1. Introduction
2. Experimental
2.1. Sample preparation of round strand
Fig. 1. (a) Structure of the round strand: 3-D structure model (left) and the cross section (right), and (b) Structural configuration of the MOVCD REBCO tape. |
Table 1. Main Specifications of a Round Strand. |
| Parameters | Value |
|---|---|
| Thickness of tapes | 0.09 mm |
| Width of tapes | 2 mm |
| Thickness of REBCO layer | 3.1 μm |
| Number of tapes | 20 |
| Critical current (77 K, self-field) | ∼70-90 A |
| Tensile Strain | 0.45% |
| Tensile Stress | >550 MPa |
| Diameter of the strand | 4 mm |
| Inner diameter of copper tube | 3 mm |
| Thickness of copper tube | 0.5 mm |
| Thickness of the tape stack | 2 mm |
| width of the tape stack | 2 mm |
Fig. 2. Fabrication process of HTS round strand sample using 2G HTS tapes. |
2.2. Monotonic axial tensile testing instrument
Fig. 3. Illustration of the electrical connections and extensometer setup. |
Fig. 4. (a) 100 kN low temperature tensile testing machine, and (b) tensile test setup. |
2.3. Axial fatigue testing set up
Fig. 5. (a) 100 kN low temperature fatigue testing machine, and (b) fatigue test setup. |
3. Results and discussion
Fig. 6. The original V-I curve of sample#1 to sample#6, as well as the fitted Ic and n-values by the power law. |
3.1. Monotonic axial tensile testing results
Fig. 7. (a) Normalized critical current versus axial tensile stresses for different samples, (b) n-value versus axial stress, (c) Axial tensile stresses and normalized critical currents as a function of the axial tensile strain, and (d) Axial tensile stresses versus the axial tensile strain for different samples. |
Table 2. The detailed experimental results of the round strand samples. |
| Parameters of 95% Ic0 | Sample#1 | Sample#2 | Sample#3 | Average value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Critical tensile stress (MPa) | ∼382 | ∼300 | ∼350 | ∼344 |
| Critical tensile strain (%) | ∼0.53 | ∼0.4 | ∼0.44 | ∼0.47 |
3.2. Axial fatigue testing results
Fig. 8. (a) Normalized critical current as a function of the number of axial tensile cycles at different peak stresses, (b) The n-value of different samples, and (c) Fracture photo of sample#4 at near the upper terminal. |
4. Microscopic characterization
Fig. 9. Microscopic cross section of (a) sample#1, (b) sample#2, (c) sample#4 and (d) sample#6. |
Fig. 10. Microscopic longitudinal section of (a) sample#1, (b) sample#2, (c) sample#4 and (d) sample#6. |
Fig. 11. Microscopic cross section of (a) tensile sample#1, (b) tensile sample#2, (c) fatigue sample#4, and (d) fatigue sample#6. |
Fig. 12. Microscopic longitudinal section of (a) tensile sample#1, (b) tensile sample#2, (c) fatigue sample#4, and (d) fatigue sample#6. |

