arXiv:2012.14675v2 [cond-mat.soft] 2 Sep 2021 2 Abstract date Accepted: / date Received: eoyeeto xenloclaino eiulsrs na in Morita Jumpei residual on oscillation external paste of effect Memory b Ltd.) Co., turen a 1 ncakfrain aeytetnino h fracture the or tension factors the the namely of formation, one crack ex- affects in be can plastic effect if satisfied memory plained is the criterion Therefore, fracture a [14,15,16,17]. when desiccation the by paste [1]. conjecture drying this the supports in effect memory deformation visual- the plastic The showing effect. the memory of the ization to re- related experimental the is by This caused oscillation deformation [3]. plastic the paste that the indicates sult exceeds of oscillation stress the yield by the induced stress the when pear several after oscillation the of [3]. days direction perpen- the patterns paste. to crack the dicular lamellar in induces “memory” memory a oscillation This horizontal imprints to desiccation reported container before Matsuo the and subjecting Nakahara that [3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11, particular, anisotropic fields In external become 12,13]. of patterns application crack have on the experiments shal- in recent that isotropic However, surface revealed and [2]. the random containers on usually low are patterns dried, paste Crack is the water [1]. of and formed powder are containing cracks paste a When Introduction 1 pas drying a using experiments d the stress in the observed of patterns dis symmetry crack stress the the residual increases, Du number the this deformation. where As oscillation, plastic oscillation. the through after oscillation remains the stress memorizes paste The wl eisre yteeditor) the by No. inserted manuscript be E (will J. Phys. Eur. rdaeSho fEgneigSine sk University, Osaka Science, Engineering of School Graduate -al .oia62galcm(urn ffiito sNe- is affiliation (Current [email protected] e-mail: eateto hsc n aeilSine hmn Univer Shimane Science, Material and Physics of Department -al [email protected] e-mail: h rcsaefre orlaetetnincaused tension the release to formed are cracks The ap- patterns crack such that discovered also They enmrclyivsiaetesrs itiuino at hnan when paste a of distribution stress the investigate numerically We a,1 ihoOtsuki Michio , b,2 ooaa sk 6-51 Japan. 560-8531, Osaka Toyonaka, iy ase hmn 9-54 Japan. 690-8504, Shimane Matsue, sity, spromd hsaayi hw htauiomplas- uniform a theory that strain shows finite analysis [21, on This Ref. based performed. in is analysis hand, nonlinear other pat- a the crack 22], On the external asymmetric. analysis, the are this terns of in direction Therefore, the oscillation. os- to the creates perpendicular which after cracks stress, desiccation asymmetric The the paste. enhances cillation the in increases of tension parts defor- the some and plastic the oscillation, in The the distribution of container. stress direction the asymmetric an of condi- causes walls mation boundary the the at to after owing tion remains anal- oscillation this deformation external In plastic the [20]. non-uniform Ref. a infinitesimal in ysis, the performed on was analy- based theory quasi-linear model strain a elastoplastic hand, an of one to sis the seem On However, studies incoherent. previous be [20,21,22]. the in effect predictions memory re- theoretical the is deformation for plastic by sponsible caused stresses residual anisotropy that in conjecture theoretical the by experiments. motivated the in clear not is stress deformation residual plastic pattern. causes which crack by perpendicular mechanism the the However, to des- leads the and to due iccation increases which di- oscillation, the the in of stress rection the residual ex- the but induces unchanged, these oscillation is external to [18, criterion According fracture effect the attention. memory periments, with special mea- paste deserve to drying 19] experiments in recent stresses regard, sure this In criterion. h tesmauigeprmns[81]hdbeen had [18,19] experiments stress-measuring The rbto eed ntenme fcce nthe in cycles of number the on depends tribution srbto sehne,wihi ossetwith consistent is which enhanced, is istribution te. otepatcdfrain h residual the deformation, plastic the to e xenloclaini applied. is oscillation external 2 tic deformation under periodic boundary conditions in- t. Therefore, ∂t represents the with respect creases the tension over the entire area of the paste. to t, with X being constant. This uniform increase of the tension leads to uniform The line element dr between two points labeled as and symmetric crack patterns along the direction of the X and X +dX with an infinitesimal vector dX is given oscillation. by However, the seemingly incoherent predictions may i dr = (∂ir)dX , (3) represent two different limiting cases, as is suggested i by a recent experiment [23], where the symmetric and where ∂i = ∂/∂X , and we use the Einstein notation for asymmetric crack patterns occur depending on the num- the summation of repeated indices. The square of the ber of cycles in the external oscillation. For a few cycles, distance between the points in the current configuration the asymmetric crack pattern predicted in the quasi- is linear analysis was formed. For a sufficiently large num- 2 i 2 i j (ds) = (∂ir)dX = gij dX dX , (4) ber of cycles, the symmetric pattern predicted in the | | nonlinear analysis was formed. However, the present where gij is a component of the Euclidean metric theories cannot explain the dependence of the crack g given by pattern on the number of cycles. Therefore, a unified gij = (∂ir) (∂j r). (5) theoretical model is required. · In this study, we formulate such a unified model, Assuming the existence of a local stress-free “natu- with which we numerically examine the residual stress ral state”, the line element between the two points in in a paste after external oscillation. In Sec. 2, we re- this state is denoted as dr♮ [21]. The square of the dis- view a Lagrangian description of kinematics. In Sec. tance between the points in the “natural state” is given 3, we derive the time evolution equations for a paste. by The memory effect of the external oscillation is numeri- cally investigated in Sec. 4. The setup of our simulation (ds♮)2 = dr♮ 2 = g♮ dXidXj , (6) | | ij is shown in Sec. 4.1. We demonstrate the relation be- ♮ ♮ tween the plastic deformation and the residual stress where gij is the natural metric tensor satisfying gij = ♮ in Sec. 4.2. In Secs. 4.3 and 4.4, we present the resid- gji. The change in the natural metric tensor represents ual stress after the oscillation for different numbers of the plastic deformation. cycles, respectively. The dependence of the stress dis- The elastic deformation is represented by the trans- tribution on the number of cycles is examined in Sec. formation from dr♮ to dr: 4.5. We discuss our results and conclude our paper in r F r♮ Sec. 5. In Appendix A, the left Cauchy–Green tensor in d = d , (7) our setup is derived. The stretching tensor is obtained where F is the deformation tensor. The left in Appendix B. The constitutive relation of the paste is Cauchy–Green Tensor is defined as [24,25] derived in Appendix C. In Appendix D, we discuss the T under steady shear in our model. B = FF . (8) B is given by 2 Kinematics ij B = g (∂ir) (∂j r), (9) ♮ ⊗ The configuration of a 3-dimensional paste is repre- ij where (g♮ ) denotes the inverse of the component sented by the current coordinates r mapped from the ♮ of the metric tensor (g ) satisfying reference coordinates X as ij ♮ jk k x(X,Y,Z,t) gij g♮ = δi . (10) (X,t) r(X,t)= y(X,Y,Z,t) , (1) 7→   See Appendix A for the derivation of Eq. (9). z(X,Y,Z,t) C The difference in velocities between two points la-   where [ ]C denotes the representation in terms of Carte- beled as X and X + dX is given by · sian components. The velocity v is given by i dv = (∂iv) dX . (11) v(X,t)= ∂tr(X,t), (2) The time rate of the deformation is described by the 2r and the acceleration is given by ∂t . Here, ∂t stands velocity gradient tensor W, which satisfies [24,25] for the time derivative in the Lagrangian description, and the independent variables of the paste are X and dv = Wdr. (12) 3

The stretching tensor is defined as the Hadamard strain energy. Substituting Eq. (19) with Eqs. (20) and (21) into Eq. (18), we obtain 1 T D = W + W . (13) (EP) 2 σ = Σ + I3Ψ ′(I3)+ µ I + µ (B I) . (22)  { } − As shown in Appendix B, the stretching tensor is rep- Here, I is the unit tensor. See Appendix C for the deriva- resented as tion of Eq. (22). For σ(V), we adopt the linear viscous 1 ij stress tensor as D = ∂tg (∂ir) (∂j r), (14) −2 ⊗ σ(V) =2ηD (23)  where (gij ) is the inverse of the component matrix of with the η [24]. the metric tensor (gij ) satisfying Following Ref. [21,22], the plastic deformation is de- jk k gij g = δi . (15) scribed by the temporal evolution of the natural metric ij g♮ as

ij ij 3 Equation of motion and constitutive relation (1 + τ∂t)g♮ = Kg . (24)

The equation of motion for r(X,t) is given by Here, K is given by 3 3 ρ∂2r = divσ + f , (16) K = = (25) t e ♮ ij I gij g 1 where ρ, σ, and fe are the density in the current config- ♮ g♮ uration, the , and the body force, to satisfy the incompressibility condition J = det = 1 in the natural state. It should be noted that we assume respectively. The Cauchy stress tensor consists of an p elastoplastic part σ(EP) and a viscous part σ(V) as effective incompressibility for g by adopting Poisson’s ratio ν λ/(λ + µ)/2 1/2 in our numerical simula- ≡ ≃ σ = σ(EP) + σ(V). (17) tions. The inverse of the relaxation time τ is given by

The elastoplastic part is given by the constitutive 1 1 σY τ − (σ )= max 0, 1 (26) relation with the strain energy per unit volume in the e τ − σ 0  e  reference configuration ΣR as with characteristic time τ0 and tensile yield strength 1 ∂Σ σY. The equivalent tensile stress σe is given by σ(EP) = R F˜ T , (18) J ∂F˜ 2 1 (EP) (EP) 2 σe = (σxx σyy ) ˜ 2 − where F = ∂r/∂X is the “apparent” deformation gra- 1 + (σ(EP) σ(EP))2 dient tensor characterizing the transformation from the 2 yy − zz reference configuration to the current configuration [26]. 1 ˜ + (σ(EP) σ(EP))2, Here, J = det F = √det g is the Jacobian. The strain 2 zz − xx energy per unit volume in the current coordinates Σ is 2 2 2 +3 σ(EP) + σ(EP) + σ(EP) . (27) related to ΣR as xz yz zx        ΣR = JΣ. (19) Equations (24) and (26) indicate that the plastic defor- mation associated with the change of the natural metric In this study, we apply the Hadamard strain energy ij [27]: g♮ occurs when the von Mises yield criterion σe = σY is satisfied [28]. See Appendix D for the flow curve of Σ = µ(I 3)+ Ψ(I ) /2, (20) { 1 − 3 } our model under steady shear. Ψ(I ) = (λ + µ)(I 1) 2(λ +2µ)( I 1), (21) 3 3 − − 3 − where I1 = trB and I3 = detB are thep rotational invari- 4 Memory of external oscillation ants of the left Cauchy–Green strain tensor B with the Lam´econstants µ and λ. Note that I1 and I3 depend In this section, we numerically investigate the memory on F˜, as shown in Appendix C. In Ref. [21], the incom- effect of the external oscillation. In Sec. 4.1, we explain pressible neo-Hookean model is adopted for the strain our setup. In Sec. 4.2, we demonstrate how plastic de- energy, but we assume Hadamard strain energy with formation affects the residual stress. The residual stress small compressibility (i.e. large but finite λ) to avoid for different numbers of cycles is shown in Secs. 4.3 and difficulties in numerical simulations. Note that the neo- 4.4. In Sec. 5, we discuss the dependence of the symme- Hookean strain energy is the incompressible limit of try of the stress distribution on the number of cycles. 4

4.1 Setup for 0 t

σzx X= L =0. (36) ❆ ✭✮ | ± In this study, we use the unit mass, length, and time as m = ρH3, l = H, and τ = H/G, respectively.

● The parameter values are set as L/H = 10, A /G =

p x ❍ 2

❩ 6.0 10− , T/τ = 31.25, ν = λ/(λ + µ)/2=0.4999, × 2 τ0/τ =0.94, µ/(ρHG)=7.3 10− , σY/(ρHG)=4.7 2 3 × × ❳ 10− , η/(ρ√GH )=0.14, TI /τ = 100, and Tw/τ = 300

based on experiments [3], except for µ and η. It should ✷ be noted that τ0 is estimated from the flow curve un- Fig. 1 Schematic illustration of a paste in a container. der steady shear, which is shown in Appendix D. The atmospheric pressure p0 is set to 0 because the numer- Assuming that the incompressibility of the natural ical results shown below do not depend on the value of state (det g♮ = 1), g♮ can be expressed by two parame- p0. We have checked that our numerical results do not depend on the value of Poisson’s ratio ν λ/(λ + µ)/2 ters, and we set ≡ α for ν 0.4999. We adopt the finite-difference method e− 0 β ≥ 5 with the time interval as ∆t/ H/G =5.0 10− and g♮ = 01 0 (30) ×   the spatial mesh size as ∆x/(2L)= ∆z/(2L)=0.025. β 0 eα(1 + β2) p and   eα(1 + β2)0 β 4.2 Effect of plastic deformation on residual stress − g♮ = 0 10 , (31)  α  In this section, we discuss the normal component of the β 0 e− − deviatoric stress whereβ represents the plastic shear strain, whereas the plastic normal strain is characterized by α. e α repre- sxx = σxx (σxx + σyy + σzz)/3 (37) − − sents a normal component of the natural metric tensor in the direction of the oscillation because its increase in the direction of the external oscillation. is essential for the formation of cracks. In the linear The initial configuration is given by u = w = α = ♮ approximation of ∂iu, α, and β while ignoring ∂iw, sxx β = 0 at t = T with g = δij . For T t < 0, we − I ij − I ≤ is given by set A(t) = 0 and relax the configuration under gravi- (L) (N) tational acceleration. We apply the external oscillation sxx = sxx + sxx (38) as with 2πt (L) A(t)= Ax cos (32) s =2µu (39) − T xx X 5 and (N) sxx =2µα. (40)

Here, we abbreviate ∂u/∂X as uX . Finite uX due to the plastic deformation leads to the change of sxx through Eqs. (38) and (39), which corresponds to the mecha- nism of the memory effect assumed in the quasi-linear analysis [20]. The plastic deformation characterized by α induces the increase of sxx through Eqs. (38) and (40), which is consistent with the scenario proposed in the nonlinear analysis [21,22].

Fig. 3 α as a function of (X,Z) after the external oscillation 4.3 Residual stress for Nc =1/2 with Nc = 1/2.

In Fig. 2, we plot sxx as a function of (X,Z) after the oscillation with Nc = 1/2 (i.e. half a cycle). Here, In Fig. 4 (a), we show β as a function of (X,Z) after (X,Z) indicates the initial position. During the oscilla- the external oscillation for Nc =1/2. For Nc =1/2, the tion, the equivalent tensile stress σe exceeds the tensile external force is applied in the negative X-axis direction yield strength σY, and plastic deformation occurs at before the external oscillation is stopped, which leads the bottom of the paste. The residual stress remains to the negative shear strain ∂Z u< 0 getting associated as a memory effect due to the plastic deformation. The with the plastic shear strain β < 0 near the center of the residual stress distribution is almost symmetric with re- bottom, as shown in Fig. 4 (a). The plastic shear strain spect to the inversion of X (i.e., X X) and positive β causes negative displacement u < 0 in the X-axis →− near the bottom, while it is asymmetric near the surface direction except for the boundaries, which results in of the paste. The asymmetric pattern near the surface the asymmetric uX as shown in 4 (b). This asymmetric is consistent with the stress distribution predicted in uX in Eq. (39) explains the asymmetric residual stress the quasi-linear analysis [20], which induces the asym- near the surface in Fig. 2. metric crack patterns observed in experiments with a few cycles of oscillation [23].

4.4 Residual stress for Nc =2

In Fig. 5, we plot sxx as a function of (X,Z) after the external oscillation with Nc = 2 (i.e. two cycles). sxx near the bottom for Nc = 2 is higher than that for Nc = 1/2. The distribution of sxx becomes almost symmetric even near the surface, which is consistent with the symmetric crack patterns shown in experi- ments with sufficient cycles of the external oscillation [23]. Figure 6 displays α as a function of (X,Z) after the oscillation with Nc = 2. As shown in Appendix D, α Fig. 2 sxx as a function of (X,Z) after the external oscilla- monotonically increases under shear. Therefore, α for tion with Nc = 1/2. Nc = 2 becomes larger than that for Nc = 1/2, which leads to an increase in sxx near the bottom, as shown Figure 3 displays α as a function of (X,Z) after the in Fig. 5. external oscillation with Nc = 1/2. α is positive near In Fig. 7 (a), we plot β for Nc = 2 as a function the center of the bottom because the equivalent tensile of (X,Z). For Nc = 2, the plastic deformation is ac- stress σe at the center of the bottom maximizes and cumulated during the oscillation and the distribution exceeds the yield stress σY under the horizontal force of β becomes nearly antisymmetric, which leads to the owing to the external oscillation. The symmetric α in symmetric uX as shown in 4 (b). This symmetric uX Eq. (40) explains the nearly symmetric distribution of explains the symmetric stress distribution near the sur- sxx near the bottom as shown in Fig. 2. face, as shown in Fig. 5. 6

Fig. 6 α as a function of (X,Z) after the external oscillation with Nc = 2.

Fig. 4 (a) β as a function of (X,Z) after the external os- cillation with Nc = 1/2. (b) uX as a function of (X,Z) after the external oscillation with Nc = 1/2.

Fig. 7 (a) β as a function of (X,Z) after the external oscil- Fig. 5 sxx as a function of (X,Z) after the external oscilla- lation with Nc = 2. (b) uX as a function of (X,Z) after the tion with Nc = 2. external oscillation with Nc = 2.

4.5 Dependence of asymmetry on Nc function of Nc. A decreases with increasing Nc, which is The asymmetric part of the deviatoric stress is given consistent with the symmetry change of the crack pat- by terns in the experiments [23]. Figure 8 indicates that (a) the nonlinear effect becomes dominant for Nc 1. A sxx (X,Z)= sxx(X,Z) sxx( X,Z) /2. (41) ≥ { − − } similar dependence is obtained for different values of µ. Here, we define a parameter The sign of the residual stress in the quasi-linear analy- L H (a) 2 sis is reversed when the direction of the external force is L dX 0 dZ sxx A = − | | (42) L H 2 reversed [20], while the stress field is independent of the R L dX R0 dZ sxx − | | direction of the external force in the nonlinear analysis characterizingR R the asymmetry of the stress distribution. [21,22]. Hence, we consider that the quasi-linear effect In Fig. 8, we show A after the external oscillation as a is gradually canceled when the external force is applied 7 in both directions for Nc 1, which leads to the fast tion of microscopic particles in a paste becomes anisotropic ≥ decrease of A in Fig. 8. after the external oscillation [32]. This anisotropy is considered as a microscopic memory effect. The rela-

tionship between the microscopic memory effect and ✵ ✿✶ ✺ the macroscopic residual stress discussed in this study is unclear. An extension of microscopic theories such as the mode-coupling theory [33,34,35,36,37,38,39] and ✵✿ ✶ the pair distribution function theory [40], predicting the

macroscopic constitutive relation, may clarify this rela- ❆

tionship. ✵ ✿✵ ✺

Acknowledgements The authors thank A. Nakahara, S. Kitsunezaki, R. Tarumi, H. Hayakawa, and T. Ooshida for fruitful discussions. This work was supported by JSPS KAK-

✵ ENHI Grant Numbers JP16H04025, JP19K03670, and JP21H01006.

✵ ✵ ✿✺ ✶ ✶ ✿✺ ✷ ✷ ✿✺ ✸ ✸✿✺ ✹

◆ ❝

Fig. 8 A as a function of Nc after the external oscillation. Author contribution statement

J.M. carried out the simulations. Both authors devel- oped the theory and wrote the manuscript. 5 Summary and discussions Appendix A: Left Cauchy–Green Tensor In this study, we numerically investigated the residual stress of a paste after an external oscillation based on In this Appendix, we derive Eq. (9) using the method an elastoplastic model. The residual stress remains as a used in Ref. [21]. We first represent the natural met- memory of the oscillation, which leads to crack patterns ♮ ric tensor gij as a dot product of orthogonal vectors. perpendicular to its direction [3,4]. The residual stress g♮, satisfying Eq. (6), is a positive definite symmetric distribution is asymmetric when the number of cycles matrix with positive eigenvalues λ2, λ2, and λ2, whose in the oscillation is small. The symmetry of the residual 1 2 3 corresponding eigenvectors are q1, q2, and q3, respec- stress is enhanced by increasing the number of cycles, tively. A matrix Q = [q1 q2 q3] is given by which is consistent with the results of the experiments 2 in Ref. [23]. λ1 0 0 ♮ 2 The plastic deformation induced by the oscillation g Q = Q 0 λ2 0 (A.1)  2  remains until the formation of cracks [1]. The desicca- 0 0 λ3 tion after the oscillation enhances the residual stress and   caused by the plastic deformation as shown in Ref. [18, 1 T Q− = Q , (A.2) 19]. Thus, we expect that the dependence of the stress symmetry on the number of cycles can be detected in which indicates 2 an experiment using the method in Ref. [18,19]. Such λ1 0 0 ♮ 2 T an experiment will verify the validity of our theory. g = Q 0 λ2 0 Q . (A.3)  2  Different crack patterns appear depending on the 0 0 λ3 types of powders and ways of applying external forces It should be noted that Q is an orthogonal matrix. Here, [5,6,7,8], which is not explained by the present theory. we define a symmetric matrix In our analysis, the process of crack formation and the λ 0 0 displacement in the y direction are neglected because 1 P = Q 0 λ 0 QT . (A.4) we have restricted our attention to the residual stress  2  0 0 λ leading to the perpendicular crack when an external 3   force is applied in one direction. An extension of the The natural metric tensor g♮ satisfies models of drying crack patterns [15,29,30,31] incorpo- g♮ = PP. (A.5) rating the effect of the plastic deformation discussed in p p p this study will help understand these crack patterns. Here, we introduce independent vectors 1, 2, and 2 Recent experiments using micro-focus X-ray com- satisfying puterized tomography have revealed that the configura- P = [p1 p2 p3]. (A.6) 8

The component of g♮ is given by Substituting this equation into Eq. (11), we obtain ♮ i i gij = pi pj . (A.7) dv = (∂iv)( X dr)= (∂iv) X dr. (B.20) · ∇ · ⊗ ∇ From Eqs. (6) and (A.7), we obtain Comparing this equation with Eq. (12), we find ♮ i dr = pidX . (A.8) i W = (∂iv) X (B.21) ⊗ ∇ Because p1, p2, and p3 are independent, there exist 1 2 3 j j Substituting Eq. (B.21) into Eq. (13) with Eq. (B.21), dual vectors p , p , and p satisfying pi p = δi . ∗ ∗ ∗ · ∗ we obtain It should be noted that the inverse of the component 1 matrix of the metric tensor (g♮ ) satisfying Eq. (10) is D = gij (∂ v) (∂ r) + (∂ r) (∂ v) ij 2 i j i j represented by { ⊗ ⊗ } 1 ij ij i j = g ∂t (∂ir) (∂j r) (B.22) g♮ = p p . (A.9) 2 { ⊗ } ∗ · ∗ Taking a dot product of Eq. (A.8) and pi , we find Differentiating Eq. (B.18) by t, we find ∗ i i ♮ dX = p dr . (A.10) ij ij g ∂t (∂ir) (∂j r) = ∂tg (∂ir) (∂j r) . ∗ · { ⊗ } − { ⊗ } Substituting this equation into Eq. (3), we obtain  (B.23) i ♮ i ♮ dr = (∂ir)p dr = (∂ir) p dr (A.11) ∗ · ⊗ ∗ Substituting this equation into Eq. (B.22), we obtain From Eqs. (7) and (A.11), we find Eq. (14). i F = (∂ir) p . (A.12) ⊗ ∗ Substituting this equation into Eq. (8) with Eq. (A.9), Appendix C: Elasto-plastic part of stress tensor we obtain Eq. (9). In this appendix, we derive Eq. (22). Substituting Eq. (19) into Eq. (18), we obtain Appendix B: Stretching Tensor Σ ∂J ∂Σ σ(EP) = F˜ T + F˜ T . (C.24) In this Appendix, we derive Eq. (14). First, we intro- J ∂F˜ ∂F˜ duce Using a formula ∂Xi Xi = , (B.13) ∂ det A ∇ ∂r AT = (det A) I (C.25) ∂A which satisfies j j for a tensor A, J = det F˜ satisfies (∂ir) X = δ (B.14) · ∇ i Σ ∂J and F˜ T = ΣI. (C.26) i J ∂F˜ (∂ir) X = I. (B.15) ⊗ ∇ The strain energy per unit volume in the current A component of the inverse matrix of g satisfying Eq. coordinates Σ is a function of the rotational invariants (15) is given by the dot product of Xi : ∇ I1 and I3 of the left Cauchy–Green strain tensor B. ij i j g = X X .  (B.16) ∇ · ∇ Hence, the Cartesian component of the second term in Using Eq. (B.15) with Eq. (B.16), we obtain Eq. (C.24) satisfies i i X = I X ∂Σ ∂Σ ∂I ∂Σ ∂I ∂Blm ∇ ∇ F˜ T = 1 + 3 F˜ . j i ˜ ˜ jk = (∂j r) X X , ∂F ij ∂I1 ∂Blm ∂I3 ∂Blm ∂Fik ⊗ ∇ ∇     i j (C.27) =  X X (∂j r), ij∇ · ∇ = g ∂j r. (B.17) Here, we obtain Substituting Eq. (B.17) into Eq. (B.15), ∂I1 ij = I (C.28) g (∂ir) (∂j r)= I. (B.18) ∂B ⊗ Taking the dot product of Eq. (3) with Xi, we and ∇ obtain ∂I3 1 = I B− (C.29) dXi = Xi dr. (B.19) ∂B 3 ∇ · 9 from Eq. (C.25) and BT = B. Using Eqs. (8), (A.9), Substituting Eqs. (D.34) and (31) into Eqs. (22) and and (A.12), we find (24) with Eq. (9), we obtain the time evolution equa- (EP) tions for the shear stress σxz as B = F˜g F˜ T . (C.30) ♮ (EP) α 1 (EP) ∂tσ = µe− γ˙ τ − (σ )σ (D.36) xz − e xz From Eq. (C.30), we obtain 1 3 α ∂tα = τ − (σ ) 1 e (D.37) e − I  1  ∂Blm ˜ Fjk = δilBjm + δimBlj . (C.31) 1 3 ∂F˜ ∂tβ = τ − (σe) γ β (D.38) ik I −  1  Substituting Eqs. (C.28), (C.29), and (C.31) into Eq. with (C.27), we derive 2 I = 3+2(cosh α 1)+ eα σ(EP)/µ . (D.39) 1 − xz ∂Σ T ∂Σ ∂Σ   F˜ =2 B + I3 I . (C.32) Here, σe is given by ∂F˜ ∂I1 ∂I3   2 (EP) 2 Substituting Eqs. (C.26) and (C.32) into Eq. (C.24), we σe = 3 σxz + Ξ (D.40) r   obtain with 2 2 (EP) ∂Σ ∂Σ 2 2α (EP) σ = ΣI +2 B + I3 I . (C.33) 2 µ e σxz α ∂I1 ∂I3 Ξ = 1+ e−   2  µ ! −    Substituting Eq. (20) into this equation, we derive Eq. 2 µ α 2 (22). + (e− 1)  2 − 2 2 2 (EP) µ α α σxz α Appendix D: Stress under uniform steady + e + e e− . (D.41) 2  µ ! −  shear   It should be noted that  In this appendix, we discuss the rheological properties (EP) 2 described by Eqs. (22) and (24) with Eq. (9) under 1 1 σxz ∂tα τ − (σe) α + (D.42) simple steady shear: ≃ − 3 µ !    X + γ(t)Z (EP) for α 1 and σxz µ, which indicates that α mono- r(X,Y,Z,t)= Y , (D.34) ≪ ≪   tonically increases under steady shear. Z (EP) C In Fig. 9(a), we plot the shear stress σxz against   where the shear strain is given by the shear strain γ for σY/µ =1.0 with differentγτ ˙ 0. For (EP) sufficiently small γ, σxz is almost proportional to γ. γ(t) =γt ˙ (D.35) (EP) As γ increases, σxz exhibits a peak and converges to a (EP) with the shear rateγ ˙ . The natural metric tensor g♮ is steady state. σxz and γ at the peak increase with in- represented by Eq. (30) with α = β =0 at t = 0. creasingγ ˙ . This behavior is qualitatively similar to the stress–strain curve in experiments [41] and numerical

