- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Materials

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Capillary control of collapse in soft composite columns

Marc Suñé*

John S. Wettlaufer†

  • Nordita, Royal Institute of Technology and Stockholm University, Hannes Alfvéns väg 12, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden

  • Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520, USA and Nordita, Royal Institute of Technology and Stockholm University, Hannes Alfvéns väg 12, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden

  • *marc.sune.simon@su.se
  • †john.wettlaufer@su.se; john.wettlaufer@yale.edu
PDF

Phys. Rev. Materials 5, 055603 – Published 20 May, 2021

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.5.055603

Abstract

Euler buckling is the elastic instability of a column subjected to longitudinal compression forces at its ends. The buckling instability occurs when the compressing load reaches a critical value, and an infinitesimal fluctuation leads to a large amplitude deflection. Since Euler's original study, this process has been extensively examined in homogeneous, isotropic, linear-elastic solids. Here, we examine the nature of the buckling in inhomogeneous soft composite materials. In particular, we consider a soft host with liquid inclusions both large and small relative to the elastocapillarity length, which lead to softening and stiffening, respectively, of a homogeneous composite. However, by imposing a gradient of the inclusion volume fraction or by varying the inclusion size we can deliberately manipulate the spatial structure of the composite properties of a column and thereby control the nature of Euler buckling.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (59)

  1. L. Euler, Methodus Inveniendi Lineas Curvas Maximi Minimive Proprietate Gaudentes Sivesolutio Problematis Isoperimetrici Latissimo Sensu Accepti (Marc-Michel Bousquet, Lausanne, Geneva, 1744).
  2. L. Euler, Memoires de l'Académie de Berlin Vol. 13 (Berlin, Germany, 1759), pp. 487–488.
  3. J. L. Lagrange, Miscellanea Taurinensia 5, 123 (1770).
  4. S. O. Erbil, U. Hatipoglu, C. Yanik, M. Ghavami, A. B. Ari, M. Yuksel, and M. S. Hanay, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 046101 (2020).
  5. S. Timoshenko and J. Gere, Theory of Elastic Stability, second ed. (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1963).
  6. S. Nezamabadi, J. Yvonnet, H. Zahrouni, and M. Potier-Ferry, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 198, 2099 (2009).
  7. L. Gong, S. Kyriakides, and N. Triantafyllidis, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 53, 771 (2005).
  8. N. Triantafyllidis, M. D. Nestorović, and M. W. Schraad, J. Appl. Mech. 73, 505 (2005).
  9. G. deBotton, I. Hariton, and E. Socolsky, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 54, 533 (2006).
  10. M. Jamal, M. Midani, N. Damil, and M. Potier-Ferry, Int. J. Solids Struct. 36, 441 (1999).
  11. J. Michel, O. Lopez-Pamies, P. P. Castañeda, and N. Triantafyllidis, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 55, 900 (2007).
  12. A. Goriely, R. Vandiver, and M. Destrade, Proc. R. Soc. London A 464, 3003 (2008).
  13. E. Lifshitz, A. Kosevich, and L. Pitaevskii, Theory of Elasticity, third ed., edited by E. Lifshitz, A. Kosevich, and L. Pitaevskii (Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, 1986), pp. 38–86.
  14. P. P. Castañeda and P. Suquet, Nonlinear composites, Advances in Applied Mechanics Volume 34, edited by E. van der Giessen and T. Y. Wu (Elsevier, 1997), pp. 171–302.
  15. G. Kirchhoff, J. F. Reine. Angew. Math. (Crelle) 56, 285 (1859).
  16. G. Kirchhoff, Vorlesungen über Mathematische Physik, Mechanik (B. G. Teubner, Leipzig, 1876).
  17. A. Clebsch, Theorie der Elasticität Fester Körper (B. G. Teubner, Leipzig, 1862).
  18. A. Clebsch, Théorie de l'Elasticité des Corps Solides (Translation of Ref. [17] by Saint-Venant & Flamant, Dunod, Paris, 1883).
  19. B. D. Coleman, E. H. Dill, M. Lembo, Z. Lu, and I. Tobias, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 121, 339 (1993).
  20. S. Mora, T. Phou, J.-M. Fromental, L. M. Pismen, and Y. Pomeau, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 214301 (2010).
  21. L. Ducloué, O. Pitois, J. Goyon, X. Chateau, and G. Ovarlez, Soft Matter 10, 5093 (2014).
  22. R. W. Style, R. Boltyanskiy, B. Allen, K. E. Jensen, H. P. Foote, J. S. Wettlaufer, and E. R. Dufresne, Nat. Phys. 11, 82 (2015).
  23. R. W. Style, J. S. Wettlaufer, and E. R. Dufresne, Soft Matter 11, 672 (2015).
  24. F. Mancarella, R. W. Style, and J. S. Wettlaufer, Proc. R. Soc. London A 472, 20150853 (2016).
  25. J. D. Eshelby and R. E. Peierls, Proc. R. Soc. London A 241, 376 (1957).
  26. H. Peisker, J. Michels, and S. N. Gorb, Nat. Commun. (2013).
  27. M. Schmitt, T. H. Büscher, S. N. Gorb, and H. Rajabi, J. Exp. Biol. 221, jeb173047 (2018).
  28. M. Rüggeberg, T. Speck, O. Paris, C. Lapierre, B. Pollet, G. Koch, and I. Burgert, Proc. R. Soc. London B 275, 2221 (2008).
  29. T. Speck and I. Burgert, Annu. Rev. Mater. Res. 41, 169 (2011).
  30. A. Fritsch and C. Hellmich, J. Theor. Biol. 244, 597 (2007).
  31. N. H. Mendelson, Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 46, 341 (1982).
  32. M. J. Jaffe and A. W. Galston, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 19, 417 (1968).
  33. A. Goriely, The Mathematics and Mechanics of Biological Growth (Springer, New York, 2017), pp. 63–96.
  34. A. Goriely, The Mathematics and Mechanics of Biological Growth (Springer, New York, 2017), pp. 97–123.
  35. R. E. Goldstein and A. Goriely, Phys. Rev. E 74, 010901(R) (2006).
  36. A. Goriely, The Mathematics and Mechanics of Biological Growth (Springer, New York, 2017), pp. 125–172.
  37. R. E. Caflisch and J. H. Maddocks, Proc.-R. Soc. Edinburgh, Sect. A: Math. 99, 1 (1984).
  38. J. H. Maddocks, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 85, 311354 (1984).
  39. S. S. Antman and G. Rosenfeld, SIAM Rev. 20, 513 (1978).
  40. Z. Hashin, J. Appl. Mech. 29, 143 (1962).
  41. Z. Hashin and S. Shtrikman, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 11, 127 (1963).
  42. R. Christensen and K. Lo, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 27, 315 (1979).
  43. S. Mora, C. Maurini, T. Phou, J.-M. Fromental, B. Audoly, and Y. Pomeau, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 114301 (2013).
  44. R. W. Style, R. Boltyanskiy, Y. Che, J. S. Wettlaufer, L. A. Wilen, and E. R. Dufresne, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 066103 (2013).
  45. N. Nadermann, C.-Y. Hui, and A. Jagota, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 110, 10541 (2013).
  46. X. Xu, A. Jagota, and C.-Y. Hui, Soft Matter 10, 4625 (2014).
  47. S. Mora, M. Abkarian, H. Tabuteau, and Y. Pomeau, Soft Matter 7, 10612 (2011).
  48. R. W. Style and E. R. Dufresne, Soft Matter 8, 7177 (2012).
  49. F. Mancarella, R. W. Style, and J. S. Wettlaufer, Soft Matter 12, 2744 (2016).
  50. F. Mancarella and J. S. Wettlaufer, Soft Matter 13, 945 (2017).
  51. T. Mori and K. Tanaka, Acta Metall. 21, 571 (1973).
  52. In order to benchmark our results for heterogeneous elastic rods against the constant Young's modulus case, we have to assume an additional constraint associated with the fact that the bending shapes are defined up to a constant. Here we impose the condition that the reference case Eqs. (44), and the heterogeneous elastic rod Eqs. (55) and (58) have the same potential energy as given by Eq. (27).
  53. The critical loads for the buckling modes in Fig. 5, γ′=0.1, are—MSW in the first place, DT second: Γcr(1)=6.785(4),7.344(9);Γcr(2)=27.104(2),29.557(6), for ϕ0=0.6; and Γcr(1)=8.265(4),8.427(8);Γcr(2)=33.059(4),33.778(8) for ϕ0=0.3.
  54. C. Bender and S. Orszag, Advanced Mathematical Methods for Scientists and Engineers I (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1999).
  55. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.5.055603 for further details of the perturbative calculations.
  56. The numerical results for the critical forces corresponding to the first two buckling modes of a polar rod with {γ0′=2,γ1′=0.01,ϕ=0.4} are Γcr(1)=10.601(6) and Γcr(2)=41.265(1) (DT), and Γcr(1)=10.502(6) and Γcr(2)=40.549(2) (MSW).
  57. H. Hofhuis, D. Moulton, T. Lessinnes, A.-L. Routier-Kierzkowska, R. J. Bomphrey, G. Mosca, H. Reinhardt, P. Sarchet, X. Gan, M. Tsiantis, Y. Ventikos, S. Walker, A. Goriely, R. Smith, and A. Hay, Cell 166, 222 (2016).
  58. J. Y. Kim, Z. Liu, B. M. Weon, T. Cohen, C.-Y. Hui, E. R. Dufresne, and R. W. Style, Sci. Adv. 6, eaaz0418 (2020).
  59. E. Riva, M. I. N. Rosa, and M. Ruzzene, Phys. Rev. B 101, 094307 (2020).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Materials 5, 055603– Published 20 May, 2021
  • Received 28 May 2020
  • Revised 29 January 2021
  • Accepted 23 April 2021
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by Bibsam.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation