The Periodic Unfolding Method Theory and Applications To Partial Differential Problems by Doina Cioranescu, Alain Damlamian, Georges Griso (Z

Series in Contemporary Mathematics 3
Doina Cioranescu
Alain Damlamian
Georges Griso
The Periodic
Unfolding
Method
Theory and Applications to Partial
Differential Problems
Series in Contemporary Mathematics
Volume 3
Editor-in-Chief
Tatsien Li
Editors
Philippe G. Ciarlet Jean-Michel Coron Weinan E
Jianshu Li Jun Li Tatsien Li Fanghua Lin
Zhi-ming Ma Andrew J. Majda Cédric Villani
Ya-xiang Yuan Weiping Zhang
Series in Contemporary Mathematics (SCM), featuring high-quality mathematical
monographs, is to presents original and systematic findings from the fields of pure
mathematics, applied mathematics and math-related interdisciplinary subjects. It
has a history of over fifty years since the first title was published by Shanghai
Scientific & Technical Publishers in 1963. Professor HUA Luogeng (Lo-Keng Hua)
served as Editor-in-Chief of the first editorial board, while Professor SU Buqing
acted as Honorary Editor-in-Chief and Professor GU Chaohao as Editor-in-Chief
of the second editorial board since 1992. Now the third editorial board is
established and Professor LI Tatsien assumes the position of Editor-in-Chief. The
series has already published twenty-six monographs in Chinese, and among the
authors are many distinguished Chinese mathematicians, including the following
members of the Chinese Academy of Sciences: SU Buqing, GU Chaohao, LU
Qikeng, ZHANG Gongqing, CHEN Hanfu, CHEN Xiru, YUAN Yaxiang, CHEN
Shuxing etc. The monographs have systematically introduced a number of
important research findings which not only play a vital role in China, but also
exert huge influence all over the world. Eight of them have been translated into
English and published abroad. The new editorial board will inherit and carry
forward the former traditions and strengths of the series, and plan to further reform
and innovation in terms of internalization so as to improve and ensure the quality
of the series, extend its global influence, and strive to forge it into an internationally
significant series of mathematical monographs.
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/13634

Doina Cioranescu Alain Damlamian
•
Georges Griso
The Periodic Unfolding

Method
Theory and Applications to Partial Differential
Problems
123
Doina Cioranescu Georges Griso
Laboratoire Jacques-Louis Lions Laboratoire Jacques-Louis Lions
University Pierre et Marie Curie University Pierre et Marie Curie
Paris, France Paris, France
Alain Damlamian
Laboratoire d’Analyse et Mathématiques
Appliquées
Université Paris-Est Créteil Val de Marne
Creteil, Cedex, France
ISSN 2364-009X ISSN 2364-0103 (electronic)

Series in Contemporary Mathematics
ISBN 978-981-13-3031-5 ISBN 978-981-13-3032-2 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3032-2
Library of Congress Control Number: 2018962117
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar
methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from
the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or
for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,
Singapore
To Ion, Jean-Michel and Joseph;
to my teachers and to my students
To Jeanne and our daughters
To Anne-Marie, our children and grandchildren

Preface
In the late 1960’s and early 1970’s, the theory of homogenization became
in its own right a new part of the branch of mathematics concerning par-
tial differential equations and their numerical approximations. It had its
origin in several works from physics and mechanics, where equivalent (spa-
tially) homogeneous macroscopic structures were obtained for microscopic
heterogeneous media (see for example Bruggeman [40](1935), Hashin and
Shtrikman [133](1963)). The interest of applied mathematicians and numer-
ical analysts started in earnest in the late 1960’s. Seminal works appear in
De Giorgi and Spagnolo [96](1973), Babuska [19](1975), Bensoussan, Lions
and Papanicolaou [21](1978), Sanchez-Palencia [179](1980), among others.
Various mathematical methods were introduced to understand the limit

of PDE’s with highly oscillating but bounded coefficients, from the formal
asymptotic expansions ([21, 179]) to G-and Gamma-convergences ([96]) and
the method of oscillating test functions (Murat and Tartar [164]), thus gen-
erating a great range of results in different settings and a wide bibliogra-
phy (e.g., the books of Sanchez-Palencia [179](1980), Attouch [17](1984),
Bakhvalov and Panasenko [20](1989), Dal Maso [82](1993), Jikov, Kozlov
and Oleinik [137](1994), Braides and Defranceschi [34](1998), Cioranescu and
Donato [70](1999), Carbone and De Arcangelis [45](2001)). In particular,
various kinds of problems concerning both scalar-valued and vector-valued
configurations were considered also for convex and non convex energies.
In 1987, the notion of “two-scale convergence” was originally introduced

as an abstract theoretical tool by Nguetseng [167](published in 1989). It was
developed and applied to periodic homogenization first by Allaire [4](1989),
then by many others (see Lukkassen, Nguetseng and Wall [154](2002) and
references therein). It was generalized to some multi-scale periodic problems
by Ene and Saint Jean Paulin [106](1995), Allaire and Briane [6](1996), Lions,
Lukkassen, Persson and Wall [150](2001) (see also [35, 153, 154]).
The method of rescaling had long been used successfully to understand

the passage from a thin three dimensional problem to a two or one dimen-
sional problem (e.g. dimensional reductions for the study of plate or beams;
see Ciarlet-Destuynder [58](1979), Caillerie [43](1980)). In some way, this
method is similar to the well-known “blow-up” method for the resolution of
vii
Preface
singularities in differential geometry as well as in algebraic geometry. Many

thought that a similar method could be applied for periodic homogenization.
But it required some more time.
Already in [14](1990) Arbogast, Douglas and Hornung used a “dilation”
operator (similar to the unfolding operator) to study homogenization for a
periodic medium with double porosity in a domain which is always a union
of small cells (but they did not envisage a general method for homoge-
nization from that point, nor did any other reader of their paper). Simi-
lar dilations were used again, independently and under different names in
many papers: see Bourgeat, Luckhaus and Mikelic [33](1996) (where it is
called “periodic modulation”), Lenczner et al [144–147](1997-2004) (specifi-
cally for discrete electrical networks), Allaire and C. Conca [7](1998), Allaire,
Conca and Vanninathan [8](1999) (for Bloch decomposition), Casado-Dı́az et
al [47–50](2000-2003) (for reticulated structures). Here again, the authors did
not realize there was an underlying general method.
Independently in the mid 1990’s, Griso, in [116], used some dilation for
the study of truss-like structures (with two small parameters) but he also
introduced the difference of the solution with its natural Q1 -interpolate as a
tool to study the limit problem (without using two-scale convergence). This
led to the periodic unfolding method as a general tool to study periodic
homogenization, presented first in [60], then developed in [59, 62, 63]). It
can be seen as the proper extension of the blow-up method in the case of
periodicity.(1)
This book is dedicated to a detailed presentation of the periodic unfolding
method. It combines the dilation technique with ideas from finite element
approximations. It replaces the two-scale convergence simply by the weak
convergence of the unfolded sequence in an appropriate fixed space (for the
periodic homogenization of quadratic energies, the appropriate spaces are
Hilbert spaces), and by introducing the adjoint of the unfolding operator, it
allows for very simple and general but precise corrector results.
It is a method, and as such, its application procedure depends signifi-
cantly upon the problem at hand.
But its philosophy is straightforward:
• apply an appropriate unfolding operator, obtain uniform estimates for the
unfolded functions and pass to the weak limit at least for a subsequence in a
fixed space;
• establish an unfolded limit problem;
• extract an homogenized problem from the unfolded limit problem;(2)
(1) The French name for the method, “éclatement périodique”, follows the “blow-up”
terminology. But, due to the close proximity with the events of 9/11/2001, the name
“periodic unfolding method”, coined by Christopher Schwab, was adopted for the English
version.
(2) If the microstructure carries too much information this last step is not always possible
(for an example of such a situation see Section 8.2).
viii
Preface
• obtain a direct corrector result (possibly making use of the adjoint of

the unfolding operator).
In this book, we present the method in various settings and give several
corresponding examples where it applies. This shows the efficiency and the
resilience of the method. In most cases, the domains are not unions of ε-
periodicity cells and this fact generates some serious complications which
are localized in a vanishing layer near their boundary. These difficulties are
completely handled in the method.
Part I presents unfolding in fixed domains with one or several small peri-
odic scales. A detailed study of the error estimates is also given.
Part II presents unfolding in perforated domains with one or several small
periodic scales. Here it has the definite advantage of setting the unfolded
problems in a fixed domain.
The brief Part III is concerned with partial unfolding and rapidly oscillat-
ing boundaries. Here also the problem, when simple, is transferred to a fixed
domain. A more general framework of varying domain is also introduced in
this setting.
Part IV deals with unfolding in the case of small holes in the bulk or
along hyperplanes. In these situations, it is known that “strange” terms can
appear. Again, in some sense, the problem is transferred to a fixed domain.
Part V is dedicated to an example in linear elasticity where both unfolding
and dimension reduction are combined.
Finally, Part VI gives a detailed presentation of sharp error estimates and
correctors for the model problem.
Each part presents several detailed examples in a very accessible form.
The prerequisites for this book are basic undergraduate functional ana-
lysis, measure theory and integration, Sobolev spaces, and elliptic partial
differential equations. Some notions of the theory of homogenization can be
useful but not absolutely necessary (for this, we refer to any of the following
books: [21, 34, 70, 78, 156, 158, 160, 168, 175, 186]).
This volume can be used as a textbook for a graduate course introducing
homogenization theory. The more technical sections are indicated with a
star (˚) and can be omitted in a first reading.
Since it was first presented in [60], the method has been used in many research
papers (too many to list here).(3)
It is the hope of the authors that this book will inspire many more ex-
tended and successful applications of the method.
Doina Cioranescu, Alain Damlamian, Georges Griso (July 2018)

(3) It is perhaps a measure of the success of the unfolding method that several (unaware)
authors use it for the very definition of “two-scale convergence” ... !(see Proposition 1.19).
ix
Contents
Preface vii
Contents xi
I Unfolding in Fixed Domains 1

1 Unfolding operators in fixed domains 5
1.1 The unfolding operator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.2 The local average operator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1.3 The averaging operator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
1.4 Unfolding and gradients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
1.4.1 First case: }wε }Lp pΩq ` ε}∇wε }Lp pΩq bounded . . . . . 26
1.4.2 Second case: twε uε bounded in W 1,p pΩq . . . . . . . . 27
1.4.3 ˚ Complements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
1.4.4 Case of twε uε bounded in W k,p pΩq . . . . . . . . . . 36
1.5 Unfolding with parameters and iterated unfolding . . . . . . . 38
1.6 Macro-micro decomposition and the scale-splitting operators 40
1.6.1 The case of the whole space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
1.6.2 The case of a subdomain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
2 Advanced topics for unfolding 61

2.1 Effect of a change of the periodicity cell . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
2.1.1 General proof of periodicity for unfoldings limits . . . 63
2.2 Unfolding with partial information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
2.2.1 Unfolding with information on the divergence . . . . . 66
2.2.2 Unfolding with information on the curl . . . . . . . . . 68
2.2.3 Unfolding with information on the symmetric gradient 72
2.2.4 ˚ Unfolding with information on one derivative . . . . 74
2.3 Unfolding in L1 and for measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
2.3.1 About the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality . . . . . . . . 81
2.3.2 Unfolding in L1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
2.3.3 ˚ Unfolding for measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
xi
Contents
3 Homogenization in fixed domains 99

3.1 Homogenization of linear diffusion problems . . . . . . . . . . . 100
3.1.1 Homogenization of the Dirichlet problem . . . . . . . 101
3.1.2 Homogenization of a Neumann problem . . . . . . . . 110
3.1.3 The case of frame-periodic coefficients . . . . . . . . . 112
3.1.4 Homogenization of multiscale diffusion . . . . . . . . 115
3.1.5 The case of weakly convergent right-hand side . . . . . 117
3.1.6 A general corrector result . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
3.2 Homogenization for non linear diffusion . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
3.2.1 Maximal monotone operators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
3.2.2 Convergence of maximal monotone graphs . . . . . . . 130
3.2.3 Measurable families of maximal monotone graphs . . . 132
3.2.4 Convergence results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
3.2.5 A general existence result . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
3.2.6 Homogenization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
3.3 Unfolding of integral functionals acting on gradients . . . . . 141
II Unfolding in Perforated Domains 151

4 Unfolding operators in perforated domains 155
4.1 Definitions and notations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
4.2 The operators for unfolding in periodically perforated domains 160
4.2.1 The unfolding operator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
4.2.2 The local average operator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
4.2.3 The averaging operator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
4.2.4 Extension by local average . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
4.3 Unfolding and gradients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
4.3.1 First case: }wε }Lp pΩ˚ε q ` ε}∇wε }Lp pΩ˚ε q bounded . . . 170
4.3.2 Second case: }wε }W 1,p pΩ˚ε q or }∇wε }Lp pΩ˚ε q bounded . 173
4.4 The boundary unfolding operator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
4.4.1 The boundary averaging operator . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
4.4.2 Convergence for the boundary unfolding . . . . . . . . 185
4.4.3 Unfolding of the space of traces . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
4.5 Unfolding for cracks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
4.6 What if the periodicity cell is not a parallelotope . . . . . . . 195
5 Homogenization in perforated domains 199

5.1 The Dirichlet-Neumann problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
5.1.1 Homogenization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
5.1.2 Convergence of the energy and correctors . . . . . . . 206
5.2 The Neumann problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
5.2.1 Homogenization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
5.2.2 Convergence of the energy and correctors . . . . . . . 213
5.3 The case of frame-periodic distribution of holes . . . . . . . . 214
xii
Contents
5.4 A Fredholm alternative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216

5.4.1 A uniform cone property for approximating domains . 217
5.4.2 A uniform Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality for perforated
domains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
5.4.3 A Neumann problem with Fredholm alternative . . . . 222
5.4.4 Homogenization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
5.5 How to treat perforated solid structures . . . . . . . . . . . . 226
5.6 Cracks: from a linear operator to a Leray-Lions operator. . . 231
6 A Stokes problem in a partially porous medium 237

6.1 Setting of the problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238
6.2 A priori estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242
6.3 Homogenization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
6.4 Standard homogenized problem and correctors . . . . . . . . 249
III Partial Unfolding 255

7 Partial unfolding: a brief primer 259
7.1 Unfolding with parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259
7.2 Unfolding with artificial periods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260
7.2.1 A diffusion problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260
8 Oscillating boundaries 263

8.1 Mosco convergences for varying domains . . . . . . . . . . . . 263
8.1.1 Mosco convergence for the sequence tLp pOε quε . . . . . 265
8.1.2 Mosco convergence for the sequence tW 1,p pOε quε . . . 265
8.1.3 Mosco convergence for the sequence tW01,p pOε quε . . . 266
8.2 An example of oscillating boundaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267
8.2.1 Setting of the problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 267
8.2.2 The partial unfolding operator . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
8.2.3 Homogenization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271
IV Unfolding for small obstacles and strange terms 281

9 Unfolding operators: the case of “small holes” 285
9.1 Sobolev - Poincaré - Wirtinger inequality . . . . . . . . . . . . 285
9.2 Unfolding for volume-distributed holes . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288
9.3 Boundary-layer unfolding operator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291
10 Homogenization in domains with “small holes” 297

10.1 Volume distributed small holes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298
10.1.1 Homogenization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299
10.1.2 Standard form of the limit problem . . . . . . . . . . . 306
10.1.3 Convergence of the energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308
xiii
Contents
10.2 Electrostatic screens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311

10.2.1 Homogenization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312
10.3 The thin Neumann sieve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318
10.3.1 Homogenization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 320
10.4 The thick Neumann sieve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327
10.4.1 Homogenization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329
10.5 Inequalities with obstacles: fakir’s carpet . . . . . . . . . . . 332
10.5.1 Homogenization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333
10.6 Singular inhomogeneities near boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . 341
10.6.1 Setting the problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341
10.6.2 A priori estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344
10.6.3 The boundary-layer unfolding operator . . . . . . . . 345
10.6.4 The functional setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347
10.6.5 Homogenization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347
10.6.7 Complement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352
V Linear Elasticity 355

11 Homogenization of an elastic thin plate 359
11.1 Geometry and preliminary results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 360
11.1.1 The plate and notations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 360
11.1.2 A decomposition for the plate displacements . . . . . 361
11.1.3 Rescaling of the plate and Korn type inequalities . . . 363
11.2 The linear elasticity problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 365
11.2.1 Hypotheses on the Hook tensor field . . . . . . . . . . 365
11.2.2 Assumptions on the forces and a priori estimate . . . 366
11.3 Unfolding the rescaled plate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 367
11.4 An unfolding result with two parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . 368
11.5 Asymptotic behavior of the strain tensor . . . . . . . . . . . 372
11.5.1 Limit of the rescaled strain tensor . . . . . . . . . . . 372
11.5.2 Limit of the unfolded scaled strain tensor . . . . . . . 375
11.6 The unfolded limit problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 386
11.7 Homogenization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388
11.7.1 The limit problems in the mid surface . . . . . . . . . 389
11.8 Complements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391
11.8.1 Dimension reduction followed by homogenization . . . 391
xiv
Contents
11.8.2 Homogenization followed by dimension reduction . . . 393

11.8.3 Continuous dependence with respect to θ . . . . . . . 395
VI An application: sharp error estimates 399

12 The scale-splitting operators revisited 403
12.1 Notations and preliminary results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403
12.2 Shifted estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406
13 * Strongly oscillating nonhomogeneous Dirichlet condition 421

13.1 The one dimensional case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 422
13.2 Notations and preliminary results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 423
13.3 The problem and first estimate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425
13.4 Dirichlet problem with data in H ´1{2 pBΩq . . . . . . . . . . . 426
13.5 Uniform estimates for solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 433
13.6 Homogenization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 437
13.7 The case of flat parts of the boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . 444
13.7.1 The general case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 444
13.7.2 A particular case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445
13.8 A variant of problem (13.8) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454
13.9 Complements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455
13.9.1 Projection operators on spaces of periodic functions . 455
13.9.2 Projection theorems for unfolded functions on the space
of periodic functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 464
14 Some sharp error estimates 471

14.1 Error estimates for the Dirichlet problem . . . . . . . . . . . 472
14.1.1 An example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 482
14.2 Error estimates for the Neumann problem . . . . . . . . . . . 483
List of Figures 493

Bibliography 495
Notations and Symbols 511
Index 513
xv
Part I
Unfolding in Fixed
Domains
Part I Unfolding in Fixed Domains
The first part of this book presents the basics of the periodic unfolding
method and a sample of its possible applications in fixed domains. In [60],
a general and elementary approach was presented for classical or multi-scale
periodic homogenization (for the classical case, the single small scale is given
by ε, a small parameter which will tend to 0). Originally restricted to the
case of domains consisting of a union of ε-cells defined from a given “periodic
cell” Y (a parallelotope), it was extended to general domains (see [86] and
[62]).
The periodic unfolding method starts with the cell Y which is defined
from the set of macroscopic periods attached to the considered problem.
In Chapter 1, the three operators intimately connected to the εY -tiling
of the domain, are defined. The first is the unfolding operator Tε , similar
to the dilation operator. The second is the local average operator Mε . The
third is the adjoint of Tε is introduced as the averaging operator Uε . A
variant is the operator Qε , which is the Q1 -approximation operator from
the theory of Finite Elements. The properties of each of these operators are
presented, most importantly when applied to sequences in the spaces of type
Lp and W 1,p .
Extending the results of Chapter 1, Chapter 2 considers various gener-
alizations concerning possible choices for the basic period, unfolding in the
case of partial information on derivatives (such as divergence, curl or even a
single derivative), as well as unfolding for L1 functions and measures. Some
of its technical sections (indicated with a ˚) can be omitted in a first reading.
Chapter 3 is devoted to examples of the use of the unfolding method
for some partial differential equations with highly oscillating coefficients. It
presents the case of linear second order elliptic diffusion equations with var-
ious conditions on the boundary. A first result for correctors is given using
the unfolding operators. An example of multiscale linear diffusion is also
presented. The chapter ends with two examples of the homogenization of
non-linear problems. (4)
(4) The last chapter of this book (Chapter 14) covers a detailed and quite technical proof
for precise optimal error estimates in the homogenization of the standard second order
Dirichlet problem.
3
Chapter 1
Unfolding operators in
fixed domains
The periodic unfolding method starts with the cell Y which is defined from
the set of macroscopic periods attached to the considered problem. Next,
three operators intimately connected to the εY -tiling of the domain, are
defined for measurable functions and functions in a Lebesgue space.
The first is the unfolding operator Tε , similar to the dilation operator
(see Section 1.1). By definition, the operator Tε associates to any function w
in Lp pΩq, a function Tε pwq in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q via Definition 1.2. An immediate
property of Tε is that it enables to transform any integral over Ω in an integral
over Ω ˆ Y . Indeed, by Proposition 1.8 below
ż ż
1
wpxq dx „ Tε pwqpx, yq dx dy, @w P L1 pΩq,
Ω |Y | ΩˆY
equality holding when Ω is the exact union of ε-cells. The unfolded function
Tε pwq is constant with respect to the variable x on each of the ε-cells. There-
fore, a useful intermediary to connect w with its unfolding is the local average
Mε pwq of w which is the piece-wise constant function of x alone taking on
each ε-cell the average value of w on that cell. The operator Mε is introduced
in Section 1.2. In Section 1.3 the adjoint of Tε is defined as the averaging op-
erator Uε . Most importantly, the averaging operator is almost a left inverse
of Tε and will play an essential role to obtain corrector results in applica-
tions. At this point, Proposition 1.19 shows that the notion of “two-scale
convergence” of a sequence is exactly equivalent to the weak convergence of
the corresponding unfolded sequence in the appropriate Lebesgue space (the
latter is not only simpler to check, but also gives more precise information
on the limit).
The second ingredient of the periodic unfolding method concerns functions
which are in a Sobolev space. It consists in separating the characteristic scales
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018 5

