4.7 Article

The shapes of physical trefoil knots

期刊

EXTREME MECHANICS LETTERS
卷 43, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.eml.2021.101172

关键词

Mechanics of knots; Geometric knot theory; X-ray tomography; Finite element modeling

资金

  1. Fonds National de la Recherche, Luxembourg [12439430]
  2. Swiss National Science Foundation [200020-18218]
  3. [2019-60059]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study compares the equilibrium shapes of physical and ideal trefoil knots, revealing similarities and differences. The shape of physical knots is influenced by elasticity and may have localized elastic deformation regions that could compromise the strength of the knot.
We perform a compare-and-contrast investigation between the equilibrium shapes of physical and ideal trefoil knots, both in closed and open configurations. Ideal knots are purely geometric abstractions for the tightest configuration tied in a perfectly flexible, self-avoiding tube with an inextensible centerline and undeformable cross-sections. Here, we construct physical realizations of tight trefoil knots tied in an elastomeric rod, and use X-ray tomography and 3D finite element simulation for detailed characterization. Specifically, we evaluate the role of elasticity in dictating the physical knot?s overall shape, self-contact regions, curvature profile, and cross-section deformation. We compare the shape of our elastic knots to prior computations of the corresponding ideal configurations. Our results on tight physical knots exhibit many similarities to their purely geometric counterparts, but also some striking dissimilarities that we examine in detail. These observations raise the hypothesis that regions of localized elastic deformation, not captured by the geometric models, could act as precursors for the weak spots that compromise the strength of knotted filaments. (C) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

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

4.7
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