In this paper, we studied the asymptotic behavior of solutions for a Rao-Nakra sandwich beam equation with time-varying weights and frictional damping terms acting complementarily in the domain. We studied the effect of the three damping on the asymptotic behavior of the energy function. Under nonrestrictive on the growth assumption on the frictional damping terms, we established exponential and general energy decay rates for this system by using the multiplier approach. The results generalized some earlier decay results on the Rao-Nakra sandwich beam equation.
Citation: Adel M. Al-Mahdi, Maher Noor, Mohammed M. Al-Gharabli, Baowei Feng, Abdelaziz Soufyane. Stability analysis for a Rao-Nakra sandwich beam equation with time-varying weights and frictional dampings[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(5): 12570-12587. doi: 10.3934/math.2024615
[1] | Soh Edwin Mukiawa . Well-posedness and stabilization of a type three layer beam system with Gurtin-Pipkin's thermal law. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(12): 28188-28209. doi: 10.3934/math.20231443 |
[2] | 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 |
[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] | Houssem Eddine Khochemane, Ali Rezaiguia, Hasan Nihal Zaidi . Exponential stability and numerical simulation of a Bresse-Timoshenko system subject to a neutral delay. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 20361-20379. doi: 10.3934/math.20231038 |
[5] | 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 |
[6] | Khaled zennir, Djamel Ouchenane, Abdelbaki Choucha, Mohamad Biomy . Well-posedness and stability for Bresse-Timoshenko type systems with thermodiffusion effects and nonlinear damping. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(3): 2704-2721. doi: 10.3934/math.2021164 |
[7] | Adel M. Al-Mahdi, Mohammad M. Al-Gharabli, Mohammad Kafini . Asymptotic behavior of the wave equation solution with nonlinear boundary damping and source term of variable exponent-type. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(11): 30638-30654. doi: 10.3934/math.20241479 |
[8] | Mohammed Alkinidri, Rab Nawaz, Hani Alahmadi . Analytical and numerical investigation of beam-spring systems with varying stiffness: a comparison of consistent and lumped mass matrices considerations. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(8): 20887-20904. doi: 10.3934/math.20241016 |
[9] | Zayd Hajjej . On the exponential decay of a Balakrishnan-Taylor plate with strong damping. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 14026-14042. doi: 10.3934/math.2024682 |
[10] | Adel M. Al-Mahdi . The coupling system of Kirchhoff and Euler-Bernoulli plates with logarithmic source terms: Strong damping versus weak damping of variable-exponent type. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(11): 27439-27459. doi: 10.3934/math.20231404 |
In this paper, we studied the asymptotic behavior of solutions for a Rao-Nakra sandwich beam equation with time-varying weights and frictional damping terms acting complementarily in the domain. We studied the effect of the three damping on the asymptotic behavior of the energy function. Under nonrestrictive on the growth assumption on the frictional damping terms, we established exponential and general energy decay rates for this system by using the multiplier approach. The results generalized some earlier decay results on the Rao-Nakra sandwich beam equation.
In this paper, we consider the following Rao-Nakra sandwich beam with time-varying weights and frictional dampings in (x,t)∈(0,L)×(0,∞),
ρ1h1utt−E1h1uxx−k(−u+v+αwx)+α1(t)f1(ut)=0,ρ3h3vtt−E3h3vxx+k(−u+v+αwx)+α2(t)f2(vt)=0,ρhwtt+EIwxxxx−αk(−u+v+αwx)x+α3(t)f3(wt)=0, | (1.1) |
in which u and v denote the longitudinal displacement and shear angle of the bottom and top layers, and w represents the transverse displacement of the beam. The positive constants ρi, hi, and Ei (i=1,3) are physical parameters representing, respectively, density, thickness, and Young's modulus of the i-th layer for i=1,2,3 and ρh=ρ1h1+ρ2h2+ρ3h3. EI=E1I1+E3I3, α=h2+(h1+h32), k=1h2(E22(1+μ)), where μ is the Poisson ratio −1<μ<12. The functions α1(t), α2(t), α3(t) are the time dependent of the nonlinear frictional dampings f1(ut), f2(vt), f3(wt), respectively. For the system (1.1), we consider the following Dirichlet-Neumann boundary conditions
u(0,t)=u(L,t)=0,t∈(0,∞),v(0,t)=v(L,t)=0,t∈(0,∞),w(0,t)=wx(0,t)=0,t∈(0,∞),w(L,t)=wx(L,t)=0,t∈(0,∞), | (1.2) |
and the initial conditions
u(x,0)=u0,ut(x,0)=u1in (0,L),v(x,0)=v0,vt(x,0)=v1in (0,L),w(x,0)=w0,wt(x,0)=w1in (0,L). | (1.3) |
The system (1.1)–(1.3) consists of one Euler-Bernoulli beam equation for the transversal displacement, and two wave equations for the longitudinal displacements of the top and bottom layers.
Our aim is to investigate the asymptotic behavior of solutions for the system (1.1)–(1.3). We study the effect of the three nonlinear dampings on the asymptotic behavior of the energy function. Under nonrestrictive on the growth assumption on the frictional damping terms, we establish exponential and general energy decay rates for this system by using the multiplier approach. The results generalize some earlier decay results on the Rao-Nakra sandwich beam equation.
First, let's review some previous findings about multilayered sandwich beam models. By applying the Riesz basis approach, Wang et al. [1] studied a sandwich beam system with a boundary control and established the exponential stability as well as the exact controllability and observability of the system. The author of [2] employed the multiplier approach to determine the precise controllability of a Rao-Nakra sandwich beam with boundary controls rather than the Riesz basis approach. Hansen and Imanuvilov [3,4] investigated a multilayer plate system with locally distributed control in the boundary and used Carleman estimations to determine the precise controllability results. Özer and Hansen [5,6] succeeded in obtaining, for a multilayer Rao-Nakra sandwich beam, boundary feedback stabilization and perfect controllability. One viscous damping effect on either the beam equation or one of the wave equations was all that was taken into account by Liu et al. [7] when they established the polynomial decay rate using the frequency domain technique. The semigroup created by the system is polynomially stable of order 1/2, according to Wang [8], who analyzed a Rao-Nakra beam with boundary damping only on one end for two displacements using the same methodology. One can find additional results on the multilayer beam in [9,10,11,12,13,14,15].
In this paper, we consider a Rao-Nakra sandwich beam with time-varying weights and frictional dampings, i.e., system (1.1)–(1.3). The main results are twofold:
(I) We establish an exponential decay of the system in the case of linear frictional dampings by using the multiplier approach, and the decay result depends on the time-varying weights αi.
(II) We establish more general decay of the system in the case of nonlinear frictional dampings by using the multiplier approach, and the decay result depends on the time-varying weights αi and the frictional dampings fi. To the best of our knowledge, there is no stability results on the Rao-Nakra sandwich beam with nonlinear frictional dampings. The remainder of the paper is as follows. In Section 2, we introduce some notations and preliminary results. In Section 3, we state the theorem of the stability and give a detailed proof.
In this section, we present some materials needed in the proof of our results. Throughout this paper, c and ε are used to denote generic positive constants. We consider the following assumptions:
(H1) For (i=1,2,3), the functions fi:R→R are C0 nondecreasing satisfying, for c1,c2>0,
s2+f2i(s)|≤F−1i(sfi(s))for all|s|≤ri,c1|s|≤|fi(s)|≤c2|s|for all|s|≥ri, | (2.1) |
where Fi:(0,∞)→(0,∞) (i=1,2,3) are C1 functions, which are linear or strictly increasing and strictly convex C2 functions on (0,ri] with Fi(0)=F′i(0)=0.
(H2) For (i=1,2,3), the time dependent functions αi:[0,∞)→(0,∞) are C1 functions satisfying ∫∞0αi(t)dt=∞.
Remark 2.1. (1) Hypothesis (H1) implies that sfi(s)>0, for all s≠0. This condition (H1) was introduced and employed by Lasiecka and Tataru [16]. It was shown there that the monotonicity and continuity of fi guarantee the existence of the function Fi with the properties stated in (H1).
(2) For more results on the convexity properties on the nonlinear frictional dampings and sharp energy decay rates, we refer to the works by Boussouira and her co-authors [17,18,19].
The following lemmas will be of essential use in establishing our main results.
Lemma 3.1. [20] Let E:R+→R+ be a nonincreasing function and γ:R+→R+ be a strictly increasing C1-function, with γ(t)→+∞ as t→+∞. Assume that there exists c>0 such that
∞∫Sγ′(t)E(t)dt≤cE(S),1≤S<+∞, |
then there exist positive constants k and ω such that
E(t)≤ke−ωγ(t). |
Lemma 3.2. Let E:R+→R+ be a differentiable and nonincreasing function and let χ:R+→R+ be a convex and increasing function such that χ(0)=0. Assume that
∫+∞sχ(E(t))dt≤E(s),∀s≥0, | (3.1) |
then E satisfies the estimate
E(t)≤ψ−1(h(t)+ψ(E(0))),∀t≥0, | (3.2) |
where ψ(t)=∫1t1χ(s)ds for t>0, and
{h(t)=0,0≤t≤E(0)χ(E(0)),h−1(t)=t+ψ−1(t+ψ(E(0)))χ(ψ−1(t+ψ(E(0)))),t>0. |
Proof. Since E′(t)≤0, this implies E(0)≤E(t0) for all t≥t0≥0. If E(t0)=0 for t0≥0, then E(t)=0 for all t≥t0≥0, and there is nothing to prove in this case. As in [21], we assume that E(t)>0 for t≥0 without loss of generality. Let
L(s)=∫∞sχ(E(t))dt,∀s≥0. |
We have L(s)≤E(s),∀s≥0. The functional L is positive, decreasing, and of class C1(0,∞) satisfying
−L′(s)=χ(E(s))≥χ(L(s)),∀s≥0. |
Since the functional χ is decreasing, we have
χ(L(s))′=−L′(s)χ(L(s))≥1,∀s≥0. |
Integrating this differential equation over (0,t), we get
χ(L(t))≥t+ψ(E(0)),∀t≥0. | (3.3) |
Since χ is convex and χ(0)=0, we have
χ(s)≤sχ(1),∀s∈[0,1]andχ(s)≥sχ(1),∀s≥1. |
We find limt→0ψ(t)=∞ and [ψ(E(0)),∞))⊂Image(ψ), then (3.3) imply that
L(t)≤ψ−1(t+ψ(E(0))),∀t≥0. | (3.4) |
Now, using the properties of χ and E, we have
L(s)≥∫tsχ(E(τ))dτ≥(t−s)χ(E(t)),∀t≥s≥0. | (3.5) |
Since limt→0χ(t)=∞,χ(0)=0, and χ is increasing, (3.4) and (3.5) imply that
E(t)≥χ−1(infs∈[0,t)ψ−1(t+ψ(E(0)))t−s),∀t>0. | (3.6) |
Now, let t>E(0)χ(E(0)) and J(s)=ψ−1(t+ψ(E(0)))t−s,s∈[0,t).
The function J is differentiable, then we have
J′(s)=(t−s)−2[ψ−1(s+ψ(E(0)))−(t−s)χ(ψ−1(s+ψ(E(0))))]. | (3.7) |
Thus, J′(s)=0⇔K(s)=t and J′(s)<0⇔K(s)<t, where
K(t)=t+ψ−1(t+ψ(E(0)))χ(ψ−1(t+ψ(E(0)))). |
Since K(0)=E(0)χ(E(0)) and K is increasing (because ψ−1 is decreasing and s→sχ(s),s>0 is nonincreasing thanks to the fact χ is convex), for t>E(0)χ(E(0)), we have
infs∈[0,t)J(K−1(t))=J(h(t)). |
Since h satisfies J′(h(t))=0, we conclude from (3.6) our desired estimate (3.2).
We define the energy associated to the problem (1.1)–(1.3) by the following formula
E(t)=12[ρ1h1∫L0u2tdx+E1h1∫L0u2xdx+ρ3h3∫L0v2tdx+E3h3∫L0v2xdx+ρh∫L0w2tdx+EI∫L0w2xxdx+k∫L0(−u+v+αwx)2dx]. | (3.8) |
Lemma 3.3. The energy E(t) satisfies
E′(t)≤−α1(t)∫L0utf1(ut)dx−α2(t)∫L0vtf2(vt)dx−α3(t)∫L0wtf3(wt)dx≤0. | (3.9) |
Proof. Multiplying (1.1)1 by ut, (1.1)2 by vt, (1.1)3 by wt and integrating each of them by parts over (0,L), we get the desired result.
In this section, we state and prove our main result. For this purpose, we establish some lemmas. From now on, we denote by c various positive constants, which may be different at different occurrences. For simplicity, we consider the case α(t)=α1(t)=α2(t)=α3(t).
Lemma 4.1. (Case: Fi is linear) For T>S≥0, the energy functional of the system (1.1)–(1.3) satisfies
∫TSα(t)E(t)dt≤cE(S). | (4.1) |
Proof. Multiplying (1.1)1 by αu and integrating over (S,T)×(0,L), we obtain
∫TSα(t)∫L0u[ρ1h1utt−E1h1uxx−k(−u+v+αwx)+α(t)f1(ut)]dxdt=0. |
Notice that
uttu=(utu)t−u2t. |
Using integration by parts and the boundary conditions, we get
−∫TSα(t)∫L0ρ1h1u2tdxdt+∫TSα(t)∫L0E1h1u2xdxdt−∫TSα(t)∫L0ku(−u+v+αwx)dxdt=−ρ1h1[α(t)∫L0uutdx]TS−∫TSα2(t)∫L0uf1(ut)dxdt. | (4.2) |
Adding 2∫TSα(t)∫L0ρ1h1u2tdxdt to both sides of the above equation, we have
∫TSα(t)∫L0ρ1h1u2tdxdt+∫TSα(t)∫L0E1h1u2xdxdt−∫TSα(t)∫L0ku(−u+v+αwx)dxdt=−ρ1h1[α(t)∫L0uutdx]TS−∫TSα2(t)∫L0uf1(ut)dxdt+2∫TSα(t)∫L0ρ1h1u2tdxdt. | (4.3) |
Similarly, multiplying (1.1)2 by α(t)v and (1.1)3 by α(t)w, and integrating each of them over (S,T)×(0,L), we obtain
∫TSα(t)∫L0ρ3h3v2tdxdt+∫TSα(t)∫L0E3h3v2xdxdt+∫TSα(t)∫L0kv(−u+v+αwx)dxdt=−ρ3h3[∫L0α(t)vvtdx]TS−∫TSα2(t)∫L0vf2(vt)dxdt+2∫TSα(t)∫L0ρ3h3v2tdxdt, | (4.4) |
and
∫TSα(t)∫L0ρhw2tdxdt+∫TSα(t)∫L0EIw2xxdxdt−∫TSα(t)∫L0kαw(−u+v+αwx)xdxdt=−ρh[∫L0α(t)wwtdx]TS−∫TSα2(t)∫L0wf3(wt)dxdt+2∫TSα(t)∫L0ρhw2tdxdt. | (4.5) |
Recalling the definition of E, and from (4.2)–(4.5), we get
2∫TSα(t)E(t)dt≤−ρ1h1[α(t)∫L0uutdx]TS−ρ3h3[α(t)∫L0vvtdx]TS−ρh[α(t)∫L0wwtdx]TS−∫TSα2(t)∫L0uf1(ut)dxdt−∫TSα2(t)∫L0vf2(vt)dxdt−∫TSα2(t)∫L0wf3(wt)dxdt+2∫TSα(t)∫L0ρ1h1u2tdxdt+2∫TSα(t)∫L0ρ3h3v2tdxdt+2∫TSα(t)∫L0ρhw2tdxdt. | (4.6) |
Now, using Young's and Poincaré inequalities, we get for any εi>0(i=1,2,3),
∫L0uutdx≤ε1∫L0u2dx+14ε1∫L0u2tdx≤cpε1∫L0u2xdx+14ε1∫L0u2tdx≤cE(t),∫L0zztdx≤ε2∫L0z2dx+14ε2∫L0z2tdx≤cpε2∫L0z2dx+14ε2∫L0z2tdx≤cE(t),∫L0wwtdx≤ε3∫L0w2dx+14ε3∫L0w2tdx≤cpε3∫L0w2dx+14ε3∫L0w2tdx≤cE(t), | (4.7) |
which implies that
−[α(t)∫L0uutdx]TS≤cα(S)E(S)−cα(S)E(T)≤cE(S), |
−[α(t)∫L0vvtdx]TS≤cE(S), |
and
−[α(t)∫L0wwtdx]TS≤cE(S). |
Using (H1), the fact that F1 is linear, Hölder and Poincaré inequalities, we obtain
α2(t)∫L0uf1(ut)dx≤α2(t)(∫L0|u|2dx)12(∫L0|f1(ut)|2dx)12≤α32||u||2(α∫L0utf1(ut)dx)12≤cE12(t)(−E′(t))12. | (4.8) |
Applying Young's inequality on the term E12(t)(−E′(t))12, we obtain for ε>0
α2(t)∫L0uf1(ut)dx≤cα(t)(εE(t)−CεE′(t))≤cεα(t)E(t)−CεE′(t), | (4.9) |
which implies that
∫TSα2(t)(∫L0(−uf1(ut))dx)dt≤cε∫TSα(t)E(t)dt+CεE(S). | (4.10) |
In the same way, we have
∫TSα2(t)(∫L0(−vf2(vt))dx)dt≤cε∫TSα(t)E(t)dt+CεE(S), | (4.11) |
and
∫TSα2(t)(∫L0(−wf3(wt))dx)dt≤cε∫TSα(t)E(t)dt+CεE(S). | (4.12) |
Finally, using (H1), and the fact that F1 is linear, we find that
2∫TSα(t)∫L0ρ1h1u2tdxdt≤c∫TSα(t)∫L0utf1(ut)dxdt≤c∫TS(−E′(t))dt≤cE(S). | (4.13) |
Similarly, we get
2∫TSα(t)∫L0ρ3h3v2tdxdt≤cE(S),and2∫TSα(t)∫L0ρhw2tdxdt≤cE(S). | (4.14) |
We combine the above estimates and take ε small enough to get the estimate (4.1).
Lemma 4.2. (Case: Fi are nonlinear) For T>S≥0, the energy functional of the system (1.1)–(1.3) satisfies
∫TSα(t)Λ(E(t))dt≤cΛ(E(S))+c∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0(|ut|2+|uf1(ut)|)dxdt+c∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0(|vt|2+|vf2(vt)|)dxdt+c∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0(|vt|2+|vf3(wt)|)dxdt, | (4.15) |
where Λ is convex, increasing, and of class C1[0,∞) such that Λ(0)=0.
Proof. We multiply (1.1)1 by α(t)Λ(E)Eu and integrate over (0,L)×(S,T) to get
ρ1h1∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0u2tdxdt+E1h1∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0u2xdxdt−k∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0u(−u+v+αwx)dxdt=−ρ1h1∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0(uut)tdxdt−∫TSα2(t)Λ(E)E∫L0uf1(ut)dxdt+2ρ1h1∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0u2tdxdt. | (4.16) |
Also, we multiply (1.1)2 by α(t)Λ(E)Ev and integrate over (0,L)×(S,T) to get
ρ3h3∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0v2tdxdt+E3h3∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0v2xdxdt+k∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0v(−u+v+αwx)dxdt=−ρ3h3∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0(vvt)tdxdt−∫TSα2(t)Λ(E)E∫L0vf2(vt)dxdt+2ρ3h3∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0v2tdxdt. | (4.17) |
Similarly, we multiply (1.1)3 by α(t)Λ(E)Ew and integrate over (0,L)×(S,T) to get
ρh∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0w2tdxdt+Eh∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0w2xxdxdt+αk∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0wx(−u+v+αwx)dxdt=−ρh∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0(wwt)tdxdt−∫TSα2(t)Λ(E)E∫L0wf3(wt)dxdt+2ρh∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0w2tdxdt. | (4.18) |
Integrating by parts in the first term of the righthand side of the Eq (4.16), we find that Eq (4.16) becomes
ρ1h1∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0u2tdxdt+E1h1∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0u2xdxdt−k∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0u(−u+v+αwx)dxdt=−ρ1h1[α(t)Λ(E)E∫L0uutdx]TS+ρ1h1∫TS∫L0ut(α′(t)Λ(E)Eu+α(t)(Λ(E)E)′u)dxdt+2ρ1h1∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0u2tdxdt−∫TSα2(t)Λ(E)E∫L0uf1(ut)dxdt. |
Using the fact that ∫L0uutdx≤cE(t), the properties of α(t), and the facts that the function s→Λ(s)s is nondecreasing and E is nonincreasing, we have
∫TSα′(t)Λ(E)E∫L0uutdxdt≤c∫TSα′(t)Λ(E)EE(t)dt≤cΛ(E(S))∫TSα′(t)dt≤cΛ(E(S)). | (4.19) |
Similarly, we get
∫TSα(t)(Λ(E)E)′∫L0uutdxdt≤E(S)∫TSα(t)(Λ(E)E)′dt≤E(S)[α(t)Λ(E)E]TS−E(S)∫TSα′(t)Λ(E)Edt≤E(S)(α(T)Λ(E(T))E(T)−α(S)Λ(E(S))E(S))−E(S)Λ(E(S))E(S)∫TSα′(t)dt≤E(S)α(T)Λ(E(T))E(T)−Λ(E(S))(α(T)−α(S))≤E(S)α(S)Λ(E(S))E(S)+Λ(E(S))α(S)≤cΛ(E(S)). | (4.20) |
Combining (4.19)–(4.20), we have
ρ1h1∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0u2tdxdt+E1h1∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0u2xdxdt−k∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0u(−u+v+αwx)dxdt≤cΛ(E(S))+2ρ1h1∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0u2tdxdt−∫TSα2(t)Λ(E)E∫L0uf1(ut)dxdt. |
Similarly, we have
ρ3h3∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0v2tdxdt+E3h3∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0v2xdxdt+k∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0v(−u+v+αwx)dxdt≤cΛ(E(S))+2ρ3h3∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0v2tdxdt−∫TSα2(t)Λ(E)E∫L0vf2(vt)dxdt, |
and
ρh∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0w2tdxdt+Eh∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0w2xxdxdt+αk∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0wx(−u+v+αwx)dxdt≤cΛ(E(S))+2ρh∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0w2tdxdt−∫TSα2(t)Λ(E)E∫L0wf3(wt)dxdt. |
Gathering all the above estimations by using (3.8), we obtain
∫TSα(t)Λ(E(t))dt≤cΛ(E(S))+c∫TSα2(t)Λ(E)E∫L0(|ut|2+|uf1(ut)|)dxdt+c∫TSα2(t)Λ(E)E∫L0(|vt|2+|vf2(vt)|)dxdt+c∫TSα2(t)Λ(E)E∫L0(|wt|2+|wf3(wt)|)dxdt. | (4.21) |
This completes the proof of the estimate (4.15).
In order to finalize the proof of our result, we let
Λ(s)=2ε0sF′i(ε20s), Ψi(s)=Fi(s2), |
where F∗i and Ψ∗i denote the dual functions of the convex functions Fi and Ψi, respectively, in the sense of Young (see Arnold [22], pp. 64).
Lemma 4.3. Suppose Fi(i=1,2,3) are nonlinear, then the following estimates
F∗i(Λ(s)s)≤Λ(s)s(F′i)−1(Λ(s)s) | (4.22) |
and
Ψ∗i(Λ(s)√s)≤ε0Λ(√s), | (4.23) |
hold.
Proof. We prove for i=1, and the remaining are similar. Since F∗1 and Ψ∗1 are the dual functions of the convex functions F1 and Ψ1, respectively, then
F∗1(s)=s(F′1)−1(s)−F1[(F′1)−1(s)]≤s(F′1)−1(s) | (4.24) |
and
Ψ∗1(s)=s(Ψ′1)−1(s)−Ψ1[(Ψ′1)−1(s)]≤s(Ψ′1)−1(s). | (4.25) |
Using (4.24) and the definition of Λ, we obtain (4.22).
For the proof of (4.23), we use (4.25) and the definitions of Ψ1 and Λ to obtain
Λ(s)√s(Ψ′1)−1(Λ(s)√s)≤2ε0√sF′1(ε20s)(Ψ′1)−1(2ε0√sF′1(ε20s))=2ε0√sF′1(ε20s)(Ψ′1)−1(Ψ′1(ε0√s))=2ε20sF′1(ε20s)=ε0Λ(√s). | (4.26) |
Now, we state and prove our main decay results.
Theorem 4.4. Let (u0,u1)×(z0,z1)∈[H20(0,L)×L2(0,L)]2. Assume that (H1) and (H2) hold, then there exist positive constants k and c such that, for t large, the solution of the system (1.1)–(1.3) satisfies
E(t)≤ke−c∫t0α(s)ds,if Fi is linear, | (4.27) |
E(t)≤ψ−1(h(˜α(t))+ψ(E(0))),∀t≥0,if Fi are nonlinear, | (4.28) |
where ˜α(t)=∫t0α(t)dt, ψ(t)=∫1t1χ(s)ds, χ(t)=cΛ(t), and
{h(t)=0,0≤t≤E(0)χ(E(0)),h−1(t)=t+ψ−1(t+ψ(E(0)))χ(ψ−1(t+ψ(E(0)))),t>0. |
Proof. To establish (4.27), we use (4.1), and Lemma 3.1 for γ(t)=∫t0α(s)ds. Consequently, the result follows.
For the proof of (4.28), we re-estimate the terms of (4.15) as follows:
We consider the following partition of the domain (0,L):
Ω1={x∈(0,L):|ut|≥ε1},Ω2={x∈(0,L):|ut|≤ε1}. |
So,
∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫Ω1(|ut|2+|uf1(ut)|)dxdt=∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫Ω1|ut|2dxdt+∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫Ω1|uf1(ut)|dxdt:=I1+I2. |
Using the definition of Ω1, condition (H1), and (3.9), we have
I1≤c∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫Ω1utf1(ut)dxdt≤c∫TSΛ(E)E(−E′(t))dt≤cΛ(E(S)). | (4.29) |
After applying Young's inequality, and the condition (H1), we obtain
I2≤ε∫TSα(t)Λ2(E)Edt+c(ε)∫TSα(t)∫Ω1|f1(ut)|2dt. | (4.30) |
The definition of Ω1, the condition (H1), (3.8), (3.9), and (4.30) lead to
I2≤ε∫TSα(t)Λ2(E)Edt+c(ε)∫TSα(t)∫Ω1utf1(ut)dxdt≤ε∫TSα(t)Λ2(E)Edt+c(ε)E(S). | (4.31) |
Using the definition of Λ, and the convexity of F1, (4.31) becomes
I2≤ε∫TSα(t)Λ2(E)Edt+cεE(S)=2εε0∫TSα(t)Λ(E)F′1(ε20E(t))dt+cεE(S)≤2εε0∫TSα(t)Λ(E)F′1(ε20E(0))dt+cεE(S)≤2cεε0∫TSα(t)Λ(E)dt+cεE(S). | (4.32) |
Using Young's inequality, Jensen's inequality, condition (H1), and (3.8), we get
∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫Ω2(|ut|2+|uf1(ut)|)dxdt≤∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫Ω2F−11(utf1(ut))dxdt+∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E‖u‖12(∫Ω2F−11(utf1(ut))dx)12dxdt≤L∫TSα(t)Λ(E)EF−11(1L∫L0utf1(ut)dx)dt+∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E√E√LF−11(1L∫L0utf1(ut)dx)dt. | (4.33) |
We apply the generalized Young inequality
AB≤F∗(A)+F(B) |
to the first term of (4.33) with A=Λ(E)E and B=F−11(1L∫L0utf1(ut)dx) to get
Λ(E)EF−11(1L∫L0utf1(ut)dx)≤F∗1(Λ(E)E)+1L∫L0utf1(ut)dx. | (4.34) |
We then apply it to the second term of (4.33) with A=Λ(E)E√E and
B=√LF−11(1L∫L0utf1(ut)dx) to obtain
Λ(E)E√E√LF−11(1L∫L0utf1(ut)dx)≤F∗1(Λ(E)E√E)+LF−11(1L∫L0utf1(ut)dx). | (4.35) |
Combining (4.33)–(4.35), using (4.22), and (4.23), we arrive at
∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫Ω2(|ut|2+|uf1(ut)|)dxdt≤c∫TSα(t)(F∗1(Λ(E)E√E)+F∗1(Λ(E)E))dt+c∫TSα(t)∫Ωutf1(ut)dxdt≤c∫TSα(t)(ε0+(F′1)−1(Λ(E)E)E)Λ(E)dt+cE(S). | (4.36) |
Using the fact that s→(F′1)−1(s) is nondecreasing, we deduce that, for 0<ε0≤√E(0),
∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫Ω2(|ut|2+|uf1(ut)|)dxdt≤cε0∫TSα(t)Λ(E)dt+cE(S). |
Therefore, combining (4.15), (4.29), and (4.32), we find that
∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0(|ut|2+|uf1(ut)|)dxdt≤cΛ(E(S))+cεε0∫TSα(t)Λ(E)dt+cεE(S), |
and similarly,
∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0(|vt|2+|vf2(vt)|)dxdt≤cΛ(E(S))+cεε0∫TSα(t)Λ(E)dt+cεE(S), |
and
∫TSα(t)Λ(E)E∫L0(|wt|2+|wf3(wt)|)dxdt≤cΛ(E(S))+cεε0∫TSα(t)Λ(E)dt+cεE(S), |
Combining all the above estimations with choosing ε and ε0 small enough, we arrive at
∫TSα(t)Λ(E(t))dt≤c(1+Λ(E(S))E(S))E(S). |
Using the facts that E is nonincreasing and s→Λ(s)s is nondecareasing, we can deduce that
∫+∞Sα(t)Λ(E(t))dt≤cE(S). |
Now, let ˜E=E∘˜α−1, where ˜α(t)=∫t0α(s)ds, then we deduce from this inequality that
∫∞SΛ(˜E(t))dt=∫∞SΛ(E(˜α−1(t)))dt=∫∞˜α−1(S)α(η)Λ(E(η))dη≤cE(˜α−1(S))≤c˜E(S). |
Using Lemma 3.1 for ˜E and χ(s)=cΛ(s), we deduce from (3.1) the following estimate
˜E(t)≤ψ−1(h(t)+ψ(E(0))) |
which, using the definition of ˜E and the change of variables, gives (4.28).
Remark 4.1. The stability result (4.28) is a decay result. Indeed,
h−1(t)=t+ψ−1(t+ψ(E(0)))χ(ψ−1(t+ψ(E(0))))=t+c2ε0cF′(ε20ψ−1(t+r))≥t+c2ε0cF′(ε20ψ−1(r))≥t+˜c, |
where F=min{Fi} and i=1,2,3. Hence, limt→∞h−1(t)=∞, which implies that limt→∞h(t)=∞. Using the convexity of F, we have
ψ(t)=∫1t1χ(s)ds=∫1tc2ε0sF′(ε20s)≥∫1tcsF′(ε20)≥c[ln|s|]1t=−clnt, |
where F=min{Fi} and i=1,2,3. Therefore, limt→0+ψ(t)=∞, which leads to limt→∞ψ−1(t)=0.
Example 1. Let fi(s)=sm, (i=1,2,3), where m≥1, then the function F (F=min{Fi}) is defined in the neighborhood of zero by
F(s)=csm+12 |
which gives, near zero,
χ(s)=c(m+1)2sm+12. |
So,
ψ(t)=c∫1t2(m+1)sm+12ds={ctm−12,if m>1;−clnt,if m=1, |
then in the neighborhood of ∞,
ψ−1(t)={ct−2m−1,if m>1;ce−t,if m=1. |
Using the fact that h(t)=t as t goes to infinity, we obtain from (4.27) and (4.28):
E(t)≤{c(∫t0α(s)ds)−2m−1,if m>1;ce−∫t0α(s)ds,if m=1. |
Example 2. Let fi(s)=sm√−lns, (i=1,2,3), where m≥1, then the function F is defined in the neighborhood of zero by
F(s)=csm+12√−ln√s, |
which gives, near zero,
χ(s)=csm+12(−ln√s)−12(m+12(−ln√s)−14). |
Therefore,
ψ(t)=c∫1t1sm+12(−ln√s)−12(m+12(−ln√s)−14)ds=c∫1√t1τm−2(lnτ)−12(m+12lnτ−14)dτ={ctm−12√−lnt,if m>1;c√−lnt,if m=1, |
then in the neighborhood of ∞,
ψ−1(t)={ct−2m−1(lnt)−1m−1,if m>1;ce−t2,if m=1. |
Using the fact that h(t)=t as t goes to infinity, we obtain
E(t)≤{c(∫t0α(s)ds)−2m−1(ln(∫t0α(s)ds))−1m−1,if m>1;ce−(∫t0α(s)ds)2,if m=1. |
The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.
The authors would like to acknowledge the support provided by King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals (KFUPM), Saudi Arabia. The support provided by the Interdisciplinary Research Center for Construction & Building Materials (IRC-CBM) at King Fahd University of Petroleum & Minerals (KFUPM), Saudi Arabia, for funding this work through Project No. INCB2402, is also greatly acknowledged.
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
[1] |
J.-M. Wang, B.-Z. Guo, B. Chentouf, Boundary feedback stabilization of a three-layer sandwich beam: Riesz basis approach, ESAIM: COCV, 12 (2006), 12–34. https://doi.org/10.1051/cocv:2005030 doi: 10.1051/cocv:2005030
![]() |
[2] |
R. Rajaram, Exact boundary controllability results for a Rao–Nakra sandwich beam, Syst. Control Lett., 56 (2007), 558–567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sysconle.2007.03.007 doi: 10.1016/j.sysconle.2007.03.007
![]() |
[3] |
S. W. Hansen, O. Imanuvilov, Exact controllability of a multilayer Rao-Nakra plate with clamped boundary conditions, ESAIM: COCV, 17 (2011), 1101–1132. https://doi.org/10.1051/cocv/2010040 doi: 10.1051/cocv/2010040
![]() |
[4] |
S. W. Hansen, O. Y. Imanuvilov, Exact controllability of a multilayer Rao-Nakra plate with free boundary conditions, Math. Control Relat. Field., 1 (2011), 189–230. https://doi.org/10.3934/mcrf.2011.1.189 doi: 10.3934/mcrf.2011.1.189
![]() |
[5] |
A. O. Ozer, S. W. Hansen, Uniform stabilization of a multilayer Rao-Nakra sandwich beam, Evol. Equ. Control Theor., 2 (2013), 695–710. https://doi.org/10.3934/eect.2013.2.695 doi: 10.3934/eect.2013.2.695
![]() |
[6] |
A. O. Ozer, S. W. Hansen, Exact boundary controllability results for a multilayer Rao-Nakra sandwich beam, SIAM J. Control Optim., 52 (2014), 1314–1337. https://doi.org/10.1137/120892994 doi: 10.1137/120892994
![]() |
[7] |
Z. Y. Liu, B. P. Rao, Q. Zhang, Polynomial stability of the Rao-Nakra beam with a single internal viscous damping, J. Differ. Equations, 269 (2020), 6125–6162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jde.2020.04.030 doi: 10.1016/j.jde.2020.04.030
![]() |
[8] |
Y. Wang, Boundary feedback stabilization of a Rao-Nakra sandwich beam, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser., 1324 (2019), 012044. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1324/1/012044 doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1324/1/012044
![]() |
[9] |
A. A. Allen, S. W. Hansen, Analyticity and optimal damping for a multilayer Mead-Markus sandwich beam, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. B, 14 (2010), 1279–1292. https://doi.org/10.3934/dcdsb.2010.14.1279 doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2010.14.1279
![]() |
[10] |
A. A. Allen, S. W. Hansen, Analyticity of a multilayer Mead-Markus plate, Nonlinear Anal., 71 (2009), e1835–e1842. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.na.2009.02.063 doi: 10.1016/j.na.2009.02.063
![]() |
[11] |
R. H. Fabiano, S. W. Hansen, Modeling and analysis of a three-layer damped sandwich beam, Conference Publications, 2001 (2001), 143–155. https://doi.org/10.3934/proc.2001.2001.143 doi: 10.3934/proc.2001.2001.143
![]() |
[12] | S. W. Hansen, R. Rajaram, Simultaneous boundary control of a Rao-Nakra sandwich beam, In: Proceedings of the 44th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, IEEE, 2005, 3146–3151. https://doi.org/10.1109/CDC.2005.1582645 |
[13] |
S. W. Hansen, R. Rajaram, Riesz basis property and related results for a Rao-Nakra sandwich beam, Conference Publications, 2005 (2005), 365–375. https://doi.org/10.3934/proc.2005.2005.365 doi: 10.3934/proc.2005.2005.365
![]() |
[14] |
A. Ozkan Ozer, S. W. Hansen, Exact controllability of a Rayleigh beam with a single boundary control, Math. Control Signals Syst., 23 (2011), 199–222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00498-011-0069-4 doi: 10.1007/s00498-011-0069-4
![]() |
[15] |
C. Yang, J.-M. Wang, Exponential stability of an active constrained layer beam actuated by a voltage source without magnetic effects, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 448 (2017), 1204–1227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmaa.2016.11.067 doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2016.11.067
![]() |
[16] |
I. Lasiecka, D. Tataru, Uniform boundary stabilization of semilinear wave equations with nonlinear boundary damping, Differ. Integral Equ., 6 (1993), 507–533. https://doi.org/10.57262/die/1370378427 doi: 10.57262/die/1370378427
![]() |
[17] |
F. Alabau-Boussouira, Convexity and weighted integral inequalities for energy decay rates of nonlinear dissipative hyperbolic systems, Appl. Math. Optim., 51 (2005), 61–105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00245 doi: 10.1007/s00245
![]() |
[18] |
F. Alabau-Boussouira, P. Cannarsa, D. Sforza, Decay estimates for second order evolution equations with memory, J. Funct. Anal., 254 (2008), 1342–1372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfa.2007.09.012 doi: 10.1016/j.jfa.2007.09.012
![]() |
[19] |
F. Alabau-Boussouira, P. Cannarsa, A general method for proving sharp energy decay rates for memory-dissipative evolution equations, C. R. Math., 347 (2009), 867–872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crma.2009.05.011 doi: 10.1016/j.crma.2009.05.011
![]() |
[20] |
P. Martinez, A new method to obtain decay rate estimates for dissipative systems, ESAIM: COCV, 4 (1999), 419–444. https://doi.org/10.1051/cocv:1999116 doi: 10.1051/cocv:1999116
![]() |
[21] | A. Guesmia, Inégalités intégrales et applications à la stabilisation des systèmes distribués non dissipatifs, PhD thesis, Université de Metz, 2006. |
[22] | V. I. Arnol'd, Mathematical methods of classical mechanics, New York: Springer, 1989. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-2063-1 |