Distortion, metastability and breaking in charge-density wave transport: Recent experiments on niobium triselenide, suggesting a new mean-field approach

  • J. C. Gill
V. Hysteresis and Metastability
Part of the Lecture Notes in Physics book series (LNP, volume 217)


Some quantities relevant to mean-field models of charge-density wave (CDW) motion have been measured in NbSe3 between 144K and 60K. Data are presented on the threshold field ET, including the contribution from breaking (phase-slip) at the current terminals; on the increase of Frohlich current with field E, confirming the predicted variation as (E-ET)3/2 near threshold; and on the conduction due to transitions between metastable distorted states, and thus on the elastic modulus of the CDW. It is tentatively concluded that, at least between 60K and 90K, the conduction near threshold is restricted mainly by the need to maintain phase-slip at the boundaries of regions, perhaps pinned at surfaces, which do not join in the general motion. A new mean-field model, mathematically equivalent to those suggested by Fisher and by Sneddon, but related also to the phenomenological model of Tua and Zawadowski, is proposed to describe this.


Elastic Modulus Voltage Terminal Threshold Field Interference Phenomenon Switching Phenomenon 
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.
    H. Frohlich, Proc. Roy. Soc. A L22, 296 (1954).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    see, e.g., the reviews by G. Gruner, Comments on Solid State Physics 10, 183 (1983), and N. P. Ong, Can. J. Phys. 60, 757 (1982).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Bardeen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 42, 1498 (1979), and 45, 1978 (1980).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    S. G. Chung, Phys. Rev. B 29, 6977 (1984)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    G. Grüner, A. Zawadoski and P. M. Chaikin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 46, 511 (1981).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. Richard, P. Monceau and M. Renard, Phys. Rev. B 25, 948 (1982).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. C. Gill, Solid State Commun. 39, 1203 (1981).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    K. K. Fung and J. W. Steeds, Phys. Rev. Lett. 45, 1696 (1980).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    T. Tamegai, K. Tsutsumi, S. Kagoshima, Y. Kanai, M. Tani, H. Tomozawa, M. Sato, K. Tsuji, J. Harada, M. Sakata and T. Nakajima, Solid State Commun. (in press).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    N. P. Ong, G. Verma and K. Maki, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 663 (1984)Google Scholar
  11. 10a.
    also J. C. Gill and A. W. Higgs, Solid State Commun. 48, 709 (1983).Google Scholar
  12. 11.
    L. Sneddon, M. C. Cross and D. S. Fisher, Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 292 (1982).Google Scholar
  13. 12.
    H. Matsukawa and H. Takayama, Solid State Commun. (in press).Google Scholar
  14. 13.
    D. S. Fisher, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 1486 (1983).Google Scholar
  15. 14.
    L. Sneddon (preprint).Google Scholar
  16. 15.
    P. F. Tua and A. Zawadowski, Solid State Commun. 49, 19 (1984).Google Scholar
  17. 16.
    J. C. Gill, Solid State Commun. 44, 1041 (1982).Google Scholar
  18. 17.
    A. Zettl and G. Grüner, Phys. Rev. B 26, 2298 (1982); also R. P. Hall and A. Zettl, preprint.Google Scholar
  19. 18.
    J. C. Gill, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. 81, 791 (1982).Google Scholar
  20. 19.
    I. Batistić, A. Bjeliš and L. P. Gorkov (preprint) consider the case of current terminals covering the ends of the crystal, and predict that phase-slip will occur some distance inside it, giving a contribution to ET varying approximately as l −1.23. Whether the dependence in the present experiments, where contact was to one side of the crystal, is significantly different from this is uncertain, as there are indications that Vs is somewhat contact-dependent.Google Scholar
  21. 20.
    P. Monceau, M. Renard, J. Richard, M. C. Saint Lager, H. Salva and Z. Z. Wang, Phys. Rev. B 28, 1646 (1983), conclude that the frequency observed corresponds to passage through half-wavelengths. The values of Ic and νin figure 2 for E less than 1.5 ET give Ic/Sν ≈ 21 A cm−2MHz−1,, which appears to agree with that conclusion. However, it is evident that current then flows only through part of the cross-sectional area S, and that the true ratio of current density to ν is greater, possibly by a factor 2.Google Scholar
  22. 21.
    M. Oda and M. Ido, Solid State Commun. 44, 1535 (1982)Google Scholar
  23. 22.
    P. A. Lee and T. M. Rice, Phys. Rev. B 19, 3970 (1979)Google Scholar
  24. 23.
    J. C. Gill, Proceedings of the International Symposium on Nonlinear Transport and Related Phenomena in Inorganic Quasi One-Dimensional Conductors, Hokkaido University, 1983: p. 139. The concentration of distortion near the current terminals noted in this paper resulted from the use of pulses shorter than the characteristic time T, the large value of which in long specimens was not then appreciated.Google Scholar
  25. 24.
    J. C. Gill, J. Phys. F 10, L81 (1980).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. C. Gill
    • 1
  1. 1.H. H. Wills Physics LaboratoryUniversity of BristolBristolEngland

Personalised recommendations