Calorimetric Measurements of the Effect of Nickel and Stabrite Coatings and Resistive Cores on AC Loss in Accelerator Cables under Fixed Pressure

  • M. D. Sumption
  • R. M. Scanlan
  • A. Nijhuis
  • H. H. J. ten Kate
  • E. W. Collings
Part of the Advances in Cryogenic Engineering Materials book series (ACRE, volume 42)


Calorimetric measurements of AC loss on long three- and four-layer stacks of Rutherford cable have been made with the applied field both normal to (face-on, FO, orientation) and parallel to the plane of the cable. Cables studied had bare-Cu, Ni-plated, and stabrite-coated strands; the latter were provided with metallic or insulating interlayers (cores) of, respectively, unalloyed Ti, stainless steel, and kapton ribbon. The cable packs were clamped in a fixture to a pressure of 75 MPa and heat treated for several hours at temperatures of 185 to 250°C. After cooling, the clamped cables were transferred to the calorimeter and measured without releasing the pressure. From the field-ramp-rate dependence of coupling loss the interlayer- and intralayer interstrand contact resistances, R and R|| were deduced. The results were interpreted against a background of earlier “cure-release-repressurize” calorimetric measurements of cable loss as well as direct measurements of contact resistance. Depending on the curing temperature the bare-Cu cable exhibited the highest (Tcure = 250°C) and the lowest (Tcure = 185°C) FO losses. Nickel plating resulted in a cable that was much less sensitive to curing temperature. All the core-type cables (Tcure = 185 and 200°C) exhibited FO loss that was mid-way between those of bare Cu (Tcure = 185°C) and Ni-plated (Tcure = 200°C) cables.


Heat Treat Contact Resistance Calorimetric Measurement Coupling Loss Bare Copper 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    C.E. Taylor, P. Barale, R. Benjegerdes, et al., IEEE Trans. Magn. 28, 315–318 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    F. van Overbeeke, R.L. Dubbeldam, and HJ. Israel, IEEE Trans. Magn. 27, 1748–1751 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    K. Hosayama, K. Hara, N. Higahi, et al., in Supercollider 5, ed. by P. Hale (Plenum Press 1993) pp. 229–232.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J.L. Borne, D. Bouichou, D. Leroy, and W. Thomi, IEEE Trans. Magn. 28, 323–326 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    F. Zerobin, D. Leroy, and B. Szeless, IEEE Trans Magn. 28, 327–330 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    D. Leroy, report on CERN LHC specification as of May 1995.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    H.J. Israel, H. Boschman, and R.L. Dubbeldam, IEEE Trans. Magn. 28, 319–322 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. Leroy, R. Perin, G. de Rijk and W. Thomi, IEEE Trans. Magn. 24, 1373–1376 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    V.E. Sytnikov, G.G. Svalov, S.G. Akopov, and LB. Peshkov, Cryogenics 29, 926–930 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. Wake, D. Gross, R. Yamada, and D. Blatchley, IEEE Trans. Magn. MAG-15, 141–142 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    A.P. Verweij, A. den Ouden, B. Sachse, and H.H.J. ten Kate, Adv. Cryo. Eng. (Materials) 40, 521–527 (1994).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    M.D. Sumption, H.H.J. ten Kate, R.M. Scanlan, and E.W. Collings, Contact resistance and cable loss measurements of coated strands and cables wound from them, Proceedings Appl. Superconductivity Conf., Boston, MA, October 18, 1994 — to be published.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    M.D. Sumption and E.W. Collings, results of as-yet unpublished research.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    E.W. Collings, M.D. Sumption, R.M. Scanlan, T. Shintomi, et al., Magnetic studies of AC loss in pressurized Rutherford cables with coated strands and resistive cores, companion paper in these Proceedings.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    A. Kimura, Electromagnetic properties of superconducting compacted stranded conductors, Doctoral Dissertation, The Graduate University for Advanced Studies, 1–1 Oho, Tsukuba-shi, Ibaraki 305, Japan.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    A. Kimura, N. Kimura, Y. Makida, A. Terashima, T. Shintomi, et al., IEEE Trans. Magn. 30, 2515–2518 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    U.R. Evans, The Corrosion and Oxidation of Metals, First Supplementary Volume, (St. Martin’s Press, New York, 1968).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    O. Ohashi, Q. J. Jpn. Weld. Soc. 62 (7) 512–517 (1993), in Japanese.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    M. Wake, results of as-yet unpublished research. See also Refs.15,16.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    S. Takács, Cryogenics 32, 258–264 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. D. Sumption
    • 1
  • R. M. Scanlan
    • 2
  • A. Nijhuis
    • 3
  • H. H. J. ten Kate
    • 3
  • E. W. Collings
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Materials Science and EngineeringThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA
  2. 2.Superconducting Magnet GroupLawrence Berkeley LaboratoryBerkeleyUSA
  3. 3.Applied Superconductivity CenterUniversity of TwenteEnschedeThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations