Figure 4.

(a,b) Influence of x−z shape, the rest state volume Vol being identical. R₁∈{0.71,0.96,1.23,1.48,1.73}, α₁=0.54, α₂=0.37, b=0.5, c=10, $d=10/R_1^2$ (the darkness of the grey of the line in the plot increases with d). $v_0=0.94,0<h<d^2/(c^2\tan (v_0^2))$. (a) Normalized opening $\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }S}$ versus vertical deformation 1−λ. The arrows point to the corresponding rest state contour (x(0,.,0),z(0,.,0)) and deformed contour (x(0,.,h),z(0,.,h)) at maximal opening. (b) Normalized opening $\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }S}$ versus energetical cost W. The arrows point to the corresponding rest state contour (x(0,.,0),y(0,.,0)) and deformed contour (x(0,.,h),y(0,.,h)) at maximal opening (the scale is 0.3 smaller than that for the x−z curve on (a)). (c,d) Influence of x−y shape: (c) at constant Vol, normalized opening $\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }S}$ versus energetic cost W. R₁∈{0.71,0.96,1.23,1.48,1.73}, α₁=0.54, α₂=0.37, $b=1/R_1^2$ (the darkness of the grey of the line in the plot increases with b), $c=10,\hspace{0.17em}d=50,v_0=0.94,0<h<d^2/(c^2\tan (v_0^2))$. The arrows point to the corresponding rest state contour (x(0,.,0),y(0,.,0)) and deformed contour (x(0,.,h),y(0,.,h)). (d) Energetic cost normalized by its minimum versus R₁ for constant $\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }S}$ and constant rest state volume Vol. R_1,0∈{0.71,0.96,1.23,1.48,1.73}, 0.1<R₁/R_1,0<1.1, α_1,0=0.54, α_2,0=0.37, b=1, c=10, $d=10/R_{1,0}^2$, v₀=0.94, $0<h<d^2/(c^2\tan (v_0^2))$. The three contours represented at the bottom are the rest state contours (x(0,.,0),y(0,.,0)), while R₁ is varying.