Quasicrystalline Three-Dimensional Foams Arxiv:1610.09286V1
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Quasicrystalline three-dimensional foams S.J. Cox1, F. Graner2, R. Mosseri3, J.-F. Sadoc4 1 Department of Mathematics, Aberystwyth University, SY23 3BZ, UK 2 Laboratoire Matiere` et Systemes` Complexes, Universite´ Denis Diderot - Paris 7, CNRS UMR 7057, 10 rue A. Domon et L. Duquet, F-75205 Paris Cedex 13, France 3 LPTMC, UPMC, CNRS UMR 7600, Sorbonne Universites,´ 4 place Jussieu, F-75005 Paris, France 4 Laboratoire de Physique des Solides, CNRS-UMR 8502, Bat.ˆ 510, Universite´ Paris-sud Paris-Saclay, F 91405 Orsay cedex, France. August 13, 2018 Abstract We present a numerical study of quasiperiodic foams, in which the bubbles are generated as duals of quasiperiodic Frank-Kasper phases. These foams are investigated as potential candi- dates to the celebrated Kelvin problem for the partition of three-dimensional space with equal volume bubbles and minimal surface area. Interestingly, one of the computed structures falls close (but still slightly above) the best known Weaire-Phelan periodic candidate. This gives additional clues to understanding the main geometrical ingredients driving the Kelvin problem. 1 Introduction Aqueous foams are space-filling packings of bubbles, with soap film surfaces and configurations governed by the celebrated Plateau’s laws. The physics of foams covers a large variety of systems and associated properties [1]. In parallel, foams prove interesting in solving and/or illustrating well-posed geometrical questions related to minimal surfaces. A paradigmatic example is the Kelvin problem [2, 3]: What is the least surface area of equal-volume objects which partition space? What is the global energy minimum of a foam in which the bubbles all have exactly the arXiv:1610.09286v1 [cond-mat.soft] 28 Oct 2016 same volume? These two formulations, one in mathematics and one in physics, are equivalent because the energy of a foam is proportional to the surface area of its soap films. The problem is difficult because there are many candidates and they all have comparable surface areas. Kelvin himself conjectured a periodic candidate, where each (identical) bubble has the shape of a truncated octahedron with slightly curved surfaces [2, 3]. A better periodic candidate was found a century later by Weaire and Phelan [4], who studied a periodic arrangement of two topologically- distinct types of bubbles with respectively 12 and 14 faces. The bubble centroids are located at the vertices of the well known A15 Frank-Kasper (F-K) phase [5]. F-K phases are polytetrahedral periodic packings, which can be easily dualized, leading to plausible skeletons for foam structures. As a consequence, many other F-K phases have been (unsuccessfully) tested with respect to the Kelvin problem (e.g. [6]), leaving the Weaire-Phelan candidate still unbeaten. F-K phases play an important role in a rather different area of material science, that of qua- sicrystalline materials. Indeed, they often appear nearby in phase diagrams, and display quite 1 similar local atomic order (especially with icosahedral patterns). It is possible to generalize the concept of a F-K phase to non-periodic structures, and for instance to define a quasicrystalline F-K phase by atomic decoration on top of a quasiperiodic tiling [7]. The aim of the present paper is to analyze the related quasiperiodic foams with respect to the Kelvin problem. Section 2 gives an introduction to foams, Plateau’s laws, and the Kelvin and Weaire-Phelan candidates. Section 3 describes the quasicrystalline F-K structures and their dual bubble skeletons. Section 4 presents our numerical results on quasiperiodic foams, compared to previously obtained results for periodic foams. Section 5 summarises our approach, discusses the results and opens perspectives. 2 From Kelvin to Weaire-Phelan 2.1 Foams Kelvin’s initial motivation [2, 3] was to look for a possible structure for the aether that permeated space. He required a structure through which light could propagate like sound does in an elastic solid medium. The puzzle was that light admits only two transverse polarizations, while sound also admits a third, longitudinal one. Kelvin looked for a low-density material, with a high ratio of its bulk to shear elastic moduli, and an elegant structure close to perfection. Thus he looked for a foam. Nowadays, the interest in the aether has faded, but not the interest in foams, which have numer- ous industrial properties in addition to being aesthetic and useful for scientists [1]. In addition, this unsolved problem specifically attracts mathematicians and physicists to work together, because the simplicity of the question contrasts with the difficulty of addressing it [8], and even draws the at- tention of architects seeking efficient partitions of space and optimal use of material. Of course we do not expect a foam to spontaneously find the global minimum of surface area among the many, many local minima. But the parallels between aqueous foams and least-area partitions of space provide a rich source of cross-fertilisation [9]. An equilibrium dry aqueous foam is a collection of bubbles that fit together without gaps or overlap. The shape of each interface between two bubbles, i.e. each soap film, is governed by surface tension, which acts to reduce the surface area of each film to a minimum. The volume of gas in each bubble can be kept fixed (at least over short to intermediate time-scales of seconds to minutes) and, under controlled conditions (see e.g. [10]), foams with bubbles of equal volume can be produced. Hence such a foam is an area-minimizing space-filling structure, and each realisation can be thought of as a candidate structure that meets the conditions of the Kelvin problem. From foams comes the solid background to build upon, called Plateau’s laws [1, 9, 11]. In any least-area partition the interfaces must meet three-fold along edges (at equal angles of 120◦), and the edges along which the interfaces meet themselves meet four-fold at vertices with the tetrahedral ◦ angle, θt = arccos(−1=3) ≈ 109:5 ≈ 1:91 rad. That these laws are a consequence of surface area minimization was proven by Taylor [12], building on work by Almgren [13, 14]. A purely topological consequence of the fact that edges are three-fold and vertices are four-fold which in this case arises from Plateau’s laws, but which can also be observed in systems which do not obey them) is that, on each individual bubble, the number of faces F and the average number of edges per face heF i are linked through [1] (6 − heF i)F = 12. Further, the Young-Laplace law relates the bubble pressures to the (mean) curvature of each interface. If two bubbles share a face, this face has a constant mean curvature, while separately its radii of curvature can vary, and its Gaussian curvature too. If two bubbles which share a face have the same pressure, this face has uniformly zero mean curvature, and hence at each point its radii of 2 curvature are opposed, although both can be non-zero like the Gaussian curvature. 2.2 Periodic structures The Kelvin problem has a simpler counterpart in 2D: what is the minimal perimeter of equal-area objects which tile the plane? The solution, a tiling of regular hexagons, was known to the Romans from their observation of beehives, but its rigorous, computer-aided proof is recent [15]. Regular hexagons have the same shape, the same pressure, flat sides, obey Plateau’s laws, and tile the plane. Their perimeter is only a few percent above that of the circle, which is the exact theoretical lower bound for any single object in general, but which does not tile the plane. Back in 3D, there exists a simpler variant of the Kelvin problem: what is the minimum sur- face area of a bubble which tiles space by periodically repeating itself? There is no shape which transposes to 3D all the properties of 2D regular hexagons. The main property one is tempted to generalize is that 2D regular hexagons have identical flat faces. Can one conceive a 3D bubble with exactly identical flat faces? If one blindly applies Plateau’s laws, one finds that such a bubble would necessarily have eF = 2π=(π − θt) ≈ 5:104 edges per face and ≈13.39 faces[16, 17, 18]. Note that these considerations, derived here for bubbles obeying Plateau’s laws, correspond to one of the two ideal solutions for three-dimensional packings – the trigonometric solution rather than the algebraic one – discussed by Coxeter [19, 20], both of which he called “statistical honeycombs”. Such ideal bubble packing is of course impossible to realize in practice. Still, since we can calculate analytically the surface area of a regular bubble obeying Plateau’s laws with any number of faces [21], interpolation indicates that this hypothetical, so-called “ideal” bubble would have a surface area of ≈5.254 (hereafter, surface areas are given with respect to bubbles of unit volume). It is reasonable to conjecture that no actual bubble could beat this value, and hereafter we use it as a reference for comparison with various candidates. Note that this lower bound for bubbles obeying Plateau’s laws and tiling the space is only a few percent above the exact theoretical lower bound for any single object in general, which is that of the sphere (≈4.836). For actually realisable bubbles, one looks for a unit cell which periodically repeats itself, as in a monatomic crystal, with faces which have everywhere two opposed radii of curvature, and obeys Plateau’s laws. The candidate proposed by Kelvin [2] is known as the Kelvin structure, the truncated octahedron or the tetrakaidecahedron. It has eight hexagonal faces and six square faces, hence 14 faces and an average of 5.14 edges per face, close to that of the hypothetical ideal bubble.