simulations [42]. ✭❛ ✮

✭❜✮ Figure 9(b) displays the shear stress σ(EP) against ✶ ✿✺ ✶ xz the shear strain rateγ ˙ for σY/µ = 1.0 in the steady (EP) (EP)

✶ state. σxz monotonically increases and obeys σxz =

✖ ✖ ❂

❂ σ ✁

✁ Y

✵ ✿✺

+ µγτ˙ 0, which is consistent with the behavior of a ③

③ √ ❊

❊ 3

① ①

✛ ✛

✵ ✿✺

✄ ✶ ✿✵

❴✌✜ Bingham plastic fluid [43].

✂

❴✌✜ ✄ ✵ ✿✺

✂

❴✌✜ ✄ ✵ ✿✶

✂

✵ ✵

✵ ✺ ✶✵ ✵ ✿✷ ✵ ✿✹

✵ References

❴✌✜ ✌ ✂ (EP) 1. L. Goehring, A. Nakahara, T. Dutta, S. Kitsunezaki, S. Fig. 9 (a) σxz against the shear strain γ for σY/µ = 1.0 Deciccation cracks and their patterns: formation (EP) Tarafdar, with differentγτ ˙ 0. (b) σxz against the shear strain rateγ ˙ and modeling in science and nature (Wiley-VCH, Wein- for σY/µ = 1.0 with differentγτ ˙ 0 in the steady state. heim, 2015). 10

