This paper develops homogenized bending shell theories from 3D nonlinear elasticity, accounting for multiple small parameters related to material scales and shell thickness, resulting in different asymptotic models.
Contribution
It introduces a multiscale homogenization approach for nonlinear shell models considering three small parameters, expanding the theoretical framework for complex materials.
Findings
01
Derivation of various asymptotic shell theories based on parameter ratios
02
Inclusion of multiple homogenization scales in shell modeling
03
Extension of nonlinear elasticity to multiscale shell structures
Abstract
We derive homogenized bending shell theories starting from three dimensional nonlinear elasticity. The original three dimensional model contains three small parameters: the two homogenization scales ε and ε2 of the material properties and the thickness h of the shell. Depending on the asymptotic ratio of these three parameters, we obtain different asymptotic theories.
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvanced Mathematical Modeling in Engineering · Composite Material Mechanics · Advanced Numerical Methods in Computational Mathematics
Full text
A homogenization bending shell theory for multiscale materials from 3D nonlinear elasticity
Tiziana Durante111
Dipartimento di Ingegneria dell’Informazione ed Elettrica e Matematica Applicata, Università degli Studi di Salerno,Via Giovanni Paolo II, 132 Salerno, Italy. E-mail: [email protected]
Luisa Faella222Dipartimento di Ingegneria Elettrica e del l’Informazione “M.Scarano”,
Università degli Studi di Cassino e del Lazio Meridionale, Via G. Di Biasio n.43, 03043 Cassino (FR), Italy. E-mail: [email protected]
Pedro Hernández-Llanos333
Instituto de Ciencias de la Ingeniería, Universidad de O’Higgins, Avenida Libertador Bernardo O’Higgins 611, 2841935 Rancagua, Chile. E-mail: [email protected](corresponding author)
Ravi Prakash444Departamento de Matemáticas, Facultad de Ciencias Físicas y Matemáticas, Universidad de Concepción, Avenida Esteban Iturra s/n, Barrio Universitario, Casilla 160-C, Concepción, Chile. Email: [email protected]
Abstract
We derive homogenized bending shell theories starting from three dimensional nonlinear elasticity.
The original three dimensional model contains three small parameters: the two homogenization scales ε and ε2 of the material properties and thickness h of the shell. Depending on the asymptotic ratio of these three parameters, we obtain different limiting behaviours.
Since the early ’90s the search for lower dimensional models describing thin three-dimensional structures has been of great interest for its implications in the mechanics of materials. The nonlinear models for plates and shells for homogeneous material have been derived rigorously by means of Γ-convergence [3], starting from three dimensional nonlinear elasticity. Hierarchies of limit models have been deduced by Γ−convergence, depending on the scaling of the elastic energy Jh with respect to the thickness parameter h∈(0,1]. More precisely, we note that Jh∼1 for membrane, Jh∼h2 for bending and Jh∼h4 for von-Kármán regime.
The first results in that direction for membrane regime for plates and shells can be found in [13] and [14], respectively. The nonlinear bending theory for plates was derived in [8] and the corresponding theory for shells in [7].
Recently, models of homogenized bending plates and shells for heterogeneous material were derived by simultaneous use of homogenization and dimensional reduction techniques in the special case when relation between thickness of the body h and oscillations of the material ε(h) is given by the existence of limit
[TABLE]
with some assumptions on stored energy density. Different limit models can be obtained depending on values of γ (γ=0, γ∈(0,+∞) and γ=+∞) see e.g. [10, 11, 12] and [16].
In [4], authors consider scaling of energy corresponding to bending plates theory by introducing two different scales for the oscillation of material, namely, ε(h),ε2(h). More precisely, they assume existence of limits
[TABLE]
In fact, they consider various cases of i.e.γ1=0 and γ2=+∞; γ1∈(0,+∞) and γ2=+∞; γ1=+∞ and γ2=+∞.
In this paper, we deduce a multiscale version of the results in [12] and it is a natural follow up of [4]. We consider the scaling of energy corresponding to bending shell theory and assume that the shell Sh⊂R3 of thickness h undergoes the action of two homogeneity scales ε(h) and ε2(h) according to the assumption (1.1). The rescaled nonlinear elastic energy is given by
[TABLE]
for every deformation v∈W1,2(Sh;R3), where the stored energy density W is periodic in its second and third arguments and satisfies the usual assumptions in nonlinear elasticity as well as the nondegeneracy condition (see Section 4) adopted from [12] and [11]. More precisely, we consider a sequences of deformations (uh)⊂W1,2(Sh;R3) satisfying
[TABLE]
We seek to identify the effective energy associated to the rescaled elastic energies
{h2Jh(uh)} for different values of γ1 and γ2. We restrict ourselves to convex shells and our analysis requires the following approaches:
(1)
Dimension reduction techniques, in particular, the quantitative rigidity estimate and approximation schemes developed by Friesecke, James and Müller in their famous work on the derivation of nonlinear
plate theories [8].
(2)
Homogenization methods, in particular, three-scale convergence see [2, 4, 5] and [6].
We derive different asymptotic theories depending on the parameters γ1 and γ2 (see Section 4) .
The main result of our article is Theorem 4.1. Starting from a limiting deformation with belongs to the space W2,2(Sh;R3) we use the density result from [12] to construct the required recovery sequence. The paper is organized as follows: in Section 2, we introduce the definition and some properties of three-scale convergence for shells. Section 3 describes the setting of our problem and introduce the assumptions on energy density. In Section 4, we mention our main result and prove it in Section 5 deriving bounds for rescaled elastic energy depending on different values of γ1 and γ2. Finally, in Section 6, we analize the homogenized model for convex shell case.
We begin by introducing some further notation. Set Y=[−21,21)2 and we denote by Y=R2/Z2 the set Y endowed with the torus topology. For all k∈N∪{0} the set of all f∈Ck(R2) with Dαf(⋅+z)=Dαf for all z∈Z2 and all multiindices α of order up to k is denoted by Ck(Y).
We denote by C0k functions with compact support. For any open set A, we denote by L2(Y), W1,2(Y) and W1,2(A×Y) the Banach spaces obtained as closures of C∞(Y) and C∞(A,C∞(Y)) with respect to the norm in L2(Y), W1,2(Y) and W1,2(A×Y), respectively. An additional dot (e.g. in L˙2(Y)) denotes functions with average zero over Y.
2.1.1 Surfaces and shells in R3
Let h∈(0,1], κ∈(0,1) and let ω⊂R2 be a bounded domain with C3,κ boundary. Set I=(−21,21), Ωh=ω×(hI), and Ω=ω×I. From now on, S⊂R3 denotes (the relative interior of) an embedded compact connected oriented surface with boundary. For convenience we assume that S is parametrized by a single chart. More precisely, we assume that there exist an open set V⊂R3 containing the closure of S and an open set U⊂R3 containing ω×{0} and C3,κ diffeomorphism Φ:V→U such that
[TABLE]
Then ξ:ω→S, defined by ξ(z)=Φ−1(z,0), is a global C3,κ chart for S.
By Wiso2,2(S) we denote the W2,2(S) isometries of the surface S into R3. The space Wiso2,∞(S) is defined similarly.
By Theorem 2.1 in [12] we have that u∈Wiso2,2(S) is equivalent to u∘ξ∈Wg2,2(ω), for g=(∇ξ)T(∇ξ) the Riemannian metric on ω induced by ξ.
As usual, TS denotes the tangent bundle over S and NS the normal bundle. A basis of the tangent space TxS is given by
[TABLE]
where β=1,2. We view TxS as a subspace of R3 and write σ⋅τ the scalar product of both spaces.
The dual basis of the tangent space TxS is denoted by (τ1(x),τ2(x)). So by definition
[TABLE]
where δαβ is the Kronecker symbol. We frenquently indentify Tx∗(S) with Tx(S) via the scalar product.
Define the normal n:S→S2 by
[TABLE]
The orthogonal projection onto TxS is
[TABLE]
The tensor products TS⊗TS etc. are defined fiberwise. Tx∗S⊗Tx∗S will be regarded as a subspace of R3×3.
If E and F are vector spaces (or bundles) then the space of all symmetric products
[TABLE]
with a∈E and b∈F is denoted by E⊙F.
Section B of T∗S⊗T∗S will frequently regarded as maps from S into R3×3 via the embedding ι defined by ι(B)=B(TS,TS). By definition, B(TS,TS):S→R3 takes the vector fields v,w:S→R3 into the function x↦B(x)(TS(x)v(x),TS(x)w(x)).
For any vector bundle E over S we denote by L2(S,E) the space of all L2−sections of E. The spaces W1,2(S,E) etc. are defined similarly. For any vector bundle E over S with fibers Ex, we denote by L2(Y,E) the vector bundle over S with fibers L2(Y,Ex). The bundles W1,2(Y,E) etc. are defined similarly. For example, L2−sections of the bundle W1,2(Y,TS) are given by
[TABLE]
For a function f:S→R its differential df is given by df(x)τ=∇τf(x) for all τ∈TxS. Here ∇τf denotes the directional derivative of f in direction of the tangent vector τ. We extend these definitions componentwise to maps into R3. By ∇ we denote the usual gradient on R3 (or on R2).
As usual, the Weingarten map S of S is the differential of the normal, i.e.,
[TABLE]
We extend S(x) trivially to R3 by setting S(x)=S(x)TS(x).
For an immersion u:S→R3 denote by Su the Weingarten map for the surface u(S). We define its pullback to S by setting
[TABLE]
for all smooth tangent vector fields τ to S. Here by definition, u∗(Dσu)=σ for all smooth tangent vector fields σ to S. As in we will encounter the relative Weingarten map
[TABLE]
The nearest point of retraction π of a tubular neightborhood of S onto S satisfies π(x+tn(x))=x for small ∣t∣ and all x∈S. After rescaling the ambient space, we may assume that the curvature of S is as small as we please. Therefore, we may assume without loss of generality that π is well-defined on a domain containing the closure of the set {x+tn(x):x∈S,−1/2<t<1/2}, and that ∣Id+tS(x)∣∈(1/2,3/2) for all t∈(−21,21) and all x∈S.
For a subset S⊂S and h∈(0,1] we define Sh={x+tn(x):x∈S,−h/2<t<h/2}. In particular, the whole shell is, by definition,
[TABLE]
We introduce the map r=Φ∘π. Moreover, we introduce the function t:S1→R by setting t(x)=(x−π(x))⋅n(x) for all x∈S1. By virtue of Lemma 2.21 in [11] we have the following identity on S1:
[TABLE]
(Here and elsewhere we write TS(π) instead of TS∘π etc.). Hence there exists a constant C depending only on S such that
[TABLE]
Abusing notations, maps f:S→Rk will often be extended to S1 by setting f=f∘π. We extend r,TS and S in this way, too.
For functions f∈L2(S,W2,2(Y)) the expression HessY is the section of the bundle L2(Y,TS⊙TS) over S given by
[TABLE]
where (∇y2f)αβ=∂yα∂yβf. Analogously, for functions f∈L2(S×Y,W2,2(Y)) the expression HessZ is the section of the bundle L2(Y×Y,TS⊙TS) over S given by
[TABLE]
where (∇z2f)αβ=∂zα∂zβf.
For v∈L2(S,W1,2(Y;R2)) we define the section DefYv of the bundle L2(Y,T∗S⊙T∗S) by
[TABLE]
For v∈L2(S×Y,W1,2(Y;R2)) we define the section DefZv of the bundle L2(Y×Y,T∗S⊙T∗S) by
[TABLE]
Here and elsewhere ∇y is the gradient in Y with respect to the variable y and ∇z is the grandient in Z with respect to the variable z (and not some directional derivative).
We define the map Ξ:ω×R→R3 by
[TABLE]
As in [10] we will use the diffeomorphism Θh:Ωh→Ω given by Θh(z1,z2,z3)=(z1,z2,z3/h), and for a map y:Ω→R3 we introduce the scaled gradient ∇hy=(∂1y,∂2y,h1∂3y). The counterpart of Θh on the shell is the diffeomorphism Θh:Sh→S1 given by
[TABLE]
It is easy to see that
[TABLE]
For given u:Sh→R3 we define its pulled back version u:Ωh→R3 by u=u∘Ξ. We also define its rescaled version y:S1→R3 by y(Θh)=u on Sh and we define the pulled back version y of this map by y=y∘Ξ. Then it is easy to see that
[TABLE]
We define the rescaled gradient ∇hy of y by the condition
Finally, to express ∇hy in terms of ∇y, we insert the definition of y into (2.4) and use (2.1) to find
[TABLE]
2.1.2 Three-scale convergence on shells
Recall that we extend the chart r trivially from S to S1. We make the following definitions:
(i)
A sequence (fh)⊂L2(S1) is said to converge weakly three-scale on S1 to the function f∈L2(S1,L2(Y×Y)) as h→0, provided that the sequence (fh) is bounded in L2(S1) and
[TABLE]
for all φ∈Cc0(S1,C0(Y×Y)).
(ii)
We say that fh strongly three-scale converges to f if, in addition,
[TABLE]
(iii)
For a sequence (fh)⊂L2(S1) and for f1∈L2(S1×Y×Y) with ∫Yf1(⋅,⋅,z)dz=0 for almost every x∈S1×Y, we write fh⇀osc,Zf1 provided that
[TABLE]
for all φ∈C0∞(S1;C∞(Y)), all ρ∈C∞(Y) with ∫Yρ(z)dz=0.
We write fh⇀3f to denote weak three-scale convergence and fh→3f to denote strong three-scale convergence. If fh⇀3f then fh⇀∫Y∫Yf(⋅,y,z)dzdy weakly in L2. If fh is bounded in L2(S1) then it has a subsequence which converges weakly three-scale to some f∈L2(S1;L2(Y×Y)). These and other facts can be deduced from the corresponding results on planar domains (cf. [1] and [17]) by means of the following simple observations.
Defining f~=fh∘Ξ and f~(Ξ(z),y,w), and taking
[TABLE]
a change of variable shows that (2.8) is equivalent to
[TABLE]
where z′ is the projection of z onto R2.
The following Lemma can be also adapted to the curved setting following the same pattern as above (writting just S1 instead of Ω).
Lemma 2.1**.**
(i)
Let f0 and f1∈H1(Ω) such that fh⇀f0 weakly in H1(Ω) then there exist ϕ∈L2(Ω;H˙1(Y;R3)) and ψ∈L2(Ω×Y;H˙1(Y;R3×3)) such that
[TABLE]
(ii)
Let f0 and fh∈H1(Ω) be such that fh⇀f0 weakly in H1(Ω) and assume that ∇fh⇀3∇f0+∇yϕ+∇zψ for some ϕ∈L2(Ω;H˙1(Y;R3)) and ψ∈L2(Ω×Y;H˙1(Y;R3×3)). Then ε2fh⇀osc,Zψ.
(iii)
Let f0 and fh∈H1(Ω) be such that fh⇀f0 weakly in H2(Ω) and assume that ∇fh⇀3∇f0+∇yϕ+∇zψ for some ϕ∈L2(Ω;H˙1(Y;R3)) and ψ∈L2(Ω×Y;H˙1(Y;R3×3)). Moreover, if ∇2fh⇀3∇2f0+∇y2ϕ+∇z2ψ for some ϕ∈L2(Ω;H˙2(Y;R3)) and ψ∈L2(Ω×Y;H˙2(Y;R3×3)). Then
ε4fh⇀osc,Zψ.
Proof.
The proof of (i) can be found in Theorem 1.2 in [2]. The proof of (ii) is an extension of Lemma 3.7 in [10], and that of (iii) is similar.
∎
3 Elasticity framework and intermediate results
Throught this paper we assume that ε:(0,1)→(0,1) denotes a function such that the limits
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
exist in [0,∞]. We will frequently write ε instead of ε(h), but always with the understanding that ε depends on h. There are five possible regimes: γ1,γ2=+∞; 0<γ1<+∞ and γ2=+∞; γ1=0 and γ2=+∞; γ1=0 and 0<γ2<+∞; γ1=0 and γ2=0. We focus initially on the first three regimes, that is on the cases in which γ2=+∞, after the case γ1=0;γ2∈(0,+∞) and then the last one.
From now on, we consider R3×3: set of all real square matrices of order 3, the set of all
rotations in R3
[TABLE]
and we fix a Borel measurable energy density
[TABLE]
with the following properties:
∙
W(⋅,y,z,F) is continuous for almost every y,z∈R2 and F∈R3×3.
∙
W(x,⋅,⋅,F) is Y×Y−periodic for all x∈S1 and almost every F∈R3×3.
∙
For all (x,y,z)∈S1×Y×Y we have W(x,y,z,I)=0 and W(x,y,z,RF)=W(x,y,z,F) for all F∈R3×3, R∈SO(3).
∙
There exist constants 0<α≤β and ρ>0 such that for all (x,y,z)∈S1×Y×Y we have
[TABLE]
∙
For each (x,y,z)∈S1×Y×Y there exists a quadratic form Q(x,y,z,⋅):R3×3→R such that
[TABLE]
Clearly Q(⋅,y,z,⋅) is continuous for almost every (y,z)∈R2×R2 and Q(x,⋅,⋅,G) is Y×Y−periodic for all x∈S1 and all G∈R3×3.
The elastic energy per unit thickness of a deformation uh∈H1(Sh;R3) of the shell Sh is given by
[TABLE]
In order to express the elastic energy in terms of the new variables, we associate with y:S1→R3 the energy
[TABLE]
By a change of variables we have
[TABLE]
where again yh(Θh)=uh. Using (2.6) and (2.7) we see that there exists a constant C such that
[TABLE]
We will consider the following result that appears in Proposition 4.2, [11].
Proposition 3.1**.**
Let (wh) be a bounded sequence in H2(S;R3) such that h1qwh is bounded in L2(S;T∗S⊗T∗S). Then there exist w0∈H2(S), w1∈L2(S;H˙2(Y;R3)) and B∈L2(S,L˙2(Y;T∗S⊗T∗S)) such that, after passing to a subsequence, qwh/h⇀2B and Hesswh⇀2Hessw0+HessYw1. Set Bw=∫YB(⋅,y)dy. Then the following condition are true:
(i)
If h≫ε2 then there exists a unique v∈L2(S;H˙1(Y;R2)) such that
[TABLE]
(ii)
If h∼ε2 and if we set γ21=limh→0hε2, then there exists a unique v∈L2(S;H˙1(Y;R2)) such that
[TABLE]
(iii)
If h≪ε2, then there exists a unique v∈L2(S;H˙1(Y;R2)) such that
[TABLE]
We adapt Lemma 4.3 in [11] to our case for γ1,γ2∈[0,+∞] in order to obtain the following result:
Lemma 3.1**.**
Let (wh)∈H1(S1;R3) be such that
[TABLE]
Then there exist a map w0∈H1(S;R3) and a field Hγ1,γ2∈L2(S×I×Y×Y;R3×3) of the form
[TABLE]
for some w1∈L2(S×I;W1,2(Y)), w2∈L2(S×I×Y;W1,2(Y)) and w3∈L2(S×Y×Y;W1,2(I)), such that, up to a subsequence, wh→w0 in L2 and
[TABLE]
Here, τ3=n, w0 is the weak limit in H1(S) of ∫Iwh(x+tn(x))dt and H^γ1,γ2∈L2(S1×Y×Y;R3×3) is defined by H^γ1,γ2(x,y,z)=Hγ1,γ2(π(x),t(x),y,z).
Proof. The hypotheses imply, e.g. by (2.7) , that the wh are uniformly bounded in H1(S1), so up to a subsequence wh⇀:w0 in H1(S1). Set w~h=wh∘Ξ, so clearly w~h is uniformly bounded in L2(Ω). From the uniform L2−bound on ∇hwh and from (2.5) we deduce that ∇~hw~h is uniformly bounded in L2(Ω). Hence there is w~0∈H1(Ω;R3) with ∂3w~0=0 such that w~h⇀w~0 weakly in H1(Ω;R3); clearly w~0=w0∘Ξ, so (since ∂3w~0=0) in particular w0 is the trivial extension of a map defined on S.
In the case γ1=0 and γ2=+∞ by uniform boundedness in L2(Ω), there exist (see Theorem 3.2 in [4]) w~1∈L2(Ω;W1,2(Y))), w~2∈L2(Ω×Y;W1,2(Y)) and w3∈L2(ω×Y×Y;W1,2(I)) with ∂yiw3=∂ziw3=0 for i=1,2 such that, up to the extraction of a (not relabeled) subsequence,
[TABLE]
By (2.5) the left-hand side equals (∇hw)(Ξ)∇Ξ(Θ~h−1). As ∇Ξ(Θ~h−1) converges uniformly on S1 to (∂1ξ,∂2ξ,n(ξ)) (extended trivially in the x3−direction), we conclude:
[TABLE]
On the right-hand side we use
[TABLE]
and (∂αw~0)∘Ξ−1=dw0(τα) to obtain the claim when γ1=γ2=+∞, after defining (w1)i=(w~1∘r)⋅τi, (w2)i=(w~2∘r)⋅τi and (w3)i=(w3∘r)⋅τi for i=1,2,3. The other four cases are proven similarly using Theorem 3.2 in [4] in where we are able to cover the two last cases(γ1=γ2=0; γ1=0and0<γ2<+∞) which are valid for plates and are extended easily to shells too.
□
3.1 Asymptotic energy functionals
Next we will introduce the asymptotic energy functionals. In order to do so, we need the definition of the relaxation fields and the cell formulae. Recall that a⊙b=21(a⊗b+b⊗a). We make the following definitions:
[TABLE]
and for (ζ,η,φ,μ)∈L2(S,D(U0,+∞)) define
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and for (ζ,η,ρ,c)∈L2(S,D(U+∞,+∞) define
[TABLE]
For γ1∈(0,∞)
[TABLE]
and for (ζ,η,ρ)∈L2(S,D(Uγ1,+∞)) define
[TABLE]
By embedding D(U0,+∞) trivially into L2(S,D(U0,∞)), we can regard U0,+∞ as a map from D(U0,+∞) into L2(S,L2(I×Y×Y,Rsym3×3)).
For γ2∈(0,+∞) set
[TABLE]
and for (ζ,η,φ,μ)∈L2(S,D(U0,γ2)) define
[TABLE]
For each x∈S the fiberwise action U0,+∞(x) of U0,+∞ is
[TABLE]
for all (ζ,η,φ,μ)∈D(U0,+∞).
For each x∈S we define L0,+∞(x)(I×Y×Y)=U0,+∞(x)(D(U0,+∞)), i.e.,
[TABLE]
This is a subspace of L2(I×Y×Y,Rsym3×3). We denote by L0,+∞(I×Y×Y) the vector bundle over S with fibers L0,+∞(x)(I×Y×Y); in what follows we will frequently omit the index (x) for the fibers. The bundle Lγ1,+∞(I×Y×Y), for γ1∈(0,∞] and L0,γ2(I×Y×Y), for γ2∈(0,∞) are defined analogously. The elements of these spaces are the relaxation fields.
For γ1∈[0,+∞], γ2=+∞ and x∈S, we define Qγ1,+∞(x,⋅);Tx∗S⊗Tx∗S→R by setting
[TABLE]
Here the infimum is taken over all U∈Lγ1,+∞(x)(I×Y×Y) and all p∈Tx∗S⊗Tx∗S.
For γ1=0, γ2∈(0,+∞) and x∈S, we define Q0,γ2(x,⋅);Tx∗S⊗Tx∗S→R by setting
[TABLE]
Here the infimum is taken over all U∈L0,γ2(x)(I×Y×Y) and all p∈Tx∗S⊗Tx∗S.
Note that Qγ1,+∞(x,q)=Qγ1,+∞(x,symq) for all x∈S and all q∈Tx∗S⊗Tx∗S. For x∈S and q∈Tx∗S⊙Tx∗S define the homogeneous relaxation (cf. [15]):
[TABLE]
Then it is easy to see that
[TABLE]
where the infimum is taken over all ζ∈W1,2(Y,R2), all φ∈W2,2(Y), all η∈L2(I×Y;W1,2(Y;R3)) and all p∈Tx∗S⊙Tx∗S. In the case when the material is homogeneous in the thickness direction, we have
[TABLE]
The analogous formula holds for Q0,γ2.
As in [12], for all x∈S and all q∈Tx∗S⊙Tx∗S we have
[TABLE]
It is not difficult to show that for all γ1∈[0,+∞], γ2=+∞ and x∈S the map Qγ1,+∞(x,⋅) is quadratic and that there exist c1,c2>0 such that for all x∈S we have
[TABLE]
For γ1∈[0,+∞] and γ2=+∞ we define Iγ1,+∞:W1,2(S;R3)→R by setting
[TABLE]
For γ2∈(0,+∞) the functional I0,γ2:W1,2(S;R3)→R is defined analogously, by replacing Qγ1,+∞ by Q0,γ2.
4 Main result
For a given sequence (uh)⊂W1,2(Sh;R3) we continue to define the sequence (yh)⊂W1,2(S1,R3) of rescaled deformations by yh(Θh)=uh. We recall the compactness result for sequences with finite bending energy, cf. Theorem 1 in [9] for a proof.
Let (uh)⊂W1,2(Sh;R3) satisfies
[TABLE]
Proposition 4.1**.**
Let (uh)⊂W1,2(Sh,R3) be such that (4.1) holds. Then there exist u∈Wiso2,2(S) such that (after passing to subsequences and extending u and n trivially to S1), as h→0 we have
[TABLE]
Here Q∈W1,2(S,SO(3)) is determined by the condition Qτ=∇τu for all smooth tangent vector fields τ along S.
We denote by Wiso2,2(S)
the set of those maps u∈Wiso2,2(S)
for which there exists (uh)⊂Wiso2,∞(S) converging strongly to u in W2,2(S). The reason to introduce this space is that we are able to construct the recovery sequence only for limiting deformations u belonging to this space. Theorem 2.1 in [12] plays an essential role in this construction. The following Γ−convergence result is our main result:
Theorem 4.1**.**
Let γ1∈[0,+∞] and γ2=+∞. Then the following are true:
(i)
Let (uh)⊂W1,2(Sh,R3) be such that (4.1) holds and such that yh−∣S1∣1∫S1yh→u strongly in L2(S1) for some u∈L2(S1,R3). Then
[TABLE]
(ii)
If, in addition, S is simply connected, then for every u∈Wiso2,2(S) there exists (uh)⊂W1,2(Sh;R3) satisfying (4.1), and such that yh→u strongly in W1,2(S1). Moreover,
[TABLE]
Furthermore, for γ1=0 and γ2∈(0,+∞) the items (i) and (ii) hold replacing Iγ1,+∞ by I0,γ2.
5 Proof of main result
5.1 Proof of lower bound
We consider a sequence (uh)⊂W1,2(Sh,R3) satisfying (4.1) and we set yh(Θh)=uh. The following lemma is analogous to Lemma 3.3 in [12] and is essentially contained in [7]. It is a consequence of Theorem 3.1 in [8] and of the arguments in [4] and [9].
Lemma 5.1**.**
Define
[TABLE]
Then there exist constants C,c>0 such that the following is true: if h≤c and u∈W1,2(Sh;R3), then there exists a map R~:ω→SO(3) which is constant on each cube x+δY with x∈δZ and there exist R~s∈W1,2(ω;R3) such that for each a∈R2 with ∣a1∣≤δ and ∣a2∣≤δ and for each ω~⊂ω with dist(ω,∂ω~)>cδ we have:
[TABLE]
Proposition 5.1**.**
Let γ1∈(0,+∞) and γ2=+∞. Let (uh)⊂W1,2(Sh;R3) satisfying (4.1) and let u∈Wiso2,2(S) such that (4.2) and (4.3) hold. Let ω~⊂R2 be a domain with C1,1 boundary whose closure is contained in ω and set S=ξ(ω~).
Denote by R~h:ω→SO(3) the piecewise constant map obtained by applying Lemma 5.1 to uh and define Rh:S1→SO(3) by Rh=R~h∘r. Define Gh∈L2(S1;R3×3) by
[TABLE]
where yh(Θh)=uh. Then there exist B∈L2(S~,T∗S~⊙T∗S~) and (ζ,η,ρ)∈L2(S~,D(Uγ1,+∞)) such that (up to passing to subsequences)
[TABLE]
Remark 5.1**.**
A similar result is true if γ1=+∞ or γ1=0. In the former case Uγ1,+∞(ζ,η,ρ) in (5.2) must be replaced by U+∞,+∞, where (ζ,η,ρ,c)∈L2(S,D(U+∞,+∞)). In the latter case, it must be replaced by U0,+∞(ζ,η,φ,μ), where (ζ,η,φ,μ)∈L2(S,D(U0,+∞)). Likewise (5.2) holds for γ1=0 and γ2∈(0,+∞).
Proof.
