LBan-IV: Difference between revisions

From Disordered Systems Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
 
(26 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
= Pinning and Depinning of a Disordered Material =
= Pinning and Depinning of a Disordered Material =


In earlier lectures, we discussed how disordered systems can become trapped in deep energy states, forming a glass. Today, we will examine how such systems can also be ''pinned'' and resist external deformation. This behavior arises because disorder creates a complex energy landscape with numerous features, including minima (of varying depth), maxima, and saddle points. 
In earlier lectures, we discussed how disordered systems can become trapped in deep energy states, forming a glass. Today we examine how such systems can also be '''pinned''' and resist external deformation.


When an external force is applied, it tilts this multidimensional energy landscape in a specific direction. However, local minima remain stable until a finite critical threshold is reached. Two important dynamical phase transitions are induced by pinning
Disorder creates a complex energy landscape with many minima, maxima, and saddle points. When an external force is applied, the landscape is tilted. Local minima remain stable until a finite threshold is reached.


* '''The depinning transition''': Interfaces pinned by impurities are ubiquitous and range from magnetic domain walls to crack fronts, from dislocations in crystals to vortices in superconductors. Above a critical force, interfaces depin, their motion becomes intermittent, and a Barkhausen noise is detected.
This gives rise to dynamical phase transitions.


* '''The yielding transition''': Everyday amorphous materials such as mayonnaise, toothpaste, or foams exhibit behavior intermediate between solid and liquid. They deform under small stress (like a solid) and flow under large stress (like a liquid). In between, we observe intermittent plastic events. 
== Depinning vs Yielding ==


== Depinning tranition: the equation of motion ==
Two important transitions associated with pinning are:
In the following we focus on the depinning trasition. At zero temperature and in the overdamped regime, where 
<math>\rho \partial_t^2 + \frac{1}{\mu} \partial_t \approx \frac{1}{\mu} \partial_t</math>, the equation of motion for the interface is: 
<center><math>
\partial_t h(x,t) = \nabla^2 h^{\text{Zhiqiang}} + f + F(x,h(x,t)), \quad \text{with} \; F(x,h(x,t)) = - \frac{\delta V(x,h(x,t))}{\delta h(x,t)}
</math></center> 
Here we set <math>\mu=1</math>, <math> f </math> the external force and the disorder force is <math>F(x,h(x,t))</math>.


For a given point <math>x</math> of the interface, the disorder potential <math>V(x,h(x))</math> is drawn from a probability distribution, for instance a Gaussian distribution. Here we consider a different type of landscape: the potential seen by point <math>x</math> as a function of <math>h</math> is flat almost everywhere, but at random values of <math>h</math> it develops narrow wells that pin the point at one of those specific values. Escaping from these wells requires overcoming a finite threshold force. This model allows the dynamics to be described in terms of cellular automata, which are both practical for numerical implementation and solvable in the mean-field limit.
* '''Depinning transition.'''
Interfaces pinned by impurities appear in many contexts: magnetic domain walls, crack fronts, dislocations, vortices.
Above a critical force <math>f_c</math>, steady motion sets in. Close to threshold, motion is intermittent and proceeds via avalanches (e.g. Barkhausen noise).


= Cellular Automata =
* '''Yielding transition.'''
Amorphous materials (foams, emulsions, pastes) deform elastically at small stress and flow at large stress.
The analogue of the depinning threshold is the '''yield stress''' <math>\sigma_y</math>, separating solid-like from flowing behavior.


We now introduce a discrete version of the interface equation of motion.
Both the critical force per unit length <math>f_c</math> and the yield stress <math>\sigma_y</math> are '''self-averaging quantities''', analogous to the free-energy density in equilibrium disordered systems. Sample-to-sample fluctuations are universal but subleading in system size. The two transitions share many phenomenological features (threshold, intermittency, avalanches) but differ in an important respect:
These cellular automata belong to the same universality class as the original model,
and they are straightforward to implement numerically. 
For clarity, we first discuss the case of one spatial dimension, <math>d = 1</math>.
We then extend its definition.


==The 1D model==
* Depinning obeys monotonic dynamics (no-passing rule).
=== Step 1: Discretization along the ''x''-direction ===
* Yielding generally does not, due to stress redistributions of mixed sign.


The interface is represented as a collection of blocks <math>i = 1, \ldots, L</math>
== Equation of Motion for Depinning ==
connected by springs with spring constant set to unity. 
The velocity of the <math>i</math>-th block is given by:


<center><math>
At zero temperature, in the overdamped regime, the interface evolves as
v_i(t) = \partial_t h_i(t) =  
<math display="block">
\frac{1}{2}\bigl[h_{i+1}(t) + h_{i-1}(t) - 2 h_i(t)\bigr]
\partial_t h(x,t)
+ f + F_i\!\bigl(h_i(t)\bigr) .
= \nabla^2 h(x,t) + f + F(x,h(x,t)),
</math></center>
\qquad
F(x,h) = - \frac{\delta V(x,h)}{\delta h}.
</math>


Here, <math>h_i(t)</math> is the position of block <math>i</math> at time <math>t</math>, 
Here:
<math>f</math> is the external driving force, and <math>F_i</math> is the quenched random pinning force. 


=== Step 2: Discretization along the ''h''-direction ===
* <math>f</math> is the external driving force,
* <math>F(x,h)</math> is the quenched disorder force.


The key simplification is the '''narrow-well approximation''' for the disorder potential. 
== The No-Passing Rule ==
In this approximation, impurities act as pinning centers, each trapping a block of the interface at discrete positions up to a local threshold force  <math>\sigma_i^{th}</math> is overcomed. The distance between two consecutive pinning centers is a positive random variable
<math>\Delta</math>, drawn from a distribution <math>g(\Delta)</math>. 


The total force acting on block <math>i</math> is:
Consider two interfaces evolving under the same disorder:
<math display="block">
\partial_t h = \nabla^2 h + f + F(x,h).
</math>


<center><math>
Let
\sigma_i = \frac{1}{2} \bigl(h_{i+1} + h_{i-1} - 2 h_i \bigr) + f .
<math display="block">
</math></center>
h_\alpha(x,0) < h_\beta(x,0) \quad \forall x.
</math>


As <math>f</math> is slowly increased, each block experiences a gradually increasing pulling force. 
Define their difference:
An instability occurs when:
<math display="block">
<center><math>
\delta h(x,t) = h_\beta(x,t) - h_\alpha(x,t).
\sigma_i \geq \sigma_i^{th} ,
</math>
</math></center>


Assume that at some first contact point <math>(x^*,t^*)</math>,
<math display="block">
\delta h(x^*,t^*) = 0.
</math>


When this condition is met, block <math>i</math> jumps to the next available well,
Subtracting the equations of motion gives
and the forces are updated as:
<math display="block">
\partial_t \delta h
= \nabla^2 \delta h
+ F(x,h_\beta) - F(x,h_\alpha).
</math>


<center><math>
At the first contact:
\begin{cases}
\sigma_i \;\to\; \sigma_i - \Delta,\\[6pt]
\sigma_{i \pm 1} \;\to\; \sigma_{i \pm 1} + \dfrac{\Delta}{2},
\end{cases}
</math></center>


After such an instability, one of the neighboring blocks may also become unstable,  
* <math>\delta h = 0</math>,
initiating a chain reaction.
* <math>\nabla^2 \delta h \ge 0</math> (minimum),
* the disorder force is identical because it is quenched.


==Extensions of the 1D model ==
One finds that the velocity of the lower interface is strictly smaller than that of the upper one:
=== Step 3: Mean-Field (Fully Connected) Limit ===
<math display="block">
v_\alpha(x^*,t^*) < v_\beta(x^*,t^*).
</math>


Let us now study the mean-field version of the cellular automata introduced above.
Thus crossing is impossible and ordering is preserved.
We make two approximations:


=== Consequences ===


* Metastable states are totally ordered.
* The critical force <math>f_c</math> is independent of initial conditions.
* For <math>f > f_c</math>, no metastable states survive.


* '''Fully connected interaction:'''   Replace the short-range Laplacian with a mean-field coupling to the center-of-mass height: 
This monotonic structure is specific to depinning and does '''not''' hold for yielding systems.


<center><math>
== Outlook ==
  \sigma_i = h_{CM} - h_i + f ,
</math></center>
where <math>h_{CM} = \frac{1}{L}\sum_{j=1}^{L} h_j</math> is the center-of-mass height.
* '''Uniform thresholds:'''    All local thresholds are taken equal to one


In the limit <math>L \to \infty</math>, the statistical properties of the system can be described  by the distribution of local stresses <math>\sigma_i</math>.
The depinning transition is simpler and better understood. In the following we focus on depinning and introduce minimal cellular automata capturing its physics. We will later return to yielding and discuss how similar automata can describe plastic flow.
It is convenient to introduce the '''distance to threshold''': 


<center><math>
= Cellular Automaton for Depinning =
x_i = 1 - \sigma_i .
</math></center>


We now introduce a discrete model in the depinning universality class.
Time is discrete and the interface evolves through jumps between narrow pinning wells.
The model captures threshold dynamics and avalanche propagation while remaining analytically tractable.


An instability occurs when a block reaches <math>x_i = 0</math>. 
== Degrees of freedom ==
This is followed by its stabilization and by a uniform redistribution over all blocks:


<center><math>
The interface is represented by blocks of height <math>h_1,\ldots,h_N</math>.
\begin{cases}  
 
x_i = 0 \;\to\; x_i = \Delta & \text{(stabilization)} \\[6pt]
== Elastic interactions in finite dimension ==
x_j \;\to\; x_j - \dfrac{\Delta}{L} & \text{(redistribution)} ,
 
\end{cases}
In spatial dimension <math>d</math>, each block interacts with its nearest neighbours:
</math></center>
<math display="block">
=== Velocity-Force Caracteristics===
F_i^{\rm elast}
= \frac{1}{z}\sum_{j\in nn(i)} (h_j-h_i),
</math>
where <math>z</math> is the coordination number.
 
When a block jumps forward by <math>\Delta</math>, each neighbour receives an additional stress <math>\Delta/z</math>.
 
== Narrow-well disorder ==
 
Each block is trapped in a sequence of narrow pinning wells along the <math>h</math>-axis.
Different blocks have independent trap sequences (translationally invariant disorder).
 
Each well has a local depinning threshold.
Disorder may affect both the threshold values and the distances between wells. Here, for simplicity, we set all thresholds equal:
<math display="block">
f_Y = 1.
</math>
The distances <math>\Delta>0</math> between consecutive wells are random variables drawn from a distribution <math>g(\Delta)</math>. A common choice is exponential wells:
<math display="block">
g(\Delta)=e^{-\Delta}.
</math>
 
[[File:WellsFigure.png|center|200px]]
''Open circles: trap positions.
Filled circles: instantaneous interface configuration in <math>d=1</math>.''
 
== Driving protocols ==
 
Two drivings will be used in the course.
 
* '''Constant force'''
<math display="block">
F_i^{\rm drive}=F.
</math>
 
* '''Displacement control'''
<math display="block">
F_i^{\rm drive}=k_0(w-h_i).
</math>
 
In this page we focus on constant force.
Displacement control will be introduced later to study avalanches.
 
== Distance to instability ==
 
Define
<math display="block">
x_i = f_Y - F_i^{\rm elast} - F.
</math>
 
Interpretation:
 
* <math>x_i>0</math>: block stable.
* <math>x_i\le0</math>: block unstable.
 
The dynamics can be written entirely in terms of the variables <math>x_i</math>.
 
== Update rule ==
 
If a block <math>i</math> becomes unstable, it jumps to the next well:
<math display="block">
h_i \to h_i + \Delta.
</math>
 
In finite dimension, this induces an elastic redistribution of stress to its neighbours.
Each neighbour receives an additional stress <math>\Delta/z</math>.
 
== Fully connected limit ==
 
In high spatial dimension, elasticity becomes mean-field:
<math display="block">
F_i^{\rm elast}=h_{\rm CM}-h_i,
\qquad
h_{\rm CM}=\frac{1}{N}\sum_i h_i.
</math>
 
When block <math>i</math> jumps by <math>\Delta</math>:
<math display="block">
x_i \to x_i+\Delta\Bigl(1-\frac{1}{N}\Bigr),
\qquad
x_{j\ne i}\to x_j-\frac{\Delta}{N}.
</math>
 
The jumping site tends to stabilize, while all other sites are shifted uniformly toward instability.
This homogeneous redistribution of stress is the origin of avalanche propagation.
 
== Thermodynamic limit ==
 
In the fully connected model, there is no spatial structure.
All blocks are statistically equivalent.
 
In the thermodynamic limit <math>N\to\infty</math>, the state of the system at time <math>t</math> is completely characterized by the distribution
<math display="block">
P_t(x),
</math>
the probability density of distances to instability.
 
Define the interface velocity
<math display="block">
v^t = h_{\rm CM}(t)-h_{\rm CM}(t-1).
</math>
 
The evolution of <math>x</math> for a single block is:
 
If <math>x(t)>0</math>:
<math display="block">
x(t+1)=x(t)-v^{t+1}.
</math>
 
If <math>x(t)<0</math>:
<math display="block">
x(t+1)=x(t)-v^{t+1}+\Delta.
</math>
 
Using the update rule for stable and unstable sites separately, one obtains:
<math display="block">
P_{t+1}(x)
=
P_t(x+v^{t+1})\,H(x+v^{t+1})
+
\int_0^\infty d\Delta\,
P_t(x+v^{t+1}-\Delta)\,g(\Delta)\,
H(-x-v^{t+1}+\Delta).
</math>
 
This equation fully describes the dynamics of the force-controlled model.
 
== Stationary solutions ==
 
In the stationary state the velocity becomes constant <math>v</math>, and <math>P_t(x)\to P(x)</math>.
 
Solving this equation in the thermodynamic limit (see exercise) yields:
 
=== Deterministic critical force ===
 
<math display="block">
F_c
=
1-\frac{\overline{\Delta^2}}{2\overline{\Delta}}.
</math>
 
The critical force is self-averaging.
 
=== Velocity–force relation ===
 
The stationary velocity satisfies the implicit quadratic relation
<math display="block">
v^2
+2v(2F_c-F-1)
-2\overline{\Delta}(F_c-F)
=0.
</math>
 
This equation determines the full <math>v\!-\!F</math> characteristic curve.

Latest revision as of 22:06, 1 March 2026

Pinning and Depinning of a Disordered Material

In earlier lectures, we discussed how disordered systems can become trapped in deep energy states, forming a glass. Today we examine how such systems can also be pinned and resist external deformation.

Disorder creates a complex energy landscape with many minima, maxima, and saddle points. When an external force is applied, the landscape is tilted. Local minima remain stable until a finite threshold is reached.

This gives rise to dynamical phase transitions.

Depinning vs Yielding

Two important transitions associated with pinning are:

  • Depinning transition.

Interfaces pinned by impurities appear in many contexts: magnetic domain walls, crack fronts, dislocations, vortices. Above a critical force fc, steady motion sets in. Close to threshold, motion is intermittent and proceeds via avalanches (e.g. Barkhausen noise).

  • Yielding transition.

Amorphous materials (foams, emulsions, pastes) deform elastically at small stress and flow at large stress. The analogue of the depinning threshold is the yield stress σy, separating solid-like from flowing behavior.

Both the critical force per unit length fc and the yield stress σy are self-averaging quantities, analogous to the free-energy density in equilibrium disordered systems. Sample-to-sample fluctuations are universal but subleading in system size. The two transitions share many phenomenological features (threshold, intermittency, avalanches) but differ in an important respect:

  • Depinning obeys monotonic dynamics (no-passing rule).
  • Yielding generally does not, due to stress redistributions of mixed sign.

Equation of Motion for Depinning

At zero temperature, in the overdamped regime, the interface evolves as th(x,t)=2h(x,t)+f+F(x,h(x,t)),F(x,h)=δV(x,h)δh.

Here:

  • f is the external driving force,
  • F(x,h) is the quenched disorder force.

The No-Passing Rule

Consider two interfaces evolving under the same disorder: th=2h+f+F(x,h).

Let hα(x,0)<hβ(x,0)x.

