corner
corner
APS » Journals » Phys. Rev. Lett. » Volume 80 » Issue 2
< Previous Article | Next Article >

Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 329–332 (1998)

Quasistatic Cracks and Minimal Energy Surfaces

Download: PDF (108 kB) Buy this article Export: BibTeX or EndNote (RIS)

V. I. Räisänen1,2, E. T. Seppala1, M. J. Alava1,3,4, and P. M. Duxbury4
1Laboratory of Physics, Helsinki University of Technology, P. O. Box 1100, HUT 02015, Finland
2ICA1, University of Stuttgart, Pfaffenwaldring 27, D-70569 Stuttgart, Germany
3NORDITA, Blegdamsvej 17, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark
4Department of Physics/Astronomy and Center for Fundamental Materials Research, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824-1116

Received 24 July 1997; published in the issue dated 12 January 1998

We compare the roughness of minimal energy (ME) surfaces and scalar “quasistatic” fracture (SQF) surfaces. Two-dimensional ME and SQF surfaces have the same roughness scaling, w∼Lζ ( L is the system size) with ζ = 2/3. The 3d ME and SQF results at strong disorder are consistent with the random-bond Ising exponent ζ(d≥3)≈0.21(5-d) ( d is the bulk dimension). However, 3d SQF surfaces are rougher than ME surfaces due to a larger prefactor. ME surfaces undergo a “weakly rough” to “algebraically rough” transition in 3d, suggesting a similar behavior in fracture.

© 1998 The American Physical Society

URL:
http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.80.329
DOI:
10.1103/PhysRevLett.80.329
PACS:
62.20.Mk, 03.40.Dz, 46.30.Nz, 81.40.Np
 
< Previous Article | Next Article >