower, it was very 11 close to average.

12 With a correction factor 1.12 (dashed lines) the agreement for SOx is much better than before. 12 cable s I c SuperOx SuperPower number of strands

13 Considerations on cable design 13

14 What is the influence of the spacing between the superconducting layers? Question #1: Does a loose packing of the strands lead to higher I c due to the reduction of self-field? Example: SuperOx cable (31 strands) Standard spacing: 125 µm I c = 2509 A Increased spacing: 350 µm I c = 2700 A +7.6 % 14

15 15

16 What is the influence of the distance between the superconducting layers? Question #2: Can we then increase J e by pushing the superconducting layers closer to each other? HTS coated conductors with 30 µm will be available soon Example: SuperOx cable (31 strands) Standard spacing: 125 µm I c = 2509 A Reduced spacing: 75 µm I c = 2446 A I c down by 2.5 % J e up by 60 % 16

17 How does I c increase with increasing number of strands? More strands more self-field Important role of J c (B,θ) I c of the cable SuperOx SuperPower number of strands

18 What is the influence of a background magnetic field? 50 strands self-field 50 strands background field 200 mt 18

19 What is the influence of a background magnetic field? cable s I c self-field reduction cable s I c (A) mt 25 mt 50 mt 100 mt 200 mt 350 mt 600 mt number of strands 19 η =1 I CC ns I CS

20 Conclusion (1) A DC model was used to evaluate critical current of Roebel cables for low-field applications. In-field performance of composing strands plays a major role on the effective I c of the cable. Distance between superconducting layers has little influence great potential for new tapes with thin substrate. With moderate fields (hundreds of mt), I c can be simply calculated from the I c of the strands. 20

21 How does J c (B,θ) vary along the length of a tape? For modeling devices made of (hundreds of) meters of tape, we use a J c (B,θ) model derived from data of a 15 cm long sample. We know that the self-field I c varies along the length. Source: SuperPower, Inc. How does J c (B,θ) vary along the length? Simply a multiplicative factor? (e.g factor we used here) Recent work says no. 21

22 22 aaaa

23 A parameter-free approach Extracting an analytic expression for J c (B,θ) is a time consuming process: 1.Find an analytic expression reproducing the angular dependence 2.Find the correct parameters that reproduce the data calculation of effective I c necessary for a large number of field/angle combinations! θ B In the example on the left: 1.the J c (B,θ) has 11 parameters brute force approach time-consuming manual tweak 2.Still, the agreement is far from perfect. 23

24 A parameter-free approach With the parameter-free approach (see Victor Zermeno s poster), we reach an excellent agreement with experimental data in just six steps. No need of thinking about an analytic formula for J c (B,θ). No need of manual or automatic tweaking of parameters. θ B The interpolated J c (B,θ) is ready to be used in successive simulations (e.g. calculation of I c or AC losses in a device). 24

25 A parameter-free approach With the parameter-free approach (see Victor Zermeno s poster), we reach an excellent agreement with experimental data in just six steps. No need of thinking about an analytic formula for J c (B,θ). No need of manual or automatic tweaking of parameters. θ B The interpolated J c (B,θ) is ready to be used in successive simulations (e.g. calculation of I c or AC losses in a device). 25

26 A parameter-free approach With the parameter-free approach (see Victor Zermeno s poster), we reach an excellent agreement with experimental data in just six steps. No need of thinking about an analytic formula for J c (B,θ). No need of manual or automatic tweaking of parameters. θ B The interpolated J c (B,θ) is ready to be used in successive simulations (e.g. calculation of I c or AC losses in a device). 26

27 A parameter-free approach With the parameter-free approach (see Victor Zermeno s poster), we reach an excellent agreement with experimental data in just six steps. No need of thinking about an analytic formula for J c (B,θ). No need of manual or automatic tweaking of parameters. θ B The interpolated J c (B,θ) is ready to be used in successive simulations (e.g. calculation of I c or AC losses in a device). 27

28 A parameter-free approach With the parameter-free approach (see Victor Zermeno s poster), we reach an excellent agreement with experimental data in just six steps. No need of thinking about an analytic formula for J c (B,θ). No need of manual or automatic tweaking of parameters. θ B The interpolated J c (B,θ) is ready to be used in successive simulations (e.g. calculation of I c or AC losses in a device). 28

29 A parameter-free approach With the parameter-free approach (see Victor Zermeno s poster), we reach an excellent agreement with experimental data in just six steps. No need of thinking about an analytic formula for J c (B,θ). No need of manual or automatic tweaking of parameters. θ B The interpolated J c (B,θ) is ready to be used in successive simulations (e.g. calculation of I c or AC losses in a device). 29 From experimental data to a ready-to-go model in 5 minutes!

30 I c calculated with the parameter-free method and with analytic expressions agree well. 30 maximum difference <3 %

31 Conclusion (2) It is important to check how the short sample on which I c (B EXT,θ) is measured is representative of the whole tape. Recent work suggests variations of pinning center quality along the length. Parameter-free method allows going from experimental I c (B EXT,θ) data to a ready-to-use local J c (B LOCAL,θ) model in a few minutes. No complex analytic expressions No parameter tweaking 31

32 The codes for I c calculation are available for free. The one for extracting J c (B,θ) will be soon. 32

33 Practical considerations on the use of J c (B,θ) in numerical models of the electromagnetic behavior of HTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNICAL PHYS Francesco Grilli and Víctor M. R. Zermeño Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Institute for Technical Physics, Germany francesco.grilli@kit.edu KIT University of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg and National Laboratory of the Helmholtz Association