* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Blocking Oscillation Due to Combination of Discrete and Continuous
Variable-frequency drive wikipedia , lookup
Three-phase electric power wikipedia , lookup
Electrical ballast wikipedia , lookup
Pulse-width modulation wikipedia , lookup
Electrical substation wikipedia , lookup
History of electric power transmission wikipedia , lookup
Current source wikipedia , lookup
Voltage regulator wikipedia , lookup
Switched-mode power supply wikipedia , lookup
Resistive opto-isolator wikipedia , lookup
Power electronics wikipedia , lookup
Rectiverter wikipedia , lookup
Buck converter wikipedia , lookup
Stray voltage wikipedia , lookup
Surge protector wikipedia , lookup
Alternating current wikipedia , lookup
Voltage optimisation wikipedia , lookup
Power MOSFET wikipedia , lookup
Semiconductor device wikipedia , lookup
Mains electricity wikipedia , lookup
Current mirror wikipedia , lookup
PIERS Proceedings, Kuala Lumpur, MALAYSIA, March 27–30, 2012 768 Blocking Oscillation Due to Combination of Discrete and Continuous Charge/Flux Transfer in Systems Including Nano/Josephson Tunnel Junctions Yoshinao Mizugaki The University of Electro-Communications (UEC Tokyo), Japan Abstract— Nanotechnology enables us to manipulate a single electron in solid-state circuits. Single-electron tunneling is known to transfer electric charge in units of the fundamental charge e through tiny (nano-scale) tunnel junctions. So far, many single-electron devices, such as a singleelectron transistor, a single-electron turnstile, and a single-electron pump, have been proposed and demonstrated. The author proposes a blocking oscillator composed of tiny tunnel junctions and a dissipative element (resistor). The key is the combination of the discrete and continuous charge transfer. Monte-Carlo simulation demonstrates blocking oscillation of an island charge. Similar blocking oscillation occurs in a superconducting loop including Josephson junctions and a resistor. Electromagnetic duality between single-electron devices and superconducting Josephson devices are observed in these results. In this paper, the author numerically demonstrates these blocking oscillation phenomena and discuss the possibility of experimental observation. 1. INTRODUCTION It is commonly understood that electric current in a metal wire is carried by electrons. Because the number of electrons is huge, electric current is considered to be continuous. It is valid if the system is macroscopic. However, if the system is microscopic or mesoscopic, we sometimes need to handle not continuous electric current but discrete electrons. In fact, recent progress of nanofabrication techniques has enabled us to manipulate a single electron in solid-state circuits [1]. Single-electron tunneling based on the Coulomb blockade is realized in tiny (nano-scale) tunnel junctions when the following conditions are satisfied: e2 /2C À kB T and Rt À RQ ≡ h/e2 , where e, C, kB , T , Rt , RQ , and h are the fundamental charge, tunnel capacitance, Boltzmann constant, absolute temperature, tunnel resistance, quantum resistance, and Planck constant, respectively. A single-electron transistor composed of two tiny tunnel junctions and a capacitive gate is known as a ultra-sensitive charge sensor [2]. Systems including more than three tiny tunnel junctions can transfer a single-electron one by one, known as a single-electron turnstile [3] and a single-electron pump [4]. On the other hand, a single flux quantum in a superconducting loop can be used as a bit carrier in superconducting Josephson electronics [5]. Interestingly, electromagnetic duality can be found between single-electron devices and single-flux-quantum devices [2]. Although the duality is phenomenological and imperfect, it sometimes helps us to develop a new device. Examples are an RF single-electron transistor [6] dual to an RF superconducting quantum interference device (RF-SQUID), a single-flux-quantum pump [7] dual to a single-electron pump, and a single-electron current mirror [8] dual to a single-flux-quantum voltage mirror. In this paper, the author describes numerical results of a single-electron blocking oscillator [9] and a single-flux-quantum blocking oscillator [10], both of which have been proposed recently. The key is the combination of the discrete and continuous charge/flux transfer. 