Citation: Soh E. Mukiawa, Tijani A. Apalara, Salim A. Messaoudi. Stability rate of a thermoelastic laminated beam: Case of equal-wave speed and nonequal-wave speed of propagation[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(1): 333-361. doi: 10.3934/math.2021021
[1] | Hicham Saber, Fares Yazid, Fatima Siham Djeradi, Mohamed Bouye, Khaled Zennir . Decay for thermoelastic laminated beam with nonlinear delay and nonlinear structural damping. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(3): 6916-6932. doi: 10.3934/math.2024337 |
[2] | Fatima Siham Djeradi, Fares Yazid, Svetlin G. Georgiev, Zayd Hajjej, Khaled Zennir . On the time decay for a thermoelastic laminated beam with microtemperature effects, nonlinear weight, and nonlinear time-varying delay. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(11): 26096-26114. doi: 10.3934/math.20231330 |
[3] | Tijani A. Apalara, Aminat O. Ige, Cyril D. Enyi, Mcsylvester E. Omaba . Uniform stability result of laminated beams with thermoelasticity of type Ⅲ. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(1): 1090-1101. doi: 10.3934/math.2023054 |
[4] | Abdelkader Moumen, Fares Yazid, Fatima Siham Djeradi, Moheddine Imsatfia, Tayeb Mahrouz, Keltoum Bouhali . The influence of damping on the asymptotic behavior of solution for laminated beam. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(8): 22602-22626. doi: 10.3934/math.20241101 |
[5] | Hasan Almutairi, Soh Edwin Mukiawa . On the uniform stability of a thermoelastic Timoshenko system with infinite memory. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 16260-16279. doi: 10.3934/math.2024787 |
[6] | Cyril Dennis Enyi, Soh Edwin Mukiawa . Dynamics of a thermoelastic-laminated beam problem. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(5): 5261-5286. doi: 10.3934/math.2020338 |
[7] | Adel M. Al-Mahdi . Long-time behavior for a nonlinear Timoshenko system: Thermal damping versus weak damping of variable-exponents type. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(12): 29577-29603. doi: 10.3934/math.20231515 |
[8] | Abdelbaki Choucha, Sofian Abuelbacher Adam Saad, Rashid Jan, Salah Boulaaras . Decay rate of the solutions to the Lord Shulman thermoelastic Timoshenko model. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(7): 17246-17258. doi: 10.3934/math.2023881 |
[9] | Qian Li . General and optimal decay rates for a viscoelastic wave equation with strong damping. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(10): 18282-18296. doi: 10.3934/math.20221006 |
[10] | Ahmed E. Abouelregal, Khalil M. Khalil, Wael W. Mohammed, Doaa Atta . Thermal vibration in rotating nanobeams with temperature-dependent due to exposure to laser irradiation. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 6128-6152. doi: 10.3934/math.2022341 |
The fundamental work of Hansen and Spies [4] modeled a two-layer beam with a structural damping due to the interfacial slip through the following system
{ρφtt+G(ψ−φx)x=0,Iρ(3w−ψ)tt−D(3w−ψ)xx−G(ψ−φx)=0,Iρwtt−Dwxx+3G(ψ−φx)+4γw+4βwt=0, | (1.1) |
where φ=φ(x,t) is the transverse displacement, ψ=ψ(x,t) is the rotation angle, w=w(x,t) is proportional to the amount of slip along the interface, 3w−ψ denotes the effective rotation angle. The physical quantities ρ,Iρ,G,D,β and γ are respectively: the density, mass moment of inertia, shear stiffness, flexural rigidity, adhesive damping and adhesive stiffness. Equation (1.1)3 describes the dynamics of the slip. For β=0, system (1.1) describes the coupled laminated beams without structural damping at the interface. In the recent result [1], Apalara considered the thermoelastic-laminated beam system without structural damping, namely
{ρφtt+G(ψ−φx)x=0,Iρ(3s−ψ)tt−D(3s−ψ)xx−G(ψ−φx)=0,Iρstt−Dsxx+3G(ψ−φx)+4γs+δθx=0,ρ3θt−λθxx+δstx=0, | (1.2) |
where (x,t)∈(0,1)×(0,+∞), θ=θ(x,t) is the difference temperature. The positive quantities γ,β,k,λ are adhesive stiffness, adhesive damping, heat capacity and the diffusivity respectively. The author proved that (1.2) is exponential stable provided
Gρ=DIρ. | (1.3) |
When β>0, the adhesion at the interface supplies a restoring force proportion to the interfacial slip. But this is not enough to stabilize system (1.1), see for instance [2]. To achieve exponential or general stabilization of system (1.1), many authors in literature have used additional damping. In this direction, Gang et al. [9] studied the following memory-type laminated beam system
{ρφtt+G(ψ−φx)x=0,Iρ(3w−ψ)tt−D(3w−ψ)xx+∫t0g(t−s)(3w−ψ)xx(x,s)ds−G(ψ−φx)=03Iρwtt−3Dwxx+3G(ψ−φx)+4γw+4βwt=0 | (1.4) |
and established a general decay result for more regular solutions and Gρ≠DIρ. Mustafa [15] also considered the structural damped laminated beam system (1.4) and established a general decay result provided Gρ=DIρ. Feng et al. [8] investigated the following laminated beam system
{ρwtt+Gφx+g1(wt)+f1(w,ξ,s)=h1,Iρξtt−Gφ−Dξxx+g2(ξt)+f2(w,ξ,s)=h2,Iρstt+Gφ−Dsxx+g3(st)+f2(w,ξ,s)=h3 | (1.5) |
and established the well-posedness, smooth global attractor of finite fractal dimension as well as existence of generalized exponential attractors. See also, recent results by Enyi et al. [20]. We refer the reader to [5,6,7,11,13,14,17,18] and the references cited therein for more related results.
In this present paper, we consider a thermoelastic laminated beam problem with a viscoelastic damping
{ρwtt+G(ψ−wx)x=0,Iρ(3s−ψ)tt−D(3s−ψ)xx+∫t0g(t−τ)(3s−ψ)xx(x,τ)dτ−G(ψ−wx)=03Iρstt−3Dsxx+3G(ψ−wx)+4γs+δθx=0,kθt−λθxx+δsxt=0 | (1.6) |
under initial conditions
{w(x,0)=w0(x), ψ(x,0)=ψ0(x), s(x,0)=s0(x), θ(x,0)=θ0(x), x∈[0,1],wt(x,0)=w1(x), ψt(x,0)=ψ1(x), st(x,0)=s1(x), x∈[0,1] | (1.7) |
and boundary conditions
{w(0,t)=ψx(0,t)=sx(0,t)=θ(0,t)=0,t∈[0,+∞),wx(1,t)=ψ(1,t)=s(1,t)=θx(1,t)=0,t∈[0,+∞). | (1.8) |
In the system (1.6), the integral represents the viscoelastic damping, and g is the relaxation function satisfying some suitable assumptions specified in the next section. According to the Boltzmann Principle, the viscoelastic damping (see [21] for details) is represented by a memory term in the form of convolution. It acts as a damper to reduce the internal/external forces like the beam's weight, heavy loads, wind, etc., that cause undesirable vibrations.
In most of the above works, the authors have established their decay result by including the structural damping along with other dampings. So, the natural question that comes to mind.
Is it possible to obtain general/optimal decay result (decay rates that agrees with that of g) to the thermoelastic laminated beam system (1.6)–(1.8), in the absence of the structural damping.
The novelty of this article is to answer this question in a consenting way, by using the ideas developed in [10] to establish general and optimal decay results for Problem 1.6. Moreover, we establish a weaker decay result in the case of a non-equal wave of speed propagation. To the best of our knowledge, there is no stability result for the latter in the literature.
The rest of work is organized as follows: In Section 2, we recall some preliminaries and assumptions on the memory term. In Section 3, we state and prove the main stability result for the case equal-speed and in the case of non-equal-speed of propagation. We also give some examples to illustrate our findings. Finally, in Section 4, we give the proofs of the lemmas used our main results.
In this section, we recall some useful materials and conditions. Through out this paper, C is a positive constant that may change through lines, ⟨.,.⟩ and ‖.‖2 denote respectively the inner product and the norm in L2(0,1). We assume the relaxation function g obeys the assumptions:
(G1). g:[0,+∞)⟶(0,+∞) is a non-inecreasing C1− function such that
g(0)>0,D−∫∞0g(τ)dτ=l0>0. | (2.1) |
(G2). There exist a C1 function H:[0,+∞)→(0,+∞) which is linear or is strictly convex C2 function on (0,ϵ0), ϵ0≤g(0), with H(0)=H′(0)=0 and a positive nonincreasing differentiable function ξ:[0,+∞)→(0,+∞), such that
g′(t)≤−ξ(t)H(g(t)),t≥0, | (2.2) |
Remark 2.1. As in [10], we note here that, if H is a strictly increasing convex C2− function on (0,r], with H(0)=H′(0)=0, then H has an extension ˉH, which is strictly increasing and strictly convex C2-function on (0,+∞). For example, ˉH can be defined by
ˉH(s)=H″(r)2s2+(H′(r)−H″(r)r)s+H(r)−H′(r)r+H″(r)2r2, s>r. | (2.3) |
Let
H1∗(0,1)={u∈H1(0,1)/u(0)=0}, ˉH1∗(0,1)={u∈H1(0,1)/u(1)=0}, |
H2∗(0,1)={u∈H2(0,1)/ux∈H1∗(0,1)}, ˉH2∗(0,1)={u∈H2(0,1)/ux∈ˉH1∗(0,1)}. |
The existence and regularity result of problem (1.6) is the following
Theorem 2.1. Let (w0,3s0−ψ0,s0,θ0)∈H1∗(0,1)×ˉH1∗(0,1)×ˉH1∗(0,1)×H1∗(0,1) and (w1,3s1−ψ1,s1)∈L2(0,1)×L2(0,1)×L2(0,1) be given. Suppose (G1) and (G2) hold. Then problem (1.6) has a unique global weak solution (w,3s−ψ,s,θ) which satisfies
w∈C(R+,H1∗(0,1))∩C1(R+,L2(0,1)), (3s−ψ)∈C(R+,ˉH1∗(0,1))∩C1(R+,L2(0,1)), |
s∈C(R+,ˉH1∗(0,1))∩C1(R+,L2(0,1)), θ∈C(R+,L2(0,1))∩L2(R+,H1(0,1)). |
Furthermore, if (w0,(3s0−ψ0),s0,θ0)∈H2∗(0,1)×ˉH2∗(0,1)×ˉH2∗(0,1)×H2(0,1)∩H1∗(0,1) and (w1,(3s1−ψ1),s1)∈H1∗(0,1)×ˉH1∗(0,1)×ˉH1∗(0,1), then the solution of (1.6) satisfies
w∈C(R+,H2∗(0,1))∩C1(R+,H1∗(0,1))∩C2(R+,L2(0,1)), |
(3s−ψ)∈C(R+,ˉH2∗(0,1))∩C1(R+,ˉH1∗(0,1))∩C2(R+,L2(0,1)), |
s∈C(R+,ˉH2∗(0,1))∩C1(R+,ˉH1∗(0,1))∩C2(R+,L2(0,1)), |
θ∈C(R+,H2(0,1)∩H2∗(0,1))∩C1(R+,H1∗(0,1)). |
The proof of Theorem 2.1 can be established using the Galerkin approximation method as in [16]. Throughout this paper, we denote by ⋄ the binary operator, defined by
(g⋄ν)(t)=∫t0g(t−τ)‖ν(t)−ν(τ)‖22dτ,t≥0. |
We also define h(t) and Cα as follow
h(t)=αg(t)−g′(t) and Cα=∫+∞0g2(τ)αg(τ)−g′(τ)dτ. |
The following lemmas will be applied repeatedly throughout this paper
Lemma 2.1. For any function f∈L2loc([0,+∞),L2(0,1)), we have
∫10(∫t0g(t−s)(f(t)−f(s))ds)2dx≤(1−l0)(g⋄f)(t), | (2.4) |
∫10(∫x0f(y,t)dy)2dx≤‖f(t)‖22. | (2.5) |
Lemma 2.2. Let v∈H1∗(0,1) or ˉH1∗(0,1), we have
∫10(∫t0g(t−s)(v(t)−v(τ))dτ)2dx≤Cp(1−l0)(g⋄v)(t), | (2.6) |
where Cp>0 is the poincaré constant.
Lemma 2.3. Let (w,3s−ψ,s,θ) be the solution of (1.6). Then, for any 0<α<1 we have
∫10(∫t0g(t−τ)((3s−ψ)x(τ)−(3s−ψ)x(t))dτ)2dx≤Cα(h⋄(3s−ψ)x)(t). | (2.7) |
Proof. Using Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, we have
∫10(∫t0g(t−τ)((3s−ψ)x(τ)−(3s−ψ)x(t))dτ)2dx=∫10(∫t0g(t−τ)√h(t−τ)√h(t−τ)((3s−ψ)x(τ)−(3s−ψ)x(t))dτ)2dx≤(∫+∞0g2(τ)h(τ)ds)∫10∫t0h(t−τ)((3s−ψ)x(τ)−(3s−ψ)x(t))2dτdx=Cα(h⋄(3s−ψ)x)(t). | (2.8) |
Lemma 2.4. [12] Let F be a convex function on the close interval [a,b], f,j:Ω→[a,b] be integrable functions on Ω, such that j(x)≥0 and ∫Ωj(x)dx=α1>0. Then, we have the following Jensen inequality
F(1α1∫Ωf(y)j(y)dy)≤1α1∫ΩF(f(y))j(y)dy. | (2.9) |
In particular if F(y)=y1p, y≥0, p>1, then
(1α1∫Ωf(y)j(y)dy)1p≤1α1∫Ω(f(y))1pj(y)dy. | (2.10) |
Lemma 2.5. The energy functional E(t) of the system (1.6)-(1.8) defined by
E(t)=12[ρ‖wt‖22+3Iρ‖st‖22+Iρ‖3st−ψt‖22+3D‖sx‖22+G‖ψ−wx‖22]+12[(D−∫t0g(τ)dτ)‖3sx−ψx‖22+(g⋄(3sx−ψx))(t)+4γ‖s‖22+k‖θ‖22], | (2.11) |
satisfies
E′(t)=12(g′⋄(3sx−ψx))(t)−12g(t)‖3sx−ψx‖22−λ‖θx‖22≤12(g′⋄(3sx−ψx))(t)≤0, ∀ t≥0. | (2.12) |
Proof. Multiplying (1.6)1, (1.6)2, (1.6)3 and (1.6)4, respectively, by wt, (3st−ψt), st and θ, integrating over (0,1), and using integration by parts and the boundary conditions (1.7), we arrive at
12ddt(ρ‖wt‖22+G‖ψ−wx‖22)=G⟨(ψ−wx),ψt⟩, | (2.13) |
12ddt[Iρ‖3st−ψt‖22+(D−∫t0g(τ)dτ)‖3sx−ψx‖22+(g⋄(3sx−ψx))(t)]=G⟨(ψ−wx),(3s−ψ)t⟩+12(g′⋄(3sx−ψx))(t)−12g(t)‖3sx−ψx‖22, | (2.14) |
12ddt[3Iρ‖st‖22+3D‖sx‖22+4γ‖s‖22]=−3G⟨(ψ−wx),st⟩−δ⟨θx,st⟩, | (2.15) |
and
12ddt(k‖θ‖22)=−λ‖θx‖22+δ⟨θx,st⟩. | (2.16) |
Adding the equations (2.13)–(2.16), taking into account (G1) and (G2), we obtain (2.12) for regular solutions. The result remains valid for weak solutions by a density argument. This implies the energy functional is non-increasing and
E(t)≤E(0), ∀t≥0. |
This section is subdivided into two. In the first subsection, we prove the stability result for equal-wave-speed of propagation, whereas in the second subsection, we focus on the stability result for non-equal-wave-speed of propagation.
Our aim, in this subsection, is to prove an explicit, general and optimal decay rate of solutions for system (1.6)–(1.8). To achieve this, we define a Lyapunov functional
L(t)=NE(t)+6∑j=1NjIj(t), | (3.1) |
where N, Nj, j=1,2,3,4,5,6 are positive constants to be specified later and
I1(t)=−Iρ∫10(3s−ψ)t∫t0g(t−τ)((3s−ψ)(t)−(3s−ψ)(τ))dτdx,t≥0, |
I2(t)=3Iρ∫10sstdx+3ρ∫10wt∫x0s(y)dydx,I3(t)=−3kIρ∫10θ∫x0st(y)dydx,t≥0, |
I4(t)=−ρ∫10wtwdx,I5(t)=Iρ∫10(3s−ψ)(3s−ψ)tdx,t≥0, |
I6(t)=3IρG∫10(ψ−wx)stdx−3ρD∫10wtsxdx,I7(t)=∫10∫t0J(t−τ)(3sx−ψx)2(τ)dτdx,t≥0, |
where
J(t)=∫+∞tg(τ)dτ. |
The following lemma is very important in the proof of our stability result.
Lemma 3.1. Suppose Gρ=DIρ. Under suitable choice of t0,N, Nj, j=1,2,3,4,5,6, the Lyapunov functional L satisfies, along the solution of (1.6)−(1.8), the estimate
L′(t)≤−β(‖wt‖22+‖st‖22+‖3st−ψt‖22+‖sx‖22+‖3wx−ψx‖22+‖ψ−wx‖22)−β(‖s‖22+‖θx‖22)+12(g⋄(3sx−ψx))(t),∀ t≥t0 | (3.2) |
and the equivalence relation
α1E(t)≤L(t)≤α2E(t) | (3.3) |
holds for some β>0, α1, α2>0.
Proof. By virtue of assumption (3.1) and using h(t)=αg(t)−g′(t), it follows from Lemmas 2.5, 4.1-4.6 (see the Appendix for detailed derivations) that, for all t≥t0>0,
L′(t)≤−[N4ρ−N2δ4]‖wt‖22−[N3δIρ2−N2C(1+1ϵ2)−N6C(1+1ϵ1)]‖st‖22−3N2γ‖s‖22−[N1Iρg0−N5Iρ−N6ϵ1]‖3st−ψt‖22−[3DN2−N3ϵ3−N4C−N6C]‖sx‖22−[N6G2−N1ϵ2−N3ϵ3−N4Cϵ4−N5C]‖ψ−wx‖22−[N5l04−N1ϵ1−N4ϵ4]‖3sx−ψx‖22−[λN−N2C−N3C(1+1ϵ3)−N6C]‖θx‖22+Nα2(g⋄(3sx−ψx))(t)−[N2−CCα(N5+N1(1+1ϵ1+1ϵ2))](h⋄(3sx−ψx))(t). | (3.4) |
Now, we choose
N4=N5=1, ϵ4=l08 | (3.5) |
and select N1 large enough such that
μ1:=N1Iρg0−Iρ>0. | (3.6) |
Next, we choose N6 large so that
μ2:=N6G2−C>0. | (3.7) |
Also, we select N2 large enough so that
μ3:=3DN2−C−N6C>0. | (3.8) |
After fixing N1,N2,N6, and letting ϵ3=μ12N3, we then select ϵ1,ϵ2, and δ4 very small such that
ρ−N2δ4>0, μ1−N6ϵ1>0, μ4:=μ22−N1ϵ2>0 | (3.9) |
and select N3 large enough so that
N3δIρ2−N2C(1+1ϵ2)−N6C(1+1ϵ1)>0. | (3.10) |
Now, we note that αg2(s)h(s)=αg2(s)αg(s)−g′(s)<g(s); thus the dominated convergence theorem gives
αCα=∫+∞0αg2(s)αg(s)−g′(s)ds→0 as α→0. | (3.11) |
Therefore, we can choose some 0<α0<1 such that for all 0<α≤α0,
αCα<14C(1+N1(1+1ϵ1+1ϵ2)). | (3.12) |
Finally, we select N so large enough and take α=1N So that
λN−N2C−N3C(1+1ϵ3)−N6C>0,N2−CCα(1+N1(1+1ϵ1+1ϵ2))>0. | (3.13) |
Combination of (3.6) - (3.13) yields the estimate (3.2). The equivalent relation (3.3) can be obtain easily by using Young's, Cauchy-Schwarz, and Poincaré's inequalities.
Now, we state and prove our stability result for this subsection.
Theorem 3.1. Assume Gρ=DIρ and (G1) and (G2) hold. Then, there exist positive constants a1 and a2 such that the energy solution (2.11) satisfies
E(t)≤a2H−11(a1∫tt0ξ(τ)dτ), where H1(t)=∫rt1τH′(τ)dτ | (3.14) |
and H1 is a strictly decreasing and strictly convex function on (0,r], with limt→0H1(t)=+∞.
Proof. Using the fact that g and ξ are positive, non-increasing and continuous, and H is positive and continuous, we have that for all t∈[0,t0]
0<g(t0)≤g(t)≤g(0), 0<ξ(t0)≤ξ(t)≤ξ(0). |
Thus for some constants a,b>0, we obtain
a≤ξ(t)H(g(t))≤b. |
Therefore, for any t∈[0,t0], we get
g′(t)≤−ξ(t)H(g(t))≤−ag(0)g(0)≤−ag(0)g(t) | (3.15) |
and
ξ(t)g(t)≤−g(0)ag′(t). | (3.16) |
From (2.12) and (3.15), it follows that
∫t00g(τ)‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ≤−g(0)a∫t00g′(τ)‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ≤−CE′(t), ∀t≥t0. | (3.17) |
From (3.2) and (3.17), we have
L′(t)≤−βE(t)+12(g⋄(3sx−ψx))(t)=−βE(t)+12∫t00g(τ)‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ+12∫tt0g(τ)‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ≤−βE(t)−CE′(t)+12∫tt0g(τ)‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ. |
Thus, we get
L′1(t)≤−βE(t)+12∫tt0g(τ)‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ, ∀t≥t0, | (3.18) |
where L1=L+CE∼E by virtue of (3.3). To finish our proof, we distinct two cases:
Case 1: H(t) is linear. In this case, we multiply (3.18) by ξ(t), keeping in mind (2.12) and (G2), to get
ξ(t)L′1(t)≤−βξ(t)E(t)+12ξ(t)∫tt0g(τ)‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ≤−βξ(t)E(t)+12∫tt0ξ(τ)g(τ)‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ≤−βξ(t)E(t)−12∫tt0g′(τ)‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ≤−βξ(t)E(t)−CE′(t), ∀ t≥t0. | (3.19) |
Therefore
(ξL1+CE)′(t)≤−βξ(t)E(t), ∀ t≥t0. | (3.20) |
Since ξ is non-increasing and L1∼E, we have
L2=ξL1+CE∼E. | (3.21) |
Thus, from (3.20), we get for some positive constant α
L′2(t)≤−βξ(t)E(t)≤−αξ(t)L2(t), ∀ t≥t0. | (3.22) |
Integrating (3.22) over (t0,t) and recalling (3.21), we obtain
E(t)≤a1e−a2∫tt0ξ(s)ds=a1H−11(a2∫tt0ξ(s)ds). |
Case 2: H(t) is nonlinear. In this case, we consider the functional L(t)=L(t)+I7(t). From (3.2) and Lemma 4.7 (see the Appendix), we obtain
L′(t)≤−dE(t), ∀t≥t0, | (3.23) |
where d>0 is a positive constant. Therefore,
d∫tt0E(s)ds≤L(t0)−L(t)≤L(t0). |
Hence, we get
∫+∞0E(s)ds<∞. | (3.24) |
Using (3.24), we define p(t) by
p(t):=η∫tt0‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ, |
where 0<η<1 so that
p(t)<1,∀t≥t0. | (3.25) |
Moreover, we can assume p(t)>0 for all t≥t0; otherwise using (3.18), we obtain an exponential decay rate. We also define q(t) by
q(t)=−∫tt0g′(τ)‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ. |
Then q(t)≤−CE′(t), ∀t≥t0. Now, we have that H is strictly convex on (0,r] (where r=g(t0)) and H(0)=0. Thus,
H(στ)≤σH(τ), 0≤σ≤1 and τ∈(0,r]. | (3.26) |
Using (3.26), condition (G2), (3.25), and Jensen's inequality, we get
q(t)=1ηp(t)∫tt0p(t)(−g′(τ))η‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ≥1ηp(t)∫tt0p(t)ξ(τ)H(g(τ))η‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ≥ξ(t)ηp(t)∫tt0H(p(t)g(τ))η‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ≥ξ(t)ηH(η∫tt0g(τ)η‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ)=ξ(t)ηˉH(η∫tt0g(τ)η‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ), | (3.27) |
where ˉH is the convex extention of H on (0,+∞) (see remark 2.1). From (3.27), we have
∫tt0g(τ)η‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ≤1ηˉH−1(ηq(t)ξ(t)). |
Therefore, (3.18) yields
L′1(t)≤−βE(t)+CˉH−1(ηq(t)ξ(t)), ∀ t≥t0. | (3.28) |
For r0<r, we define L3(t) by
L3(t):=ˉH′(r0E(t)E(0))L1(t)+E(t)∼E(t) |
since L1∼E. From (3.28) and using the fact that
E′(t)≤0, ˉH′(t)>0, ˉH″(t)>0, |
we obtain for all t≥t0
L′3(t)=r0E′(t)E(0)ˉH″(r0E(t)E(0))L1(t)+ˉH′(r0E(t)E(0))L′1(t)+E′(t)≤−βE(t)ˉH′(r0E(t)E(0))+CˉH′(r0E(t)E(0))ˉH−1(ηq(t)ξ(t))+E′(t). | (3.29) |
Let us consider the convex conjugate of ˉH denoted by ˉH∗ in the sense of Young (see [3] page 61-64). Thus,
ˉH∗(τ)=τ(ˉH′)−1(τ)−ˉH[(ˉH′)(τ)] | (3.30) |
and ˉH∗ satisfies the generalized Young inequality
AB≤ˉH∗(A)+ˉH(B). | (3.31) |
Let A=ˉH′(r0E(t)E(0)) and B=ˉH−1(μz(t)ξ(t)), It follows from (2.12) and (3.29)-(3.31) that
L′3(t)≤−βE(t)ˉH′(r0E(t)E(0))+CˉH∗(ˉH′(r0E(t)E(0)))+Cηq(t)ξ(t)+E′(t)≤−βE(t)ˉH′(r0E(t)E(0))+Cr0E(t)E(0)ˉH′(r0E(t)E(0))+Cηq(t)ξ(t)+E′(t). | (3.32) |
Next, we multiply (3.32) by ξ(t) and recall that r0E(t)E(0)<r and
ˉH′(r0E(t)E(0))=H′(r0E(t)E(0)), |
we arrive at
ξ(t)L′3(t)≤−βξ(t)E(t)H′(r0E(t)E(0))+Cr0E(t)E(0)ξ(t)H′(r0E(t)E(0))+Cηq(t)+ξ(t)E′(t)≤−βξ(t)E(t)H′(r0E(t)E(0))+Cr0E(t)E(0)ξ(t)H′(r0E(t)E(0))−CE′(t). | (3.33) |
Let L4(t)=ξ(t)L3(t)+CE(t). Since L3∼E, it follows that
b0L4(t)≤E(t)≤b1L4(t), | (3.34) |
for some b0,b1>0. Thus (3.33) gives
L′4(t)≤−(βE(0)−Cr0)ξ(t)E(t)E(0)ξ(t)H′(r0E(t)E(0)), ∀t≥t0. |
We select r0<r small enough so that βE(0)−Cr0>0, we get
L′4(t)≤−mξ(t)E(t)E(0)ξ(t)H′(r0E(t)E(0))=−mξ(t)H2(E(t)E(0)), ∀t≥t0, | (3.35) |
for some constant m>0 and H2(τ)=τH′(r0τ). We note here that
H′2(τ)=H′(r0τ)+r0tH″(r0τ), |
thus the strict convexity of H on (0,r], yields H2(τ)>0,H′2(τ)>0 on (0,r]. Let
F(t)=b0L4(t)E(0). |
From (3.34) and (3.35), we obtain
F(t)∼E(t) | (3.36) |
and
F′(t)=a0L′4(t)(t)E(0)≤−m1ξ(t)H2(F(t)), ∀t≥t0. | (3.37) |
Integrating (3.37) over (t0,t), we arrive at
m1∫tt0ξ(τ)dτ≤−∫tt0F′(τ)H2(F(τ))dτ=1r0∫r0F(t0)r0F(t)1τH′(τ)dτ. | (3.38) |
This implies
F(t)≤1r0H−11(¯m1∫tt0ξ(τ)dτ), where H1(t)=∫rt1τH′(τ)dτ. | (3.39) |
Using the properties of H, we see easily that H1 is strictly decreasing function on (0,r] and
limt⟶0H1(t)=+∞. |
Hence, (3.14) follows from (3.36) and (3.39). This completes the proof.
Remark 3.1. The stability result in (3.1) is general and optimal in the sense that it agrees with the decay rate of g, see [10], Remark 2.3.
Corollary 3.2. Suppose Gρ=DIρ, and (G1), and (G2) hold. Let the function H in (G2) be defined by
H(τ)=τp, 1≤p<2, | (3.40) |
then the solution energy (2.11) satisfies
E(t)≤a2exp(−a1∫t0ξ(τ)dτ), for p=1,E(t)≤C(1+∫tt0ξ(τ)dτ)1p−1, for 1<p<2 | (3.41) |
for some positive constants a2,a1 and C.
In this subsection, we establish another stability result in the case non-equal speeds of wave propagation. To achieve this, we consider a stronger solution of (1.6). Let (w,3s−ψ,s,θ) be the strong solution of problem (1.6)–(1.8), then differentiation of 1.6 with respect to t gives
{ρwttt+G(ψ−wx)xt=0,Iρ(3s−ψ)ttt−D(3s−ψ)xxt+∫t0g(τ)(3s−ψ)xxt(x,t−τ)dτ+g(t)(3s0−ψ0)xx−G(ψ−wx)t=03Iρsttt−3Dsxxt+3G(ψ−wx)t+4γst+δθxt=0,kθtt−λθxxt+δsxtt=0, | (3.42) |
where (x,t)∈(0,1)×(0,+∞) and (3s−ψ)xx(x,0)=(3s0−ψ0)xx. The modified energy functional associated to (3.42) is defined by
E1(t)=12[ρ‖wtt‖22+3Iρ‖stt‖22+Iρ‖3stt−ψtt‖22+3D‖sxt‖22+G‖ψt−wxt‖22]+12[4γ‖st‖22+k‖θt‖22+(D−∫t0g(τ)dτ)‖3sxt−ψxt‖22+(g⋄(3sxt−ψxt))(t)]. | (3.43) |
Lemma 3.2. Let (w,3s−ψ,s,θ) be the strong solution of problem (1.6)-(1.8). Then, the energy functional (3.43) satisfies, for all t≥0
E′1(t)=12(g′⋄(3sxt−ψxt))(t)−12g(t)‖3sxt−ψxt‖22−g(t)⟨(3stt−ψtt),(3s0−ψ0)xx⟩−λ‖θxt‖22 | (3.44) |
and
E1(t)≤C(E1(0)+‖(3s0−ψ0)xx‖22). | (3.45) |
Proof. The proof of (3.44) follows the same steps as in the proof of Lemma 2.5. From (3.44), it is obvious that
E′1(t)≤−g(t)⟨(3stt−ψtt),(3s0−ψ0)xx⟩. |
So, using Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, we obtain
E′1(t)≤Iρg(t)2‖3stt−ψtt‖22+g(t)2Iρ‖(3s0−ψ0)xx‖22≤g(t)E1(t)+g(t)2Iρ‖(3s0−ψ0)xx‖22. | (3.46) |
This implies
ddt(E1(t)e−∫t0g(τ)dτ)≤e−∫t0g(τ)dτg(t)2Iρ‖(3s0−ψ0)xx‖22≤g(t)2Iρ‖(3s0−ψ0)xx‖22 | (3.47) |
Integrating (3.47) over (0,t) yields
E1(t)e−∫+∞0g(τ)dτ≤E1(t)e−∫t0g(τ)dτ≤E1(0)+12Iρ(∫t0g(τ)dτ)‖(3s0−ψ0)xx‖22≤E1(0)+12Iρ(∫+∞0g(τ)dτ)‖(3s0−ψ0)xx‖22. | (3.48) |
Hence, (3.45) follows.
Remark 3.2. Using Young's inequality, we observe from (3.44) and (3.45) that
λ‖θxt‖22=−E′1(t)+12(g′⋄(3sxt−ψxt))(t)−12g(t)‖3sxt−ψxt‖22−g(t)⟨(3stt−ψtt),(3s0−ψ0)xx⟩≤−E′1(t)−g(t)⟨(3stt−ψtt),(3s0−ψ0)xx⟩≤−E′1(t)+g(t)(‖3stt−ψtt‖22+‖(3s0−ψ0)xx‖22)≤−E′1(t)+g(t)(2IρE1(t)+‖(3s0−ψ0)xx‖22)≤C(−E′1(t)+c1g(t)) | (3.49) |
for some fixed positive constant c1. Similarly, we obtain
0≤−(g′⋄(3sxt−ψxt))(t)≤C(−E′1(t)+c1g(t)). | (3.50) |
As in the case of equal-wave-speed of propagation, we define a Lyapunov functional
˜L(t)=˜NE(t)+6∑j=1~NjIj(t)+~N6I8(t), | (3.51) |
where ˜N, ~Nj, j=1,2,3,4,5,6, are positive constants to be specified later and
I8(t)=3λδ(IρG−ρD)∫10θxwxdx. |
Lemma 3.3. Suppose Gρ≠DIρ. Then, under suitable choice of ˜N, ~Nj, j=1,2,3,4,5,6, the Lyapunov functional ˜L satisfies, along the solution of (1.6), the estimate
˜L′(t)≤−˜βE(t)+12(g⋄(3sx−ψx))(t)+C(−E′1(t)+c1g(t)),∀ t≥t0, | (3.52) |
for some positive constants ˜β and c1.
Proof. Following the proof of Lemma 3.1, we end up with (3.52).
Lemma 3.4. Suppose assumptions (G1) and (G2) hold and the function H in (G2) is linear. Let (w,3s−ψ,s,θ) be the strong solution of problem (1.6)-(1.8). Then,
ξ(t)(g⋄(3sxt−ψxt))(t)≤C(−E′1(t)+c1g(t)), ∀ t≥0, | (3.53) |
where c1 is a fixed positive constant.
Proof. Using (3.50) and the fact that ξ is decreasing, we have
ξ(t)(g⋄(3sxt−ψxt))(t)=ξ(t)∫t0g(t−τ)(‖(3sxt−ψxt)(t)−(3sxt−ψxt)(τ)‖22)dτ≤∫t0ξ(t−τ)g(t−τ)(‖(3sxt−ψxt)(t)−(3sxt−ψxt)(τ)‖22)dτ≤−∫t0g′(t−τ)(‖(3sxt−ψxt)(t)−(3sxt−ψxt)(τ)‖22)dτ=−(g′⋄(3sxt−ψxt))(t)≤C(−E′1(t)+c1g(t)). | (3.54) |
Our stability result of this subsection is
Theorem 3.3. Assume (G1) and (G2) hold and Gρ≠DIρ. Then, there exist positive constants a1,a2 and t2>t0 such that the energy solution (2.11) satisfies
E(t)≤a2(t−t0)H−12(a1(t−t0)∫tt2ξ(τ)dτ),∀t>t2, where H2(τ)=τH′(τ). | (3.55) |
Proof. Case 1: H is linear. Multiplying (3.52) by ξ(t) and using (G1), we get
ξ(t)˜L′(t)≤−˜βξ(t)E(t)+12ξ(t)(g⋄(3sx−ψx))(t)+Cξ(t)(−E′1(t)+c1g(t))≤−˜βξ(t)E(t)−CE′(t)−Cξ(0)E′1(t)+ξ(0)c1g(t), ∀ t≥t0 |
Using the fact that ξ non-increasing, we obtain
(ξ˜L+CE+E1)′(t)≤−˜βξ(t)E(t)+c2g(t), ∀ t≥t0. |
for some fixed positive constant c2. This implies
˜βξ(t)E(t)≤−(ξ˜L+CE+E1)′(t)+c2g(t), ∀ t≥t0. | (3.56) |
Integrating (3.56) over (t0,t), using the fact that E is non-increasing and the inequality (3.45), we arrive at
˜βE(t)∫tt0ξ(τ)dτ≤˜β∫tt0ξ(τ)E(τ)dτ≤−(ξ˜L+CE+E1)(t)+(ξ˜L+CE+E1)(t0)+c2∫tt0g(τ)dτ≤(ξ˜L+CE+E1)(0)+C‖(3s0−ψ0)xx‖22+c2∫∞0g(τ)dτ=(ξ˜L+CE+E1)(0)+C‖(3s0−ψ0)xx‖22+c2(D−l0). | (3.57) |
Thus, we have
E(t)≤C∫tt0ξ(τ)dτ, ∀ t≥t0. | (3.58) |
Case II: H is nonlinear. First, we observe from (3.52) that
˜L′(t)≤−˜βE(t)+12(g⋄(3sx−ψx))(t)+C(−E′1(t)+c1g(t))≤−˜βE(t)+C((g⋄(3sx−ψx))(t)+(g⋄(3sxt−ψxt))(t))+C(−E′1(t)+c1g(t)), ∀ t≥t0. | (3.59) |
From (2.12), (3.16) and (3.50), we have for any t≥t0
∫t00g(τ)‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ+∫t00g(τ)‖(3sxt−ψxt)(t)−(3sxt−ψxt)(t−τ)‖22dτ≤1ξ(t0)∫t00ξ(τ)g(τ)‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ+1ξ(t0)∫t00ξ(τ)g(τ)‖(3sxt−ψxt)(t)−(3sxt−ψxt)(t−τ)‖22dτ≤−g(0)aξ(t0)∫t00g′(τ)‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ−g(0)aξ(t0)∫t00g′(τ)‖(3sxt−ψxt)(t)−(3sxt−ψxt)(t−τ)‖22dτ≤−C(E′(t)+E′1(t))+c2g(t), | (3.60) |
where c2 is a fixed positive constant. Substituting (3.60) into (3.59), we obtain for any t≥t0
˜L′(t)≤−˜βE(t)−C(E′(t)+E′1(t))+c3g(t)+C∫tt0g(τ)‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ+C∫tt0g(τ)‖(3sxt−ψxt)(t)−(3sxt−ψxt)(t−τ)‖22dτ, | (3.61) |
where c3 is a fixed positive constant. Now, we define the functional Φ by
Φ(t)=σt−t0∫tt0‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ+σt−t0∫tt0‖(3sxt−ψxt)(t)−(3sxt−ψxt)(t−τ)‖22dτ, ∀ t>t0. | (3.62) |
Using (2.11), (2.12), (3.43) and (3.45), we easily get
1t−t0∫tt0‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ+1t−t0∫tt0‖(3sxt−ψxt)(t)−(3sxt−ψxt)(t−τ)‖22dτ≤2t−t0∫tt0(‖(3sx−ψx)(t)‖22+‖(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22)dτ+2t−t0∫tt0(‖(3sxt−ψxt)(t)‖22+‖(3sxt−ψxt)(t−τ)‖22)dτ≤4l0(t−t0)∫tt0(E(t)+E(t−τ)+E1(t)+E1(t−τ))dτ≤8l0(t−t0)∫tt0(E(0)+C(E1(0)+‖(3s0−ψ0)xx‖22))dτ≤8l0(E(0)+C(E1(0)+‖(3s0−ψ0)xx‖22))<∞, ∀ t>t0. | (3.63) |
This last inequality allows us to choose 0<σ<1 such that
Φ(t)<1, ∀ t>t0. | (3.64) |
Hence forth, we assume Φ(t)>0, otherwise, we get immediately from (3.61)
E(t)≤Ct−t0, ∀ t>t0. |
Next, we define the functional μ by
μ(t)=−∫tt0g′(τ)‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ−∫tt0g′(τ)‖(3sxt−ψxt)(t)−(3sxt−ψxt)(t−τ)‖22dτ | (3.65) |
and observe that
μ(t)≤−C(E′(t)+E′1(t))+c4g(t), ∀ t>t0, | (3.66) |
where c4 is a fixed positive constant. The fact that H is strictly convex and H(0)=0 implies
H(ντ)≤νH(τ), 0≤ν≤1 and τ∈(0,r]. | (3.67) |
Using assumption (G1), (3.67), Jensen’s inequality and (3.64), we get for any t>t0
μ(t)=−1Φ(t)∫tt0Φ(t)g′(τ)‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ−1Φ(t)∫tt0Φ(t)g′(τ)‖(3sxt−ψxt)(t)−(3sxt−ψxt)(t−τ)‖22dτ≥1Φ(t)∫tt0Φ(t)ξ(τ)H(g(τ))‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ+1Φ(t)∫tt0Φ(t)ξ(τ)H(g(τ))‖(3sxt−ψxt)(t)−(3sxt−ψxt)(t−τ)‖22dτ≥ξ(t)Φ(t)∫tt0H(Φ(t)g(τ))‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ+ξ(t)Φ(t)∫tt0H(Φ(t)g(τ))‖(3sxt−ψxt)(t)−(3sxt−ψxt)(t−τ)‖22dτ≥ξ(t)(t−t0)σH(σt−t0∫tt0g(τ)(Ω1(t−τ)+Ω2(t−τ))dτ)=ξ(t)(t−t0)σˉH(σt−t0∫tt0(Ω1(t−τ)+Ω2(t−τ))dτ), | (3.68) |
where
Ω1(t−τ)=‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22,Ω2(t−τ)=‖(3sxt−ψxt)(t)−(3sxt−ψxt)(t−τ)‖22 |
and ˉH is the C2− strictly increasing and convex extension of H on (0,+∞). This implies
∫tt0g(τ)‖(3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(t−τ)‖22dτ+∫tt0g(τ)‖(3sxt−ψxt)(t)−(3sxt−ψxt)(t−τ)‖22dτ≤(t−t0)σˉH−1(σμ(t)ξ(t)(t−t0)), ∀ t>t0. | (3.69) |
Thus, the inequality (3.61) becomes
˜L′(t)≤−˜βE(t)−C(E′(t)+E′1(t))+c3g(t)+C(t−t0)σˉH−1(σμ(t)ξ(t)(t−t0)), ∀ t>t0. | (3.70) |
Let ˜L1(t):=˜L(t)+C(E(t)+E1(t)). Then (3.70) becomes
˜L′1(t)≤−˜βE(t)+C(t−t0)σˉH−1(σμ(t)ξ(t)(t−t0))+c3g(t), ∀ t>t0. | (3.71) |
For 0<r1<r, we define the functional ˜L2 by
˜L2(t):=ˉH′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))˜L1(t),, ∀ t>t0. | (3.72) |
From (3.71) and the fact that
E′(t)≤0, ˉH′(t)>0, ˉH″(t)>0, |
we obtain, for all t>t0,
˜L′2(t)=(−r1(t−t0)2.E(t)E(0)+r1t−t0.E′(t)E(0))ˉH″(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))˜L1(t)+ˉH′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))˜L′1(t)≤−˜βE(t)ˉH′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))+c3g(t)ˉH′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))+C(t−t0)σˉH′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))ˉH−1(σμ(t)ξ(t)(t−t0)). | (3.73) |
Let ˉH∗ be the convex conjugate of ˉH as in (3.30) and let
A=ˉH′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0)) and B=ˉH−1(σμ(t)ξ(t)(t−t0)). |
Then, (3.30), (3.31) and (3.73) yield, for all t>t0,
˜L′2(t)≤−˜βE(t)ˉH′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))+c3g(t)ˉH′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))+C(t−t0)σˉH∗(ˉH′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0)))+C(t−t0)σ.σμ(t)ξ(t)(t−t0)≤−˜βE(t)ˉH′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))+c3g(t)ˉH′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))+Cr1E(t)E(0)ˉH′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))+Cμ(t)ξ(t)≤−(˜βE(0)−Cr1)E(t)E(0)ˉH′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))+Cμ(t)ξ(t)+c3g(t)ˉH′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0)) | (3.74) |
By selecting r1 small enough so that (˜βE(0)−Cr1)>0, we arrive at
˜L′2(t)≤−˜β2E(t)E(0)ˉH′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))+Cμ(t)ξ(t)+c3g(t)ˉH′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0)), ∀ t>t0, | (3.75) |
for some positive constant ˜β2.
Now, multiplying (3.75) by ξ(t) and recalling that r1E(t)E(0)<r, we arrive at
ξ(t)˜L′2(t)≤−˜β2ξ(t)E(t)E(0)ˉH′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))+Cμ(t)+c3g(t)ξ(t)H′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))≤−˜β2ξ(t)E(t)E(0)H′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))−C(E′(t)+E′1(t))+c4g(t)+c3g(t)H′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0)), ∀ t>t0. | (3.76) |
Since r1t−t0⟶0 as t⟶∞, there exists t2>t0 such that r1t−t0<r1, whenever t>t2. Using this fact and observing that H′ strictly increasing, and E and ξ are non-decreasing, we get
H′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))≤H′(r1), ∀ t>t2. | (3.77) |
Using (3.77), it follows from (3.76) that
˜L′3(t)≤−˜β2ξ(t)E(t)E(0)H′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))+c5g(t), ∀ t>t2, | (3.78) |
where ˜L3=(ξ˜L2+CE+CE1) and c5>0 is a constant. Using the non-increasing property of ξ, we have
˜β2ξ(t)E(t)E(0)H′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))≤−˜L′3(t)+c5g(t), ∀ t>t2. | (3.79) |
Using the fact that E is non-increasing and H″>0 we conclude that the map
t⟼E(t)H′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0)) |
is non-increasing. Therefore, integrating (3.79) over (t2,t) yields
˜β2E(t)E(0)H′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))∫tt2ξ(τ)dτ≤˜β2∫tt2ξ(τ)E(τ)E(0)H′(r1τ−t0.E(τ)E(0))dτ≤−˜L3(t)+˜L3(t2)+c5∫tt2g(τ)dτ≤˜L3(t2)+c5∫∞0g(τ)dτ=˜L3(t2)+c5(b−l0), ∀ t>t2. | (3.80) |
Next, we multiply both sides of (3.80) by 1t−t0, for t>t2, we get
˜β2(t−t0).E(t)E(0)H′(r1t−t0.E(t)E(0))∫tt2ξ(τ)dτ≤˜L3(t2)+c5(b−l0)t−t0, ∀ t>t2. | (3.81) |
Since H′ is strictly increasing, then H2(τ)=τH′(τ) is a strictly increasing function. It follows from (3.81) that
E(t)≤a2(t−t0)H−12(a1(t−t0)∫tt2ξ(τ)dτ), ∀ t>t2. |
for some positive constants a1 and a2. This completes the proof.
(1). Let g(t)=ae−bt, t≥0, a, b>0 are constants and a is chosen such that (G1) holds. Then
g′(t)=−abe−bt=−bH(g(t)) with H(t)=t. |
Therefore, from (3.14), the energy function (2.11) satisfies
E(t)≤a2e−αt, ∀ t≥0, where α=ba1. | (3.82) |
Also, for H2(τ)=τ, it follows from (3.55) that, there exists t2>0 such that the energy function (2.11) satisfies
E(t)≤Ct−t2, ∀ t>t2, | (3.83) |
for some positive constant C.
(2).Let g(t)=ae−(1+t)b, t≥0, a>0, 0<b<1 are constants and a is chosen such that (G1) holds. Then,
g′(t)=−ab(1+t)b−1e−(1+t)b=−ξ(t)H(g(t)), |
where ξ(t)=b(1+t)b−1 and H(t)=t. Thus, we get from (3.14) that
E(t)≤a2e−a1(1+t)b, ∀ t≥0. | (3.84) |
Likewise, for H2(t)=t, then estimate (3.55) implies there exists t2>0 such that the energy function (2.11) satisfies
E(t)≤C(1+t)b, ∀ t>t2, | (3.85) |
for some positive constant C.
(3).Let g(t)=a(1+t)b, t≥0, a>0, b>1 are constants and a is chosen in such a way that (G1) holds. We have
g′(t)=−ab(1+t)b+1=−ξ(a(1+t)b)b+1b=−ξgq(t)=−ξH(g(t)), |
where
H(t)=tq, q=b+1b satisfying 1<q<2 and ξ=ba1b>0. |
Hence, we deduce from (3.41) that
E(t)≤C(1+t)b, ∀ t≥0. | (3.86) |
Furthermore, for H2(t)=qtq, estimate (3.55) implies there exists t2>0 such that the energy function (2.11) satisfies
E(t)≤C(1+t)(b−1)/(b+1), ∀ t>t2, | (3.87) |
for some positive constant C.
In this section, we prove the functionals Li,i=1⋯8, used in the proof of our stability results.
Lemma 4.1. The functional I1(t) satisfies, along the solution of (1.6)−(1.8), for all t≥t0>0 and for any ϵ1,ϵ2>0, the estimate
I′1(t)≤−Iρg02‖3st−ψt‖22+ϵ1‖3sx−ψx‖22+ϵ2‖ψ−wx‖22+CCα(1+1ϵ1+1ϵ2)(h⋄(3sx−ψx))(t), | (4.1) |
where g0=∫t00g(τ)dτ≤∫t0g(τ)dτ.
Proof. Differentiating I1(t), using (1.6)2 and integrating by part, we have
I′1(t)=−Iρ∫10(3st−ψt)∫t0g′(t−τ)((3s−ψ)(t)−(3s−ψ)(τ))dτdx+D(t)∫10(3sx−ψx)∫t0g(t−τ)((3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(τ))dτdx+∫10(∫t0g(t−τ)((3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(τ))dτ)2dx−Iρ(∫t0g(τ)dτ)∫10(3st−ψt)2dx−G∫10(ψ−wx)∫t0g(t−τ)((3s−ψ)(t)−(3s−ψ)(τ))dτdx, | (4.2) |
where D(t)=(D−∫t0g(τ)dτ). Now, we estimate the terms on the right hand-side of (4.2). Exploiting Young's and Poincaré's inequalities, Lemmas 2.1-2.6 and performing similar computations as in (2.8), we have for any ϵ1>0,
D(t)∫10(3sx−ψx)∫t0g(t−τ)((3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(τ))dτdx≤ϵ1‖(3sx−ψx‖22+CCαϵ1(h⋄(3sx−ψx))(t) | (4.3) |
and
∫10(∫t0g(t−τ)((3sx−ψx)(t)−(3sx−ψx)(τ))dτ)2dx≤Cα(h⋄(3sx−ψx))(t). | (4.4) |
Also, for δ1>0, we have
−Iρ∫10(3st−ψt)∫t0g′(t−τ)((3s−ψ)(t)−(3s−ψ)(τ))dτdx=Iρ∫10(3st−ψt)∫t0h(t−τ)((3s−ψ)(t)−(3s−ψ)(τ))dτdx−Iρα∫10(3st−ψt)∫t0g(t−τ)((3s−ψ)(t)−(3s−ψ)(τ))dτdx≤δ1‖3st−ψt‖22+I2ρ2δ1∫10(∫t0h(t−τ)((3s−ψ)(t)−(3s−ψ)(τ))dτ)2dx+α2I2ρ2δ1∫10(∫t0g(t−τ)((3s−ψ)(t)−(3s−ψ)(τ))dτ)2dx≤δ1‖3st−ψt‖22+I2ρ2δ1(∫t0h(τ)dτ)(h⋄(3s−ψ))(t)+α2I2ρCα2δ1(h⋄(3s−ψ))(t)≤δ1‖3st−ψt‖22+C(Cα+1)δ1(h⋄(3s−ψ)x)(t). | (4.5) |
For the last term, we have
−G∫10(ψ−wx)∫t0g(t−τ)((3s−ψ)(t)−(3s−ψ)(τ))dτdx≤ϵ2‖ψ−wx‖22+G2Cα4ϵ2(h⋄(3s−ψ)x)(t). | (4.6) |
Combination of (4.2)-(4.6) lead to
I′1(t)≤−(Iρ∫t0g(τ)dτ−δ1)‖3wt−ψt‖22+ϵ1‖3sx−ψx‖22+ϵ2‖ψ−wx‖22+CCα(1+1δ1+1ϵ1+1ϵ2)(h⋄(3sx−ψx))(t). | (4.7) |
Since g(0)>0 and g is continuous. Thus for any t≥t0>0, we get
∫t0g(τ)dτ≥∫t00g(τ)dτ=g0>0. | (4.8) |
We select δ1=Iρg02 to get (4.1).
Lemma 4.2. The functional I2(t) satisfies, along the solution of (1.6)−(1.8) and for any δ4>0, the estimate
I′2(t)≤−3D‖sx‖22−3γ‖s‖22+δ4‖wt‖22+C(1+1δ4)‖st‖22+C‖θx‖22, ∀t≥0. | (4.9) |
Proof. Differentiation of I2(t), using (1.6)1 and (1.6)3 and integration by part, leads to
I′2(t)=3Iρ‖st‖22−3D‖sx‖22−4γ‖s‖22−δ∫t0sθxdx+3ρ∫10wt∫x0st(y)dydx. |
Applying Cauchy-Schwarz and Young's inequalities and (2.5), we get for any δ4>0,
I′2(t)≤3Iρ‖st‖22−3D‖sx‖22−4γ‖s‖22+γ‖s‖22+δ24γ‖θx‖22+δ4‖wt‖22+9ρ24δ4∫10(∫x0st(y)dy)2dx≤−3D‖sx‖22−3γ‖s‖22+δ4‖wt‖22+C(1+1δ4)‖st‖22+C‖θx‖22. |
This completes the proof.