2. A. Groisman and E. Kaplan, Europhys. Lett. 25, 415 37. S. Fritschi, M. Fuchs, and Th. Voigtmann, Soft Matter (1994). 10, 4822 (2014). 3. A. Nakahara and Y. Matsuo, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 74, 1362 38. L. Mohan, M. Cloitre, and R. T. Bonnecaze, J. Rheol. (2005). 59, 63 (2015). 4. A. Nakahara and Y. Matsuo, J. Stat. Mech. 2006, P07016 39. E. Moghimi, A. R. Jacob, and G. Petekidis, Soft Matter (2006). 13, 7824 (2017). 5. A. Nakahara and Y. Matsuo, Phys. Rev. E 74, 045102(R) 40. M. Otsuki and S. Sasa, J. Sta. Mech.: Theory Exp. 2006, (2006). L10004 (2006). 6. Y. Matsuo and A. Nakahara, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 81, 024801 41. B. van Aken, P. de Hey, and J. Sietsma, Mater. Sci. Eng., (2012). A 278, 247 (2000). 7. H. Nakayama, Y. Matsuo, T. Ooshida, and A. Nakahara, 42. F. Varnik, L. Bocquet, and J.-L. Barrat, J. Chem. Phys. Eur. Phys. J. E 36, 1 (2013). 120, 2788 (2004). 8. Y. Akiba and H. Shima, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 88, 024001 43. E. C. Bingham, Fluidity and Plasticity (McGraw-Hill, (2019). New York, 1922). 9. D. Mal, S. Sinha, T. R. Middya, and S. Tarafdar, Phys. A 384, 182 (2007). 10. T. Khatun, T. Dutta, and S. Tarafdar, Langmuir 29, 15535 (2013). 11. L. Pauchard, F. Elias, P. Boltenhagen, A. Cebers, J. C. Bacri, Phys. Rev. E 77, 021402 (2008). 12. A. T. Ngo, J. Richardi, and M. P. Pileni, J. Phys. Chem. B 112, 14409 (2008). 13. H. Lama, V. R. Dugyala, M. G. Basavaraj, and D. K. Satapathy, Phys. Rev. E 94, 012618 (2016). 14. J. L. Jr. Beuth, Int. J. Solids Struct. 29, 1657 (1992). 15. S. Kitsunezaki, Phys. Rev. E 60, 6449 (1999). 16. K. B. Singh and M. S. Tirumkudulu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 218302 (2007). 17. W. Man and W. B. Russel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 198302 (2008). 18. S. Kitsunezaki, A. Nakahara, and Y. Matsuo, EPL 114, 64002 (2016). 19. S. Kitsunezaki, Y. Matsuo, and A. Nakahara, J. Chem. Eng. Jpn. 50, 775 (2017). 20. M. Otsuki, Phys. Rev. E 72, 046115 (2005). 21. T. Ooshida, Phys. Rev. E 77, 061501 (2008). 22. T. Ooshida, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 78, 104801 (2009). 23. A. Nakahara, T. Hiraoka, R. Hayashi, Y. Matsuo, and S. Kitsunezaki, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 377, 20170395 (2018). 24. A. Romano and A. Marasco, us- ing Mathematica: Fundamentals, Methods, and Applica- tions (Brikhauser Basel, Basel, 2014). 25. C. Truesdell and W. Noll, The Non-Linear Field Theories of Mechanics (Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, 2004). 26. M. F. Beatty, Appl. Mech. Rev. 40, 1699 (1987). 27. M. Destrade and G. Saccomandi, Phys. Rev. E 72, 016620 (2005). 28. R. M. Jones, Deformation Theory of Plasticity (Bull Ridge Corporation, Blacksburg, 2009). 29. S.-i Ito and S. Yukawa, Phys. Rev. E 90, 042909 (2014). 30. S.-i Ito and S. Yukawa, J. Phys. Soc. Jap. 83, 124005 (2014). 31. Z. Hal´asz, A. Nakahara, S. Kitsunezaki, and F. Kun, Phys. Rev. E 96, 033006 (2017). 32. S. Kitsunezaki, A. Sasaki, A. Nishimoto, T. Mizuguchi, Y. Matsuo and A. Nakahara, Eur. Phys. J. E 40, 88 (2017). 33. K. Miyazaki and D. R. Reichman, Phys. Rev. E 66, 050501(R) (2002). 34. M. Fuchs and M. E. Cates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 248304 (2002). 35. M. Ballauff, J. M. Brader, S. U. Egelhaaf, M. Fuchs, J. Horbach, N. Koumakis, M. Kr¨uger, M. Laurati, K. J. Mutch, G. Petekidis, M. Siebenb¨urger, Th. Voigtmann, and J. Zausch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 215701 (2013). 36. L. Mohan, R. T. Bonnecaze, and M. Cloitre, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 268301 (2013).