2. CONFIGURATION OF BLOCKING OSCILLATORS 2.1. Single-electron Blocking Oscillator The author has proposed a blocking oscillator composed of tiny tunnel junctions and a dissipative element (resistor) [9], of which configuration is shown in Figure 1(a). Because of charge leakage through the resistive path, the island charge Q0 becomes continuous, whereas single-electron tunneling events through the junctions carry fundamental charges into/from the island electrode discretely. Combination of continuous and discrete charge transfer eventually shifts the operation point into the Coulomb blockade, resulting in blocking oscillation. Progress In Electromagnetics Research Symposium Proceedings, KL, MALAYSIA, March 27–30, 2012 769 Island charge Q 0 J1 (Cj , R j ) Ib J2 (Cj , R j ) L lp Vb JJ 1 (lc , Rn, C jj ) Cg Rg R lp JJ 2 (lc , Rn, C jj ) (a) (b) Figure 1: Blocking oscillators utilizing combination of discrete and continuous chrage/flux transfer. (a) Single-electron blocking oscillator comprising series array of two tiny tunnel junctions with capacitive and resistive ground paths from its island electrode. Cj and Rj are the junction capacitance and junction resistance, respectively. (b) Single-flux-quantum blocking oscillator comprising parallel array of two Josephson junctions connected via a superconducting inductor and a resistor. Ic , Rn , and Cjj are the superconducting critical current, junction resistance, and junction capacitance, respectively. Vb = 27.0 mV -19 Island charge Q0 (× 10 C) -19 Island charge Q0 (× 10 C) Vb = 26.7 mV 1.5 1 0.5 0 -0.5 -1 2 3 4 5 Time (ns) 6 7 1.5 1 0.5 0 -0.5 -1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Time (ns) 4 4.5 5 (a) (b) Figure 2: Numerical waveforms of the island charge. Cj , Rj , Cg , and Rg are set at 1 aF, 100 kΩ, 1 aF, and 20 MΩ, respectively. Absolute zero temperature and no cotunneling processes are assumed. Vb is set at (a) 26.7 mV and (b) 27.0 mV. 2.2. Single-flux-quantum Blocking Oscillator A single-flux-quantum blocking oscillator [10] dual to the single-electron blocking oscillator is presented in Figure 1(b). The flux in the JJ1 -Llp -Rlp -JJ2 loop is continuously changing toward zero due to the resistive element Rlp , whereas switching events of the Josephson junctions (JJ1 and JJ2 ) transfer flux quanta into/from the loop discretely. Combination of continuous and discrete flux transfer eventually moves the operation point into the superconducting state, resulting in blocking oscillation. 3. NUMERICAL RESULTS 3.1. Waveforms of Island Charge in Single-electron Blocking Oscillator Two examples of the island charge evolution in the single-electron blocking oscillator are shown in Figure 2. Simulation was carried out using a simulator for single-electron devices and circuits (SIMON) on the basis of the Monte Carlo method [11]. Blocking oscillation can be confirmed in both results, whereas sporadic single-electron tunneling events are seen for the lower bias condition in Figure 2(a), at the time durations from 3 ns to 5 ns and from 7 ns to 7.5 ns. Since single-electron tunneling events are stochastic, intervals among events are not constant in both Figures 2(a) and 2(b). Especially at low bias conditions, time intervals vary widely, resulting in sporadic events. 3.2. Waveforms of Junction Voltages in Single-flux-quantum Blocking Oscillator Waveforms of the junction voltages in the single-flux-quantum blocking oscillator are shown in Figure 3. For discussion on the voltages across the junctions below, not the magnetic flux in the loop but the junction voltages are presented. Simulation was carried out using a Josephson integrated circuit simulator (JSIM) [12]. The voltage V across a Josephson junction is expressed PIERS Proceedings, Kuala Lumpur, MALAYSIA, March 27–30, 2012 770 as V = (Φ0 /2π)(∂φ/∂t), where Φ0 and φ are the flux quantum and the quantum phase difference across the junction, respectively. The numbers of junction switching in JJ1 and JJ2 in one period of blocking oscillation are rather small in these conditions: the numbers of switching in one period are 2 in JJ1 and 1 in JJ2 for Figure 3(a), and those are 3 in JJ1 and 2 in JJ2 for Figure 3(b). The switching number in JJ1 is one greater than that in JJ2 , which is a feature of the single-flux-quantum blocking oscillator [10]. Differently from the results in Figure 2, the blocking oscillation is deterministic and periodic, which demonstrates imperfect duality between single-electron devices and single-flux-quantum devices. 4. EVIDENCE OF BLOCKING OSCILLATION OBTAINED FROM STATIC CHARACTERISTICS It can be seen in Figures 2 and 3 that the signals from the blocking oscillators are rather small and fast. The RF-SET technique [6] and the Josephson sampling technique [13, 14] would be applied to detect such signals, although each of them is a challenging task. Here, the author proposes an indirect measurement method of blocking oscillation in the singleflux-quantum blocking oscillator. A voltage waveform across a Josephson junction is a pulse train as shown in Figure 3. In experiments, however, pulses are smeared through conventional lowbandwidth equipments, and the average voltage expressed as hV i = Φ0 f is measured, where f is the number of pulses per unit time (the pulse repetition frequency). In other words, the number of pulses per unit time can be obtained by measuring the average voltage. Thus, the average voltage across JJ1 in Figure 3(a) is twice as large as that across JJ2 . In Figure 3(b), the average voltage ratio for JJ1 to JJ2 becomes 3/2 (= 1.5). The current (Ib )-average voltage (hV i) characteristics, calculated using the device parameters described in Figure 3, are shown in Figure 4(a). These characteristics are those obtained by means of quasi-static (low-bandwidth) measurements. Several step structures can been seen, which will be explained later. lb = 0.185 mA JJ1 Voltage (0.2 mV/div) Voltage (0.2 mV/div) lb = 0.170 mA 0 JJ2 0 200 250 300 350 400 Time (ps) 450 500 JJ1 0 JJ2 0 200 250 300 350 400 Time (ps) 450 500 0.25 0.2 JJ1 JJ2 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 -0.05 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2 0.22 lb (mA) Voltage ratio for JJ 1 to JJ 2 Average voltage <V> (mV) (a) (b) Figure 3: Numerical waveforms of the junction voltages. Ic , Rn , Cjj , Llp , and Rlp are 0.10 mA, 3.8 Ω, 0.22 pF, 20 pH, and 0.38 Ω, respectively. Absolute zero temperature is assumed. Ib is set at (a) 0.170 mA and (b) 0.185 mA. 2 2/1 3/2 1.5 4/3 5/4 1 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.2 lb (mA) 0.21 0.22 (a) (b) Figure 4: (a) Current (Ib )-average voltage (hV i) characteristics across JJ1 and JJ2 . (b) The voltage ratio for JJ1 to JJ2 plotted as functions of Ib . Progress In Electromagnetics Research Symposium Proceedings, KL, MALAYSIA, March 27–30, 2012 771 The voltage ratio for JJ1 to JJ2 is plotted in Figure 4(b) as functions of Ib . The constant voltage ratios of 2/1, 3/2, 4/3, and 5/4 can be confirmed. These voltage ratios directly correspond to the ratios of the pulse numbers per unit time. That is, the blocking oscillation in the mode of “2 switching events in JJ1 and 1 switching event in JJ2 ” appears as the voltage ratio of 2/1, that of “3 in JJ1 and 2 in JJ2 ” appears as the voltage ratio of 3/2, and so on. The step structures in Figure 4(a) correspond to the boundaries between the oscillation modes. According to these results, it is possible to obtain an evidence of blocking oscillation in the single-flux-quantum blocking oscillator by means of quasi-static measurements. 