MPEMathematical Problems in Engineering1563-51471024-123XHindawi Publishing Corporation35832910.1155/2009/358329358329Research ArticleWell Posedness for a Class of Flexible Structure in Hölder SpacesCuevasClaudio1LizamaCarlos2RodellarJ.1Departamento de MatemáticaUniversidade Federal de PernambucoAv. Prof. Luiz Freire, S/NRecife-PE, CEP. 50540-740Brazilufpe.br2Departamento de MatemáticaFacultad de CienciasUniversidad de Santiago de ChileCasilla 307-Correo 2Santiago-ChileChileusach.cl200923062009200904122008060420092009Copyright © 2009This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

We characterize well-posedness in Hölder spaces for an abstract version of the equation () u′′+λu′′′=c2(Δu+μΔu)+f which model the vibrations of flexible structures possessing internal material damping and external force f. As a consequence, we show that in case of the Laplacian with Dirichlet boundary conditions, equation () is always well-posed provided 0<λ<μ.

1. Introduction

During the last few decades, the use of flexible structural systems has steadily increased importance. The study of a flexible aerospace structure is a problem of dynamical system theory governed by partial differential equations.

We consider here the problem of characterize well posedness, for a mathematical model of a flexible space structure like a thin uniform rectangular panel. For example, a solar cell array or a spacecraft with flexible attachments. This problem is motivated by both engineering and mathematical considerations.

Such mechanical system was mathematically introduced in  and consists of a short rigid hub, connected to a flexible panel of length l. Control torque Q(t) is applied to the hub. The panel is made of viscoelastic material with internal Voigt-type damping with coefficient μ, that is, an ideal dashpot damping which is directly proportional to the first derivative of the longitudinal displacement, and opposing the direction of motion. The equation of motion of the panel is given by u=c2(Δu+μΔu), where c is the velocity of longitudinal wave propagation, c2=Dp/ρJp, and Dp,ρ,Jp are, respectively, torsional rigidity, density and radius of gyration about the central axis of the panel. Initial position and deflection angle are known. In  exact controllability and boundary stabilization for the solution of (1.1) was analyzed and in [2, p. 188], the exact decay rate was obtained.

More generally, the study of vibrations of flexible structures possessing internal material damping is modeled by a equation of the form u+λu”'=c2(Δu+μΔu),  0<λ<μ, in a bounded domain Ω in n with smooth boundary Γ, see [3, 4].

In  the explicit exponential energy decay rate was obtained for the solution of (1.2) subject to mixed boundary conditions. However, consideration of external forces interacting with the system, which lead us naturally with the well posedness for the nonhomogeneous version of (1.2), appears as an open problem.

In the first part of this paper we study well posedness of the following abstract version of (1.2): u(t)+λu(t)=c2Au(t)+c2μAu(t)+f(t),0<λ<μ,

where A is a closed linear operator acting in a Banach space X and f is a X-valued function. We emphasize that when A=Δ in general one cannot expect that (1.3) is well posed due to the presence of the term u. In fact, it is well known that the abstract Cauchy problem associated with (1.3) is in general ill posed, see for example .

We are able to characterize well posedness, that is, temporal maximal regularity, of solutions of (1.3) solely in terms of boundedness of the resolvent set of A. This will be achieved in the Hölder spaces Cα(,X), where 0<α<1. The methods to obtain this goal are those incorporated in  where a similar problem in case of the first order abstract Cauchy problem has been studied.

2. Preliminaries

Let X,Y be Banach spaces, we write (X,Y) for the space of bounded linear operators from X to Y and let 0<α<1. We denote by Ċα(,X) the spaces Ċα(,X)={f:X:f(0)=0,fα<} normed by fα=suptsf(t)-f(s)t-sα. Let Ω be an open set. By Cc(Ω) we denote the space of all C-functions in Ω having compact support in Ω.

We denote by f or f̃ the Fourier transform, that is, (f)(s):=f̃(s):=e-istf(t)dt(s,fL1(;X)).

Definition 2.1.

Let M:{0}(X,Y) be continuous. We say that M is a Ċα-multiplier in (X,Y) if there exists a mapping L:Ċα(,X)Ċα(,Y) such that (Lf)(s)(ϕ)(s)ds=((ϕ·M))(s)f(s)ds for all fCα(,X) and all ϕCc({0}).

Here ((ϕ·M))(s)=e-istϕ(t)M(t)dt(X,Y). Note that L is well defined, linear and continuous (cf. [6, Definition 5.2]).

Define the space Cα(,X) as the set Cα(,X)={f:X:fCα<} with the norm fCα=fα+f(0). Let Cα+k(,X) (where k is a positive integer) be the Banach space of all uCk(,X) such that u(k)Cα(,X), equipped with the norm uCα+k=u(k)Cα+u(0). Observe from Definition 2.1 and the relation ((ϕM))(s)ds=2π(ϕM)(0)=0, that for fCα(,X) we have LfCα(,X). Moreover, if fCα(,X) is bounded then Lf is bounded as well (see [6, Remark 6.3]). The following multiplier theorem is due to Arendt, Batty and Bu [6, Theorem 5.3].

Theorem 2.2.

Let MC2({0},(X,Y)) be such that supt0M(t)+supt0tM(t)+supt0t2M(t)<. Then M is a Ċα-multiplier.

Remark 2.3.

If X is B-convex, in particular if X is a UMD space, Theorem 2.2 remains valid if condition (2.2) is replaced by the following weaker condition: supt0M(t)+supt0tM(t)<, where MC1({0},(X,Y)) (cf. [6, Remark 5.5]).

3. A Characterization of Well Posedness in Hölder Spaces

In this section we characterize Cα-well posedness. Given fCα(,X), we consider in this section the linear problem u(t)+au(t)=bAu(t)+cAu(t)+f(t),t,

where A is a closed linear operator in X and a,b,c>0. Note that the solution of (3.1) does not have to satisfy any initial condition. In the case a=0, solutions of (3.1) with periodic boundary conditions has been recently studied in . On the other hand, well posedness of the homogeneous abstract Cauchy problem has been observed recently in  for a=0 and all b under certain assumptions on A. See also  for related maximal regularity results in the case of a damped wave equation.

We denote by [D(A)] the domain of A considered as a Banach space with the graph norm.

Definition 3.1.

We say that (3.1) is Cα-well posed if for each fCα(,X) there is a unique function uCα+3(,X)Cα+1(,[D(A)])Cα(,[D(A)]) such that (3.1) is satisfied.

In the next proposition, as usual we denote by ρ(T),R(λ,T) the resolvent set and resolvent of the operator T, respectively.

Proposition 3.2.

Assume that (3.1) is Cα-well-posed. Then

l(η):=-η2((1+iaη)/(b+icη))ρ(A)   for all η and,

supη||(η3/(b+icη))R(l(η),A)||<.

Proof.

Denote by L:Cα(,X)Cα+3(,X) the bounded operator which associates to each fCα(,X) the unique solution u of (3.1). Let η. Let xD(A) be such that Ax-l(η)x=0. Define u(t)=eiηtx. Then it is not difficult to see that u is a solution of (3.1) with f0. Hence, by uniqueness, x=0.

Let yX and define f(t)=eiηty. Let u=Lf. For fixed s we define v1(t)=u(t+s),v2(t)=eiηsu(t). Then is easy to check that v1 and v2 are both solutions of (3.1) with f replaced by eiηsf. By uniqueness, u(t+s)=eiηsu(t) for all t,s. In particular, it follows that u(s)=eiηsu(0) for all s. Let x=u(0)D(A). Replacing u(t)=eiηtx in (3.1) we obtain (-η2-iaη3)u(t)=(b+icη)Au(t)+eiηty. Taking t=0 we conclude that (l(η)-A) is bijective and u(t)=1b+icηR(l(η),A)eiηty. Define eη(t)=eiηt and (eηy)(t)=eη(t)y. We have the identity ||eηx||α=Kα|η|α||x|| where Kα=2supt>0t-αsin(t/2) (see [6, section 3]). Hence Kα|η|αη3b+icηR(l(η),A)y=eηη3b+icηR(l(η),A)yα=uαuα+3=Lfα+3LfαL(fα+f(0))=L(eηyα+y)L(Kα|η|α+1)y. Therefore, for ε>0 we have sup|η|>εη3b+icηR(l(η),A)yLsup|η|>ε(1+1Kα|η|α)y<. On the other hand, since {1/(b+icη)}η is bounded and ηη3R(l(η),A) is continuous at η=0, we obtain (ii) and the proof is complete.

In what follows, we denote by idk the function: s(is)k for all s, and k. As before, we also use the notation l(s):=-s21+iasb+ics,M(s):=1b+icsR(l(s),A),  s.

Lemma 3.3.

Assume that supss3M(s)<, then id2·M and id3·M are Ċα- multipliers in (X). Moreover M and id·M are Ċα-multipliers in (X,D(A)).

Proof.

Define κ(s):=1/(b+ias). We first observe that the functions θ(s):=κ(s)/κ(s) and ϑ(s):=l(s)/l(s) have the property that sθ(s),sϑ(s),s2θ(s) and s2ϑ(s) are bounded on . We next claim that M is a Ċα-multiplier. In fact, note that by hypothesis sup|s|>εM(s)< for each ε>0, and the function sM(s) is continuous at t=0 since b>0. Hence M(s) is bounded. Moreover, defining ξ(s):=l(s)/κ(s)=-s2-ias3 we have M(s)=θ(s)M(s)-ϑ(s)ξ(s)[M(s)]2, where sξ(s) is of order s4 and then Q(s):=ξ(s)[M(s)]2 is bounded by (3.8). It follows that sM(s) is bounded. Next, we have the identity s2M(s)=s2θ(s)M(s)+sθ(s)sM(s)-s2ϑ(s)Q(s)-s2ϑ(s)Q(s). where the first three terms on the right hand side are bounded. For the last term, we have s2ϑ(s)Q(s)=[sϑ(s)]2Q(s)-sϑ(s)sθ(s)Q(s)+2sϑ(s)ξ(s)M(s)sM(s). It is clear that the first two terms on the right hand side are bounded. We observe that the last term also is bounded. In fact, note that by hypothesis sup|s|>εξ(s)M(s)< for each ε>0 and the function sξ(s)M(s) is continuous at s=0. Hence ξ(s)M(s) is bounded. This completes the proof of the Lemma.

Lemma 3.4.

Let 0<α<1,k and u,vCα(,X). The following assertions are equivalent:

uCα+k(,X) and u(k)-v is constant.

v(s)(φ)(s)ds=u(s)(  idk·φ)(s)ds for all φ𝒟({0}).

Proof.

(i)(ii). Let Φ𝒟({0}). Then v(s)(φ)(s)ds=u(k)(s)(φ)(s)ds=(-1)ku(s)(φ)(k)(s)ds=u(s)(idk·φ)(s)ds.

(ii)(i). Let Φ𝒟({0}) and ψ(s)=φ(s)/sk. Then ψ  𝒟({0}) and φ=(ψ)(k). Let w(t)=0t(t-s)k-1v(s)ds. Then integration by parts and assumption give w(s)(φ)(s)ds=u(s)(φ)(s)ds. It follows from [10, Theorems 4.8.2 and 4.8.1] that w-u is a polynomial. Since w(t)c(1+|t|α+k) it follows that u(t)=w(t)+y0+ty1+  t2y2++tk  yk=0t      (t-s)k-1    v(s)ds+y0+ty1+t2  y2++tk  yk for some vectors y0,y1,,ykX. Thus u(k)=v+x for some vector xX.

The following theorem, which is one of the main results in this paper, shows that the converse of Proposition 3.2 is valid.

Theorem 3.5.

Let A be a closed linear operator defined on a Banach space X. Then the following assertions are equivalent:

Equation (3.1) is Cα-well posed;

l(η):=-η2((1+iaη)/(b+icη))ρ(A) for all η and supηη3b+icηR(l(η),A)<.

Proof.

The implication (i)(ii) follows by Proposition 3.2. We now prove the converse implication.

Let fCα(,X). By Lemma 3.3 there exists u1,u2Cα(,[D(A)]) and u3,u4Cα(,X) such that u1(s)(ϕ1)(s)ds=(ϕ1·M)(s)f(s)ds,u2(s)(ϕ2)(s)ds=(ϕ2·id·M)(s)f(s)ds,u3(s)(ϕ3)(s)ds=(ϕ3·id2·M)(s)f(s)ds,u4(s)(ϕ4)(s)ds=(ϕ4·id3·M)(s)f(s)ds for all ΦiC0({0})(i=1,2,3,4). Choosing Φ1=id·Φ2 in (3.13), it follows from Lemma 3.4 that   u1C1+α(,X) and u1=u2+y1, for some y1X. Now we can choose ϕ2=id·ϕ3 in (3.14), it follows that u1Cα+2(,X) and u1=u3+y2, for some y2X. In a similar way, we can see that u1Cα+3(,X) and u1”'=u4+y3, for some y3X. From the definition of M(s) we obtain (b+ics)(l(s)-A)M(s)=I. Taking into account the definition of l(s) we get [-s2(1+ics)-(b+ics)A]M(s)=I. Then we deduce the identity (is)2M(s)+a(is)3M(s)=bAM(s)+icsAM(s)+I. We multiply the above identity by ϕ, take Fourier transforms and then integrate over after taking the values at f(s), we obtain (ϕ·id2·M)(s)f(s)ds+a(ϕ·id3·M)(s)f(s)ds=bA(ϕ·M)(s)f(s)ds+cA(ϕ·id·M)(s)f(s)ds+(ϕ)(s)f(s)ds for all ϕC0({0}). Using (3.17), (3.18) and (3.19) in the above identity we conclude that u1(s)(ϕ)(s)ds+au1(s)(ϕ)(s)ds=bAu1(s)(ϕ)(s)ds+cAu1(s)(ϕ)(s)ds+(ϕ)(s)f(s)ds for all ϕC0({0}). By Lemma 3.4 there exists zX such that u1(t)+au1(t)=bAu1(t)+cAu1(t)+f(t)+z,  t. We define u(t)=u1(t)+1bA-1(z). Then, we can show that u solves (3.1) and that uCα+3(,X)Cα+1(,[D(A)])Cα(,[D(A)]).

In order to prove uniqueness, suppose that u(t)+au(t)=bAu(t)+cAu(t),  t. where uCα+3(,X)Cα+1(,[D(A)])Cα(,[D(A)]). Let σ>0. We define Lσu by (Lσu)(ρ)=û(σ+iρ)-û(-σ+iρ),  ρ where the hat indicates the Carleman transform (see e.g. ). By [12, Proposition A.2(i)], we have that u(ρ)(ϕ)(ρ)dρ=limσ0(Lσu)(ρ)ϕ(ρ)dρ for all ϕ𝒮(), the Schwartz space of smooth rapidly decreasing functions on . We will prove that the right term in (3.27) is zero, from which u0 proving the theorem. In fact, by [12, Proposition A.2(iii)] we have (b+c(σ+iρ))(lσ(ρ)-A)(Lσu)(ρ)=2σcAû(-σ+iρ)-[2σ(σ+iρ)+2σa(σ+iρ)2]û(-σ+iρ)-[2σ+2σa(σ+iρ)]û(-σ+iρ)-2σaû(-σ+iρ):=Ha,c(σ,ρ), where lσ(ρ)=(σ+iρ)21+a(σ+iρ)b+c(σ+iρ). Observe that l0(ρ)=l(ρ)ρ(A) for all ρ. Therefore we have (lσ(ρ)-l(ρ))(l(ρ)-A)-1(Lσu)(ρ)+(Lσu)(ρ)=1b+c(σ+iρ)(l(ρ)-A)-1Ha,c(σ,ρ). Let ϕC0(). Multiplying by ϕ and integrating over the above identity we obtain (Lσu)(ρ)ϕ(ρ)dρ=Nσ(ρ)Ha,c(σ,ρ)dρ-Mσ(ρ)(Lσu)(ρ)dρ where Nσ(ρ)=1b+c(σ+iρ)ϕ(ρ)(l(ρ)-A)-1Mσ(ρ)=ϕ(ρ)(lσ(ρ)-l(ρ))(l(ρ)-A)-1. We note that in [12, Lemma A.4], limσ0Mσ(ρ)Lσ(u)(ρ)dρ=0. It remains to prove that limσ0Nσ(ρ)Ha,c(σ,ρ)dρ=0. In fact, since (Lσu)(ρ)=e-σ|t|e-iρtu(t)dt, we have Mσ(ρ)Lσ(u)(ρ)dρ=e-iρtMσ(ρ)dρe-σ|t|u(t)dt=(Mσ)(t)e-σ|t|u(t)dt. Then Mσ(ρ)Lσ(u)(ρ)dρ(Mσ)(t)u(t)dt.2C(MσL1+MσL1). It is easy to check that MσL1+MσL10 as σ0, proving (3.34).