Lemma 4.3. The functional I3(t) satisfies, along the solution of (1.6)−(1.8) and for any ϵ3>0, the estimate
I′3(t)≤−δIρ2‖st‖22+ϵ3‖sx‖22+ϵ3‖ψ−wx‖22+C(1+1ϵ3)‖θx‖22, ∀t≥0. | (4.10) |
Proof. Differentiation of I3, using (1.6)3, (1.6)4 and integration by parts, yields
I′3(t)=3λIρ∫10θxstdx−3Iρδ‖st‖22−3kD∫10θsxdx+kδ‖θ‖22+3kG∫10θ∫x0(ψ−wy)(y)dydx+4γk∫10θ∫t0s(y)dydx. |
Using Cauchy-Schwarz, Young's and Poincaré's inequalities together with Lemmas 2.1-2.6, we have
I′3(t)≤δ2‖st‖22+Cδ2‖θx‖22−3Iρδ‖st‖22+ϵ32‖sx‖22+C(1+1ϵ3)‖θ‖22+ϵ3∫10(∫x0(ψ−wy)(y)dy)2dx+ϵ32∫10(∫x0s(y)dy)2dx≤δ2‖st‖22+Cδ2‖θx‖22−3Iρδ‖st‖22+ϵ3‖sx‖22+ϵ3‖ψ−wx‖22+C(1+1ϵ3)‖θx‖22. |
We choose δ2=5Iρδ2 to get (4.10).
Lemma 4.4. The functional I4(t) satisfies, along the solution of (1.6)−(1.8) and for any ϵ4>0, the estimate
I′4(t)≤−ρ‖wt‖22+ϵ4‖3sx−ψx‖22+C‖sx‖22+Cϵ4‖ψ−wx‖22, ∀t≥0. | (4.11) |
Proof. Using (1.6)1 and integration by parts, we have
I′4(t)=−ρ‖wt‖22−G∫10(ψ−wx)wxdx. |
We note that wx=−(ψ−wx)−(3s−ψ)+3s to arrive at
I′4(t)=−ρ‖wt‖22+G‖ψ−wx‖22+G∫10(ψ−wx)(3s−ψ)dx−3G∫10(ψ−wx)sdx. |
It follows from Young's and Poincaré's inequalities that
I′4(t)≤−ρ‖wt‖22+G‖ψ−wx‖22+ϵ4‖3s−ψ‖22+Cϵ4‖ψ−wx‖22+3G2‖ψ−wx‖22+3G2‖s‖22≤−ρ‖wt‖22+G‖ψ−wx‖22+ϵ4‖3sx−ψx‖22+C‖sx‖22+C(1+1ϵ4)‖ψ−wx‖22. |
This completes the proof.
Lemma 4.5. The functional I5(t) satisfies, along the solution of (1.6)−(1.8) and for any 0<α<1, the estimate
I′5(t)≤−l04‖3sx−ψx‖22+Iρ‖3st−ψt‖22+C‖ψ−wx‖22+CCα(h⋄(3sx−ψx))(t). | (4.12) |
Proof. Differentiating I5, using (1.6)2, we arrive at
I′5(t)=Iρ‖3st−ψt‖22−(D−∫t0g(τ)dτ)‖3sx−ψx‖22+G∫10(3s−ψ)(ψ−wx)dx+∫10(3sx−ψx)∫t0g(t−τ)((3sx−ψx)(x,τ)−(3sx−ψx)(x,t))dτdx. |
Applying Lemmas 2.1-2.6, Cauchy-Schwarz, Young's and Poincaré's inequalities, we obtain any δ3>0
I′5(t)≤Iρ‖3st−ψt‖22−l0‖3sx−ψx‖22+δ3‖3sx−ψx‖22+G24δ3‖ψ−wx‖22+l02‖3sx−ψx‖22+12l0Cα(h⋄(3sx−ψx))(t). | (4.13) |
We select δ3=l04 and obtain the desired result.
Lemma 4.6. The functional I6(t) satisfies, along the solution of (1.6)−(1.8) and for any for any ϵ1, the estimate
I′6(t)≤−G2‖ψ−wx‖22+ϵ1‖3st−ψt‖22+C(1+1ϵ1)‖st‖22+C‖sx‖22+C‖θx‖22+3(IρG−ρD)∫10wtsxtdx, ∀t≥0. | (4.14) |
Proof. Differentiating I6(t), using (1.6)1 and (1.6)3 and integration by parts, we obtain
I′6(t)=−3G2‖ψ−wx‖22−4γG∫10(ψ−wx)sdx−δG∫10(ψ−wx)θxdx−3IρG∫t0(3st−ψt)stdx+9IρG‖st‖22+3(IρG−ρD)∫10wtsxtdx. | (4.15) |
Young's and Poincaré's inequalities give
−4γG∫10(ψ−wx)sdx≤G2‖ψ−wx‖22+4γ2Cp‖sx‖22,−δG∫10(ψ−wx)θxdx≤G2‖ψ−wx‖22+δ24‖θx‖22,−3IρG∫t0(3st−ψt)stdx≤ϵ1‖3st−ψt‖22+(3IρG)2ϵ1‖st‖22. | (4.16) |
Substituting (4.16) into (4.15), we obtain (4.14). This completes the proof.
Lemma 4.7. The functional I7(t) satisfies, along the solution of (1.6)−(1.8), the estimate
I′7(t)≤3(D−l0)‖3sx−ψx‖22−12(g⋄(3sx−ψx))(t), ∀t≥0. | (4.17) |
Proof. Differentiate I7(t) and use the fact that J′(t)=−g(t) to get
I′7(t)=∫10∫t0J′(t−τ)(3sx−ψx)2(τ)dτdx+J(0)‖3sx−ψx‖22=−(g⋄(3sx−ψx))(t)+J(t)‖3sx−ψx‖22 −2∫10(3sx−ψx)∫t0g(t−τ)((3sx−ψx)(τ)−(3sx−ψx)(t))dx. | (4.18) |
Using Cauchy-Schwarz and (G1), we have
−2∫10(3sx−ψx)∫t0g(t−τ)((3sx−ψx)(τ)−(3sx−ψx)(t))≤2(D−l0)‖3sx−ψx‖22+∫t0g(τ)dτ2(D−l0)(g⋄(3sx−ψx))(t)≤2(D−l0)‖3sx−ψx‖22+12(g⋄(3sx−ψx))(t) | (4.19) |
Thus, we get
I′7(t)≤2(D−l0)‖3sx−ψx‖22−12(g⋄(3sx−ψx))(t)+J(t)‖3sx−ψx‖22. | (4.20) |
Since J is decreasing (J′(t)=−g(t)≤0), so J(t)≤J(0)=D−l0. Hence, we arrive at
I′7(t)≤3(D−l0)‖3sx−ψx‖22−12(g⋄(3sx−ψx))(t). |
The next lemma is used only in the proof of the stability result for nonequal-wave-speed of propagation.
Lemma 4.8. Let (w,3s−ψ,s,θ) be the strong solution of problem (1.6). Then, for any positive numbers σ1,σ2,σ3, the functional I8(t) satisfies
I′8(t)≤−3(IρG−ρD)∫10wtsxtdx+σ1‖wt‖22+σ2‖ψ−wx‖22+σ3‖3sx−ψx‖22+C‖sx‖22+C(1+1σ1+1σ2+1σ3)‖θxt‖22, ∀ t≥t0. | (4.21) |
Proof. Differentiation of I8, using integration by part and the boundary condition give
I′8(t)=3λδ(IρG−ρD)∫10θxwxtdx+3λδ(IρG−ρD)∫10θxtwxdx=3λδ(IρG−ρD)[−∫10θxxwtdx]+3λδ(IρG−ρD)∫10θxtwxdx. | (4.22) |
We note that wx=−(ψ−wx)−(3s−ψ)+3s and from (1.6)4, λθxx=kθt+δsxt. So, (4.22) becomes
I′8(t)=−3δ(IρG−ρD)k∫10θtwtdx−3(IρG−ρD)∫10sxtwtdx+9λδ(IρG−ρD)∫10θxtsdx−3λδ(IρG−ρD)∫10θxt(ψ−wx)dx−3λδ(IρG−ρD)∫10θxt(3s−ψ)dx | (4.23) |
Using Young's and Poincaré's inequalities, we have for any positive numbers σ1,σ2,σ3,
−3δ(IρG−ρD)∫10θtwtdx≤σ1‖wt‖22+Cσ1‖θxt‖22,−3λδ(IρG−ρD)∫10θxt(ψ−wx)dx≤σ2‖ψ−wx‖22+Cσ2‖θxt‖22,−3λδ(IρG−ρD)∫10θxt(3s−ψ)dx≤σ3‖3sx−ψx‖22+Cσ3‖θxt‖22,9λδ(IρG−ρD)∫10θxtsdx≤C‖sx‖22+C‖θxt‖22. | (4.24) |
Substituting (4.24) into (4.23), we obtain (4.21).
