2019
DOI: 10.4171/ifb/426
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A homogenization result in the gradient theory of phase transitions

Abstract: A variational model in the context of the gradient theory for fluid-fluid phase transitions with small scale heterogeneities is studied. In particular, the case where the scale ε of the small homogeneities is of the same order of the scale governing the phase transition is considered. The interaction between homogenization and the phase transitions process will lead, in the limit as ε → 0, to an anisotropic interfacial energy.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
30
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
30
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Here the periodic structure of the material is modeled by the periodicity of the function W in the first variable. The sharp interface model was derived by Braides and Zeppieri in [17] for the one dimensional case N = 1 and by Fonseca, Hagerty, Popovici, and the first author in [22] (see also [20]) for N > 1. When the homogenization takes place at the level of the singular perturbation we refer to [7,8,27,28].…”
Section: Previous Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Here the periodic structure of the material is modeled by the periodicity of the function W in the first variable. The sharp interface model was derived by Braides and Zeppieri in [17] for the one dimensional case N = 1 and by Fonseca, Hagerty, Popovici, and the first author in [22] (see also [20]) for N > 1. When the homogenization takes place at the level of the singular perturbation we refer to [7,8,27,28].…”
Section: Previous Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In view of (H.2), we can assume m large enough so that the sets z i (Q r m ) are pairwise disjoint. Let us remark that the advantage to work with (22) instead of ( 21) is that the latter is a purely geometric problem, i.e., the functional that we aim at minimizing does not depend on the specific choice of the parametrization. We are able to prove an explicit upper bound on the Euclidean length of certain solutions to the minimization problem in (22) (see Proposition 3.2).…”
Section: Sketch Of the Strategymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations