Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Replicating SQUID loop result in paper #84

Closed
Rende410 opened this issue Jul 2, 2024 · 4 comments
Closed

Replicating SQUID loop result in paper #84

Rende410 opened this issue Jul 2, 2024 · 4 comments
Labels
resolved Issue has been resolved; keeping it open for reference

Comments

@Rende410
Copy link

Rende410 commented Jul 2, 2024

Hello, I am still getting to familiarise with pyTDGL, and one of the things i tried to do in the process was to try and replicate the results of the SQUID loop in the paper (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2023.108799).

I tried to create a similar structure from scratch with notches at the two sides of the loop as below:
image

However I cannot get a similar results as in Figure 5 of the paper. I have used largely the same parameters as in the paper for coherence length, penetration depth and thickness etc. While I can observe a localisation of the currents on one side of the loop, I cannot observe the periodic switching of the currents between the two sides, as shown in Figure 5 of the paper. What I can only observe is a single voltage spike with no periodic switching as below.

image
image

I have tried playing around with the bias current and/or applied field with not much effect. Is there something I am missing out?

Another thing I would like to ask is how was panel 5i generated? I suppose it was achieved by running the simulation for several tries while changing the field and bias current and recording the average generated voltage?

Thanks in advance!

@loganbvh
Copy link
Owner

loganbvh commented Jul 2, 2024

Hi @Rende410,

Here is the actual Jupyter notebook I used to make the figure: https://gist.github.com/loganbvh/a91a8f79d851e8f38359cfc18fab575f. I hope that you can use this as a starting point.

Each pixel in Figure 5(i) is the average voltage for single TDGL simulation at a given value of B_z and I_bias. This type of 2D sweep takes a long time of course. I included it in the paper as a proof of principle. I ran the simulations for that figure on a compute cluster, where each column in the image was run on a different CPU in the cluster.

@Rende410
Copy link
Author

Rende410 commented Jul 3, 2024

Hi @loganbvh ,

Thanks for the notebook, I was able to figure out what went wrong with my own version and could replicate the periodic fluctuations now. While looking through yours, I noticed that you defined the B field as a function where it is constant within the loop and scales as cos(lead_angle) outside of it. How would this differ from say, just having a constant uniform B-field all around, even outside the loop? Is this definition of decaying B-field outside the loop essential to produce the V-B curve?

As a quick check I have tried changing the B-field (both with a constant field and with your definition), however, I found that the average voltage seems to increase with the B-field indefinitely, instead of showing the periodic V-B modulations. I'm not sure what went wrong here.

@loganbvh
Copy link
Owner

loganbvh commented Jul 3, 2024

I don't remember how big of an effect the angle of the leads makes - you can try it yourself. For some combination of parameters, you will end up getting a bunch of vortices in the leads, which will ultimately change the IV curve.

@loganbvh loganbvh added the resolved Issue has been resolved; keeping it open for reference label Jul 27, 2024
@loganbvh
Copy link
Owner

Closing this issue. Feel free to re-open if needed

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
resolved Issue has been resolved; keeping it open for reference
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants