4.6 Article

LaBH8: Towards high-Tc low-pressure superconductivity in ternary superhydrides

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW B
卷 104, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.104.L020511

关键词

-

资金

  1. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [P 30269-N36, P 32144-N36]
  2. dCluster of the Graz University of Technology
  3. VSC3 of the Vienna University of Technology
  4. Fondo Ateneo-Sapienza 2017
  5. VSC4 of the Vienna University of Technology
  6. Fondo Ateneo-Sapienza 2018
  7. Fondo Ateneo-Sapienza 2019

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper, a new high-Tc hydride superconductor, LaBH8, is computationally predicted to have a Tc of 126 K at a pressure of 50 GPa, making it thermodynamically stable above 100 GPa and dynamically stable down to 40 GPa. LaBH8's unique structure, a ternary sodalite-like hydride, is stabilized by a metallic hydrogen sublattice supported by La-B scaffolding, allowing for a more efficient packing of atoms than in binary sodalite hydrides due to the combination of elements of different sizes.
In the last five years a large number of new high-temperature superconductors have been predicted and experimentally discovered among hydrogen-rich crystals, at pressures, which are way too high to meet any practical application. In this paper, we report the computational prediction of a hydride superconductor, LaBH8, with a T-c of 126 K at a pressure of 50 GPa, thermodynamically stable above 100 GPa, and dynamically stable down to 40 GPa, an unprecedentedly low pressure for high-T-c hydrides. LaBH8 can be seen as a ternary sodalite-like hydride, in which a metallic hydrogen sublattice is stabilized by the chemical pressure exerted by the La-B scaffolding, which achieves a more efficient packing of atoms than in binary sodalite hydrides thanks to the combination of elements with very different sizes. The proposed aufbau principle may be exploited to design high-T-c hydrides that survive at even lower pressure, through a careful choice of the elements.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据