# Josephson junction with magnetic-field tunable current-phase relation

###### Abstract

We consider a 0- Josephson junction consisting of asymmetric and regions of different lengths and having different critical current densities and . If both segments are rather short, the whole junction can be described by an effective current-phase relation for the spatially averaged phase , which includes the usual term , a negative second harmonic term as well as the unusual term tunable by magnetic field . Thus one obtains an electronically tunable current-phase relation. At this corresponds to the Josephson junction.

###### pacs:

74.50.+r, 85.25.Cp## I Introduction

Recently we proposedGoldobin et al. (2011) to implement a Josephson junction (JJ) Buzdin and Koshelev (2003) with magnetic-field tunable current-phase relation (CPR) based on an 0- JJ with the 0 and segments of different length . This proposal was made keeping in mind YBaCuO-Nb ramp zigzag JJ technologySmilde et al. (2002); Hilgenkamp et al. (2003) (or a similar oneAriando et al. (2005) with NdCeCuO-Nb) established recently in our group alsoScharinger et al. (2012). However, in experiment we were more successfulSickinger et al. (2012) in employing superconductor-insulator-ferromagnet-superconductor (SIFS) 0- JJsWeides et al. (2006, 2010); Kemmler et al. (2010), where the lengths of 0 and segments are equal, but critical current densities and in the 0 and parts are different.

Therefore, in this paper we present a more general theory, which describes an effective JJ made of asymmetric and regions of different lengths and having different critical current densities and .

## Ii Model

The static sine-Gordon equation that describes the behavior of the Josephson phase in a 0- JJ is

(1) |

Here is the magnetic flux quantum, is the specific inductance (per square) of the superconducting electrodes forming the JJ and is the bias current density. The prime denotes the partial derivatives with respect to coordinate . We assume that the critical current density has the form of a step-function

(2) | |||||

(3) |

We write the critical current density as

(4) |

where

(5) |

is the average critical current density, is the total length of the junction, and . The function is defined as

(6) |

that results in

(7) |

where

(8) |

Then we divide Eq. (1) by and normalize the coordinate to the Josephson length calculated using , i.e.,

(9) |

Thus, we obtain a normalized sine-Gordon equation for the phase difference

(10) |

where is the normalized bias current density. It is worth mentioning that can be positive as well as negative. Below, for the same of simplicity, we assume . Thus, Eq. (10) becomes

(11) |

In the case the substitution converts Eq. (10) to the same Eq. (11).

We look for a solution of Eq. (11) in the form

(12) |

where

(13) |

is a constant average phase, while describes the deviation of the phase from the average value, i.e., . Further we assume that the deviation is small, i.e., . Then we plug the relation (12) into Eq. (11), expand it in series in , and keep the terms of zero and first order. We get

(14) |

The constant terms (zero order of in Eq. (14)) are

(15) |

The terms of first order of in Eq. (14) are

(16) |

Numerical calculations show that the two terms have an extremely weak effect on solutions of Eq. (16). We neglect these terms and obtain for

(17) |

We treat solutions of Eq. (17) by using the matching continuity (at ) and boundary (at , ) conditions

(18) |

(19) |

The applied field is normalized by , i.e.,

(20) |

where is the effective magnetic thickness of the JJ. We integrate Eq. (17) once and obtain

(21) |

(22) |

The second integration results in

(23) | |||

(24) | |||

The integration constant can be obtained using the condition

(25) |

We use Eqs. (7), (23), and (24) and obtain the average in the form

(26) |

where the coefficients and are given by

(27) | |||||

(28) |

It is worth noting that there is a simple relation between the coefficients and . Indeed, it follows from Eqs. (27) and (28) that

(30) |

In the case of equal lengths of 0 amd parts () we find

(31) |

The energy corresponding to the current-phase relation (29) is given by

(32) |

## Iii Conclusions

We have extended our previous results Goldobin et al. (2011) to the case of arbitrary critical current densities more relevant for experimentSickinger et al. (2012). The dependence (29) of the CPR on the phase and applied field is the same as in our previous studyGoldobin et al. (2011). The difference is in the formulas (28) for and .

## References

- Goldobin et al. (2011) E. Goldobin, D. Koelle, R. Kleiner, and R. G. Mints, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 227001 (2011), 1110.2326 .
- Buzdin and Koshelev (2003) A. Buzdin and A. E. Koshelev, Phys. Rev. B 67, 220504(R) (2003), cond-mat/0305142 .
- Smilde et al. (2002) H.-J. H. Smilde, Ariando, D. H. A. Blank, G. J. Gerritsma, H. Hilgenkamp, and H. Rogalla, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 057004 (2002).
- Hilgenkamp et al. (2003) H. Hilgenkamp, Ariando, H.-J. H. Smilde, D. H. A. Blank, G. Rijnders, H. Rogalla, J. R. Kirtley, and C. C. Tsuei, Nature (London) 422, 50 (2003).
- Ariando et al. (2005) Ariando, D. Darminto, H. J. H. Smilde, V. Leca, D. H. A. Blank, H. Rogalla, and H. Hilgenkamp, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 167001 (2005).
- Scharinger et al. (2012) S. Scharinger, M. Turad, A. Stoehr, V. Leca, E. Goldobin, R. G. Mints, D. Koelle, and R. Kleiner, “Critical current vs. magnetic field dependence in ramp-zigzag Josephson junctions,” (2012), arXiv:1208.0280 [cond-mat.supr-con] .
- Sickinger et al. (2012) H. Sickinger, A. Lipman, M. Weides, R. Mints, H. Kohlstedt, D. Koelle, R. Kleiner, and E. Goldobin, Phys. Rev. Lett. (2012), (in press), arXiv:1207.3013 [cond-mat.supr-con] .
- Weides et al. (2006) M. Weides, M. Kemmler, H. Kohlstedt, R. Waser, D. Koelle, R. Kleiner, and E. Goldobin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 247001 (2006), cond-mat/0605656 .
- Weides et al. (2010) M. Weides, U. Peralagu, H. Kohlstedt, J. Pfeiffer, M. Kemmler, C. Gürlich, E. Goldobin, D. Koelle, and R. Kleiner, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 23, 095007 (2010).
- Kemmler et al. (2010) M. Kemmler, M. Weides, M. Weiler, M. Opel, S. T. B. Goennenwein, A. S. Vasenko, A. A. Golubov, H. Kohlstedt, D. Koelle, R. Kleiner, and E. Goldobin, Phys. Rev. B 81, 054522 (2010).