We write Ha,c(σ,ρ)=I1(σ,ρ)+I2(σ,ρ)+I3(σ,ρ)+I4(σ,ρ). We first prove that limσ0Nσ(ρ)I1(σ,ρ)dρ=0. In fact, we apply Fubini's theorem to obtain Nσ(ρ)I1(σ,ρ)dρ=2σcNσ(ρ)Aû(-σ+iρ)dρ=-2σc-0[e-iρtNσ(ρ)dρ]eσtAu(t)dt=-2σc-0(Nσ)(t)eσtAu(t)dt It follows from [, Lemma A.3] that -0(Nσ)(t)eσtAu(t)dt2C(NσL1+NσL1), where C is a positive constant. Taking into account (3.39) and (3.40) we deduce (3.38).

We next prove that limσ0Nσ(ρ)I2(σ,ρ)dρ=0. In fact, define Nσa(ρ)=[1+a(σ+iρ)](σ+iρ)Nσ(ρ). Then Nσ(ρ)I2(σ,ρ)dρ=-2σ-0e(σ-iρ)sNσa(ρ)u(s)dsdρ=-2σ-0(Nσa)(s)easu(s)ds. By [12, Lemma A.3], we have for 0σε,-0(Nσa)(s)easu(s)ds2Csup0σε(NσaL1+(Nσa)L1), where C>0. Therefore, we deduce (3.41). Proceeding in the same way we obtain limσ0Nσ(ρ)Ij(σ,ρ)dρ=0,  j=3,4. This completes the proof of the assertion (3.34).

Corollary 3.6.

The solution u of problem (3.1) given by Theorem 3.5 satisfies the following maximal regularity property: u,uCα(;[D(A)]) and Au,Au,u,uCα(;X). Moreover, there exists a constant C>0 independent of fCα(;X) such that uα+uα+uα+uα+Auα+AuαCfα.

The following consequence of Theorem 3.5 is remarkable in the study of Cα well posedness for flexible structural systems. We recall that l(η):=-η2((1+iaη)/(b+icη)).

Corollary 3.7.

If A is the generator of a bounded analytic semigroup, then (3.1) is Cα-well posed.

Proof.

Since A generates a bounded analytic semigroup, we have that {τ:Reτ>0}ρ(A) and there is a constant M>0 such that τ(τ-A)-1M for Reτ>0. Note that η3b+icηR(l(η);A)=-η1+iαηl(η)R(l(η);A) and that Re(l(η))=b+acη2b2+c2η2>0      for eachη. We conclude that l(η)ρ(A) and supηη3b+icηR(l(η),A)<. The conclusion follows by Theorem 3.5.

For example, if A is a normal operator on a Hilbert space H satisfying σ(A){z:arg(-z)<δ} for some δ[0,π/2), then A generates a bounded analytic semigroup. In particular, the semigroup generated by a self-adjoint operator that is bounded above is analytic of angle π/2. Another important class of generators of analytic semigroups is provided by squares of group generators.

Example 3.8.

Since the Laplacian Δ is the generator a bounded analytic semigroup (the diffusion semigroup) in X=Lp(N)(1p<),   we obtain that for each fCα(,Lp(N)) the problem utt(t,x)+λuttt(t,x)=c2(Δu(t,x)+μΔut(t,x))+f(t,x) has a unique solution uCα+3(,Lp(N))Cα+1(,W2,p(N))Cα(,W2,p(N)).

Since it is also well known that the Dirichlet Laplacian Δ generates a bounded analytic semigroup on L2(Ω), where Ω is a bounded domain with smooth boundary Ω in 3, we obtain the following consequence for our initial problem.

Corollary 3.9.

If Ω is a bounded domain with boundary of class C2 in 3 then for each fCα(,L2(Ω)), the problem (3.50) is Cα-well posed, that is, has a unique solution uCα+3(,L2(Ω))Cα+1(,H2(Ω)H01(Ω))Cα(,H2(Ω)H01(Ω)).

We note that the same assertion remain true for all p[1,).

Acknowledgment

The first author is partially supported by CNPQ/Brazil. The second author is partially financed by Laboratorio de Análisis Estocástico, Proyecto Anillo ACT-13.

BoseS. K.GorainG. C.Exact controllability and boundary stabilization of torsional vibrations of an internally damped flexible space structureJournal of Optimization Theory and Applications1998992423442MR165703710.1023/A:1021778428222ZBL0938.93009BátkaiA.PiazzeraS.Semigroups for Delay Equations200510Wellesley, Mass, USAA. K. Petersxii+259Research Notes in MathematicsMR2181405ZBL1089.35001BoseS. K.GorainG. C.Exact controllability and boundary stabilization of flexural vibrations of an internally damped flexible space structureApplied Mathematics and Computation20021262-3341360MR187916710.1016/S0096-3003(00)00112-0ZBL1037.93045BoseS. K.GorainG. C.Stability of the boundary stabilised internally damped wave equation y+λy=c2(Δy+μΔy) in a bounded domain in nIndian Journal of Mathematics1998401115MR1654783ZBL0923.35091XiaoT.-J.LiangJ.The Cauchy Problem for Higher-Order Abstract Differential Equations19981701Berlin, GermanySpringerxii+301Lecture Notes in MathematicsMR1725643ZBL0915.34002ArendtW.BattyC.BuS.Fourier multipliers for Hölder continuous functions and maximal regularityStudia Mathematica200416012351MR202973810.4064/sm160-1-2ZBL1073.42005KeyantuoV.LizamaC.Periodic solutions of second order differential equations in Banach spacesMathematische Zeitschrift20062533489514MR222108310.1007/s00209-005-0919-1ZBL1104.34041MugnoloD.A variational approach to strongly damped wave equationsFunctional Analysis and Evolution Equations: The Günter Lumer Volume2008Basel, SwitzerlandBirkhäuser503514MR240274710.1007/978-3-7643-7794-6_30ChillR.SrivastavaS.Lp-maximal regularity for second order Cauchy problemsMathematische Zeitschrift20052514751781MR219014210.1007/s00209-005-0815-8ZBL1101.34043ArendtW.BattyC. J. K.HieberM.NeubranderF.Vector-Valued Laplace Transforms and Cauchy Problems200196Basel, SwitzerlandBirkhäuserxii+523Monographs in MathematicsMR1886588ZBL0978.34001PrüssJ.Evolutionary Integral Equations and Applications199387Basel, SwitzerlandBirkhäuserxxvi+366Monographs in MathematicsMR1238939ZBL0784.45006KeyantuoV.LizamaC.Hölder continuous solutions for integro-differential equations and maximal regularityJournal of Differential Equations20062302634660MR226993710.1016/j.jde.2006.07.018ZBL1115.45006