4.6 Article

Coarsening of Folds in Hanging Drapes

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cpa.21643

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [DMS-0807347, DMS-1311833, OISE-0967140]
  2. Division Of Mathematical Sciences
  3. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [1311833] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  4. Office Of The Director
  5. Office Of Internatl Science &Engineering [967140] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We consider the elastic energy of a hanging drapea thin elastic sheet, pulled down by the force of gravity, with fine-scale folding at the top that achieves approximately uniform confinement. This example of energy-driven pattern formation in a thin elastic sheet is of particular interest because the length scale of folding varies with height. We focus on how the minimum elastic energy depends on the physical parameters. As the sheet thickness vanishes, the limiting energy is due to the gravitational force and is relatively easy to understand. Our main accomplishment is to identify the scaling law of the correction due to positive thickness. We do this by (i) proving an upper bound, by considering the energies of several constructions and taking the best; and (ii) proving an ansatz-free lower bound, which agrees with the upper bound up to a parameter-independent prefactor. The coarsening of folds in hanging drapes has also been considered in the recent physics literature, by using a self-similar construction whose basic cell has been called a wrinklon. Our results complement and extend that work by showing that self-similar coarsening achieves the optimal scaling law in a certain parameter regime, and by showing that other constructions (involving lateral spreading of the sheet) do better in other regions of parameter space. Our analysis uses a geometrically linear Foppl-von Karman model for the elastic energy, and is restricted to the case when Poisson's ratio is 0. (C) 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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