5. CONCLUSION In this paper, the author presented the single-electron blocking oscillator and the single-fluxquantum blocking oscillator. Numerical simulation demonstrated the waveforms of blocking oscillation in both. Some electromagnetic duality was confirmed between the two blocking oscillators, although it was not perfect. Since the blocking oscillation in the single-flux-quantum blocking oscillator was deterministic and periodic, it would be confirmed by measuring quasi-static currentvoltage characteristics using conventional low-bandwidth equipments. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The author thanks Prof. H. Shimada, Dr. M. Moriya, Mr. K. Kuroiwa, and Mr. Y. Sato for their technical support and fruitful discussion. This work was partially supported by the Asahi Glass Foundation, and also VLSI Design and Education Center (VDEC), the University of Tokyo, in collaboration with Cadence Design Systems, Inc. REFERENCES 1. Likharev, K. K., “Single-electron devices and their applications,” Proc. IEEE, Vol. 87, 606–632, 1999. 2. Likharev, K. K., “Single-electron transistors: Electrostatic analogs of the dc SQUIDs,” IEEE Trans. Magn., Vol. 23, 1142–1145, 1987. 3. Geerligs, L. J., V. G. Anderegg, P. A. M. Holweg, J. E. Mooij, H. Pothier, D. Esteve, C. Urbina, and M. H. Devoret, “Frequency-locked turnstile device for single electron,” Phys. Rev. Lett., Vol. 64, 2691–2694, 1990. 4. Pothier, H., P. Lafarge, C. Urbina, D. Esteve, and M. H. Devoret, “Single electron pump based on charging effects,” Europhys. Lett., Vol. 17, 249–254, 1992. 5. Hayakawa, H., N. Yoshikawa, S. Yorozu, and A. Fujimaki, “Superconducting digial electronics,” Proc. IEEE, Vol. 92, 1549–1563, 2004. 6. Schoelkopf, R. J., P. Wahlgren, A. A. Kozhevnikov, P. Delsing, and D. E. Prober, “The radiofrequency single-electron transistor (RF-SET): A fast and ultrasensitive electrometer,” Science, Vol. 280, 1238–1242, 1998. 7. Mizugaki, Y., J. Chen, S. Nishikata, K. Sugi, K. Nakajima, and T. Yamashita, “Single-fluxquantum pump based on a three-junction superconducting quantum interference device,” Appl. Phys. Lett., Vol. 80, 4585–4587, 2002. 8. Mizugaki, Y., M. Itoh, and H. Shimada, “Current correlation in single-electron current mirror electromagnetically dual to josephson voltage mirror,” Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 46, Part 1, 6237–6242, 2007. 9. Mizugaki, Y., “Blocking charge oscillation in a series array of two tiny tunnel junctions with a resistive ground path from its island electrode,” IEEE Trans. Nanotechnol., (to be published. DOI: 10.1109/TNANO.2011.2169984). 10. Mizugaki, Y., “Numerical demonstration of relaxation oscillation in a resistive superconducting quantum interference device with two nonhysteretic Josephson junctions,” IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond., Vol. 20, 2322–2326, 2010. 11. Wasshuber, C., Computational Single-Electronics, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 2001. 12. Fang, E. S. and T. Van Duzer, “A Josephson integrated circuit Simulator (JSIM) for superconductive electronics application,” Extended Abstracts of 1989 International Superconductivity Electronics Conference, 407–410, Tokyo, Japan, Jun. 1989. 13. Faris, S. M., “Generatin and measurement of ultrashort current pulses with Josephson devices,” Appl. Phys. Lett., Vol. 36, 1005–1007, 1980. 14. Tuckerman, D. B., “A Josephson ultrahigh-resolution sampling system,” Appl. Phys. Lett., Vol. 36, 1008–1010, 1980.