Alain Miranvilleand Charbel Wehbe
1 Laboratoire de Math´ematiques et Applications,UMR CNRS 7348,SP2MI,Boulevard Marie et Pierre Curie-T´el´eport 2,F-86962 Chasseneuil Futuroscope Cedex,France.
2 Xiamen University,School of Mathematical Sciences,Xiamen,Fujian,P.R.China.
Abstract.We consider a phase field model based on a generalization of the Maxwell Cattaneo heat conduction law,with a logarithmic nonlinearity,associated with Neumann boundary conditions.The originality here,compared with previous works,is that we obtain global in time and dissipative estimates,so that,in particular,we prove,in one and two space dimensions,the existence of a unique solution which is strictly separated from the singularities of the nonlinear term,as well as the existence of the finite-dimensional global attractor and of exponential attractors.In three space dimensions,we prove the existence of a solution.
Key words: Caginalp phase-field system,Maxwell-Cattaneo law,logarithmic potential,Neumann boundary conditions,well-posedness,global attractor,exponential attractor.
The Caginalp phase-field model
has been proposed to model phase transition phenomena,for example melting-solidification phenomena,in certain classes of materials.Caginalp considered the Ginzburg-Landau free energy and the classical Fourier law to derive his system,see,e.g.,[1,2].Here,u denotes the order parameter and θ the(relative)temperature.Furthermore,all physical constants have been set equal to one.For more details and references we refer the reader to[2-4]. This model has been extensively studied(see,e.g.,[5]and the references therein). Now,a drawback of the Fourier law is the so-called”paradox of heat conduction”,namely,it predicts that thermal signals propagate with infinite speed,which,in particular,violates causality(see,e.g.,[5]).One possible modification,in order to correct this unrealistic feature,is the Maxwell-Cattaneo law. We refer the reader to[3,5,6]for more discussions on the subject.
In this paper,we consider the following model
which is a generalization of the original Caginalp system(see[2]).In this context α is the thermal displacement variable,defined by
As mentioned above the Caginalp system can be obtained by considering the Ginzburg-Landau free energy
the enthalpy H=u+θ and by writing
where d >0 is a relaxation parameter,∂udenotes a variational derivative and q is the thermal flux vector.Setting d=1 and taking the usual Fourier law
we find(1.1)-(1.2).
The Maxwell-Cattaneo law reads
where η is a relaxation parameter;when η=0,one recovers the Fourier law.Taking for simplicity η=1,it follows from(1.8)that
hence the following second-order(in time)equation for the relative temperature
Integrating finally(1.11)between 0 and t,we obtain the equation
where f depends on the initial data(for u and θ),which reduces to(1.4)when f vanishes.Furthermore,noting that,(1.1)can be rewritten in the equivalent form(1.3).
We endow this model with Neumann boundary conditions and initial conditions.Then,we are led to the following initial and boundary value problem(P):
in a bounded and regular domain Ω⊂Rn(n is to be specified later),with boundary ∂Ω.
We assume here that g=G′,where
i.e.,
In particular,it follows from(1.18)that
Concerning the mathematical setting,we introduce the following Hilbert spaces
Our aim in this paper is to prove the existence of a solution in the case of the logarithmic nonlinearity(1.18).The main difficulty is to prove that the order parameter is separated from the singularities of g.In particular,we are only able to prove such a property in one and two space dimensions.In three space dimensions,we prove the existence of a solution.
Throughout the paper,the same letter c(and,sometimes,c′)denotes constants which may change from line to line.
The singularities of the potential g lead us to define the quantity
We set
We rewrite(1.13)in the form
We then rewrite(1.14)in the form
where
Integrating(2.3)over Ω,we obtain
In particular,we deduce from(2.4)that
hence
Furthermore,if〈H(0)〉=0,i.e.,〈u0+α1〉=0,we have conservation of the enthalpy,
Setting φ=φ-〈φ〉,we then have
We first sum(2.9)and δ1×(2.10)to have
where δ1>0 is small enough so that,in particular,
and then sum(2.2)and δ2×(2.11),where δ2>0 is small enough,to obtain
where
We now multiply(1.13)by-Δu,and have,owing to(1.19),
Summing(2.13)and δ3×(2.15),where δ3>0 is small enough,we finally obtain
where
satisfies
We differentiate(1.13)with respect to time to find,owing to(1.14),
Finally,we multiply(1.14)by-Δα and we integrate over Ω to have
which implies
We sum(2.21)and δ4×(2.22),where δ4>0 is small enough,to get
We then have
where
Now we sum(2.20)and δ5×(2.24),where δ5>0 is small enough,to get
where
Finally,we sum(2.16)and δ6×(2.26),where δ6>0 is small enough,to get
where
satisfies
Using(2.16),(2.20)and Gronwall’s lemma,we deduce
and
Note that
Using(2.31)and(2.33),we deduce from(2.32)the following inequality
We rewrite(1.13)in an elliptic form for t≥0 fixed,
We multiply(2.35)by-Δu.Using(1.19),H¨older and Young’s inequalities,we obtain
Using now(2.31),(2.34)and(2.37)we find
Applying Gronwall’s lemma to(2.28)and using(2.30)we have
By(2.34),(2.38)and(2.39)we get
Our aim now is to prove that u a priori satisfies
where δ>0 is to be specified later.
In one space dimension,we have,owing to the embeddingan estimate onin L∞(R+×Ω).It is then not difficult to prove the separation property(2.41)for solutions to the parabolic equation
with right-hand side h∈L∞(R+×Ω).
Indeed,by(2.40),h satisfies
We prove(see[16]and[20]):
Thus,due to the comparison principle,we deduce the following inequalities:
Estimates(2.43)-(2.46)imply that
Combining(2.40)and(2.47),we obtain
In particular
We now turn to thetwo-dimensional case.To this end,we derive further a priori estimates.
We then multiply(1.14)by Δ2α to get
Summing(2.50)and ϵ×(2.51),where ϵ>0 is small enough such that 1-2ϵ>0 and 1-ϵ>0,we have
where
and
Applying Gronwall’s lemma to(2.52),we have
Furthermore,by(2.40)we get
Now,we differentiate(1.13)with respect to time to have,owing to(1.14),
where
We apply Gronwall’s lemma to(2.58),to have
Hence we have to estimate the termds.To do so,we first prove the following lemma.
Lemma 2.1.∀M>0:
where c′only depends on M.
Proof.We can assume,without loss of generality,that
We fix M>0 and multiply(2.42)by g(u)eM|g(u)|to have:
In order to estimate the second term in the right-hand side of(2.63),we use the following Young’s inequality
where
Taking a=N|h|and b=N-1|g(u)|eM|g(u)|,where N>0 is to be fixed later,in(2.64),we obtain
Now,if|g(u)|≤1,then
Furthermore,if|g(u)|≥1,then|g(u)|eM|g(u)|≥1 and
where c only depends on M.We thus deduce from(2.63)and(2.66)the following inequality
where c′only depends on M.
To conclude,we use the following Orlicz’s embedding inequality
where c only depends on Ω and N.It then follows from(2.43),(2.67)and(2.68)that
Noting finally that
where c only depends on M,(2.69)yields the desired inequality(2.60).
It is not difficult to show,by comparing growths,that the logarithmic function g satisfies
Therefore,
whence,owing to(2.60),
Thus φ in(2.57)satisfies,owing to(2.60)(for p=4)and the above a priori estimates(which imply thatΩ)),
hence,
Furthemore,we have
Using(2.75)and(2.76)in(2.59)and by(2.48),we deduce
By(2.48),(2.53),(2.55)and(2.77),we deduce from(2.54)
Rewriting again(1.13)in the form
we have,owing to the above estimates,
and the separation property follows as in the one-dimensional case.
We have the
Theorem 3.1.(i)In one space dimension,we assume that
Then,(1.13)-(1.16)possesses a unique solution(u,α,)such that
(ii)In two space dimension,we assume that
Then,(1.13)-(1.16)possesses a unique solution(u,α,)such that
(iii)In three space dimension,we consider the set K={φ ∈L2(Ω),-1 ≤φ ≤1, a.e.in Ω}and we assume that(u0,α0,α1)∈FK=(K∩H1(Ω))×H1(Ω)×L2(Ω).Then,(1.13)-(1.16)possesses a unique solution(u,α,)such that
Moreover for all t>0,‖u(t)‖L∞(Ω)≤1 and the set{x∈Ω/|u(x,t)|=1}has measure zero.Proof.In one and two space dimensions,the proof of existence is standard,once we have the separation property(2.41),since the problem then reduces to one with a regular nonlinearity.Indeed,we consider the same problem,in which the logarithmic function g is replaced by the C1function
where δ is the same constant as in(2.41).
This function meets all the requirements of[25]to have the existence of a regular solutionFurthermore,It is not difficult to see that g and gδsatisfy(1.19),(1.20)and(2.71),for the same constants.We can thus derive the same estimates as above,with the very same constants.
Since g and gδcoincide on[-δ,δ],we finally deduce that uδis solution to the original problem.
In three space dimension,following an idea of Debussche and Dettori[7]we consider the approximation of the function g by a polynomial of odd degree gN,and the boundary value problem(PN)that one obtains by replacing g by gNin problem(P)
The existence and uniqueness of a solutionto problem(3.5)-(3.8)have been proved in[25].We then construct the solution of problem(1.13)-(1.16)as the limit ofas N →+∞.Indeed,we first derive uniform estimates with respect to N for problem(3.5)-(3.8).Replacing(u,α)in(2.16)by(uN,αN),we write
where
satisfies
Using Gronwall’s Lemma we have
where c is independent of N.Hence there exists a subsequence ofthat we denote again bywhich satisfies as N →+∞
Moreover,integrating(3.9)over(0,t),we obtain
where c is independent of N.We then deduce
Replacing H by HNin(2.5),we write
which can be written as
Integrating(3.20)over(0,t)we obtain
We then deduce
Using the equivalent norm in H1(Ω)we get
where c is independent of N.We deduce that
We now multiply(3.5)by gN(uN)and integrate over Ω using≥-c to have
Integrating(3.25)over(0,t),we deduce
where c is independent of N and Q=Ω×(0,T).
By(3.26)and for a subsequence we obtain
Letting N →+∞in the equation(3.5),we deduce from(3.15),(3.17),(3.18)and(3.27)thatsatisfies
where〈.,.〉denote the duality product between D′((0,T)×Ω)and D((0,T)×Ω).
Then letting N-→+∞,using(3.13),(3.15),(3.17)and(3.24)we deduce
Moreover using[12],(3.13),(3.17)on the one hand and(3.15),(3.24)on the other hand implies that as N-→+∞
so that in particular u(x,0)=u0and α(x,0)=α0in Ω.
Furthermore we deduce from(3.15)thatOn the other hand we haveso that
Using Strauss Theorem,we getand there exist a subsequencesuch that in particular asµ→+∞we have
Note also that using Lions’Theorem and(3.13)-(3.15),(3.17)and(3.24),we get
We now prove that g⋆=g(u)and the set{x ∈Ω,|u(x,t)|=1}has measure zero.To do so we adapt a method introduced by Debussche and Dettori[7].For an arbitrary small η ∈(0,1)and for all t∈(0,T),we set
Integrating(3.9)over(t,t+r),we obtain
To continue the proof of the theorem we state the following two lemmas.
Lemma 3.1.There exists a constant c such that for all r>0
Proof.Replacing(u,α)in(2.20)by(uN,αN),we write
Applying the uniform Gronwall’s Lemma to(3.38),using(3.11)and(3.36)we deduce that∀s>0,
which completes the proof of(3.37).
Lemma 3.2.There exists a constant c such that for all r>0
Proof.Applying Gronwall’s lemma to(3.9),using(3.11)we deduce that
By(3.37)and(3.41),we get from(3.25)the inequality(3.40).
Using Lemma 3.2 we deduce that
and thus
which implies that
Thus letting N →+∞we deduce from(3.30),(3.43)and Fatou’s Lemma that
where|Eη(t)|and χη(t)respectively stand for the measure of the set{x ∈Ω,|u(x,t)|>1-η}and for its characteristic function.Letting then η→0,it follows that for all t∈(0,T)
It follows respectively from(3.30)and(3.44)that for all t∈(0,T)and almost every x∈Ω
Then using Lions([8],lemma 1.3,p.12)it follows from(3.26)and(3.45)that
so that g∗=g(u).
We then have
which is equivalent to
In one space dimension,by(2.41)we have for all t≥0,
We set δ0=min(δ1,δ2)and then deduce
hence
Remark 3.1.In two space dimension,we have
where
This yields,owing to Gronwall’s lemma,
Integrating then(3.52)over Ω,we have,as above,
Noting that it follows from(3.58)that
where c depends on T and δ0,which yields,in particular,
we finally deduce from(3.60)-(3.62)that
where c depends on T and δ0,hence the uniqueness,as well as the continuous dependence with respect to the initial data.
Thanks to Theorem 3.1(i),we can define the dissipative semigroupassociated with problem(1.13)-(1.16)on the phase space
Indeed,by(3.2)we have
Concerning the two-dimensional case,we have that
is a bounded absorbing set for S(t)in Ψ0.Indeed,we have
We have the
Theorem 4.1.(i)If n=1,we take the initial conditions inThen the semigroup(t),t≥0,defined fromto itself possesses the connected global attractorin
(ii)If n=2,the initial conditions belong to.Then(t)defined fromto itself possesses the connected global attractor
Proof.We use a semigroup decomposition argument(see,e.g.,[6])consisting in splitting the semigroupt≥0,into the sum of two families of operators:where operatorsgo to zero as t tends to infinity while operatorsare compact.
This corresponds to the following solution decomposition
where f(s)=g(s)-s(f and g satisfy the same properties)and with initial data belonging toMultiplying(4.1)by(4.2)byand summing the resulting equations,we have
we get
where ϵ3>0 is small enough,and we have in particular
Summing(4.9)and ϵ4×(4.11)where ϵ4>0 is small enough,we have
where
Applying Gronwall’s lemma to(4.13),we write
Considering equation(4.10)and repeating exactly the estimates that gave(2.13),we get
where
and ϵ5>0 and ϵ6>0 are small enough so that we have in particular
Applying Gronwall’s lemma to(4.17),we have
Combining(4.15)and(4.20),we obtain
Now,we consider system(4.5)-(4.8).
We multiply(4.5)by-Δuc.Integrating over Ω we have
Summing the resulting equations,we get
Summing(4.25),(4.26)and ϵ7×(4.27)where ϵ7>0 is small enough,we have
where
By(3.2),we deduce that
By(4.30),we deduce from(4.28)the following estimate
Applying Gronwall’s lemma to(4.31)(noting that ψ1(0)=0)and by using(4.29)we obtain
Summing now(4.23),(4.33)and ϵ8×(4.24),where ϵ8>0 is small enough,we deduce that
where
Applying Gronwall’s lemma to(4.34),using(3.2)and(4.35)we have
Combining(4.32)and(4.36),we get
Hence,the operator S2(t)is asymptotically compact in the sense of the Kuratowski measure of noncompactness(see[18]),which concludes the existence part of Theorem 4.1(i).
In order to prove part(ii)of Theorem 4.1,we now take the initial data inthen multiply(4.1)byand(4.2)bySumming the two resulting equations,we end up with
We multiply(4.10)by Δ2αd.Integrating over Ω,and using∀φ ∈H3(Ω),c>0,we have
Summing(4.39)and ϵ9×(4.40)where ϵ9>0 is small enough,we deduce that
and we have,in particular,
Summing then(4.38)and ϵ10×(4.41),where ϵ10>0 is small enough,we obtain
where
Applying Gronwall’s lemma to(4.43),using(4.42)and(4.44)we get
By(4.21)and the continuous injection F2⊂F1,we have
We then deduce from(4.45)and(4.46)the following estimate
Concerning system(4.5)-(4.8),we multiply(4.5)by Δ2uc.Integrating over Ω,we get
Summing(4.26),(4.27)and(4.48)we obtain
Summing(4.49),(4.50)and ϵ11×(4.51)where ϵ11>0 is small enough,we obtain
where
Furthermore,we have
Inserting(4.54)and(4.55)in(4.52)and applying Gronwall’s lemma to the resulting estimate,we deduce by(4.53)that
Combining(4.37)and(4.56)we have
which completes the proof of the theorem.
We define for what follows the following invariant sets:in one space dimension,=whereis the bounded absorbing set forinand in two space dimensions,whereis the bounded absorbing set forinIn what follows,we will work in these two subspacesandwhich are positively invariant for
Now that the existence of the global attractor is proven,one natural question is to know whether this attractor has finite dimension in terms of the fractal or Hausdorff dimension.This is the aim of the final section.
The aim of this section is to prove the existence of exponential attractors for the semigroup S(t),t ≥0,associated to problem(1.13)-(1.16)in one and two space dimensions using the separation property(2.41).To do so,we need the semigroup to be Lipschitz continuous and satisfy the smoothing property,but also to verify a H¨older condition in time(see[18],[19],[28-30]).This is enough to conclude on the existence of exponential attractors,but before going further,let us recall the definition of an exponential attractor which is also called inertial set.
Definition 5.1.A compact set M is called an exponential attractor for({S(t)}t≥0,X),if
(i)A⊂M⊂X,where A is the global attractor,
(ii)M is positively invariant for S(t),i.e.S(t)M⊂M for every t≥0,
(iii)M has finite fractal dimension,
(iv)M attracts exponentially the bounded subsets of X in the following sense:∀B⊂X bounded, dist(S(t)B,M)≤Q(‖B‖X)exp(-αt), t≥0,
where the positive constant α and the monotonic function Q are independent of B,and dist stands for the Hausdorff semi-distance between sets in X,defined by
We start by stating an abstract result that will be useful in what follows(see[18]).
Theorem 5.1.Let Ψ and Ψ1be two Banach spaces such that Ψ1is compactly embedded into Ψ and S(t):Y-→Y be a semigroup acting on a closed subset Y of Ψ.We assume that
(i)
where
d is continuous,t≥0,d(t)→0 as t→+∞,and
Then S(t)possesses an exponential attractor M on Y.
In order to get the existence of exponential attractors in our case,we will use Theorem 5.1.We have the following result
Theorem 5.2.(i)In one space dimension,the semigroupcorresponding to equations(1.13)-(1.16)defined fromto itself satisfies a decomposition as in Theorem 5.1.
and
respectively.We start with the proof of(i).In that case the initial conditions belong toRepeating for(5.6)-(5.9)the estimates which led to(4.13)and(4.17),we then write(noting that
where
where
Here ϵ>0 and δ>0 are small enough so that we have in particular
An application of Gronwall’s lemma to(5.14)and(5.16)respectively yields
Combining(5.20)and(5.21),we get
Noting that
due to the continuous embedding H2(Ω)⊂L∞(Ω),and by(3.2),we have
Thus,
Choosing ϵ>0 small enough and using(5.24)and(5.26),we deduce from(5.23)the following inequality
Integrating(5.27)over(0,t),by(5.13)we have
H¨older’s inequality,(3.2)and(5.5)yield
Analogously,we have
Choosing ϵ>0 small enough and recalling(5.30)and(5.31),we obtain
where
Integrating(3.61)over(0,t),we get
Integrating then(5.32)over(0,t)and using(5.34)we deduce that
hence(5.28)yields
H¨older’s inequality and(5.5)yield
where
In particular
Applying Gronwall’s lemma to(5.40)and using(5.39)we deduce that
Finally,multiplying(5.10)by υ+and(5.11)byand proceeding exactly as above we deduce that
Combining(5.36),(5.41)and(5.42),we obtain
where h(t)=c′ect,with c and c′depending onWe can see that h is continuous.
We now turn to the two-dimensional case,and prove part(ii)of Theorem 5.2.To do so we take here the initial data inRepeating for(5.6)-(5.9)the estimates which led to(4.43),we then write
where
and ϵ>0 is small enough so that
In particular
An application of Gronwall’s lemma yields
Furthermore,by(5.22)and the continuous embedding F2⊂F1,we get
By(5.48)and(5.49)we have
Concerning problem(5.10)-(5.13),we multiply(5.10)byand(5.11)bySumming the resulting equations,we then obtain
Analogously to(5.26),we write
By(3.4)and the continuous embedding,we have
so that
Choosing ϵ >0 small enough and recalling(5.52)and(5.54),we deduce from(5.51)the estimate
Integrating(5.55)over(0,t)and by(5.13)we get
By(5.35),we have
As above we have
Choosing ϵ>0 small enough and by recalling(5.59)and(5.60),we deduce from(5.58)the estimate
Integrating(5.61)over(0,t)and by(5.57)we have
Combining(5.57)and(5.62),we get
Inserting(5.63)in(5.56)we obtain
Noting that〈ξ〉=0,from(5.64)we deduce that
Combining(5.43)and(5.65),we obtain
which completes the proof.
Lemma 5.1.The semigroup S(t),t≥0 generated by the problem(1.13)-(1.16)is H¨older continuous on[0,T]×i=1,2(i depending on the space dimension).
Proof.We consider the one-dimensional case(the two-dimensional case can be treated similarly).The Lipschitz continuity in space is a consequence of(3.63).It just remains to prove the continuity in time(actually,a H¨older condition in time for the semigroup(t),t≥0).We assume that the initial data belong to.For every t1≥0 and t2≥0,owing to the above estimates,one gets:
where c depends on T.We multiply(1.14)byto obtain
Integrating(5.67)between t1and t2,we deduce from the above estimates that
We deduce from Theorem 5.2 and Lemma 5.1 the following result.
Theorem 5.3.The dynamical system(respectivelyassociated to(1.13)-(1.16)possesses,in one space dimension,an exponential attractorin(respectively,in two space dimensions,an exponential attractorin