In this paper, we have established a general and optimal stability estimates for a thermoelastic Laminated system, where the heat conduction is given by Fourier's Law and memory as the only source of damping. Our results are established under weaker conditions on the memory and physical parameters. From our results, we saw that the decay rate is faster provided the wave speeds of the first two equations of the system are equal (see (1.3)). A similar result was established recently in [19] when the heat conduction is given by Maxwell-Cattaneo's Law. An interesting case is when the kernel memory term is couple with the first or third equations in system (1.6). Our expectation is that the stability in both cases will depend on the speed of wave propagation.
The authors appreciate the continuous support of University of Hafr Al Batin, KFUPM and University of Sharjah. The first and second authors are supported by University of Hafr Al Batin under project #G-106-2020 . The third author is sponsored by KFUPM under project #S B181018.
The authors declare no conflict of interest
[1] |
T. A. Apalara, On the stability of a thermoelastic laminated beam, Acta Mathematica Scientia, 39 (2019), 1-8. doi: 10.1007/s10473-019-0101-1
![]() |
[2] |
J. M. Wang, G. Q. Xu, S. P. Yung, Exponential stabilization of laminated beams with structural damping and boundary feedback controls, SIAM J. Control Optim., 44 (2005), 1575-1597. doi: 10.1137/040610003
![]() |
[3] | V. I. Arnold, Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics, New York: Springer-Verlag, 1989. |
[4] |
R. Spies, Structural damping in a laminated beams due to interfacial slip, J. Sound Vib., 204 (1997), 183-202. doi: 10.1006/jsvi.1996.0913
![]() |
[5] |
X. Cao, D. Liu, G. Xu, Easy test for stability of laminated beams with structural damping and boundary feedback controls, J. Dyn. Control Syst., 13 (2007), 313-336. doi: 10.1007/s10883-007-9022-8
![]() |
[6] | S. W. Hansen, A model for a two-layered plate with interfacial slip. In: Control and Estimation of Distributed Parameter Systems, Int. Series Numer. Math., 118 (1993), 143-170. |
[7] |
J. M. Wang, G. Q Xu, S. P. Yung, Exponential stabilization of laminated beams with structural damping and boundary feedback controls, SIAM J. Control Optim., 44 (2005), 1575-1597. doi: 10.1137/040610003
![]() |
[8] |
B. Feng, T. F. Ma, R. N. Monteiro, C. A. Raposo, Dynamics of Laminated Timoshenko Beams, J. Dyn. Diff Equat., 30 (2018), 1489-1507. doi: 10.1007/s10884-017-9604-4
![]() |
[9] |
G. Li, X. Kong, W. Liu, General decay for a laminated beam with structural damping and memory, the case of non-equal-wave, J. Integral. Equations Appl., 30 (2018), 95-116. doi: 10.1216/JIE-2018-30-1-95
![]() |
[10] | M. I. Mustafa, General decay result for nonlinear viscoelastic equations J. Math. Anal. Appl., 457 (2018), 134-152. |
[11] | A. Guesmia, S. A. Messaoudi, On the stabilization of Timoshenko systems with memory and different speeds of wave propagation, Appl. Math. Comput., 219 (2013), 9424-9437. |
[12] |
J. L. Jensen, Sur les fonctions convexes et les inégualités entre les valeurs moyennes, Acta Math., 30 (1906), 175-193. doi: 10.1007/BF02418571
![]() |
[13] |
S. E. Mukiawa, T. A. Apalara, S. A. Messaoudi, A general and optimal stability result for a laminated beam, J. Integral Equations Appl., 32 (2020), 341-359. doi: 10.1216/jie.2020.32.341
![]() |
[14] |
T. A. Apalara, S. A. Messaoudi, An exponential stability result of a Timoshenko system with thermoelasticity with second sound and in the presence of delay, Appl. Math. Optim., 71 (2015), 449-472. doi: 10.1007/s00245-014-9266-0
![]() |
[15] |
M. I. Mustafa, Laminated Timoshenko beams with viscoelastic damping, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 466 (2018), 619-641. doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2018.06.016
![]() |
[16] | J. H. Hassan, S. A. Messaoudi, M. Zahri, Existence and new general decay result for a viscoleastic-type Timoshenko system, J. Anal. Appl., 39 (2020), 185-222. |
[17] |
T. A. Apalara, S. A. Messaoudi, A. A. Keddi, On the decay rates of Timoshenko system with second sound, Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 39 (2016), 2671-2684. doi: 10.1002/mma.3720
![]() |
[18] | M. M. Cavalcanti, A. Guesmia, General decay rates of solutions to a nonlinear wave equation with boundary condition of memory type, Differ. Integral Equ., 18 (2005), 583-600. |
[19] |
S. E. Mukiawa, T. A. Apalara, S. A. Messaoudi, A stability result for a memory-type Laminatedthermoelastic system with Maxwell-Cattaneo heat conduction, J. Thermal Stresses, 43 (2020), 1437-1466, doi: 10.1080/01495739.2020.1785979
![]() |
[20] |
C. D. Enyi, S. E. Mukiawa, Dynamics of a thermoelastic-laminated beam problem, AIMS Mathematics, 5 (2020), 5261-5286. doi: 10.3934/math.2020338
![]() |
[21] | E. H. Dill, Continuum mechanics: elasticity, plasticity, viscoelasticity, CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group, New York, (2006). |
1. | Kassimu MPUNGU, Tijani APALARA, Asymptotic behavior of a laminated beam with nonlinear delay and nonlinear structural damping, 2022, 2651-477X, 1, 10.15672/hujms.947131 | |
2. | Aissa Guesmia, Jaime E. Muñoz Rivera, Mauricio A. Sepúlveda Cortés, Octavio Vera Villagrán, Laminated Timoshenko beams with interfacial slip and infinite memories, 2022, 45, 0170-4214, 4408, 10.1002/mma.8046 | |
3. | Zineb Khalili, Djamel Ouchenane, Abdallah El Hamidi, Stability results for laminated beam with thermo-visco-elastic effects and localized nonlinear damping, 2022, 67, 14681218, 103555, 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2022.103555 | |
4. | Kassimu Mpungu, Tijani A. Apalara, Exponential stability of laminated beam with neutral delay, 2022, 33, 1012-9405, 10.1007/s13370-022-00965-2 | |
5. | Xinxin Cao, Wenjun Liu, Yanning An, Li Zhang, Polynomial Stability of the Laminated Beam with One Discontinuous Local Internal Fractional Damping, 2022, 57, 0025-6544, 1424, 10.3103/S0025654422060024 | |
6. | Djellali Fayssal, On the stabilization of a type III thermoelastic laminated beam with structural memory, 2022, 2254-3902, 10.1007/s40324-022-00318-w | |
7. | Tijani A. Apalara, Aminat O. Ige, Cyril D. Enyi, Mcsylvester E. Omaba, Uniform stability result of laminated beams with thermoelasticity of type Ⅲ, 2023, 8, 2473-6988, 1090, 10.3934/math.2023054 | |
8. | Kassimu Mpungu, Exponential stability of a laminated beam system with thermoelasticity of type III and distributed delay, 2023, 1607-3606, 1, 10.2989/16073606.2023.2182727 | |
9. | Djellali Fayssal, Tijani A. Apalara, General decay for laminated beams with structural memory and modified thermoelasticity of type III, 2022, 0430-3202, 10.1007/s11565-022-00451-4 | |
10. | Muhammad I. Mustafa, On the Internal and Boundary Control of the Laminated Beams, 2022, 19, 1660-5446, 10.1007/s00009-022-02189-x | |
11. | Djellali Fayssal, Well posedness and stability result for a thermoelastic laminated beam with structural damping, 2022, 0035-5038, 10.1007/s11587-022-00708-2 | |
12. | Fayssal Djellali, Tijani A. Apalara, Ouarda Saifia, New Exponential Stability Result for Thermoelastic Laminated Beams with Structural Damping and Second Sound, 2023, 184, 0167-8019, 10.1007/s10440-023-00569-3 | |
13. | Yu-Ying Duan, Ti-Jun Xiao, Stability of Laminated Timoshenko Beams with Local Viscoelastic Versus Frictional Damping, 2024, 90, 0095-4616, 10.1007/s00245-024-10183-w | |
14. | Jianghao Hao, Jiali Qin, Stability results of a laminated beam with Cattaneo's thermal law and structural damping, 2024, 0, 2163-2480, 0, 10.3934/eect.2024068 | |
15. | Adel M. Al‐Mahdi, Mohammed M. Al‐Gharabli, Baowei Feng, Existence and stability of a weakly damped laminated beam with a nonlinear delay, 2024, 0044-2267, 10.1002/zamm.202300213 | |
16. | Soh Edwin Mukiawa, Well-posedness and stability analysis for Timoshenko beam system with Coleman-Gurtin's and Gurtin-Pipkin's thermal laws, 2023, 21, 2391-5455, 10.1515/math-2023-0127 |