Define their difference: δh(x,t)=hβ(x,t)hα(x,t).

Assume that at some first contact point (x*,t*), δh(x*,t*)=0.

Subtracting the equations of motion gives tδh=2δh+F(x,hβ)F(x,hα).

At the first contact:

  • δh=0,
  • 2δh0 (minimum),
  • the disorder force is identical because it is quenched.

One finds that the velocity of the lower interface is strictly smaller than that of the upper one: vα(x*,t*)<vβ(x*,t*).

Thus crossing is impossible and ordering is preserved.

Consequences

  • Metastable states are totally ordered.
  • The critical force fc is independent of initial conditions.
  • For f>fc, no metastable states survive.

This monotonic structure is specific to depinning and does not hold for yielding systems.

Outlook

The depinning transition is simpler and better understood. In the following we focus on depinning and introduce minimal cellular automata capturing its physics. We will later return to yielding and discuss how similar automata can describe plastic flow.

Cellular Automaton for Depinning

We now introduce a discrete model in the depinning universality class. Time is discrete and the interface evolves through jumps between narrow pinning wells. The model captures threshold dynamics and avalanche propagation while remaining analytically tractable.

Degrees of freedom

The interface is represented by blocks of height h1,,hN.

Elastic interactions in finite dimension

In spatial dimension d, each block interacts with its nearest neighbours: Fielast=1zjnn(i)(hjhi), where z is the coordination number.

When a block jumps forward by Δ, each neighbour receives an additional stress Δ/z.

Narrow-well disorder

Each block is trapped in a sequence of narrow pinning wells along the h-axis. Different blocks have independent trap sequences (translationally invariant disorder).

Each well has a local depinning threshold. Disorder may affect both the threshold values and the distances between wells. Here, for simplicity, we set all thresholds equal: fY=1. The distances Δ>0 between consecutive wells are random variables drawn from a distribution g(Δ). A common choice is exponential wells: g(Δ)=eΔ.

Open circles: trap positions. Filled circles: instantaneous interface configuration in d=1.

Driving protocols

Two drivings will be used in the course.

  • Constant force

Fidrive=F.

  • Displacement control

Fidrive=k0(whi).

In this page we focus on constant force. Displacement control will be introduced later to study avalanches.

Distance to instability

Define xi=fYFielastF.

Interpretation:

  • xi>0: block stable.
  • xi0: block unstable.

The dynamics can be written entirely in terms of the variables xi.

Update rule

If a block i becomes unstable, it jumps to the next well: hihi+Δ.

In finite dimension, this induces an elastic redistribution of stress to its neighbours. Each neighbour receives an additional stress Δ/z.

Fully connected limit

In high spatial dimension, elasticity becomes mean-field: Fielast=hCMhi,hCM=1Nihi.

When block i jumps by Δ: xixi+Δ(11N),xjixjΔN.

The jumping site tends to stabilize, while all other sites are shifted uniformly toward instability. This homogeneous redistribution of stress is the origin of avalanche propagation.

Thermodynamic limit

In the fully connected model, there is no spatial structure. All blocks are statistically equivalent.

In the thermodynamic limit N, the state of the system at time t is completely characterized by the distribution Pt(x), the probability density of distances to instability.

Define the interface velocity vt=hCM(t)hCM(t1).

The evolution of x for a single block is:

If x(t)>0: x(t+1)=x(t)vt+1.

If x(t)<0: x(t+1)=x(t)vt+1+Δ.

Using the update rule for stable and unstable sites separately, one obtains: Pt+1(x)=Pt(x+vt+1)H(x+vt+1)+0dΔPt(x+vt+1Δ)g(Δ)H(xvt+1+Δ).

This equation fully describes the dynamics of the force-controlled model.

Stationary solutions

In the stationary state the velocity becomes constant v, and Pt(x)P(x).

Solving this equation in the thermodynamic limit (see exercise) yields:

Deterministic critical force

Fc=1Δ22Δ.

The critical force is self-averaging.

Velocity–force relation

The stationary velocity satisfies the implicit quadratic relation v2+2v(2FcF1)2Δ(FcF)=0.

This equation determines the full vF characteristic curve.