Define uh:S→R3 by setting
[TABLE]
Let R~sh:ω~→R3×3 be the maps obtained by applying Lemma 5.1 to uh and set Rsh=R~sh∘r. On S~h define zh via
[TABLE]
Clearly
[TABLE]
Let τ be a smooth tangent vector field along S. Then we have
[TABLE]
Observe that (2.2) implies that ∇τπ equals τ−tSτ up to a term of higher order. Using this and rewriting the problem in coordinates, one can now argue as in Theorem 4.1 in [4] to deduce the claim for γ1∈[0,+∞]. The fields Uγ1,+∞ arise, essentially, due the Lemma 3.1.
∎
The remaining proof of the lower bound follows standard arguments: truncation, Taylor expansion and lower semicontinuity of integral functional with respect the three-scale convergence. Thus one obtains a lower bound on every C1,1 bounded compactly contained subdomain ω~ of ω. Exhausting ω with a sequence of such subdomains, Theorem 4.1 (i) follows. Detail for this argument can be found in [4] and [11].
Lemma 5.2**.**
Let (yh)⊂H1(S1;R3), define Gh:S1→R3×3 by (5.1) and G be such that Gh⇀3G. Then we have
[TABLE]
We refer to [11] and [17] for a proof of Lemma 5.2 in the case in which Q is independent of z. The proof in our setting is a straightforward adaptation.
5.2 Proof of upper bound
Let us introducing the recovery sequence. Recall Lemma 3.5 in [12].
Lemma 5.3**.**
Let u∈Wiso2,∞(S) and define ν:S→S2 by
[TABLE]
Let w∈W2,∞(S,R3) and define μ∈W1,∞(S,R3) by
[TABLE]
and define the deformations vh:Sh→R3 by
[TABLE]
Define R∈W1,∞(S,SO(3)) by R=∇uTS+ν⊗n. Then there exists Yh∈L∞(Sh,R3×3) with ∣∣Yh∣∣L∞(Sh)≤Ch2 such that
[TABLE]
Remark 5.2**.**
The choice of our recovery sequences depends on the following two factors:
(i)
It considers the inhomogeneity of material.
(ii)
The energy density contains spatial variable which makes it necessary to choose a nonzero displacement w in Lemma 5.3 and whose existence is guaranteed by Proposition 2.15 in **[12]**.
Moreover, multilayered materials can be deduces as particular cases of Theorem 4.1(cf. [4] for corresponding problem for plates).
By approximation, it is enough to prove the claim for u∈Wiso2,∞(S) and, thanks also to Proposition 2.15 in [12], for all B of the form B=du⊙dw with w∈W2,∞(S,R3).
We will use the same notation as in the statement of Lemma 5.3; in particular the definition of vh in terms of w and u. Moreover, we set σα=∇ταu.
Caseγ1∈(0,+∞) and γ2=+∞. Let ζ∈C01(S,C˙1(I×Y,R2)), ρ∈C01(S,C˙1(I;C˙1(Y))) and η∈C01(S×Y,C˙1(I×Y)) and define the rescaled deformations yh:S1→R3 by the following equation on Sh:
By frame invariance of W and using (3.1), we deduce from (5.3) that
[TABLE]
pointwise on S1. From this we readily deduce
[TABLE]
**Case ** γ1=γ2=+∞. This is similar to the previous case. So we only state the formula for the recovery sequence. For ζ∈C01(S,C˙1(I×Y,R2)), ρ∈C01(S,C˙1(I;C˙1(Y))), η∈C01(S×Y,C˙1(I×Y)) and c∈C01(S,C01(I,R3)), we define yh:S1→R3 by the following equation on Sh:
[TABLE]
**Case ** γ1=0 and γ2=+∞. For ζ∈C01(S,C˙1(Y,R2)), φ∈C02(S,C˙2(Y)), η∈C01(S×Y,C˙1(I×Y)) and μ∈C01(S,C01(I×Y,R3)), we define yh:S1→R3 by the following equation on Sh:
[TABLE]
Caseγ1=0 and γ2∈(0,+∞). For ζ∈C01(S,C˙1(Y,R2)), φ∈C02(S,C˙2(Y)), η∈C01(S×Y,C˙1(I×Y)) and μ∈C01(S,C01(I×Y,R3)), we define yh:S1→R3 by the following equation on Sh:
[TABLE]
We leave the details to the reader.
□
6 Convex shells
In this section, we shall identify the Γ−limit for convex shells in the remaining case γ1=γ2=0, i.e.h≪ε2. We wish to ilustrate the stronger influence of the geometry in this case. For obtaining the limit model we shall closely follow the arguments used in [11] as follows: We work under the assumption that S is uniformly convex, i.e., there exists C>0 such that
[TABLE]
For x∈S we define a relaxation operator with the values in L2(I×Y×Y;Rsym3×3) as follows: Set D(U0,0)=L˙2(Y;Rsym2×2)×L2(I×Y;W˙1,2(Y;R3))×L2(I×Y;R3) and for all (B˙,η,μ)∈L2(S,D(U0,0)) define
[TABLE]
As usual, we introduce the vector bundle L0,0(I×Y×Y) of relaxation fields to be the range of U0,0 similarly to the bundles L0,+∞(I×Y×Y) introduced earlier. As in the previous cases, each fiber of L0,0(I×Y×Y) is a closed subspace of L2(I×Y×Y;Rsym3×3). We also define the functional I0,0:W1,2(S;R3)→R by setting
[TABLE]
with the quadratic form Q0,0(x,⋅):T∗S⊙T∗S→R given by
[TABLE]
Here the infimum is taken over all U∈L0,0(x)(I×Y×Y) and all p∈Tx∗S⊗Tx∗S.
