1: \documentclass[aps,twocolumn,showpacs]{revtex4}
2: \usepackage{graphicx}
3: \usepackage{amsfonts,mathptm}
4: \begin{document}
5: \title{A dynamical approach to the spatiotemporal aspects of the
6: Portevin-Le Chatelier effect: Chaos, turbulence and band
7: propagation}
8: \author{G. Ananthakrishna$^{1,2}$ and M.S. Bharathi$^{1}$}
9: \affiliation{$^1$ Materials Research Centre, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore-560012, India\\
10: $^{2}$ Centre for Condensed Matter Theory, Indian Institute of Science,
11: Bangalore-560012, India}
12:
13:
14: \begin{abstract}
15:
16: The analysis of experimental time series obtained from single and
17: poly-crystals subjected to a constant strain rate tests report an
18: intriguing dynamical crossover from a low dimensional chaotic
19: state at medium strain rates to an infinite dimensional power law
20: state of stress drops at high strain rates. We present results of
21: an extensive study of all aspects of the PLC effect within the
22: context a recent model that reproduces this crossover. We
23: characterize the dynamics of this crossover by studying the
24: distribution of the Lyapunov exponents as a function of the strain
25: rate, with special attention to system size effects. The
26: distribution of the exponents changes from a small set of positive
27: exponents in the chaotic regime to a dense set of null exponents
28: in the scaling regime. As the latter is similar to the result in
29: the GOY shell model for turbulence, we compare the results of our
30: model with that of the GOY model. Interestingly, the null
31: exponents in our model themselves obey a power law. The study is
32: complimented by visualizing the configuration of dislocations
33: through the slow manifold analysis. This shows that while a large
34: proportion of dislocations are in the pinned state in the chaotic
35: regime, most of them are pushed to the threshold of unpinning in
36: the scaling regime, thus providing an insight into the mechanism
37: of crossover. We also show that this model qualitatively
38: reproduces the different types of deformation bands seen in
39: experiments. At high strain rates where propagating bands are
40: seen, the model equations can be reduced to the Fisher-Kolmogorov
41: equation for propagative fronts. Marginal stability analysis shows
42: that the velocity of the propagating of the bands varies linearly
43: with the strain rate and inversely with the dislocation density.
44: These results are consistent with the known experimental results.
45: We also discuss the connection between the nature of band types
46: and the dynamics in the respective regimes. The analysis
47: demonstrates that this simple dynamical model captures the
48: complex spatio-temporal features of the PLC effect.
49: \end{abstract}
50: \pacs{05.65.+b, 05.45.Ac, 62.20.Fe, 05.90.+m}
51: \maketitle
52:
53:
54: \section{INTRODUCTION}
55:
56: Plastic deformation is a highly dissipative irreversible
57: nonequilibrium process where nonlinearities play a fundamental
58: role. Under normal conditions, one finds homogeneous deformation.
59: However, under suitable conditions of deformation, different
60: types of spatial and temporal patterns are observed. At a
61: microscopic level, these patterns arise due to the collective
62: behavior of dislocations. These can be broadly classified by the
63: associated time and length scales. For example, the persistent
64: slip bands observed in cyclic deformation is an example of nearly
65: permanent pattern lasting over long time scales \cite{KFA}. On the
66: other hand, a type of propagative bands referred to as the
67: L\"uders bands observed in uniaxial tension tests are
68: characterized by short time scale \cite{KFA}. Yet another and even
69: more complex spatio-temporal patterns are observed during tension
70: tests of dilute metallic alloys in a certain range of strain rates
71: and temperatures. This phenomenon has come to be known as the
72: Portevin-Le Chatelier (PLC) effect \cite{PLC}. Here a uniform
73: deformation mode becomes unstable leading to a spatially and
74: temporally inhomogeneous state. The instability manifests itself
75: in the form of serrations on the stress-strain curves of the
76: sample \cite{KFA,HZ}. Each stress drop is generally associated
77: with the nucleation and often the propagation of a band of
78: localized plastic deformation. In poly-crystals, these bands and
79: the associated serrations are classified into three generic types.
80: On increasing strain rate or decreasing the temperature, one first
81: finds the type C band, identified with randomly nucleated static
82: bands with large characteristic stress drops on the stress- strain
83: curve. The serrations are quite regular. Then the type B
84: 'hopping' bands are seen. The serrations are more irregular with
85: amplitudes that are smaller than that for the type C. The bands
86: formed are still localized and static in nature, but forming ahead
87: of the previous band in a spatially correlated way giving the
88: visual impression of a hopping propagation. Finally, one observes
89: the continuously propagating type A bands associated with small
90: stress drops. (In single crystals such a clear classification does
91: not exist.) These different types of PLC bands are believed to
92: represent distinct correlated states of dislocations in the bands.
93:
94: The well accepted classical explanation of the PLC effect is via
95: the dynamic strain aging (DSA) concept first introduced by
96: Cottrell \cite{Cottrell} and later extended by others
97: \cite{KFA,van,penning,Kubin85}. In the Cotrell's picture, the
98: dynamic strain aging refers to the interaction of mobile
99: dislocations with the diffusing solute atoms. At low strain rates
100: (or high temperatures) the average velocity of dislocations is low
101: and there is sufficient time for the solute atoms to diffuse to
102: the dislocations and pin them (called as aging). Thus, longer the
103: dislocations are arrested, larger will be the stress required to
104: unpin them. When these dislocations are unpinned, they move at
105: large speeds till they are arrested again. At high strain rates
106: (or low temperatures), the time available for solute atoms to
107: diffuse to the dislocations decreases and hence the stress
108: required to unpin them decreases. Thus, in a range of strain rates
109: and temperatures where these two time scales are of the same order
110: of magnitude, the PLC instability manifests. The competition
111: between the slow rate of pinning and sudden unpinning of the
112: dislocations, at the macroscopic level translates into a negative
113: strain rate sensitivity (SRS) of the flow stress as a function of
114: strain rate which is the basic instability mechanism used in most
115: phenomenological models \cite{KFA,HZ}. Slow-fast dynamics and the
116: negative flow rate characteristic is common to many stick-slip
117: systems such as frictional sliding \cite{Pers}, fault dynamics
118: \cite{Carlson} and peeling of an adhesive tape
119: \cite{Maug} and charge density waves \cite{Dumas}.\\
120:
121:
122: There are two different types of challenges in dealing with the
123: PLC effect. First, understanding the collective behavior of
124: dislocations which has been slow largely due to lack of techniques
125: for describing the cooperative behavior of dislocations. Second,
126: the PLC effect involves collective modes of dislocations where
127: both fast and slow times scales play equally important role which
128: requires specific techniques of nonlinear dynamics (as we shall
129: see). Further, these time scales themselves evolve as a function
130: of strain rate and temperature which in turn leads to different
131: types of serrations. At low strain rate, the existence of both
132: fast ( time scales over which stress drops occur) and slow time
133: scales ( loading time scales) are clearly displayed in the stress
134: -strain curves. However, at high strain rate, as internal
135: (plastic) relaxation is not complete, and a clear demarkation of
136: time scales becomes difficult. This along with the corresponding
137: length scales ( band widths), which also evolve, points to an
138: extremely complex underlying dynamics.
139:
140: The inherent nonlinearity and the presence of multiple time scales
141: necessitates the use of tools and concepts of nonlinear dynamics
142: for a proper understanding of this phenomenon. Early theories
143: based on DSA do not deal with the temporal aspect
144: \cite{van,penning,Kubin85} and thus are unsuitable for analyzing
145: the dynamical aspects of the PLC effect. The first dynamical
146: approach was undertaken in early 80s by Ananthakrishna and
147: coworkers \cite{Anan82}, which by its very nature affords a
148: natural basis for the description of the time dependent aspects of
149: the PLC effect. Further, it also allows for explicit inclusion and
150: interplay of different time scales inherent in the dynamics of
151: dislocations. The original model which attempts to address the
152: time dependence of the phenomenon uses three types of dislocation
153: densities assumed to represent the collective degrees of freedom
154: of dislocations \cite{Anan82}. Despite the simplicity of the
155: model, many generic features of the PLC effect such as the
156: existence of a window of strain rates and temperatures within
157: which it occurs, etc., were correctly reproduced. More
158: importantly, the {\it negative SRS was shown to emerge naturally}
159: in the model, as a result of nonlinear interaction of the
160: participating defects \cite{Anan82,Rajesh}.
161:
162:
163: Due to the dynamical nature of the model, one prediction that is
164: unique to this model is the existence of the chaotic stress drops
165: in a certain range of temperatures and strain rates \cite{Anan83}.
166: This triggered a series of experiments to verify this prediction.
167: The method followed was to analyze the stress-time series
168: \cite{Anan95,Noro97} using dynamical methods \cite{Licht,Abar}.
169: Apart from confirming the chaotic nature of stress drops in a
170: window of strain rates, these attempts have shown that a wealth
171: of dynamical information can be extracted from the stress-time
172: series obtained during the PLC effect \cite{Anan95,Noro97}.
173: Indeed, the number of degrees of freedom estimated from the
174: experimental time series turn out to be same as in the model
175: offering justification for ignoring spatial degrees of freedom.
176: Subsequent efforts to extend this analysis to the time series
177: obtained over a range of strain rates showed {\it an intriguing
178: crossover from a chaotic state at low and medium strain rates to a
179: power law state at high strain rates} \cite{Anan99,Bhar01}. As the
180: crossover is observed in both single and polycrystals, it appears
181: to be insensitive to the microstructure. However, chaotic state is
182: dynamically a distinct state from the power law state as the
183: former involves a small number of degrees of freedom characterized
184: by the self-similarity of the attractor and sensitivity to initial
185: conditions \cite{Abar} while latter is an infinite dimensional
186: state reminiscent of self-organized criticality (SOC)
187: \cite{Bak,Bak96,Jensen}. Due to this basic difference in the
188: nature of the dynamics, most systems exhibit either of these
189: states. More importantly, these studies also demonstrate that the
190: nature of the dynamics in a given strain regime is correlated with
191: the nature of band type. The chaotic state has been identified
192: with the type B bands and the scaling regime at high strain rate
193: with the propagating type A bands \cite{Bhar01}. These authors
194: also make a connection between the transition in the nature of
195: serration between the type B and type A bands regime of strain
196: rates with the Anderson's transition in condensed matter physics.
197: Indeed, recently the spatio-temporal features of the PLC effect
198: have attracted attention from physicists also \cite{Dann}. Thus,
199: it appears that the PLC effect is a storehouse of many paradigms
200: in condensed matter physics. Understanding these connections
201: between dynamics and general features of the PLC effect would
202: give insight into the rich physics. As the above studies
203: underscore the importance of nonlinearity, it demands a dynamical
204: approach to the PLC effect.
205:
206:
207: The dynamics of the crossover as a function of strain rate is {\it
208: unusual in a number of ways}. First, the PLC effect is one of the
209: two rare instances where such an intriguing crossover phenomenon
210: is seen, the other being in the hydrodynamic turbulence
211: \cite{Lib}. Second, the power law, both in the PLC effect and
212: turbulence, arises at high drive rates \cite{Lib,Bohr}. Thus, it
213: would be interesting to examine the similarity and differences
214: with hydrodynamic turbulence by comparing results of the Lyapunov
215: spectrum of the model for the PLC effect and GOY shell model of
216: turbulence \cite{Yam87,Bohr}. Another motivation is that such a
217: study helps us to compare the nature of the Lyapunov spectrum with
218: the conventional SOC systems seen at low drives ( such as those in
219: earthquakes \cite{Guten}, acoustic emission during volcanic
220: activity \cite{Diod}, Barkhausen noise \cite{Barkhou}). ( For
221: lack of anything better, we shall reserve SOC for power law
222: situations at low drives.) Finally, as different types of bands
223: are a characteristic feature of the PLC effect, we investigate the
224: connection between spatial aspects and the nature of the dynamics.
225:
226: The fully dynamical nature of the model and it prediction of
227: chaotic stress drops at intermediate strain rates as found in
228: experiments, makes it most suitable for studying this crossover
229: by including spatial degrees of freedom. The paper reports a
230: detailed investigation of all these issues ( some of which has
231: been reported in brief earlier \cite{Bhar02,Bhar03}) within the
232: context of an extension of Ananthakrishna's model for the PLC
233: effect. Particular attention will be paid to study the system size
234: effects during the crossover.
235:
236: Section II, briefly introduces the dynamical model and its
237: extension to include spatial degrees of freedom. Section III
238: contains the numerical procedure used. In Section IV, we
239: introduces the background material used for the study. Section V
240: contains a comparison of the results of analysis of experimental
241: time series with that of the model. Section VI, contains all the
242: major results on the dynamics of crossover including the evolution
243: of the Lyapunov spectrum with special attention to study the
244: system size effects as a function of the strain rate along with
245: the analysis of the distribution of null exponents in the power
246: law regime of stress drops. The section also includes a comparison
247: of the results of the model with that of the GOY model for
248: turbulence followed by the slow manifold method of visual
249: realization of dislocation configurations. Finally, in section VII
250: we discuss both analytical and numerical results on the nature of
251: dislocation bands. We conclude the paper with a few general
252: comments.
253:
254:
255: \section{\bf THE ANANTHAKRSHANA's MODEL}
256:
257:
258: In the dynamical model due to Ananthakrishna and coworkers
259: \cite{Anan82}, the well separated time scales mentioned in the DSA
260: are mimicked by three types of dislocations, namely, the fast
261: mobile, immobile and the 'decorated' Cottrell type dislocations.
262: The basic idea of the model is that all the qualitative features
263: of the PLC effect emerge from the nonlinear interaction of these
264: few dislocation populations, assumed to represent the collective
265: degrees of freedom of the system. As the model has been studied in
266: detail by our group and others including an extension to the case
267: of fatigue \cite{Bekele,Glazov,Zaiser}, following the notation in
268: Ref. \cite{Rajesh}, we shall briefly outline the model in the
269: scaled variables. In our model, a natural basis for including the
270: spatial coupling is through the cross-slip mechanism proposed
271: earlier \cite{KFA} with an important difference (see below). The
272: model consists of densities of mobile, immobile, and Cottrell's
273: type dislocations denoted by $\rho_m(x,t)$, $\rho_{im}(x,t)$ and
274: $\rho_c(x,t)$ respectively, in the scaled form. The evolution
275: equations are:
276: \begin{eqnarray}
277: \nonumber
278: \frac{\partial{\rho_m}}{\partial t} & = & -b_0\rho_m^2
279: -\rho_m\rho_{im} +\rho_{im} - a \rho_m + \phi_{eff}^m\rho_m \\
280: &+&\frac{D}{\rho_{im}}\frac{\partial^2 (\phi_{eff}^m(x)\rho_m)}{\partial x^2},\label{Eq: xeqn}\\
281: \frac{\partial{\rho_{im}}}{\partial t} & = & b_0(b_0\rho_m^2
282: -\rho_m\rho_{im} -\rho_{im}+a\rho_c), \label{Eq: yeqn}\\
283: \frac{\partial{\rho_c}}{\partial t} & = & c(\rho_m-\rho_c)
284: \label{Eq: zeqn}.
285: \end{eqnarray}
286: \noindent The model includes the following dislocation mechanisms:
287: immobilization of two mobile dislocations due to the formation of
288: locks ($b_0 \rho_m^2$), the annihilation of a mobile dislocation
289: with an immobile one ($\rho_m\rho_{im}$), the remobilisation of
290: the immobile dislocation due to stress or thermal activation
291: ($\rho_{im}$). It also includes the immobilisation of mobile
292: dislocations due to solute atoms ($a\rho_m$). Once a mobile
293: dislocation starts acquiring solute atoms we regard it as the
294: Cottrell's type dislocation $ \rho_c$. As they progressively
295: acquire more solute atoms, they eventually stop, then they are
296: considered as immobile dislocations $\rho_{im}$. Alternately, the
297: aggregation of solute atoms can be regarded as the definition of
298: $\rho_c$, ie., $\rho_c = \int_{-\infty}^t
299: dt^{\prime}\rho_m(t^{\prime} ) K(t-t^{\prime})$, where $K(t)$ is
300: an appropriate kernel. For the sake of simplicity, this kernel is
301: modelled through a single time scale, $K(t) = e^{-ct} $ . The
302: convoluted nature of the integral physically implies that the
303: mobile dislocations to which solute atoms aggregate earlier will
304: be aged more than those which acquire solute atoms later (see ref.
305: \cite{Rajesh}). The fifth term in Eqn.(1) represents the rate of
306: multiplication of dislocations due to cross-slip. This depends on
307: the velocity of the mobile dislocations taken to be $ V_m(\phi) =
308: \phi_{eff}^m$, where $\phi_{eff} = (\phi - h \rho_{im}^{1/2})$ is
309: the scaled effective stress, $\phi$ the scaled stress, $m$ the
310: velocity exponent and $h$ a work hardening parameter.
311:
312:
313: The nature of the spatial coupling in the PLC effect has been a
314: matter of much debate \cite{KFA}. Several mechanisms have been
315: suggested as a source of spatial coupling, such as compatibility
316: stresses between the slipped and the un-slipped regions, long
317: range interactions, and triaxiality of stresses \cite{KFA}. Within
318: the scope of our model, cross-slip is a natural source of spatial
319: coupling, as dislocations generated due to cross slip at a point
320: spread over to the neighboring elements. Let $\Delta x$ be an
321: elementary length. Then, the flux $\Phi(x)$ flowing from $x \pm
322: \Delta x$ and out of $x$ is given by
323: \begin{equation}
324: \Phi(x) + \frac{p}{2} \left[\Phi(x+\Delta x) - 2 \Phi(x) + \Phi(x
325: - \Delta x)\right] ).
326: \end{equation}
327: where $\Phi(x) = \rho_m(x)V_m(x)$ and $p$ is the probability of
328: cross-slip spreading into neighboring elements. Expanding $\Phi(x
329: \pm \Delta x)$ and keeping the leading terms, we get
330: \begin{equation}
331: \rho_m V_m + \frac{p}{2}\frac{\partial^2(\rho_m V_m)}{\partial
332: x^2} (\Delta x)^2.
333: \end{equation} We further note that cross-slip
334: spreads only into regions of minimum back stress. Here, we
335: consider the back stress is taken to result from the immobile
336: dislocation density ahead of it. Thus, we use $\Delta x^2 =
337: <\Delta x^2> = \bar {r}^2 \rho_{ im}^{-1}$, where $<\ldots>$
338: refers to the ensemble average and $\bar{r}^2$ is an elementary
339: (dimensionless) length. Finally, $a$, $b_0$ and $c$ are the scaled
340: rate constants referring, respectively, to the concentration of
341: solute atoms slowing down the mobile dislocations, the thermal and
342: athermal reactivation of immobile dislocations, and the rate at
343: which the solute atoms are gathering around the mobile
344: dislocations. We note here that the order of magnitudes of the
345: constants have been identified in Ref.
346: \cite{Anan82,Bekele,Zaiser}. These equations are coupled to the
347: machine equation
348: \begin{equation}
349: \frac{d\phi(t)}{dt}=
350: d[\dot{\epsilon}-\frac{1}{l}\int_0^l\rho_m(x,t)
351: \phi_{eff}^m(x,t)dx], \label{Eq: seqn}
352: \end{equation}
353: where $\dot\epsilon$ is the scaled applied strain rate, $d$ the
354: scaled effective modulus of the machine and the sample, and $l$
355: the dimensionless length of the sample. (We reserve $\dot
356: {\epsilon}_a $ for the unscaled strain rate.) We also note here
357: that there is a feed back mechanism between Eq. \ref{Eq: seqn} and
358: Eq.(1). The machine equation which determines the stress depends
359: on the the difference between the applied strain rate and average
360: plastic strain rate generated in the sample. Thus, the nature of
361: internal relaxation can influence stress generated in the sample
362: which in turn determines the dislocation multiplication in Eq.
363: (1). This type of global coupling (Eq. \ref{Eq: seqn}) is common
364: to many other situations for instance in the nonlinear transport
365: properties of charge density waves ( in blue bronze for example)
366: \cite{Dumas}. We shall make some comments on this later.
367:
368:
369:
370:
371: \section{NUMERICAL SOLUTION OF THE MODEL}
372:
373: We first note that the spatial dependence of $\rho_{im}$ and
374: $\rho_c$ arises only through that of $\rho_m$. We solve the above
375: set of equations by discretizing the specimen length into $N$
376: equal parts. Then, $\rho_m(j,t)$, $\rho_{im}(j,t)$, $\rho_c(j,t)$,
377: $j= 1,...,N$, and ${\phi}(t)$ are solved. The widely differing
378: time scales \cite{Rajesh,Rajesh00,Bhar02} calls for appropriate
379: care in the numerical solutions. We use a variable step fourth
380: order Runge-Kutta scheme with an accuracy of $10^{-6}$ for all the
381: four variables. The spatial derivative in $\rho_m$ is approximated
382: by its central difference. The initial values of the dislocation
383: densities are so chosen that they mimic the values in real
384: samples. They are uniformly distributed with a Gaussian spread
385: along the sample. However, for most calculations, we have used the
386: steady state values for the variables as the long term evolution
387: does not depend on the initial values. As for the boundary
388: conditions, we note that the sample is strained at the grips. This
389: means that there is a high density of immobile dislocations at the
390: ends of the sample. We simulate this by employing two orders of
391: magnitude higher values for $\rho_{im}(j,t)$ at the end points $j
392: = 1$, and $N$ than the rest of the sample. Further, as bands
393: cannot propagate into the grips, we use $\rho_m(j,t)
394: =\rho_c(j,t)=0$ at $j=1$ and $N$.
395:
396: For the original model ($D =0$), it has been shown that the fixed
397: point of the system of equations becomes unstable in a certain
398: range of parameter values. In particular, as a function of the
399: applied strain rate, the PLC state is reached through a Hopf
400: bifurcation and is terminated by a reverse Hopf bifurcation ( with
401: the other parameters kept in the instability domain). This feature
402: is retained with the addition of the spatial degrees of freedom
403: except that the number of complex conjugate roots are 2N, the
404: negative ones are N and one zero exponent. We find that the
405: instability domain in $\dot\epsilon$ increases when the values of
406: the other parameters $a,b_0,c,d,m$ are taken as in Ref.
407: \cite{Rajesh00}. This is due to fact that the range of $\dot
408: \epsilon$ depends on the value of $D$ due to the global coupling
409: in Eq. \ref{Eq: seqn}. ( The domain converges quickly as a
410: function of $N$.) The boundary of $ \dot \epsilon $ is
411: approximately in the range 10 to 1000 for $a = 0.8, b_0 = 0.0005,
412: c = 0.08, d =0.00006, m = 3.0$, $h=0$ with $D = 0.5$, beyond which
413: a uniform steady state exits. A set of four eigen values are shown
414: in Fig. \ref{fig0}. The numerical results reported in the present
415: work are for the above values. However, the results hold true for
416: a wide range of values of other parameters in the instability
417: domain including a range of values of $D$. Various system sizes
418: are used depending upon the property studied, but are generally
419: in the range $N$=100 to 3333. A sequence of values of N are used
420: wherever convergence of the properties are investigated.
421: \begin{figure}
422: \includegraphics[height=4.5cm,width=7.5cm]{figure1.ps}
423: \caption{Eigen value spectrum of the fixed point for the model.
424: $\omega_r$ and $\omega_i$ refer to the real and imaginary parts of
425: the eigen value.}
426: \label{fig0}
427: \end{figure}
428:
429: \section{METHODOLOGY}
430:
431: As our approach is fully dynamical and keeping in view the
432: materials science community, we collect here a few definitions and
433: provide some details of the methodology used in the analysis.
434: Characterizing the dynamics of the model equations is carried out
435: by studying the Lyapunov spectrum. The number of Lyapunov
436: exponents $M$ for a given $N$ is $M=3 N +1$. We shall also use two
437: other well know invariants namely the Kaplan-Yorke dimension
438: $D_{KY} =j+\frac{\sum^j_{i=1}\lambda_i}{\vert\lambda_{j+1}\vert}$,
439: where $j$ is such that $\sum^{j}_{i=1}\lambda_i>0,
440: \sum^{j+1}_{i=1}\lambda_i <0$ and the Kolmogorov entropy $ H
441: =\sum^p_{i=1}\lambda_i$ such that $\lambda_p\ge 0 $ and
442: $\lambda_{p+1} <0$. One important issue that is relevant to
443: systems with many degrees of freedom is the existence of a
444: limiting density for the Lyapunov spectrum as the system size is
445: increased. This requires that we should ascertain if $\lambda_j$
446: versus $x=j/L^d$ converges to a well-defined asymptotic density
447: function $\Lambda(x)$ with $x \in [0,1]$. ( See Ref. \cite{Bohr}.)
448: We address this issue by calculating the spectrum for various
449: system sizes $N$ = 100 to 3333 which covers approximately two
450: orders in $M$. In particular, such a study will be useful in
451: comparing the results of our model with the GOY shell model for
452: turbulence \cite{Yam87} in the power law regime of stress drops.
453: Then, one expects that $j/D_{KY}$ converges to well defined
454: density function. Following Ref. \cite{Yam87}, we use $j/D_{KY}$
455: verses an appropriately scaled quantity $\lambda_j D_{KY}/H$. This
456: quantity is expected to converge to $f( \lambda_j D_{KY}/H$). ( We
457: note here that the distribution function is proportional to the
458: negative derivative of $f$.) The nature of the converged Lyapunov
459: density function $f(\lambda_j D_{KY}/H)$ as a function of the
460: drive parameter $\dot \epsilon$ can be used to quantify the
461: changes the dynamics during the crossover.
462:
463:
464: As stated earlier, a proper description of the PLC effect requires
465: a description of both the slow and fast time scales which in turn
466: requires special techniques in nonlinear dynamics. These two time
467: scales are transparent in the model equations where Eq. (\ref{Eq:
468: xeqn}) represents a fast dynamics compared to the rest ( both Eq.
469: (\ref{Eq: yeqn}) and (\ref{Eq: seqn}) are slow while (\ref{Eq:
470: zeqn}) falls in between). Such a system can be studied by
471: eliminating the fast variable thereby allowing a reduction in the
472: dimensionality of the system \cite{Milik}. To illustrate this
473: consider
474: \begin{eqnarray}
475: \mu \dot x & = & f(x,y,\mu) \label{fast}\\
476: \dot y & = & g(x,y,\mu)\label{slow}
477: \end{eqnarray}
478: where $\mu$ is small parameter and $x \in \mathbb{R}^p$ and $y
479: \in \mathbb{R}^q$. The main feature of such systems is that $x$
480: evolves much faster than $y$ unless $f(x,y,\mu)$ is small. In the
481: vicinity of the slow manifold defined by $f(x,y,\mu)=0$, the
482: dynamics is characterized by the evolution of the slow variable
483: $y$. Thus, there is a reduction in the dimensionality of the
484: system. On the other hand, if one is interested in the fast
485: sub-system, using a scaled time $\tau = t/\mu$, we get the
486: corresponding fast variable $x$ defined by Eq. \ref{fast} where
487: the slow variables $y$ act as parameters (obtained from Eq.
488: \ref{slow}). This subspace is clearly the complimentary subspace
489: of the slow manifold. We shall use these two subspaces for the
490: visualization of dislocation configurations in the high strain
491: rate power law regime and obtain the band velocity at high strain
492: rates respectively.
493:
494: The analysis of the experimental stress-time series is carried
495: out by estimating both correlation dimension $\nu$ and the
496: Lyapunov spectrum. These methods involve embedding the scalar time
497: series in a higher dimensional space using time-delay technique
498: \cite{Pack,Abar}. Given a time series \{$\sigma_j \vert j=
499: 1,..,M\}$, one first constructs vectors $\vec{\xi}_i = (\sigma_i,
500: \sigma_{i - \tau}, \sigma_{i - 2\tau},...,\sigma_{M - (d-1)\tau})$
501: in a $d$ dimensional space. The assumption here is that the actual
502: dynamics can be unfolded by embedding the time series in a higher
503: dimensional space in which the original attractor resides. (In
504: addition, surrogate data analysis was also carried out in
505: \cite{Anan99}.) Then, a quantitative estimate of the self
506: similarity of the attractor, namely the correlation dimension,
507: $\nu$, can be obtained by calculating the integral \cite{Grass}
508: $C(r) = \frac{1}{N_T} \sum \Theta ( r - \vert \vec {\xi}_i - \vec
509: {\xi}_j \vert ) \sim r^{\nu}$, where $N_T$ is the total number of
510: points in the sum. Correlation dimension also provides a lower
511: bound for the number degrees of freedom required for a dynamical
512: description of the system which is given by the minimum integer
513: larger than $\nu +1$ \cite{Ding}. The geometrical interpretation
514: of these degrees of freedom is that they correspond to the
515: subspace to which the trajectories are confined.
516: \begin{figure}
517: \includegraphics[height=6cm,width=8cm]{figure2.ps}
518: \caption{(a) \& (b) Experimental stress-time series: (a) chaotic
519: state at strain rates $\dot\epsilon_a = 1.7\times 10^{-5}s^{-1}$
520: and (b) power law state at $\dot\epsilon_a=8.3
521: \times10^{-5}s^{-1}$. (c) \& (d) Stress-time series from the
522: model at (c) $\dot\epsilon=120$ (d)$\dot\epsilon=280$.}
523: \label{fig1}
524: \end{figure}
525: The dimension of this subspace can be obtained directly by using
526: singular value decomposition (SVD) \cite{King}. This method is
527: often used for filtering noise component superposed on the time
528: series. However, another use of SVD in the present context is that
529: it is useful for the {\it visualization of the strange
530: attractor}. (This method has been applied to the PLC time series
531: earlier \cite{Noro97}.) The method involves setting up the $m
532: \times d$ trajectory matrix $\bf T$ defined by
533: $(\vec{\xi}_1,\vec{\xi}_2,...,\vec{\xi}_m)$ where $m = M - (d-1)
534: \times \tau$. The eigen values of the matrix are obtained using
535: the standard method of decomposition $ \bf T = \bf{U} \bf{W}
536: \bf{V}^T$, where $\bf U$ is $m \times d$ orthogonal matrix, $\bf
537: V$ is a $d\times d$ unitary matrix and $\bf W$ is the matrix of
538: eigen values of the covariance matrix of $\bf T$ which are all
539: nonnegative. The eigen values usually decrease rapidly saturating
540: to a level below which the changes are minimal. Then the dimension
541: of the attractor is taken to be that corresponding to number at
542: which the eigen values saturate.
543:
544:
545:
546: \section{COMPARISON WITH EXPERIMENTS}
547:
548: To make the motivation clear, we begin by briefly recalling the
549: relevant experimental results on the crossover phenomenon and then
550: compare them with those from the model. The simplest feature to
551: compare is the nature of serrations in the respective regimes of
552: strain rate. Plots of two experimental stress-strain curves from
553: $Cu Al$ single crystals corresponding to the chaotic and power law
554: regimes of applied strain rates are shown in Fig. ~\ref{fig1} a,b.
555: The stress-time series in the intermediate and high strain rate
556: regimes from the model are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig1}c,d. The
557: similarity of the experimental time series with that of the model
558: in the respective regimes are clear.
559: \begin{figure}
560: \includegraphics[height=5cm,width=8.5cm]{figure3.ps}
561: \caption{Singular value spectrum of the experimental time series
562: shown in Fig.~\ref{fig1}a}. \label{fig2}
563: \end{figure}
564:
565: The analysis of the stress-time series given in Fig. \ref{fig1}
566: has been reported in Ref. \cite{Anan99}. The correlation dimension
567: was found to be $\nu = 2.3$. Then, the number of degrees of
568: freedom required for the description of the dynamics of the system
569: given by the minimum integer larger than $\nu +1$ \cite{Ding} is
570: seen to be four, consistent with that used in the original model.
571: As an independent check to obtain the number degrees of freedom,
572: as also for the visualization of the experimental attractor, we
573: have carried out the singular value decomposition of this time
574: series. The normalized eigen values ( with respect the largest) is
575: shown in Fig. ~\ref{fig2}. It is clear that the relative strength
576: of the fourth eigen value drops more than two orders of magnitude
577: compared to the first and changes very little beyond the fourth.
578: Thus, we estimate the dimension of the experimental attractor to
579: be four which is also consistent with that obtained from the
580: correlation dimension. ( For time series from model systems, one
581: usually finds a floor level below which the eigen values saturate.
582: This is taken as the dimension of the actual attractor. However,
583: in real situations, as in the present case, the eigen values do
584: not saturate due to the presence of noise.) Then, for the
585: visualization of the experimental attractor, we can use the
586: dominant eigen values to reconstruct the nature of the attractor.
587: Using the first three principal directions of the subspace $C_i; i
588: =1$ to 3, we have reconstructed the experimental attractor in the
589: space of specifically chosen directions $C_1 - C_2, C_3$ and $C_1$
590: to permit comparison with the attractor obtained from the model.
591: This is shown in Fig. ~\ref{fig3} a for the experimental time
592: series at $\dot {\epsilon}_a = 1.7 \times 10^{-5}s^{-1}$. This can
593: be compared with the strange attractor obtained from the model in
594: the space of $\rho_m,\rho_{im}$ and $\rho_c$ (at an arbitrary
595: spatial location, here $j=50$ and $N=100$) shown in
596: Fig.~\ref{fig3} b for $\dot \epsilon = 120$ corresponding to the
597: mid chaotic region (see below). Note the similarity with the
598: experimental attractor particularly about the linear portion in
599: the phase space (Fig.~\ref{fig3} a). This direction can be
600: identified with the loading direction in Fig.~\ref{fig1} a. Note
601: that the identification of the loading direction is consistent
602: with the absence of growth of $\rho_m$.
603: \begin{figure}
604: \includegraphics[height=4.5cm,width=6.5cm]{figure4a.ps}
605: \includegraphics[height=4.5cm,width=6.5cm]{figure4b.ps}
606: \caption{(a) Reconstructed experimental attractor from the time
607: series shown in Fig.~\ref{fig1}a. (b)Attractor from the model for
608: $N=100$, $j=50$. } \label{fig3}
609: \end{figure}
610:
611: In contrast to the experimental time series at low and medium
612: strain rates, for the time series at the highest strain rate (
613: Fig. \ref{fig1} b), we neither find a positive Lyapunov exponent
614: and nor a converged value of the correlation dimension as was
615: shown in Ref.\cite{Anan99}. However, the distribution of stress
616: drops was shown to obey a power law \cite{Anan99}.
617:
618: Apart from comparing the statistics of stress drops from the model
619: with that of the experimental time series, there is another more
620: important issue, namely, does it generate power law statistics? If
621: so, what mechanism is responsible for this? This is particularly
622: important as the model is fully dynamical and noise free. It is
623: clear that Fig.\ref{fig1} d is similar to Fig. \ref{fig1} b, as
624: there no inherent scale in the magnitudes of the stress drops in
625: both cases and thus it is likely to also show a power law
626: statistics. Indeed, the distribution of stress drop magnitudes,
627: $D(\Delta \phi)$, shown in Fig. \ref{fig4} obtained from long runs
628: for a large system size ( $N =1000$) shows a power law $D(\Delta
629: \phi) \sim \Delta \phi ^{- \alpha }$ over two orders of magnitude
630: which increases with both length of stress series and system size.
631: ( Note that the value of $N$ here nearly three times larger than
632: the results in Ref. \cite{Bhar02}, Fig. 3b and thus, the power law
633: is well converged with respect to the system size. ) Surprisingly,
634: experimental points ($\bullet$) corresponding to $\dot
635: {\epsilon}_a = 8.3 \times 10^{-5} s^{-1}$ also fall on the same
636: curve with an exponent value $\alpha \approx 1.1$. ( We have
637: scaled the experimental points by a constant amount along both the
638: axis to show that these points also fall on the same line.) The
639: distribution of the duration's of the stress drops $D(\Delta t)
640: \sim \Delta t^{ -\beta}$ also shows a power law with an exponent
641: value $\beta \approx 1.3$. The conditional average of $\Delta \phi
642: $ denoted by $<\Delta\phi>_c$ for a given value of $\Delta t$
643: behaves as $<\Delta\phi>_c \sim {\Delta}t^{1/x}$ with $x \approx
644: 0.65$. The exponent values satisfy the scaling relation $\alpha =
645: x(\beta - 1)+1$ quite well. The exponent values remain unaltered
646: in the region of strain rate $270 < \dot \epsilon < 700$ we have
647: investigated thus is independent of the value of the drive
648: parameter. ( There are models of coupled map lattices that produce
649: power laws where the exponent value depends on the drive
650: parameter.) We now investigate the underlying causes leading to
651: this power law.
652: \begin{figure}
653: \includegraphics[height=4.5cm,width=7.5cm]{figure5.ps}
654: \caption{Distributions of the stress drops from the model
655: ($\circ$), from experiments ($\bullet$) for $N = 1000$ and
656: $\dot\epsilon =280$. Solid line is a guide to the eye.}
657: \label{fig4}
658: \end{figure}
659:
660: \section{ DYNAMICS OF CROSSOVER}
661:
662: \subsection{Lyapunov Spectrum}
663:
664: Our next aim is to characterize the dynamics of this crossover. A
665: natural tool for characterizing the crossover is to study the
666: distribution of Lyapunov exponents as a function of the applied
667: strain rate in the entire interval where the PLC effect is seen.
668: Further, we also discuss the convergence properties of the
669: Lyapunov spectrum as the system size is increased. In particular,
670: this will be useful in examining the density of null ( nearly
671: vanishing) exponents and also to compare our results with that of
672: the GOY model of turbulence.
673:
674: We have calculated the spectrum of Lyapunov exponents using the
675: algorithm due to Benettin {\it et al} \cite{Bennet}. The exponent
676: values reported here were obtained by averaging over 15000 time
677: steps after stabilization with an accuracy of $10^{-6}$. We have
678: used several system sizes ranging from $N=100, 150,\, 350, \,500,
679: 1000$, and 3333 which covers approximately two orders of magnitude
680: in $M$, {\it i.e.,} from 301 to 10000. A rough idea of the changes
681: in the dynamics of the system can be obtained by studying the
682: dependence of the largest Lyapunov exponent (LLE) as a function of
683: the strain rate. The LLE converges fast as a function of the
684: system size. For instance, we find that the LLE for $N=500$ looks
685: much the same for a much smaller system size N=100 given in Fig.
686: 3a in Ref. \cite{Bhar02}. The LLE becomes positive around $\dot
687: \epsilon \approx 35$ reaching a maximum at $\dot \epsilon =120$,
688: practically vanishing around 250. ( Periodic states are observed
689: in the interval $10 <\dot \epsilon < 35$.) In the region $\dot
690: \epsilon \ge 250$, the dispersion in the value of the LLE is $
691: \sim 5 \times 10 ^ {-4}$ which is the same order as the mean.
692: Thus, the LLE can be taken to vanish beyond $\dot\epsilon = 250$.
693:
694:
695:
696: The study of the Lyapunov spectrum reveals that in the chaotic
697: regime of strain rates, only a small proportion of the exponents
698: are positive, an equal small number are close to zero value and a
699: large proportion of the exponents are negative. The distribution
700: of the Lyapunov exponents $D(\lambda)$, is shown for $N=1000$ in
701: the inset of Fig. ~\ref{fig5} for the strain rate,
702: $\dot\epsilon=120$. For this system size (with a total of
703: exponents $M$=3001), the number of positive exponents is $\approx$
704: 6.2\% of the total number of exponents and the null exponents are
705: also $\approx$ 9\%. (For numerical purposes null exponents are
706: taken to correspond to $|\lambda|\le5.2\times10^{-4}$.) These
707: ratios remain the same for the larger system sizes used.
708: \begin{figure}
709: \includegraphics[height=5.5cm,width=8cm]{figure6.ps}
710: \caption{ A plot of $j/D_{KY}$ verses $\lambda_j D_{KY}/H$ for
711: $\dot\epsilon=120$. Inset shows a plot of
712: $D(\lambda)$ as a function of $\lambda$ for N =1000.} \label{fig5}
713: \end{figure}
714:
715: While $D(\lambda)$ reflects the distribution of Lyapunov exponents
716: in various regions, for studying the convergence of the Lyapunov
717: spectrum, plots of the density function $j/D_{KY} = f( \lambda_j
718: D_{KY}/H)$ are better suited. Further, these quantities have been
719: used traditionally in the studies of extended dynamical systems
720: \cite{Bohr}. A plot of $j/D_{KY}$ verses $\lambda_j D_{KY}/H$ for
721: $\dot \epsilon = 120$ for N = 500 and 1000 is shown in Fig.
722: \ref{fig5}. It is clear that while the density function has not
723: yet converged for negative values of $\lambda_j D_{KY}/H$, those
724: for positive values are already converged. As we increase the
725: strain rate beyond $\dot\epsilon=180$, concomitant with the
726: decrease in the value of the LLE, the number of null exponents
727: increases. For instance, at $\dot\epsilon=220$, for which the
728: maximum Lyapunov exponent is small $\sim$ 0.0058, the number of
729: null exponents increases to 30\% $M$ (see inset of Fig.
730: \ref{fig6}). $D(\lambda)$ shows that the number of null exponents
731: has increased. Concomitant with this trend, a plot of $j/D_{KY}$
732: verses $\lambda_j D_{KY}/H$ for N = 500 and 1000 (Fig. \ref{fig6})
733: shows that for $\dot \epsilon =220$ is well converged for the
734: entire range of values of the scaled Lyapunov exponent $ \lambda_j
735: D_{KY}/H$. This signals a faster convergence of the density
736: function $j/D_{KY} = f( \lambda_j D_{KY}/H)$ with the system size
737: as we approach the scaling regime. Indeed, we find that
738: %as can be seen from Fig. \ref{fig7},
739: plots for N = 500 and 1000 for strain rate $\dot \epsilon =280$
740: cannot be distinguished over the entire range of values of
741: $\lambda_j D_{KY}/H$. Even though it would be adequate to use
742: $N=1000$, for further analysis when dealing with Lyapunov spectrum
743: in the scaling regime, we use a much bigger system size of
744: $N=3333$, which for all practical purposes can be taken to be
745: large $N$ limit. A plot of $j/D_{KY} $ verses $\lambda_j D_{KY}/H$
746: shown in Fig. \ref{fig7} for $N$ = 3333 ( and also for 1000) shows
747: that for $\dot \epsilon =280$ is well converged for the entire
748: range of values of $ \lambda_j D_{KY}/H$. Note also that nearly
749: 40\% the exponents are close to zero (see the inset).
750:
751: As we approach the power-law regime of stress drops (extending
752: from $\dot\epsilon=250$), as the largest Lyapunov exponent
753: approaches zero ($\sim 5.16 \times 10^{-4}$ for $\dot \epsilon
754: =280$), exponents below a certain value cross each other as a
755: function of time. However, the first few exponents remain
756: distinct. Figure \ref{fig8} shows the first two exponents that are
757: well separated and another two which are close to each other in
758: magnitude (for $\dot \epsilon = 280$ and N = 3333). Below $\vert
759: \lambda \vert < 5 \times 10^{-5}$, even though the exponents cross
760: each other, the distribution of the exponents remains unchanged.
761: The most significant feature of the spectrum in the region is that
762: there is a {\it dense set of null exponents}. The peaked nature
763: of the distribution of the null exponents ($|\lambda| \le
764: 5.2\times10^{-4}$) for $\dot\epsilon=280$ for $N=3333$ is shown in
765: Fig. ~\ref{fig9}.
766: \begin{figure}
767: \includegraphics[height=5cm,width=8cm]{figure7.ps}
768: \caption{A plot of $j/D_{KY}$ verses $\lambda_j D_{KY}/H$ for
769: $\dot\epsilon=220$. Inset shows a plot of
770: $D(\lambda)$ as a function of $\lambda$ for N =1000. }
771: \label{fig6}
772: \end{figure}
773: \begin{figure}
774: \includegraphics[height=5cm,width=8cm]{figure8.ps}
775: \caption{A plot of $j/D_{KY}$ verses $\lambda_j D_{KY}/H$ for
776: $\dot\epsilon=280$. Inset
777: shows a plot of $D(\lambda)$ for N =
778: 3333. A schematic plot of the Lyapunov density function
779: (continuous line) for the GOY model (after \cite {Yam87}).}
780: \label{fig7}
781: \end{figure}
782:
783:
784: \begin{figure}
785: \includegraphics[height=5cm,width=8cm]{figure9.ps}
786: \caption{The first two Lyapunov exponents that do not cross each
787: other as a function of time for N =3333 for $\dot\epsilon$=280.
788: Also shown are two more exponents that are close to each other.}
789: \label{fig8}
790: \end{figure}
791: \begin{figure}
792: \includegraphics[height=5cm,width=8cm]{figure10.ps}
793: \caption{The peaked nature of the distribution of null exponents
794: lying in the range $[-5.2\times 10^{-4}, 5.2 \times 10^{-4}]$ for
795: $\dot\epsilon=280, N=3333$.} \label{fig9}
796: \end{figure}
797:
798: The peaked nature of $D(\vert \lambda\vert)$ for null exponents
799: suggests the possibility of a power law distribution for their
800: magnitudes. We have plotted the distribution of the null exponents
801: ($\vert\lambda_i\vert \le 5.2\times 10^{-4}$) for
802: $\dot\epsilon=280$, for a system size of $N=3333, \, M=10000$
803: shown in Fig.~\ref{fig10}. It is clear that both the positive
804: and negative exponents show a power-law distribution $D(|\lambda|)
805: \sim |\lambda|^{-\gamma}$ with an exponent value $\gamma \sim
806: 0.51$ and the scaling extends over an impressive three decades as
807: shown in Fig.~\ref{fig10}. As null exponents correspond to
808: marginal stable nature of the system, their finite density, which
809: itself obeys a power law, elucidates the underlying cause of power
810: law distribution of stress drops at high strain rates.
811:
812: \begin{figure}
813: \includegraphics[height=5cm,width=8cm]{figure11.ps}
814: \caption{Log-log plot of the distribution of the marginal
815: exponents for $\dot\epsilon=280, \, N=3333$. Solid line is a guide
816: to the eye.} \label{fig10}
817: \end{figure}
818:
819: \subsection{Comparison with Shell Model for Turbulence}
820:
821: As mentioned in the introduction, both in the PLC effect and in
822: turbulence, power law statistics is seen at high drive rates in
823: contrast to conventional SOC systems where the power law arises at
824: low drives \cite{Jensen}. In addition, the dense set of null
825: Lyapunov exponents in the scaling regime is similar to the finite
826: density of null exponents obtained by Ruelle \cite{Ruelle} for the
827: discrete spectrum of the operator that linearizes the
828: Navier-Stokes equations, if the fractal dimension of the energy
829: dissipation set is $D_F \le 2.5$. This property is preserved by
830: the GOY shell model \cite{Yam87}. Here we attempt a comparison of
831: the Lyapunov spectrum obtained from our model with that of the GOY
832: model.
833:
834:
835: Shell models of turbulence \cite{Bohr} are designed to mimic the
836: behavior of Navier-Stokes equations at high drives where the power
837: law is seen. One standard model is the GOY model
838: \cite{Yam87,Bohr}. For this model, Ohkitani and Yamada
839: \cite{Yam87} gave a good numerical evidence that the density
840: function exists as the viscosity parameter $\eta$ tends to zero.
841: In our case, the role of the viscosity parameter is taken by the
842: applied strain rate. In Section IV A, we have shown that there is
843: a rapid increase in the density of null exponents and
844: consequently, there is a rapid convergence of $j/D_{KY} = f(
845: \lambda_j D_{KY}/H)$ as function of N, starting from $\dot
846: \epsilon =220$. This suggests that one should expect convergence
847: of the limiting $j/D_{KY} = f( \lambda_j D_{KY}/H)$ function as we
848: approach the power law strain rate regime of stress drops. Thus,
849: we should expect that the limiting distribution itself converges
850: as a function of $\dot \epsilon$ as we approach the scaling
851: regime. Considering $N =1000$ approximates the limiting
852: distribution ( see Fig. \ref{fig6} for justification), we have
853: verified that plots of $j/D_{KY} = f( \lambda_j D_{KY}/H)$ for
854: three values of $\dot \epsilon=250, 260$ and 280 for reasonably
855: large N = 1000 converge. This result is similar to the convergence
856: of the density function in the GOY model as a function the
857: viscosity parameter. The density function $j/D_{KY}$ obtained from
858: the model can be compared with that of the GOY model. Plot of
859: $j/D_{KY} = f( \lambda_j D_{KY}/H)$ for a large system N=3333 (
860: which can be taken to represent the limiting density as a function
861: of system size ) for $\dot \epsilon =280$ is shown in Fig.
862: \ref{fig7} along with a schematic plot for the GOY model shown by
863: the continuous line. As can be seen, in both the cases, the
864: distribution function which is proportional to
865: $-df(\lambda)/d\lambda$, shows a singularity near zero. The
866: difference being that the singularity is more pronounced for our
867: model. Ohkitani and Yamada also plot another quantity which
868: represents the null exponents better, namely, the sum of Lyapunov
869: exponents up to $j$ normalized by $H$ as function of $j$ scaled by
870: $D_{KY}$. The quantity $\sum_1^j\lambda_j/H$ is an increasing
871: function of $j/D_{KY}$ for positive $\lambda_j$ and goes to unity
872: when $\sum_{i=1}^j\lambda_i =H$. In the region of null exponents,
873: this quantity remains constant and then decreases with $j$ when
874: $\lambda_j$'s are negative. Thus, this quantity also reflects the
875: density of null exponents. A schematic plot of
876: $\sum_1^j\lambda_j/H$ as a function of $j/D_{KY}$ ( continuous
877: and dashed line) for the GOY model is shown in Fig. \ref{fig11}.
878: The increase in $\sum_1^j\lambda_j/H$ for small $j/D_{KY}$ shows
879: that there is a finite density of positive exponents in the
880: Lyapunov spectrum for the GOY model. Further, these authors find
881: that there is a convergence with respect to the viscosity
882: parameter for Lyapunov spectrum corresponding to the interior of
883: the attractor (ie., $j/D_{KY} < 1$), while there is scatter for
884: $j/D_{KY} > 1$ (the dashed line represents this portion). We have
885: plotted $\sum_1^j\lambda_j/H$ as a function of $j/D_{KY}$ for N
886: =3333 on the same plot for the sake of comparison. In our case,
887: the increase to unit value is much slower ( compared to the GOY
888: model) which clearly implies that there are very few positive
889: exponents (of any significant magnitude) with most of them being
890: vanishingly small. This feature is unlike the shell model where
891: there is a finite density of positive exponents. In the GOY model,
892: the largest exponent is proportional to $\eta^{-1/2}$ which is
893: reflected in the steeper increase in $\sum_1^j\lambda_j/H$ for the
894: GOY model.
895:
896:
897:
898: Thus, we have shown that the power-law regime seen in our model at
899: high drives as in hydrodynamics is not a superficial feature. The
900: Lyapunov spectrum of the model is quite similar to the GOY model
901: which however has a finite density of positive exponents. In
902: addition, the distribution of the {\it null Lyapunov exponents}
903: itself shows a power law in our case. Such a feature has not been
904: verified for the GOY model. This feature is also quite distinct
905: from the Lyapunov spectrum of models of SOC studied so far
906: \cite{Erzan,desouza,Cess}. We comment on this later.
907:
908:
909:
910: \begin{figure}
911: \includegraphics[height=5cm,width=8cm]{figure12.ps}
912: \caption{A plot of $\sum_1^j\lambda_j/H$ as a function of
913: $j/D_{KY}$ for $\dot\epsilon=$ 280 and $N =3333$. The
914: corresponding schematic plot for the GOY model for $j/D_{KY} <1$
915: (continuous line) and $j/D_{KY}\ge 1$ (dashed curve) (after \cite
916: {Yam87}). } \label{fig11}
917: \end{figure}
918:
919:
920:
921:
922: \subsection{Slow Manifold Analysis}
923:
924: The analysis provided in the previous section shows that as the
925: strain rate is increased most exponents get concentrated in a
926: narrow interval around the zero value. As zero Lyapunov exponents
927: represent a marginal situation, we see that the region of strain
928: rate beyond 240 (corresponding to the power law statistics of
929: stress drops) can be identified with a marginally stable state.
930: Thus, it would be interesting to realize a geometrical picture of
931: dislocation configurations in the marginal state and examine how
932: dislocations reach such state as a function of strain rate. We
933: accomplish this through the slow manifold of the model
934: \cite{Rajesh00,Rajesh,Milik}.
935:
936: Recently, the geometry of the slow manifold of the original model
937: has been analyzed in detail \cite{Rajesh00,Rajesh}. The analysis
938: shows that the relaxational nature of the PLC effect arises from
939: the atypical bent nature of the manifold. Here we recall some
940: relevant results on the slow manifold of the original model
941: ($D=0$) and extend the ideas to the situation when the spatial
942: degrees of freedom are switched on ($D \neq 0$). Slow manifold
943: expresses the fast variable in terms of the slow variables,
944: conventionally done by setting the derivative of the fast variable
945: to zero \cite{Rajesh,Rajesh00}
946: \begin{equation}
947: \dot \rho_m = g(\rho_m,\phi) = - b_0 \rho_m^2 + \rho_m \delta
948: +\rho_{im} =0.
949: \label{slow1}
950: \end{equation}
951: where $\delta = \phi^m - \rho_{im} -a$. The variable $\delta$ has
952: been shown to have all the features of an effective stress and
953: thus plays an important physical role \cite{Rajesh00},
954: particularly in studying the pinning-unpinning of dislocations. We
955: note that $\delta$ is a combination of two slow variables $\phi$
956: and $\rho_{im}$ both of which take small positive values. Hence,
957: $\delta$ takes on small positive and negative values. Using Eq.
958: \ref{slow1}, we get two solutions
959: \begin{equation}
960: \rho_m = [\delta + (\delta^2 + 4 b_0 \rho_{im})^{1/2}]/2b_0,
961: \end{equation}
962: one for $\delta <0 $ and another $\delta > 0$. For regions of
963: $\delta < 0$, as $b_0$ is small $\sim 10^{-4}$, we get
964: $\rho_m/\rho_{im} \approx - 1/\delta$ which takes on small values.
965: This defines a part of the slow manifold, $S_2$ where $\rho_m$
966: is small. In this region, as the mobile density is small and
967: immobile density is large ( relative to $\rho_m$), this region can
968: be identified with pinned configuration of dislocations and hence
969: we shall refer to the region $S_2$ as the {\it 'pinned state of
970: dislocations'}. We note that larger negative values of $\delta$
971: correspond to strongly pinned configurations, as they refer to
972: smaller ratio of $\rho_m/\rho_{im}$. For positive values of
973: $\delta$, another connected piece $S_1$ is defined by {\it large
974: values} of $\rho_m$, given by $\rho_m \approx \delta/b_0$, which
975: we refer to as the {\it 'unpinned state of dislocations'} as
976: $\rho_{im}$ is also small. These two pieces $S_2$ and $S_1$ are
977: separated by $\delta = 0$, which we refer to as {\it the fold
978: line} \cite{Rajesh,Rajesh00}(see below). A plot of the slow
979: manifold in the $\delta-\rho_m$ plane is shown in Fig.
980: ~\ref{fig12}a. For the sake of illustration, we have plotted a
981: monoperiodic trajectory describing the changes in the densities
982: during a loading-unloading cycle. The inset shows $\rho_m(t)$ and
983: $\phi(t)$. For completeness, the corresponding plot of the slow
984: manifold in the $(\rho_m,\rho_{im},\phi)$ space is shown in Fig.
985: ~\ref{fig12}b, along with the trajectory and the symbols. In this
986: space, one can see that $\delta =\phi^m-\rho_{im} -a = 0$ is a
987: line that separates the pieces $S_2$ and $S_1$ of the slow
988: manifold, and hence the name {\it fold line}. The cyclic changes
989: in the variables is well captured by the nature of trajectory
990: shown in Fig. ~\ref{fig12}b. The trajectory enters $S_2$ at $A$
991: and moves into $S_2$, the value of $\delta$ ( in Fig.
992: \ref{fig12}a) decreases from zero to a maximum negative value as
993: the trajectory reaches $B$. Then $\delta$ increases as the
994: trajectory returns to $A^{\prime}$ before leaving $S_2$. The
995: corresponding segment is $ABA^{\prime}$ in Fig. ~\ref{fig12}b,
996: which is identified with the flat region of $\rho_m(t)$ in the
997: inset of Fig. ~\ref{fig12}a. As the trajectory crosses $\delta
998: =0$, $\partial g/\partial \rho_m $ becomes positive and it
999: accelerates into the shaded region (Fig. ~\ref{fig12}a) rapidly
1000: till it reaches $\rho_m = \delta/2b_0$. Thereafter it settles down
1001: quickly on $S_1$ decreasing rapidly till it reenters $S_2$ again
1002: at $A$. The burst in $\rho_m$ (inset in Fig. ~\ref{fig12}a)
1003: corresponds to the segment $A^{\prime}DA$ in Fig. ~\ref{fig12}a
1004: and b. The nature of trajectories for higher strain rate remains
1005: essentially the same, but is chaotic. The nature of the
1006: trajectories in the power law regime of strain rates which will be
1007: discussed later.
1008:
1009:
1010: \begin{figure}
1011: \includegraphics[height=5.0cm,width=8.0cm]{figure13a.ps}
1012: \vspace{0.5cm}
1013: \includegraphics[height=5.5cm,width=8.0cm]{figure13b.ps}
1014: \caption{(a)Bent slow manifold $S_1$ and $S_2$ (thick lines) with
1015: a simple trajectory for $\dot\epsilon=200$ and $m= 3$. Inset:
1016: $\rho_m$ (dotted curve) and $\phi$ (solid line).(b)The same trajectory in the
1017: $(\phi,\rho_{im},\rho_m)$ space.} \label{fig12}
1018: \end{figure}
1019:
1020:
1021:
1022:
1023: Having identified the regions of the slow manifold with the
1024: pinned and unpinned states of dislocations, we now consider the
1025: variation of stress when dislocations are pinned and are unpinned.
1026: Consider the stress changes as the state of the system goes though
1027: a burst of plastic activity. For $D =0$, Eq. \ref{Eq: seqn}
1028: reduces to
1029: \begin{equation}
1030: \dot \phi = d[ \dot \epsilon -\dot {\epsilon}_p],
1031: \end{equation}
1032: where $\dot\epsilon_p = \phi^m \rho_m$ defines the plastic strain
1033: rate. Since $\rho_m$ is small and nearly constant on $S_2$, stress
1034: increases monotonically. However, during the burst in $\rho_m$
1035: ($A^{\prime} D A$ in the inset), $\dot \epsilon_p (t)$ exceeds
1036: $\dot \epsilon$ leading to an yield drop. Since $\rho_m$ grows
1037: outside $S_2$, $\delta =0$ line separates the pinned state from
1038: the unpinned state. Thus, $\delta =0$ {\it physically corresponds
1039: to the value of the effective stress at which dislocations are
1040: unpinned.}
1041:
1042:
1043: When the spatial degrees of freedom are included, there is no
1044: additional complication as the slow manifold is defined at each
1045: point. In this case, a convenient set of variables for
1046: visualization of dislocations is $(\rho_m (x), \delta (x), x)$.
1047: Here, our aim is to investigate the nature of typical spatial
1048: configurations in the chaotic and the power law regimes of stress
1049: drops and study the changes as we increase the strain rate. For
1050: simplicity, we shall use $h=0$ for which we have
1051: $\phi_{eff}=\phi$. ( It is straightforward to extend the arguments
1052: to the case when $h \ne 0$.) Then, the plastic strain rate $\dot
1053: \epsilon_p(t)$ is given by
1054: \begin{equation}
1055: \dot \epsilon_p(t) = \phi^m(t)\frac{1}{l}\int_0^l\rho_m(x,t)dx =
1056: \phi^m(t) \bar\rho_m(t)\label{marstab},
1057: \end{equation}
1058: where $\bar \rho_m(t)$ is the mean mobile density
1059: ($=\sum_j\rho_m(j,t)/N$ in the discretized form). With the
1060: inclusion of spatial degrees of freedom, the yield drop is
1061: controlled by the spatial average $\bar \rho_m(t)$ rather than by
1062: individual values of $\rho_m(j)$. Further, we note that the
1063: configuration of dislocations change during one loading-unloading
1064: cycle. However, one should expect that configurations will be
1065: representative for a given strain rate. Further, we know that the
1066: drastic changes occurs during an yield drop when $\bar \rho_m(t)$
1067: grows rapidly. Thus, we focus our attention on the spatial
1068: configurations on the slow manifold at the onset and at the end of
1069: typical yield drops.
1070:
1071: First consider the configuration seen just before and after the
1072: yield drop when the strain rate is in the chaotic regime. In this
1073: regime, the stress drop magnitudes are large which implies that
1074: the change in mobile density is large. Figures \ref{fig13} a, b
1075: for a typical value of $\dot \epsilon = 120$. It is clear that
1076: both at the onset and at the end of a typical large yield drop,
1077: the $\delta(j)$ values which reflect the state of system ( pinned
1078: or unpinned state), is negative and correspondingly the mobile
1079: density $\rho_m(j)$'s are small, i.e., most dislocations are in
1080: {\it a strongly pinned state}. ( Recall that $\delta$ signifies
1081: how close the spatial elements are close to unpinning threshold.)
1082: The arrows show the increase in $\rho_m(j)$ at the end of the
1083: yield drop. We have checked that this is a general feature for all
1084: yield drops in the chaotic regime of strain rates. Now consider
1085: dislocation configuration in the scaling regime at high strain
1086: rates, say, $\dot \epsilon =280$, at the onset and at the end of
1087: an yield drop shown in Fig. ~\ref{fig13} c,d respectively. In
1088: contrast to the chaotic regime, in the scaling regime, {\it most
1089: dislocations are clearly seen to be at the threshold of unpinning
1090: with $\delta(j) \approx 0$,} both at the onset and end of the
1091: yield drop. This also implies that they remain close to this
1092: threshold all through the process of an stress drop. We have
1093: verified that {\it the edge-of-unpinning picture is valid} in the
1094: entire power law regime of stress drops for a range of $N$ values.
1095: Further, as a function strain rate, we find that the number of
1096: spatial elements reaching the threshold of unpinning $\delta = 0$
1097: during an yield drop increases as we approach the scaling regime.
1098: \begin{figure}
1099: \includegraphics[height=8cm,width=8.8cm]{figure14.ps}
1100: \caption{Dislocation configurations on the slow manifold at the
1101: inset and at the end of an yield drop: (a) and (b) for
1102: $\dot\epsilon=120$ (chaotic regime), and (c) and ( d) for
1103: $\dot\epsilon=280$ (scaling regime).} \label{fig13}
1104: \end{figure}
1105:
1106:
1107:
1108:
1109: \section{TYPES OF BANDS}
1110:
1111: The fact that the spatially extended Ananthakrishna's model is
1112: able to successfully reproduce the crossover dynamics from chaos
1113: to the power-law regime of stress drops ( and other generic
1114: features demonstrated earlier) might suggest that the
1115: characteristic features of the PLC bands may also emerge out of
1116: the model. Most models of dislocations bands use diffusive
1117: coupling although the physical mechanism of the term is different
1118: in different situations \cite{KFA}. An important feature of the
1119: spatial coupling in the model is that it accounts for spreading of
1120: dislocations into regions of low back stress once dislocations are
1121: unpinned ( the factor $\rho^{-1}_{im}$). The term also determines
1122: the length scale over which dislocations spread into the
1123: neighboring elements. Thus, while dislocation pinning and
1124: unpinning gives a heterogeneity in space (in principle), regions
1125: of low $\rho_{im}$ are favored for dislocation multiplication and
1126: spreading into neighboring regions. Further, this type of spatial
1127: term couples length scale and time scales in a dynamical way as
1128: $\rho_{im}$ itself evolves in time and hence the associated time
1129: scale. Indeed, multiplication of dislocation depends on stress,
1130: ({\it i.e.,} $\phi_{eff}^m$), and hence this rate itself is
1131: changing dynamically leading to changes in the time scale of
1132: internal relaxation as a function of $\dot \epsilon$. We expect
1133: this to lead to changes in spatial correlation as strain rate is
1134: increased.
1135:
1136: Below we report both numerical and analytical studies on the
1137: spatiotemporal patterns emerging from the model as a function of
1138: the strain rate, $\dot\epsilon$. We begin with the numerical
1139: results \cite{Bhar03a}.
1140:
1141: For $\dot\epsilon < 10$ and $\dot\epsilon > 2000$, we get
1142: homogeneous steady state solutions for all the dislocation
1143: densities, $\rho_m$, $\rho_{im}$ and $\rho_c$. In these ranges of
1144: strain rates, $\phi$ takes the fixed point values asymptotically.
1145: In the region where interesting dynamics of chaotic and power law
1146: states are observed, the nature of the dislocation bands can be
1147: broadly classified into three different types occurring at low,
1148: intermediate and high strain rates described below.
1149:
1150:
1151: For strain rates, $30\le \dot\epsilon <70$, we get uncorrelated
1152: static dislocation bands. The features of these bands are
1153: illustrated for a typical value, say for $\dot\epsilon=40$. A plot
1154: of $\rho_m(j,t)$ is given in Fig.~\ref{fig14}. Dislocation bands
1155: of finite width nucleate randomly in space and they remain static
1156: till another band is nucleated at another spatially uncorrelated
1157: site. The associated stress-time curves which are nearly regular
1158: have large characteristic stress drops. The distribution of these
1159: stress drops is found to be peaked as in experiments at low strain
1160: rates \cite{Bhar01}.
1161: \begin{figure}
1162: \includegraphics[height=6cm,width=8cm]{figure15.ps}
1163: \caption{Spatially uncorrelated bands at $\dot\epsilon=40$.}
1164: \label{fig14}
1165: \end{figure}
1166:
1167:
1168:
1169: At slightly higher values of strain rates, $70 \le \dot\epsilon <
1170: 180$ we find that new bands nucleate ahead of the earlier ones,
1171: giving a visual impression of {\it hopping bands}. This can be
1172: clearly seen from Fig.~\ref{fig15} where a plot of $\rho_m(j,t)$
1173: is given for $\dot\epsilon=130$. However, this hopping motion does
1174: not continue till the other boundary. They stop midway and another
1175: set of hopping bands reappear in the neighborhood. Often
1176: nucleation occurs at more than one location. Stress-time plots in
1177: this regime have a form similar to Fig. ~\ref{fig1}c with the
1178: average amplitude of the stress drops being smaller than the
1179: localized non-hopping bands at low strain rates as seen in
1180: experiments. These stress drops also have a nearly symmetric
1181: peaked distribution as in the previous case but slightly skewed to
1182: the right similar to those observed in experiments \cite{Bhar01}.
1183:
1184: \begin{figure}
1185: \includegraphics[height=6cm,width=8cm]{figure16.ps}
1186: \caption{Hopping type bands at $\dot\epsilon=130$ (arrow shows one
1187: such band).} \label{fig15}
1188: \end{figure}
1189:
1190:
1191: As the strain rate is increased further, the extent of propagation
1192: increases, concomitantly, the magnitudes of the stress drops
1193: decrease. We see continuously propagating bands even at $\dot
1194: \epsilon =240$ as can be seen from Fig. \ref{fig16}. One can see
1195: dislocation bands nucleating from one end of the sample ($j=0, \,
1196: t=25,50$ and 75) and propagating continuously to the other end.
1197: Often, we see a band nucleating at a point, branching out and
1198: propagating only partially towards both the ends. Unlike the
1199: present case which exhibits rather uniform values of $\rho_m$, we
1200: usually find irregularities as the band reaches the edges. The
1201: stress strain curves in this region of strain rates, exhibit scale
1202: free feature in the amplitude of the stress drops (Fig. \ref{fig1}
1203: d) with a large number of small drops. As can be seen from Fig.
1204: \ref{fig1} d, the mean stress level of these small amplitude
1205: stress drops increases until a large yield drop is seen. This
1206: large stress drop corresponds to bands having reached the end of
1207: the specimen.
1208: \begin{figure}
1209: \includegraphics[height=6cm,width=8cm]{figure17.ps}
1210: \caption{Fully propagating bands at $\dot\epsilon=240$}
1211: \label{fig16}
1212: \end{figure}
1213:
1214:
1215:
1216: It is possible to calculate the velocity of the propagating bands
1217: in the high strain rate limit. We first note that our equations
1218: constitute a coupled set of integro-partial differential
1219: equations, and hence cannot be dealt with in their present form.
1220: To reduce these equations to a form that is suitable for further
1221: analysis, we recall a few pertinent points about the changes in
1222: the structure of the slow manifold as a function of the applied
1223: strain rate. We note that the original model exhibits an
1224: incomplete approach to homoclinicity \cite{Rajesh00}, {\it i.e.,}
1225: the number of mixed mode oscillations of the type $L^s$, where $s$
1226: refers to the small period oscillations and $L$ refers to a large
1227: relaxation oscillation, are limited. Typically, about 12 small
1228: period nearly harmonic oscillations are known to occur for a
1229: single large one at high values of the strain rate. The reason
1230: attributed to this is the finite rate of softening of the eigen
1231: value of the fixed point due to presence of the reverse Hopf
1232: bifurcation is reached \cite{Rajesh00}. In the presence of the
1233: spatial coupling we find that the softening is further enhanced as
1234: is clear from the fact that the upper Hopf bifurcation is pushed
1235: to much larger values of strain rate ( $\dot\epsilon_{c_2}=2000$,
1236: see Fig. \ref{fig0}). This enhanced softening rate implies that
1237: the number of small period oscillations is also increased in this
1238: domain of strain rates. Even so, the geometry of the slow manifold
1239: is not altered from that of the space independent model. In
1240: particular, the position of the unstable saddle focus remains
1241: located on the $S_1$ part of the manifold
1242: (Ref.\cite{Rajesh00,Rajesh}). In addition, the feature of the
1243: fixed point approaching the fold line as a function of the strain
1244: rate is retained. Under these conditions, for high strain rates
1245: nearly sinusoidal oscillations are executed around the fixed point
1246: with the orbits touching $S_2$ only after executing several such
1247: turns. A plot of this is shown in Fig. ~\ref{fig17}.
1248: \begin{figure}
1249: \includegraphics[height=5cm,width=8cm]{figure18.ps}
1250: \caption{Slow manifold showing a trajectory for the space
1251: independent model near the reverse Hopf bifurcation point, at
1252: $\dot\epsilon=90$, $m=2$. $\bullet$ fixed point of Eqn 1-3 and 6.} \label{fig17}
1253: \end{figure}
1254: \noindent To understand the dynamics at high strain rates, we
1255: recall that our analysis in Ref. \cite{Rajesh00} shows that the
1256: orbit is re-injected along the stable manifold close to the
1257: unstable saddle focus ( as shown in Fig.11 of
1258: Ref.\cite{Rajesh00}). The orbit then spirals out along the
1259: unstable manifold of the fixed point. Once the orbit is
1260: sufficiently away from the fixed point when the influence of the
1261: fixed point is lost, it is re-injected close to the fixed point
1262: via $S_1$. The dynamics then repeats. Note that at high applied
1263: strain rate, the system is close to reverse Hopf bifurcation point
1264: and hence the fixed point is close to the applied strain rate
1265: value. Thus as the orbit executes one turn, there is one small
1266: yield drop. However, the orbit executes several turns around the
1267: fixed point, each turn leading larger loop sizes, i.e., larger
1268: values of $\rho_m$ and consequently to successively larger stress
1269: levels than the earlier one before briefly visiting $S_2$.
1270:
1271:
1272:
1273: Under these conditions the dynamics is entirely controlled by the
1274: spiralling motion around the fixed point. Thus, the entire
1275: dynamics is essentially described by the fast variable; the other
1276: two variables $\rho_{im}$ and $\phi$ can be taken to be
1277: parameters. Such a situation is described by the transient
1278: dynamics dictated entirely by equation of the fast variable (the
1279: so called layer problem \cite{Milik}) and thus, we are justified
1280: in using only the evolution equation of the fast variable in terms
1281: of the slow manifold parameter $\delta = \phi^m-\rho_{im}-a$.
1282: Since the trajectory rarely visits the $S_2$ part of the slow
1283: manifold, we restrict the calculations to $\delta
1284: > 0$. The physical picture of a propagating solution is that as
1285: the orbit at a site makes one turn around the fixed point, {\it
1286: i.e.,} $\delta $ small but positive, around the value of the
1287: applied strain rate, the front advances by a certain distance
1288: along the specimen like the motion of a screw.
1289:
1290:
1291: The rate equation for the mobile dislocation density
1292: $\rho_m$ in terms of $\delta$ is
1293: \begin{equation}
1294: \frac{\partial\rho_m}{\partial t} = -b_o\rho_m^2 + \delta \rho_m +
1295: \rho_{im} + D'\frac{{\partial}^2\rho_m}{\partial x^2},
1296: \label{marglin}
1297: \end{equation}
1298: where $D'=D\phi^m/\rho_{im}$. Since, the slow variables,
1299: $\rho_{im}$ and $\phi$ are treated as parameters, this has the
1300: form of Fisher-Kolmogorov equation for propagating fronts, which
1301: has been well studied. This equation can be reduced to the
1302: standard form
1303: \begin{equation}
1304: \frac{\partial Z}{\partial t'} = Z (1-Z) + D'\frac{{\partial}^2
1305: Z}{\partial x^2}, \label{marglin1}
1306: \end{equation}
1307: (This is done by first transforming $\rho_m = X -
1308: \rho_{im}/\delta$, dropping the term $2b_0\rho_{im}/\delta$
1309: compared to $\delta$ in the linear term in $X$, and then using $ Z
1310: = X \delta/b_0 $ and $t' = t \delta$.) It is clear that $Z=0$ is
1311: unstable and $Z =1$ is stable. Using the form for propagating
1312: front $Z=Z_oe^{\omega t' -kx'}$, the marginal velocity is
1313: calculated using $v^* = Re \omega (k^*)/Re k^* = d\omega/d
1314: k\vert_{k = k^*}$ and $\Im d\omega/d k\vert_{k = k^*} = 0$, gives
1315: the velocity of the bands $v^*=2$ \cite{Dee,Saarloos}. In terms of
1316: the variables in Eqn.~\ref{marglin}, the marginal velocity is
1317: \begin{equation}
1318: v^*=2\sqrt{D\delta}.
1319: \label{marglvel}
1320: \end{equation}
1321: \noindent In order to relate this to the applied strain rate, we
1322: note that for a fixed value of the strain rate (where propagating
1323: bands are seen), the average level of stress drop is essentially
1324: constant. Thus, from Eqn.~\ref{Eq: seqn}, we see that in this
1325: regime of high strain rates, the applied strain rate
1326: $\dot\epsilon$ is essentially balanced by the plastic strain rate
1327: $ ({1}/{l})\int_0^l\phi^m\rho_m(x,t) \equiv \dot{\epsilon}_p$.
1328: Then, using $\phi^m = \dot \epsilon / \bar {\rho}_m$, and using
1329: $\delta = \phi^m - a -\rho_{im}$, we get
1330: \begin{equation}
1331: v=2\sqrt{\frac{D\dot\epsilon}{\bar{\rho}_m\rho_{im}}\big(\frac{\dot\epsilon}{\bar{\rho}_m}-a-\rho_{im}\big)}.
1332: \label{velarg2}
1333: \end{equation}
1334: It is important to note that at high applied strain rate
1335: $\bar\rho_m \sim \bar\rho_m^*$ , the fixed point value. Thus, for
1336: all practical purposes, we can assume $\bar\rho_m$ as a constant.
1337: From the above equation, we see that the velocity of the
1338: propagating bands is proportional to the applied strain rate. This
1339: result is similar to the result obtained recently by H\"ahner {\it
1340: et al.} \cite{Hahner02}. Further, $v \propto \bar \rho_m^{-1}$
1341: which also appears to be consistent with an old experimental
1342: result. (See Fig. 7 of Ref. \cite{Korbel} which appears to fit $v
1343: \bar \rho_m$ = constant.) This result needs further experimental
1344: support.
1345:
1346:
1347: As the form of our equation has been reduced to the standard form,
1348: all other results carry through, including nonlinear analysis. We
1349: have numerically calculated the velocity of the continuously
1350: propagating bands at high strain rates from the model which
1351: confirms the linear dependence of the band velocity on applied
1352: strain rate. In the region of strain rates $\dot\epsilon =$ 220 to
1353: 280 (corresponding to unscaled strain rate values $10^{-5} - 1.5
1354: \times 10^{-5}s^{-1}$), we find that the unscaled values of the
1355: band velocity increases from 100 to 130 $\mu m/s$. These values
1356: are consistent with the experimental values reported by H\"ahner
1357: et. al. \cite{Hahner02}.
1358:
1359:
1360: We note here that the types of the bands seen in our model are
1361: correlated with the two distinct dynamical regimes investigated.
1362: The hopping type bands belong to the chaotic regime, a result
1363: consistent with the recent studies on Cu-Al polycrystals
1364: \cite{Bhar01}. On the other hand, the propagating bands are seen
1365: in the power law regime of stress drops \cite{Bhar02}, again
1366: consistent with these studies \cite{Anan99,Bhar01}. Curiously the
1367: uncorrelated bands predicted by the model also belong to the
1368: chaotic regime. We shall now explain these results based on the
1369: dynamics of the model. We first note that each spatial element is
1370: described the three dislocation densities ( Eq. (1-3)). Consider
1371: one of these elements being close to unpinning threshold, ie.,
1372: $\delta =0$. It has been shown earlier that $\rho_{im}$ is out of
1373: phase with $\rho_m$ \cite{Rajesh,Rajesh00}. This feature is
1374: retained with the spatial coupling as well. When the orbit is
1375: about to leave $S_2$, ie., when $\rho_m(j)$ is at the verge of a
1376: sharp increase, $\rho_{im}$ is largest. However, the extent of the
1377: spatial coupling is determined by $\rho_{im}^{-1}$. But the
1378: magnitude of $\rho_{im}$ itself decreases with the applied strain
1379: rate, being large at low strain rates \cite{Rajesh,Rajesh00}.
1380: Thus, the spatial width of this is small at low $\dot \epsilon$
1381: and large at high $\dot \epsilon$. Next we note that the growth
1382: and decay of $\rho_m(j)$ with $j$ occurs over a short time scale
1383: which is typically of the order of the correlation time, $\tau_c$,
1384: of $\phi(t)$. Beyond this time, the memory of its initial state is
1385: lost. Consider an initial state when a band is formed at some
1386: location. Before the memory of this initial state decays, if a new
1387: band is {\it not} created, we get an uncorrelated band. On the
1388: other hand, if a new band is created before the memory of the
1389: initial state decays, there are two possibilities. If another band
1390: is created just before the correlation decays substantially by
1391: that time, we get a hopping type band. If however, even before the
1392: burst of $\rho_m (j)$ decreases beyond its peak value, new sources
1393: of creation of $\rho_m$ occur, then we end up seeing a propagating
1394: band. An analysis of the correlation time shows that it increases
1395: with the applied strain rate. Concomitantly, $\rho_{im}$ decreases
1396: with $\dot\epsilon$ which implies that the spatial correlation
1397: increases. (Indeed, the value $\rho_{im}$ is quite small for large
1398: $\dot\epsilon$ as we reach the power law regime of stress drops.)
1399: Under these conditions, only partial plastic relaxation is
1400: possible in this regime. This discussion clarifies the dynamic
1401: interplay of time scales and length scales. Moreover, as the
1402: spatial coupling term allows the spreading of dislocations only
1403: into regions of low $\rho_{im}$ or low back stress, the propensity
1404: for continuous propagation of the band is enhanced when
1405: $\rho_{im}$ is small. In addition, we find that higher values of
1406: $\rho_{im}$ at the wake of the band which favors propagation into
1407: regions of smaller immobile density thus determining the direction
1408: of propagation also.
1409:
1410:
1411:
1412: \section{Summary and Conclusions}
1413:
1414: We first summarize and make appropriate comments wherever
1415: necessary. Detailed numerical and analytical studies on the
1416: extended Ananthakrishna's model shows that it reproduces all the
1417: important features of the PLC effect including the crossover in
1418: the dynamics from a chaotic to a power law regime observed in
1419: experiments. It also provides insight into the dynamical causes
1420: leading to this crossover. A systematic study of the system size
1421: effects of the Lyapunov spectrum carried out elucidates the
1422: underlying mechanism controlling the crossover. The study
1423: demonstrates that the limiting Lyapunov distribution evolves from
1424: a set of positive and negative exponents with a few null exponents
1425: to a dense set of null exponents as we approach the scaling regime
1426: of stress drops. This study is complemented through an analysis of
1427: the slow manifold. This method is particularly useful in giving a
1428: geometrical picture of the spatial configurations, both in the
1429: chaotic and power law regime of stress drops. The study shows that
1430: {\it the configuration of dislocations is largely in the pinned
1431: state in low and medium strain rates (chaotic domain) are pushed
1432: to the threshold of unpinning as we increase strain rate ( power
1433: law stress drop regime)}. The study also establishes that the
1434: present model has considerable similarities with the GOY model of
1435: turbulence \cite{Yam87}. The model also reproduces the major
1436: spatial features of the PLC effect. The randomly nucleated band,
1437: the hopping and propagating types are found as the strain rate is
1438: increased. It also predicts a linear dependence of the velocity of
1439: the band and inverse dependence on the mobile density at high
1440: strain rates.
1441:
1442:
1443:
1444:
1445: Several observations may be in order on the dynamics of the
1446: crossover. We first note that the crossover itself is smooth as
1447: the changes in the Lyapunov spectrum are gradual, though it occurs
1448: in a narrow interval of strain rates ( from 220-250). Second, the
1449: power law here is of purely dynamical origin (in the sense
1450: elaborated below below). We have shown that this is a direct
1451: result of the existence of a reverse Hopf bifurcation at high
1452: strain rates. In this regime due to softening of the eigen values
1453: ( as a function of the applied strain rate), the orbits are mostly
1454: restricted to the region around the saddle node fixed point
1455: located on the $S_1$ part of the manifold. This offers a dynamical
1456: reason for the smallness of the yield drops in this region
1457: \cite{Rajesh,Rajesh00}. Note also that there is a dynamic feed
1458: back between the stress determined by Eq. \ref{Eq: seqn} and the
1459: production of dislocations in Eq. \ref{Eq: xeqn} which provides an
1460: explanation for the slowing down of the plastic relaxation. ( The
1461: partial plastic relaxation has been cited as the reason for the
1462: power law \cite{Anan99,Bhar01}.) This sets up a competition
1463: between the time scale of internal relaxation and the time scale
1464: determined by the applied strain rate ( essentially Deborah
1465: number). We note that while the time scale for internal relaxation
1466: is increasing, that due to the applied strain rate is decreasing.
1467: Third, our analysis shows that the power law regime of stress
1468: drops occurring at high strain rates belongs to a different
1469: universality class compared to SOC systems, as it is characterized
1470: by a dense set of null exponents. This must be contrasted with
1471: the lack of any characteristic feature of the nature of the
1472: Lyapunov spectrum in the few models of SOC studied so far
1473: \cite{Cess,desouza,Erzan}. For instance, no zero and positive
1474: exponents, zero exponent in the large $N$ limit etc., have been
1475: reported \cite{Cess,desouza,Erzan}. ( Often, the nature of largest
1476: Lyapunov exponent is inferred based on the similarity of other
1477: dynamical invariants \cite{Erzan}.) The dense set of null
1478: exponents in our model is actually similar to that obtained in
1479: shell models of turbulence where the power law is seen at high
1480: drive values \cite{Yam87}. However, there are significant
1481: differences. First, we note that the shell model \cite{Yam87}
1482: cannot explain the crossover as it is only designed to explain the
1483: power law regime. Second, the maximum Lyapunov exponent is large
1484: for small viscosity parameter $\eta$, ie., $\lambda_1 \propto
1485: \eta^{-1/2}$ in shell models \cite{Yam87} in contrast to near zero
1486: value in our model. It is also interesting to note that in our
1487: model propagating solutions arise in the power law regime of
1488: stress which comes as a surprise. As far as we are aware, this is
1489: the first situation, both from a experimental and theoretical
1490: angle, where propagating solutions are seen in a marginally
1491: stable situation.
1492:
1493: Regarding the spatial features seen in the model, we stress that
1494: these features emerge purely due to dynamical reasons without any
1495: recourse to using the negative strain rate sensitivity feature as
1496: an input, as is the case in most models
1497: \cite{Hahner02,Mc,Zhang,Leby}. Even the recently introduced
1498: poly-crystalline plasticity model which reproduces the crossover
1499: behavior also uses the negative SRS as an input \cite{Kok}. The
1500: dynamical approach followed here clearly exposes how the slowing
1501: down of the plastic relaxation occurs {\it due to a feed back
1502: mechanism of dislocation multiplication and applied strain rate}
1503: as we reach the power law regime of stress drops. While the three
1504: different types of bands have features of the uncorrelated type C,
1505: hopping type B and the propagating type A bands found in
1506: poly=crystalline materials, there is no element of
1507: poly-crystallinity in the model in its present form. In
1508: poly-crystals, other types of coupling terms do arise which have
1509: also been modelled by diffusive type terms \cite{KFA}. One way of
1510: including the presence of grain boundaries within the natural
1511: setting of the model is to recognize that crossslip will be
1512: hindered near the grain boundaries which also leads to a term
1513: similar to the present diffusive term. Such a term can account for
1514: the back stress arising from the incompatibility of grains. As the
1515: form of these terms are similar, the basic results are unlikely
1516: to change although one should expect a competition between the
1517: terms operating within a crystal and that at the grain boundaries.
1518:
1519:
1520: From a purely dynamical point of view, this model should be of
1521: interest to the area of dynamical systems, as it appears to be the
1522: first fully dynamical model which exhibits a crossover from a
1523: chaotic to a power law regime, in the sense that our model is
1524: continuous space time model {\it without any recourse to
1525: artificial thresholds} as is done in coupled map lattices
1526: \cite{Chate}. We note also that while the slow manifold subspace
1527: gives a method of visualizing the dislocations configurations,
1528: particularly in the scaling regime, the complementary subspace of
1529: the fast variable has helped us to obtain the band velocity in the
1530: same regime of strain rates. From the point of view of plastic
1531: instabilities, the present dynamical approach should be a
1532: promising direction for explaining many other patterns mentioned
1533: in the introduction \cite{KFA}.
1534:
1535: Finally, as stated in the introduction, the PLC effect bears
1536: considerable similarity with many stick-slip systems and hence
1537: presents a way of understanding some of these systems. Here we
1538: make a few comments on the similarity of the present model for a
1539: possible adoption to the observed voltage fluctuations in charge
1540: density wave (CDW) compounds \cite{Dumas,Anan98}. Under the action
1541: of applied electric field, anomalously large voltage fluctuations
1542: are reported when the electric field is above the threshold value.
1543: This ohmic to non-ohmic transition in $K_{0.3}MoO_3$ and
1544: $Rb_{0.3}MoO_3$, for instance \cite{Dumas1}, has not been
1545: adequately explained although the similarity with the PLC effect
1546: has been noted \cite{Dumas}. Lee and Rice \cite{Lee} have
1547: suggested that phase dislocations of the CDW carry current at
1548: fields too low for the CDW to move as a whole. Indeed both fall
1549: in the category of pinning-depinning phenomenon. In the case of
1550: CDW, pinned at impurity/defect sites is unpinned due to the
1551: applied electric field. The threshold value of the electric field
1552: can be viewed as the onset of plastic flow of the charged phase
1553: dislocations \cite{Dumas}. These authors identify stress with
1554: voltage and strain with current and suggest that the total current
1555: is the sum of the ohmic part and that arising from charge density
1556: waves. This is corresponds to the elastic and plastic
1557: displacements competing to give rise to the PLC instability. We
1558: believe that this parallel can be taken further along the lines of
1559: our PLC model where one can identify the phase dislocations with
1560: mobile dislocations, the neutral defects of the CDW with
1561: dislocation dipoles, ie., the immobile, and the phase dislocations
1562: pinned at defects with the Cottrell type. Work along these lines
1563: is progress.
1564:
1565:
1566:
1567: This work is supported by Department of Science and Technology,
1568: New Delhi, India.
1569:
1570: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1571: \bibitem{KFA}L.P. Kubin, C. Fressengeas and G. Ananthakrishna,
1572: in {\it Collective Behaviour of Dislocations}, edited by F.R.N.
1573: Nabarro and M.S. Deusbery, {\it Dislocations in Solids} Vol.11. P
1574: 101 (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2002).
1575: \bibitem{PLC} A detailed study of this effect is due to
1576: F. Le Chatelier, Rev. de M\'etall. {\bf 6}, 914 (1909). However,
1577: the phenonmenon was first observed by Savart, F. Savart, Ann.
1578: Chim. Phys. Second series {\bf 65}, 337 (1937).
1579: \bibitem{HZ} M. Zaiser and P. H\"ahner, Phys. Stat. Solidi B {\bf
1580: 199}, 267 (1997).
1581:
1582: \bibitem{Cottrell}A. H. Cottrell, {\it Dislocations and Plastic Flow in Crystals}. (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1953).
1583: \bibitem{van}A. Van den Beukel, Phys. Stat. Solidi A{\bf 30}, 197
1584: (1975).
1585: \bibitem{Kubin85}L.P. Kubin, and Y. Estrin, Acta. Metall. {\bf 33}, 397 (1985)
1586: \bibitem{penning} P. Penning, Acta Metall. {\bf 20}, 1169 (1972)
1587: \bibitem{Pers}B.N.J. Persson and E. Tosatti, {\it Physics of Sliding Friction}. (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1996).
1588: \bibitem{Carlson}J.M. Carlson and J.S. Langer, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 62}, 2632 (1989); Phys. Rev. A. {\bf 40}, 6470 (1989).
1589: \bibitem{Maug}D. Maugis and M. Barquins, {\it Adhesion}, edited by K.W. Allen, Vol. 12. (Elsevier, London, 1988).
1590: \bibitem{Dumas} J. Dumas and D. Feinberg, Europhys. Lett. {\bf
1591: 2}, 555 (1986).
1592:
1593: \bibitem{Anan82}G. Ananthakrishna and M.C. Valsakumar, J. Phys. D {\bf 15}, L171 (1982).
1594: \bibitem{Rajesh} S. Rajesh and G. Ananthakrishna, Phys. Rev. E.
1595: {\bf 61}, 3664 (2000).
1596: \bibitem{Anan83}G. Ananthakrishna and M.C. Valsakumar, Phys. Lett. {\bf A95}, 69 (1983).
1597:
1598: \bibitem{Anan95}G. Ananthakrishna {\it et al.}, Scripta. Metall. {\bf 32}, 1731
1599: (1995).
1600: \bibitem{Noro97} S.J. Noronha, {\it et al.}, Int. Jl. of Bifurcation
1601: and Chaos {\bf 7}, 2577 (1997).
1602:
1603: \bibitem{Licht} A. J. Lichtenberg and M. A. Libermann, {\it Regular and
1604: Chaotic Dyanmics},(Springer-Verlag, New York, 1991).
1605:
1606: \bibitem{Abar}H.D.I. Abarbanel, {\it Analysis of Observed Chaotic Data}. (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1996).
1607:
1608: \bibitem{Anan99}G. Ananthakrishna {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. E {\bf 60} 5455 (1999).
1609:
1610:
1611: \bibitem{Bhar01}M.S. Bharathi, {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 87}, 165508 (2001).
1612:
1613: \bibitem{Bak}P. Bak, C. Tang and K. Wiesenfeld, Phys. Rev. Lett.
1614: {\bf 59}, 381 (1987); Phys. Rev. A {\bf 38}, 364 (1988).
1615: \bibitem{Bak96}P. Bak, {\it How Nature Works}. (Springer - Verlag, New York, 1996).
1616: \bibitem{Jensen}H.J. Jensen, {\it Self-Organized Criticality}. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998).
1617: \bibitem{Dann}G. D'Anna and F. Nori, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 85}, 4096(2000);
1618: S. V. Franklin {\it et al}, F. Martens and M. Marder, Phys. Rev. E
1619: {\bf 62}, 8195 (2000); Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 78}, 4502 (1997).
1620: \bibitem{Pack} N. H. Packard, J. P. Crutchfield, J. D. Former and R. S. Shaw,
1621: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 45}, 712 (1980).
1622:
1623: \bibitem{Lib} See for instance F. Heslot, B. Castaing and A. Libchaber, Phys. Rev. A. {\bf 36}, 5780 (1987).
1624: \bibitem{Bohr}T. Bohr, M.H. Jensen, G. Paladin and A. Vulpiani,
1625: {\it Dynamical Systems Approach to Tubulence}, ( Cambridge,United
1626: Kingdom, 1997 ).
1627: \bibitem{Yam87} M. Yamada and K. Ohkitani, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. {\bf 56},
1628: 4210 (1987);M. Yamada and K. Ohkitani, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 60},
1629: 983 (1988); Progr. Theor. Phys. {\bf 79}, 1265 (1988); A. Cristani
1630: {\it et al}, Physica D, {\bf 76}, 239 (1994) and the references
1631: therein.
1632:
1633: \bibitem{Guten} B. Gutenberg and C. F. Richter, Ann. Goefis. {\bf
1634: 9}, 1 (1956).
1635: \bibitem{Diod} P. Diodati, F. Marchesoni and S. Piazza, Phys. Rev.
1636: Lett. {\bf 67}, 2239 (1991).
1637: \bibitem{Barkhou} X. Che and H. Suhl, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 64},
1638: 1670 (1990); K. L. Babcock and R. M. Westervelt, Phys. Rev. Lett.
1639: {\bf 64}, 2168 (1990).
1640: \bibitem{Bhar02} M.S. Bharathi and G. Ananthakrishna, Europhys.
1641: Lett.
1642: {\bf 48}, 1355 (2002).
1643: \bibitem{Bhar03} M.S. Bharathi and G. Ananthakrishna, Phys. Rev. E
1644: {\bf 67}, 065104R (2003).
1645: \bibitem{Glazov} M.V. Glazov {\it et al} Appl. Phys. A {\bf 64}, 373 (1997).
1646: \bibitem{Zaiser} M. Zaiser {\it et al}, Comp. Mater. Science {\bf 5}, 35 (1999).
1647: \bibitem{Bekele} M. Bekele and G. Ananthakrishna, Phys. Rev. E {\bf 56}, 6917 (1997).
1648: \bibitem{Rajesh00}S. Rajesh and G. Ananthakrishna, Physica D {\bf 140}, 193 (2000).
1649: \bibitem{Milik}A. Milik {\it et al}, Int. J. of Bifurcation and Chaos
1650: {\bf 8}, 505 (1998).
1651: \bibitem{Grass} P. Grassberger and I. Procaccia, Physica D {\bf 9}, 189 (1983).
1652: \bibitem{Ding} M. Ding, C. Grebogi, E. Ott, T. Sauer and J. A
1653: Yorke, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 70}, 3872 (1993).
1654: \bibitem{King}D. Broomhead and G. King, Physica. D{\bf 20}, 217 (1987).
1655: \bibitem{Bennet} G. Benettin, L. Galgani, A. Giorgilli and J. M. Strelcyn,
1656: Mechanica, {\bf 15}, 9 (1980).
1657:
1658: \bibitem{Ruelle}D. Ruelle, Comm. Math. Phys. {\bf 87}, 287 (1982).
1659:
1660:
1661:
1662: \bibitem{Erzan} A. Erzan and S. Sinha, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 66}, 2750
1663: (1991).
1664:
1665: \bibitem{desouza} M. de Sousa Vieira and A.J. Lichtenberg,
1666: Phys. Rev. E. {\bf 53}, 1441 (1996).
1667: \bibitem{Cess}B. Cessac, Ph. Blanchard and T. Kruger, Phys. Rev. E {\bf
1668: 64}, 016133 (2001).
1669:
1670: \bibitem{Bhar03a} M.S. Bharathi, S. Rajesh and G. Ananthakrishna,
1671: Scripta Mater. {\bf 48}, 1355 (2003).
1672:
1673:
1674: \bibitem{Dee} G. Dee and J. S. Langer, Phys. Rev, Lett. {\bf 50},
1675: 383 (1983).
1676:
1677:
1678: \bibitem{Saarloos} W. van Saarloos, Phys. Rev. A {\bf 37}, 211 (1988).
1679:
1680: \bibitem{Hahner02}P. H\"ahner, A. Ziegenbein, E. Rizzi and H.
1681: Neuh\"auser, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 65}, 134109 (2002).
1682: \bibitem{Korbel} A. Korbel, J. Zasadzinski and Z. Siekluka, Acta
1683: Metall. {\bf 24}, 921 (1976).
1684:
1685: \bibitem{Mc}P. G. Mc Cormick, and C. P. Ling. Acta Metall.
1686: Mater. {\bf 43},1069 (1995).
1687: \bibitem{Zhang} S. Zhang, P. G. McCormick, Y. Estrin, Acta Mater. {\bf 49},
1688: 1087 (2001).
1689: \bibitem{Leby} M. Lebyodkin, L. Dunin-Barkowskii, Y. Br\'echet, Y.
1690: Estrin, L. P. Kubin., Acta Mater. {\bf 48}, 2529 (2000) and the
1691: references therein.
1692: \bibitem{Kok} S. Kok, M. S. Bharathi, A. J. Beaudoin, C.
1693: Fressengeas, G. Ananthakrishna, L. P. Kubin and M. Lybyodkin, Acta
1694: Materialia, {\bf 51}, 3651 (2003).
1695: \bibitem{Chate} H. Chate and P. Manneville, Physic D {\bf 32}, 409 (1988);
1696: S. Sinha and D. Biswas, Phys. Rev. lett. {\bf 71}, 2010 (1993); S.
1697: Sinha, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B {\bf 9} 875 (1994); T. Bohr {\it et
1698: al}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 86}, 5482 (2001).
1699:
1700:
1701: \bibitem{Dumas1} J. Dumas, C. Schlenker, J. Marcus and R. Buder, Phys.
1702: Rev. Lett. {\bf 50}, 757 (1983), J. Dumas and C. Schlenker,
1703: Lecture Notes in Physics, Vol. {\bf 217}, 439 (1985).
1704: \bibitem{Lee} P. A. Lee and T. M. Rice, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 19},
1705: 3970 (1979).
1706:
1707: \bibitem{Anan98} G. Ananthakrishna, J. Indian Inst. {\bf 78}, 165 (1998).
1708:
1709:
1710:
1711: \end{thebibliography}
1712:
1713: \end{document}
1714: