Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1. Introduction
Many structures in mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, civil engineering and aerospace engineering are formed by a single beam or a number of beams.
We can cite for instance, robot arms, rotor turbine and helicopter blades, turbomachineries, electronic equipment, antennas, missiles, panels, pipelines, buildings,
bridges, etc. There are mainly three important theories. The first one is named after
Euler and Bernoulli and the second one after Rayleigh. To alleviate the shortcomings in these two theories, Timoshenko came up with a new theory which is better
suited for engineering practice and is nowadays widely used for moderately thick
beams. Both, rotatory inertia and the effect of shear forces are taken into account.
In his theory, Timoshenko also assumed that the plane cross-sections perpendicular
to the beam centerline remain plane but could become oblique after deformation.
An additional kinematics variable is added in the displacement assumptions. Internal and external forces like the weight of the beam, heavy loads, wind, earthquakes
and interaction with other bodies or materials are examples of some sources causing
high stresses accompanying unwanted vibration. These stresses not only bring some
discomfort, reduce the fatigue-life of the material and produce annoying noise but
also are harmful to the structure as they may cause significant damage or complete
destruction of the machine or equipment. Therefore, some ways and devices capable of enhancing dynamic stability must accompany these structures. To this end
various devices and energy dissipation mechanisms have been designed either in the
material itself such as smart materials (piezoelectric, pietzoceramic, viscoelastic),
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 34B05, 34D05, 34H05.
Key words and phrases. Exponential stabilization; vibration reduction; Timoshenko system;
slip; boundary control; multiplier technique.
c
2015
Texas State University - San Marcos.
Submitted February 24, 2015. Published May 7, 2015.
1
EJDE-2015/129
on its surface (viscoelastic layers, sandwich plates,. . . ) or at the boundary (or part
of the boundary). Some well-known dampers are: friction dampers, sensors and
actuators, special loads, viscoelastic dampers, tuned mass dampers, tuned liquid
dampers and tuned mass liquid dampers. Sometimes they are classified into active,
semi-active and passive control methods. In this paper, we would like to investigate
the case of two identical beams with an adhesive layer in the interface creating a
restoring force. It has been already shown that when this restoring force is proportional to the amount of slip the created frictional damping is unable by itself
to stabilize the system exponentially. The first investigators have been forced to
control the system by an additional boundary feedback. We intend to seek other
ways and means, preferably less costly, less demanding and easy to implement, to
stabilize the system exponentially.
Statement of the problem. The original structure consists of a two-layered
beam with an adhesive layer bonding the two adjoining surfaces. The adhesive
layer creates a restoring force which is assumed proportional to the amount of slip.
Therefore, we are in the presence of a structural damping due to interfacial slip.
Moreover, we assume that the adhesive layer is of negligible thickness and mass so
that the contribution of its mass to the kinetic energy of the structure can be ignored. The equations of motion modeling the system are derived using Timoshenko
theory and a third equation is coupled with the first two describing the dynamic of
the slip and containing the internal frictional (Kelvin-Voigt) damping. Namely, we
have the system
wtt + G( wx )x = 0,
I (3stt tt ) G( wx ) D(3sxx xx ) = 0,
3I stt + 3G( wx ) + 4s + 4st 3Dsxx = 0,
supplemented by the initial data
(w, , s)(x, 0) = (w0 , 0 , s0 ),
EJDE-2015/129
There are basically three main papers in this subject [3, 10, 31]. In [10], the
problem has been derived in details. The authors assumed that the adhesive layer
is of negligible thickness and mass and that the restoring force created by this layer
is proportional to the amount of slip at the interface.
p
p
In [31], the system is studied assuming that G/ and D/I are two different
wave speeds. Putting = 3s , they transformed the original system into
wtt + G(3s wx )x = 0,
I tt G(3s wx ) Dxx = 0,
3I stt + 3G(3s wx ) + 4s + 4st 3Dsxx = 0
where 0 < x < 1 and t > 0. In addition to the well-posedness, the authors pointed
out that the frictional damping is enough to asymptotically stabilize the system.
However, it is not possible to have exponential stability. They justified their claim
by the fact that the eigenvalues of two branches are very close to the imaginary
axis as their moduli go to infinity. To achieve exponential decay of solutions they
implemented an additional boundary control
w(0, t) = (0, t) = s(0, t) = 0,
x (1, t) = u1 (t) := k1 t (1, t),
sx (1, t) = 0,
4
4
I stt + G( wx ) + s + st sxx = 0,
3
3
where 0 < x < 1 and t > 0, with the boundary conditions
(0, t) = s(0, t) = 0,
sx (1, t) = x (1, t) = 0,
wx (0, t) = 0,
(1.2)
w(1, t) = 0.
The well-posedness of the system has been addressed in [3,31] (see [4,5,7,9,17] for
the viscoelastic term). We have weak solutions in (V1 L2 )3 and strong solutions
in (V2 H 1 )3 where
Vk = v : v H k (0, 1) : v(0) = 0 , k = 1, 2.
EJDE-2015/129
(1.3)
(1.4)
3 22 9
(H1) If < 12
, then G
<
min{,
,
}, and if
2
9
assume G < min , 3
.
2
12
< <
then
2. Uniform stabilization
The modified energy of the system (1.1)(1.2) is given by
1h
E(t) = kwt k2 + I k3st t k2 + 3I kst k2 + Gk wx k2
2
Z t
+ (1
h(r)dr)k3sx x k2 + 3ksx k2 + 4ksk2
(2.1)
Z
+
i
(h(3s )x )dx ,
t 0.
t > 0.
We first give some lemmas that will serve as a support for the proof of this
theorem.
Lemma 2.2. If k and are two differentiable functions then
Z
i
1 d h t
1
k(s)ds 2 (t) (k)(t)
(k )(t)0 (t) = (k 0 )(t) +
2
2 dt
0
1
2
k(t) (t), t > 0
2
where stands for the usual convolution.
Proof. The statement of the this follows from the identity
Z t
d
0
(k)(t) = (k )(t) + 2
k(s)ds t (t)(t) 2(k )(t)t (t)
dt
0
h Z t
i
d
= (k 0 )(t) +
k(s)ds 2 (t) k(t) 2 (t)
dt
0
2(k )(t)t (t), t > 0.
EJDE-2015/129
Lemma 2.3. The energy E(t) given by (2.1) satisfies
Z
d
h(t)
1 1 0
(h (3s )x )dx,
E(t) =
k(3s )x k2 4kst k2 +
dt
2
2 0
t > 0.
Proof. Multiplying the first equation of (1.1) by wt and integrating over (0, 1) we
obtain
Z 1
d
2
kwt k + G
( wx )x wt dx = 0
2 dt
0
or
Z 1
d
1
2
kwt k G
( wx )wxt dx + [G( wx )wt ]0 = 0
2 dt
0
and by our boundary conditions (1.2)
Z 1
d
[kwt k2 ] G
( wx )wxt dx = 0, t > 0.
2 dt
0
Note that
Z
Z
( wx )wxt dx = G
G
0
( wx )( wx )t dx
0
G d
[k wx k2 ] + G
=
2 dt
( wx )t dx.
0
Therefore,
1 d
[kwt k2 + Gk wx k2 ] G
2 dt
( wx )t dx = 0,
t > 0.
(2.2)
Similarly multiplying the second equation of (1.1) by 3st t and integrating over
(0, 1) we obtain
Z 1
I d
[k3st t k2 ] G
( wx )(3st t )dx
2 dt
0
Z 1
Z 1
Z t
(3st t )x
h(t r)(3s )x (r) dr dx = 0, t > 0.
0
(2.3)
h(t)
1
k3sx x k2
= (h0 (3s )x )(t)
2
2
Z
i
1 d h t
+
h(s)ds k3sx x k2 (h(3s )x )(t) ,
2 dt
0
(2.4)
t > 0.
EJDE-2015/129
Likewise, multiplying the third equation of (1.1) by st and integrating over (0, 1),
we obtain
Z 1
4
1 d
4
I kst k2 +
( wx )st dx +
ksk2 + ksx k2 + G
kst k2 = 0,
(2.5)
2 dt
3
3
0
for t > 0. Now it is clear from (2.2)(2.5) that
E 0 (t) = 4kst k2
h(t)
1
k(3s )x k2 +
2
2
t > 0.
As h0 (t) 0, we see that E 0 (t) 0 for all t > 0. Therefore the energy is
non-increasing and uniformly bounded above by E(0).
Next we shall construct a Lyapunov functional F satisfying the inequalities
d
F (t) F (t)
dt
for some positive constants 1 , 2 and . The first two inequalities show that E(t)
and F (t) are equivalent. The second one gives the exponential decay of F (t) (and
therefore the exponential decay of E(t) as well). To this end, we define
X5
F (t) = E(t) +
i Gi (t), i > 0, i = 1, . . . , 5, t 0,
1 E(t) F (t) 2 E(t)
and
i=1
where
G2 (t) = (wt , w), G3 (t) = I (3st t , 3s ), t 0,
4
3
G4 (t) =
(wt , ) (sx , wt ) + 3I (st , wx ), t 0,
G
G
R1
with (x, t) = x s(, t)d and
Z t
G5 (t) = I 3st t ,
h(t r) [(3s )(t) (3s )(r)] dr , t 0.
G1 (t) = I (st , s),
Using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and the Poincare inequality, one can easily
see that all the Gi (t), i = 1, . . . , 5 are bounded (above and below) by an expression
containing the existing terms in the energy E(t). This leads to the equivalence of
F (t) and E(t).
We shall now prove several lemmas with the purpose of creating negative counterparts of the terms that appear in the energy in the estimations of the derivatives
of the above functionals.
Lemma 2.4. Along the solutions of (1.1)(1.2), we have
4
42
G
+ ksk2 + 0 Gk wx k2 + I +
kst k2 ,
40
3
9
for all t > 0 and some 0 , > 0.
G01 (t) ksx k2 +
Proof. Clearly,
G01 (t) = I kst k2 + I (stt , s),
t>0
4
4
ksk2
(st , s) G( wx , s)
3
3
EJDE-2015/129
G
4 2
42
ksk + 0 Gk wx k2 + ksk2 +
kst k2
40
3
9
G
4 2
42
ksx k2 +
+
ksk + 0 Gk wx k2 + I +
kst k2 .
40
3
9
I kst k2 ksx k2 +
G
9G
kx 3sx k2 +
ksx k2 ,
21
21
= kwt k2 G( wx , wx ) + G [( wx )w]0
= kwt k2 + G( wx , wx ) G( wx , )
G
kx k2
kwt k2 + Gk wx k2 + 1 Gk wx k2 +
41
G
9G
kwt k2 + (G + 1 )k wx k2 +
kx 3sx k2 +
ksx k2 .
21
21
Lemma 2.6. The derivative of G3 (t) along solutions of (1.1)(1.2) satisfies
G
)k3sx x k2 + 2 Gk wx k2
G03 (t) I k3st t k2 (
42
Z
1 1
+
(h(3sx x ))dx, t > 0
4 0
for 2 > 0, > 0.
Proof. Using the second equation in (1.1) we find that
d
(3st t , 3s ) = I k3st t k2 k3sx x k2
dt
+ [(3sx x )(3s )]10 + G(( wx ), (3s ))
Z t
+
h(t r)(3sx x )(r)dr, 3sx x , t > 0.
Then
G
k3sx x k2
G03 (t) I k3st t k2 k3sx x k2 + 2 Gk wx k2 +
42
Z t
+
h(t r) [(3sx x )(r) (3sx x )(t)] dr, 3sx x
0
Z t
+
h(r)dr ((3sx x , 3sx x )
0
EJDE-2015/129
for 2 > 0, or
G03 (t) I k3st t k2 k3sx x k2 + 2 Gk wx k2
Z
G
1 1
+
(h(3sx x ))dx
k3sx x k2 + k3sx x k2 +
42
4 0
+ (1 )k(3sx x )k2 ,
for > 0. Hence
G
G03 (t) I k3st t k2 (
)k3sx x k2 + 2 Gk wx k2
42
Z
1 1
(h(3sx x ))dx, t > 0.
+
4 0
Lemma 2.7. The derivative of G4 (t) is estimated as follows
G04 (t) (3G 1 )k wx k2 + 1 (1 + )I k3st t k2 + 1 kwt k2
4 2 2
42
1
9
+
+
+ (9 + +
)I kst k2 , t > 0,
2
1 G
1
41
.
for 1 , > 0 provided that I = G
Proof. Using the first and third equations in (1.1),
4
4
3
3
G04 (t) =
(wtt , )
(wt , t ) (sxt , wt ) (sx , wtt )
G
G
G
G
+ 3I (stt , wx ) + 3I (st , t wxt ) .
Then we find that
4
3
(wt , t ) (sxt , wt ) + 3(sx , ( wx )x )
G
G
4
4
+ 3(G( wx )
s
st + sxx , wx ) + 3I (st , t wxt ),
3
3
, we obtain
for t > 0. Next, by the definition of and the assumption I = G
G04 (t) = 4(( wx )x , )
4
(wt , t ) 3Gk wx k2 4(st , wx ) + 3I (st , t ),
G
for t > 0. Now, clearly
G04 (t) =
4
4 2 2
(wt , t ) 1 kwt k2 +
kst k2 ,
G
1 G2
42
4(st , wx ) 1 k wx k2 +
kst k2 ,
1
9
3(st , t ) 1 kt k2 +
kst k2
41
1
9
1 (1 + )k3st t k2 + (9 + +
)kst k2
41
lead to
42
4 2 2
2
2
2
3Gk
w
k
+
w
k
+
ks
k
kst k2
t
x
1
x
1 G2
1
9
1
+ 1 (1 + )I k3st t k2 + (9 + +
)I kst k2
41
EJDE-2015/129
or
G04 (t) (3G 1 )k wx k2 + 1 (1 + )I k3st t k2 + 1 kwt k2
4 2 2
42
1
9
+
+
+ 9+ +
I kst k2 , t 0.
2
1 G
1
41
R t For the next lemma we need to get away
R t from zero Rtot0 ensure strict positivity of
h(r)dr.
So
for
that
t
t
>
0
we
have
h(r)dr 0 h(r)dr = h0 > 0.
0
0
0
Lemma 2.8. For the functional G5 (t) we have
G05 (t)
Z
1 1
(h (3s )x )dx
Gk wx k + (G + 4 + 2 )
4 0
+ (2 )k3sx x k2 + I ( h0 )k3st t k2
Z
I h(0) 1 0
+
(|h |(3s )x )dx, t t0 > 0
4
0
2
for > 0.
Proof. We recall that
Z t
G5 (t) = I 3st t ,
h(t r)[(3s )(t) (3s )(r)]dr ,
t>0
and therefore
G05 (t)
= I (3stt tt ,
h(t r)[(3s )(t) (3s )(r)]dr)
0
Z
t
I 3st t ,
h0 (t r)[(3s )(t) (3s )(r)]dr
0
Z t
I
h(r)dr k3st t k2 , t > 0.
0
In view of the second equation in (1.1) and the boundary conditions (1.2) we write
Z t
0
G5 (t) = G( wx ) + (3s )xx ,
h(t r)[(3s )(t) (3s )(r)]dr
0
Z t
Z t
+
h(t r)(3s )xx (r)dr,
h(t r)[(3s )(t) (3s )(r)]dr
0
0
Z t
I 3st t ,
h0 (t r)[(3s )(t) (3s )(r)]dr
0
Z t
I
h(r)dr k3st t k2 , t > 0.
0
(2.6)
It is easy to see that for t > 0,
Z t
G wx ,
h(t r) [(3s )(t) (3s )(r)] dr
0
G(1 )
Gk wx k +
4
2
(2.7)
(h (3s )x )dx,
0
10
EJDE-2015/129
h(t r) [(3s )(t) (3s )(r)] dr
0
Z t
h(t r) [(3s )x (t) (3s )x (r)] dr
= (3s )x ,
(3s )xx ,
(2.8)
1
k3sx x k +
4
2
and
Z
(h(3s )x )dx,
0
t
h(t r)(3s )xx (r)dr,
h(t r)[(3s )(t) (3s )(r)]dr
0
0
Z t
=k
h(t r)[(3s )x (t) (3s )x (r)]drk2
0
Z t
Z t
h(r)dr (3s )x ,
h(t r)[(3s )x (t) (3s )x (r)]dr
0
0
(2.9)
Z t
n
2
2
k
h(t r)[(3s )x (t) (3s )x (r)]drk + (1 ) k3sx x k
0
Z t
o
1
+ k
h(t r)[(3s )x (t) (3s )x (r)]drk2
4 0
Z 1
1
)(1 )
(h (3s )x )dx + (1 )k3sx x k2 ,
(1 +
4
0
I h(0)
I k3st t k +
4
2
(2.10)
1
0
t > 0.
Z
1 1
Gk wx k + (G + 4 + 2 )
(h (3s )x )dx
4 0
+ (2 )k3sx x k2 + I ( h0 )k3st t k2
Z
I h(0) 1 0
+
(|h |(3s )x )dx.
4
0
EJDE-2015/129
11
Using the previous lemmas we now give the proof of our main result.
Proof of Theorem 2.1. Gathering the estimates in the previous lemmas we find that
X5
h(t)
F 0 (t) = E 0 (t) +
i G0i (t) 4kst k2
k(3s )x k2
i=1
2
Z
1 1 0
G
4
(h (3s )x )dx 1 ksx k2 + 1 (
+
+ )ksk2
2 0
40
3
2
4
+ 1 0 Gk wx k2 + 1 (I +
)kst k2 2 kwt k2
9
9G2
G2
k3sx x k2 +
ksx k2
+ 2 (G + 1 )k wx k2 +
21
21
G
+ 3 I k3st t k2 3 (
)k3sx x k2 + 3 2 Gk wx k2
42
Z
1 1
(h(3sx x ))dx 4 (3G 1 )k wx k2
+ 3
4 0
4 2 2
42
9
1
+ 4 1 (1 + )I k3st t k2 + 4 [
+
+ (9 + +
)I ]kst k2
2
2 G
1
41
+ 1 4 kwt k2 + 5 Gk wx k2 + 5 (2 )k3sx x k2
Z
1 1
(h (3s )x )dx
+ 5 (G + 4 + 2 )
4 0
Z
I h(0) 1 0
2
+ 5 I ( h0 )k3st t k + 5
(|h |(3s )x )dx, t t0 > 0
4
0
or
9
42
1
42
4 2 2
) 4 (9 + +
kst k2
F (t) 4 1 (I +
)I +
+
9
41
1
2 G2
9G2
G
4
(1
)ksx k2 + 1 (
+ )ksk2
21
40
3
[4 (3G 1 ) 1 0 G 2 (G + 1 ) 3 2 G 5 G] k wx k2
o
n
G2
G
)
5 (2 ) k3sx x k2
3 (
42
21
2
(2 2 4 )kwt k + I [3 + 4 1 (1 + ) + 5 ( h0 )] k3st t k2
n
1
1
1
3
5 (G + 4 + 2 )
2
4
4
Z
0 I h(0) o 1
5
(h (3s )x )dx.
4
0
(2.11)
Our strategy for selecting the different coefficients and parameters is as follows:
all the i , i = 1, . . . 5 will be determined in terms of only one of them (here 1 ). This
1 will be accountable in front of and 1 in the coefficients of the first and the last
term in (2.11). From the beginning, we have managed in our estimations to balance
the largest coefficients (here 1/) on the terms that appear in the derivative of the
energy. This will allow us to ignore at the beginning of the process of selection.
0
12
EJDE-2015/129
Let us ignore for the moment the first and the last terms in (2.11). We shall, at
the same time, ignore the terms having coefficients in . The focus will be on
9G
G
4
2 > 0,
< 0,
21
40
3
4 (3G 1 ) 1 0 G 2 (G + 1 ) 3 2 G > 0,
G
G
)
2 > 0,
3 (
42
21
2 2 4 > 0, 3 + 4 1 5 h0 < 0,
1
or
9G
G
4
2 < 1 ,
< ,
21
40
3
1 0 G + 2 (G + 1 ) + 3 2 G < 4 (3G 1 ),
G
G
2 < 3 (
),
21
42
2 4 < 2 , 3 + 4 1 < 5 h0 .
(2.12)
G
G
Let 0 = 4
so that the second inequality in (2.12) is satisfied. Put 2 = 2
, 1 = G
and ignore the last inequality (we will take 5 large enough as it does not appear
elsewhere), we will be left with
9
2 < 1 ,
2
G
G
1
+ 22 + 3
< 24 ,
4
2
G
4 < 2 .
2 < 3 ,
2
Note that 22 < 4 <
reduces to
2
G 2
(2.13)
G+
G 2 .
Therefore (2.13)
9
2 < 1 ,
2
G +
G
G
+ 3
<
2 ,
1
4
2
G
2 < 3 .
By assumption (H1) we may have
1
G
G +
G +
<
2 <
1 ,
4
2G
9G
G
G +
G +
<
2 <
3 .
2
2G
2G
These inequalities ensure the possibility of selecting (for instance) 2 and 3 in terms
of 1 . It is now possible to select 5 (satisfying the last relation in (2.12)) in terms
of 1 and then . Finally, 1 is chosen so small that the coefficients of the first and
the last terms in (2.11) are satisfied. We end up with an inequality of the form
F 0 (t) CF (t),
t t0 > 0.
This gives the exponential decay of F (t) on [t0 , ). The exponential decay of the
energy follows from the equivalence with F (t) and the statement of the theorem for
t 0 is clear. The proof is complete.
EJDE-2015/129
13
14
EJDE-2015/129