We introduce the space
[TABLE]
By Fourier transform it can be easily seen that FL(S;C˙∞(Y)) is dense in L2(S;H˙m(Y)), for any m∈N0.
Lemma 6.1**.**
(see Lemma 6.1 in [11])
Assume (6.1) is satisfied and let B˙∈L2(S;L˙2(Y;T∗S⊗T∗S)). Then there exists unique w∈L2(S;H˙1(Y;R2)) and φ∈L2(S;L˙2(Y)) such that
[TABLE]
Moreover, if B˙ij∈FL(S;C˙∞(Y)) for every i,j=1,2 then wi∈FL(S;H˙1(Y)), for i=1,2 and φ∈FL(S;H˙1(Y)).
Theorem 6.1**.**
Under the hypotheses and with the notation of Theorem 4.1 and assuming, in addition, that S is uniformly convex and that h≪ε2, moreover, the following are true:
∙
We have
[TABLE]
∙
If, in addition, S is simply connected, then for every u∈Wiso2,2(S) there exists (uh)⊂W1,2(Sh;R3) satisfying (4.1) and such that yh→u, strongly in W1,2(S1). Moreover,
[TABLE]
Proof.
We only sketch the proof. As in Proposition 5.1 there exist B∈L2(S,T∗S⊙T∗S) and (ζ,η,φ,μ)∈L2(S,D(U0,+∞)) such that (5.2) is satisfied. Using Proposition 3.1 (iii) as well Lemma 6.1, we conclude that φ=0. Thus by Proposition 5.1 there exists (B˙,η,μ)∈L2(S,D(U0,0)) , where B˙=DefYζ and B∈L2(S,T∗S⊙T∗S) such that the maps Gh defined as in (5.1) converge weakly three-scale to
[TABLE]
Hence the lower bound part follows readily from the Lemma 5.2 and definition of the functional I0,0.
To prove the upper bound part we consider B˙ with (B˙)ij∈FL(S;C˙∞(Y)) for i,j=1,2. From Lemma 6.1 there exists z∈(FL(S;C˙(Y)))2 and φ∈FL(S;C˙∞(Y)) solving the system DefYz+φS=B˙. We choose ζ∈C01(S,C˙1(Y,R2)), η∈C01(S×Y,C˙1(I×Y)) and μ∈C01(S,C01(I×Y,R3)) and we define yh:S1→R3 by the following equation on Sh:
[TABLE]
∎
Acknowledgment
This work was inspired by the great contributions of Prof. Igor Velčić to the theory of thin structures. P. Hernández-Llanos was supported by Agencia Nacional de Investigación y Desarrollo, FONDECYT Postdoctorado 2023 grant no. 3230202. The warm hospitality at the Instituto de Ciencias de la Ingeniería of the Universidad de O’Higgins is gratefully acknowledged by P. Hernández-Llanos.
Bibliography17
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] G. Allaire, Homogenization and two-scale convergence, SIAM J. Math. Anal. 23( 6 ) (1992) 1482–1518.
2[2] G. Allaire, M. Briane, Multiscale convergence and reiterated homogenisation, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A 126 (1996) no.2 297–342.
3[3] A. Braides, Γ − limit-from Γ \Gamma- Convergence for Beginners , Oxford Lecture Ser. Math. Appl. 22 , Oxford University Press, Oxford (2002).
4[4] L. Bufford, E. Davoli and I. Fonseca, Multiscale homogenization in Kirchhoff’s nonlinear plate theory, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 25 (2015), no. 9 1765–1812. 40 no. 4 (2008) 1585–1620.
5[5] R. Ferreira, I. Fonseca, Characterization of the multiscale limit associated with bounded sequences in BV, J. Convex Anal. 19 (2012) no. 2 403–452.
6[6] I. Fonseca, E. Zappale, Multiscale relaxation of convex functionals, J. Convex Anal. 10 (2003) no.2 325–350.
7[7] G. Friesecke, R.D. James, M.G. Mora, S. Müller, Derivation of nonlinear bending theory for shells from three-dimensional nonlinear elasticity by Gamma-convergence, C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris 336 (8) (2003) 697–702.
8[8] G. Friesecke, R.D. James, S. Müller, A theorem on geometric rigidity and the derivation of nonlinear plate theory from three-dimensional elasticity , Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 55 (11) (2002) 1461–1506.