D. Cioranescu et al., The Periodic Unfolding Method, Series in
Contemporary Mathematics 3, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3032-2_1
1.1. The unfolding operator
by decomposing every function w belonging to W 1,p pΩq in two parts, one cor-
responding to an average behavior of w and the other collecting the oscilla-
tions of scale ε of w. In Section 1.4 this scale splitting is achieved by using the
local average Mε pwq and the local deviation w ´ Mε pwq. In Section 1.6, the
original proof of this scale-splitting, inspired by the Finite Element Method,
is presented. The confrontation of the two methods of Section 1.4 and 1.6 is
interesting in itself (Theorem 1.41 and Proposition 1.78).
As an interesting variation, in Section 1.5, a theory of unfolding with
parameters and iterated unfolding (unfolding for multiscales) is briefly pre-
sented.
1.1 The unfolding operator

In RN , let Ω be an open set and G an additive subgroup generated by a
.
basis B “ pb1 , . . . , bN q of RN (the group of reference periods). Let Y be
the open parallelotope associated with this basis. For example, G“ ZN and
Y “ p0, 1qN , which is classical in standard homogenization.
By analogy with the notation in the one-dimensional case, for řN almost
every (a.e.) z P RN , rzsY denotes the unique integer combination j“1 kj bj
in G such that z ´ rzsY belongs to Y , and set
tzuY “ z ´ rzsY P Y. (1.1)
Figure 1.1: Definition of rzsY and tzuY
Figure 1.1 gives a paving on RN . We scale this paving by ε, a strictly

positive number in a sequence going to 0` . Then for a.e. x P RN and ε ą 0,
´” x ı !x) ¯
x“ε ` . (1.2)
ε Y ε Y
6
Chapter 1. Unfolding operators in fixed domains
For Ω a domain in RN , consider a covering using the notations
Ξε “ tξ P G, εpξ ` Y q Ă Ωu ,
` ˘(
p ε “ interior Ť ε ξ ` Y ,
Ω p ε.
Λε “ ΩzΩ
(1.3)
ξPΞε
p ε is the largest union of εpξ ` Y q cells (ξ P G) included in Ω, while

The set Ω ` ˘
Λε is the subset of Ω containing the parts from ε ξ ` Y cells intersecting
the boundary BΩ (See Figure 1.2).
p ε and Λε
Figure 1.2: The domains Ω
Remark 1.1. Note that, if Ω “ RN , the corresponding set Λε is empty, and

so it is if Ω is the union of ε-cells (i.e. a union of εpξ ` Y q, ξ P G up to a
Lebesgue null set). More generally,
Λε Ă tx P Ω | dist px, BΩq ă ε diameter pY qu.
Hence its characteristic function 1Λε converges to 0 a.e. in Ω. Consequently,

if BΩ is bounded,
.
|Λε | “ measure pΛε q Ñ 0.
Definition 1.2 (The unfolding operator Tε ). For φ Lebesgue-measurable on
p ε , the unfolding operator Tε is defined as follows:
Ω
$ ´ ” ı ¯
&φ ε x ` εy p ε ˆ Y,
for a.e. px, yq P Ω
Tε pφqpx, yq “ ε Y
%0 for a.e. px, yq P Λ ˆ Y.
ε
p ε (such as
More precisely, Tε acts on functions defined on sets larger than Ω
p
Ω) by operating on their restriction to Ωε .
7
1 ´ x¯ 1
Figure 1.3: The functions fε pxq “ sin 2π ` x and Tε pfε q for ε “
4 ε 6
Remark 1.3. It is clear that the map Tε depends on the domain Ω. We shall
not indicate this dependence explicitly, except for the simplest case Ω ” RN
where we denote the corresponding unfolding operator Trε .
Remark 1.4. The introduction of the boundary layer Λε is necessary to deal
with the unavoidable complications arising from the fact that Ω is not a union
of cells. Recently, some papers proposed a variant for the definition of Tε by
setting it to be the identity on Λε , so that it is an isometry. This does not
improve on any of the results but makes matters more intricate when dealing
with derivatives (with their definition formula (1.33) is false on Λε !).
Observe that the function Tε pφq is Lebesgue-measurable on Ω ˆ Y and
vanishes for x outside of the set Ω p ε.
As in classical periodic homogenization, two different scales appear in the
definition of Tε : the “macroscopic” scale x gives the position of a point in
the domain Ω, while the “microscopic” scale y p“ x{εq gives the position of
a point in the cell Y . The unfolding operator doubles the dimension of the
space and put all the oscillations in the second variable, in this way separating
the two scales (see Figures 1.3 and 1.4 as well as Figures 1.5 and 1.6 for other
examples).
The following properties of Tε are simple consequences of Definition 1.2
for v and w Lebesgue-measurable, and for every continuous function H on R
(e.g. r ÞÑ |r| or r ÞÑ |r|p ),
Tε pvwq “ Tε pvq Tε pwq,
(1.4)
Tε pHpvqq “ HpTε pvqq.
8
Another easy consequence of Definition 1.2, is the following result con-

cerning highly oscillating functions:
Proposition 1.5. For f measurable on Y , extended by Y ´periodicity to the
whole of RN , define the sequence tfε uε by
´x¯
fε pxq “ f for a.e. x P RN . (1.5)
ε
Then #
f pyq p ε ˆ Y,
Tε pfε |Ω qpx, yq “ (1.6)
0 for a.e. px, yq P Λε ˆ Y.
If f belongs to Lp pY q, p P r1, `8r, and if Ω is bounded,
Tε pfε |Ω q Ñ f strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q. (1.7)
Proof. Formula (1.6) is straightforward from Definition 1.2. Convergence (1.7)

follows from the a.e. convergence to 0 of 1Λε (cf. Remark 1.1).
Remark 1.6. An equivalent way to define fε in (1.5) is to take simply
´! x ) ¯
.
fε pxq “ f .
ε Y
For example, with $ ´ 1¯
’
&1 for y P 0, ,
f pyq “ 2
’ ´ ¯
%2 for y P 1 , 1 ,
2
the function fε is the highly oscillating periodic function with period ε from
Figure 1.4.
Figure 1.4: The functions fε and Tε pfε q
9
Remark 1.7. Suppose p P p1, `8q. Let f in Lp pY q and fε be defined

by (1.5). It is well-known that tfε |Ω u converges weakly in Lp pΩq to the mean
value of f on Y , and not strongly, unless f is a constant (see Proposition 1.14
below for a proof of both statements).
For a smooth function “with no oscillations”, the unfolding exhibits small
jumps in x and is smooth in y, see Figure 1.5 below.
1
Figure 1.5: The function f pxq “ xp2 ´ xq and Tε pf q for ε small.
2
For a highly oscillating function, the unfolding can be smooth. In the
case of f below, the unfolding is simply cosp2πyq (note that the ε is the same
in the function and in the operator).
2πx
Figure 1.6: The functions f pxq “ cos and Tε pf q for ε small.
ε
10
The next two results, essential in the study of the properties of the un-
folding operator, are also straightforward from Definition 1.2.
Proposition 1.8. Suppose p P r1, `8s. The operator Tε is linear and con-
tinuous from Lp pΩp ε q to Lp pΩ ˆ Y q. For every φ in L1 pΩ p ε q, ψ in L1 pΩq and
w in Lp pΩq,
ż ż
1
piq Tε pφqpx, yq dxdy “ φpxq dx,
|Y | ΩˆY Ωpε
ˇż ż ˇ ż
ˇ 1 ˇ
ˇ
piiq ˇ ψ dx ´ Tε pψq dxdy ˇˇ ď |ψ| dx,
Ω |Y | ΩˆY Λε
1{p
piiiq }Tε pwq}Lp pΩˆY q ď | Y | }w}Lp pΩq .
Proof. Recalling Definition 2.2 of Ωp ε , one has

ż ż
1 1
Tε pφqpx, yq dxdy “ Tε pφqpx, yq dxdy
|Y | ΩˆY |Y | Ωp ε ˆY
ż
1 ÿ (1.8)
“ Tε pφqpx, yq dxdy.
|Y | ξPΞ pεξ`εY qˆY
ε
On each pεξ `εY qˆY , by definition, Tε pφqpx, yq “ φpεξ `εyq is constant in x.

Hence each integral in the sum on the right-hand side successively equals
ż ż
Tε pφqpx, yq dxdy “ |εξ ` εY | φpεξ ` εyq dy
pεξ`εY qˆY Y
ż
“ εN |Y | φpεξ ` εyq dy
ż Y
“ |Y | φpxq dx.
pεξ`εY q
Summing over Ξε , property (i) follows from (1.8) and from the equality
ÿ ż ż
φpxq dx “ φpxq dx.
pεξ`εY q pε
Ω
ξPΞε
Inequality (ii) is immediate from (i). By (1.4) for Hprq “ |r|p , r P R, (i)
implies
1{p
}Tε pwq}Lp pΩˆY q “ | Y | }w}Lp pΩp ε q ,
which gives (iii) for p finite. The case p “ `8 is straightforward.
Property (ii) in Proposition 1.8 above shows that any integral of a function
on Ω, is “almost equivalent” to the integral of its unfolded on Ω ˆ Y , the
”integration defect” arises only from the cells intersecting the boundary BΩ
and is controlled by its integral over Λε .
11
Property (iii) means that Tε is bounded uniformly with respect to ε from

Lp pΩq to Lp pΩ ˆ Y q. The connection of Tε with strong convergences in Lp -
spaces is presented in the next proposition, and that with weak convergences
in Proposition 1.12.
Proposition 1.9. Suppose p P r1, `8q.
(i) For w P Lp pΩq,
Tε pwq Ñ w strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q.
(ii) Let twε uε be a sequence in Lp pΩq such that
wε Ñ w strongly in Lp pΩq.
Then
Tε pwε q Ñ w strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q.
Proof. (i) For w in Cc0 pΩq (the space of continuous function with compact
support in Ω) one has
` ˘
}Tε pwq ´ w}L8 pΩp ε ˆY q ď ε diameterpY q ,
where is the modulus of uniform continuity of w. Because of the compact

support of w, for ε small enough, Tε pwq and w vanish in Λε ˆ Y . This implies
the convergence of Tε pwq to w in all Lp pΩ ˆ Y q for every p P r1, `8q.
If w P Lp pΩq with p P r1, `8q, let φ P Cc0 pΩq. Then by using (iii) from
Proposition 1.8,
` ˘
}Tε pwq ´ w}Lp pΩˆY q “ }Tε pw ´ φq ` Tε pφq ´ φ ` pφ ´ wq}Lp pΩˆY q
ď 2|Y |1{p }w ´ φ}Lp pΩq ` }Tε pφq ´ φ}Lp pΩˆY q ,
hence,
lim sup }Tε pwq ´ w}Lp pΩˆY q ď 2|Y |1{p }w ´ φ}Lp pΩq ,
εÑ0
from which statement (i) follows by density.
(ii) The following estimate is a consequence of Proposition 1.8(iii):
1
}Tε pwε q ´ Tε pwq}Lp pΩˆY q ď | Y | p }wε ´ w}Lp pΩq , @w P Lp pΩq.
This, together with (i), gives the result.
To investigate the relationship of Tε with weak convergences in the spaces
Lp when ε goes to 0, requires to introduce the mean value operator MY .
Definition 1.10 (The mean value operator MY ). For p P r1, `8s, the mean
value operator
MY : Lp pΩ ˆ Y q ÝÑ Lp pΩq,
is defined for Φ in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q, as follows:
ż
1
MY pΦqpxq “ Φpx, yq dy for a.e. x P Ω. (1.9)
|Y | Y
12
A consequence of this definition is the estimate
Proposition 1.11. Suppose p P r1, `8s. For every Φ P Lp pΩ ˆ Y q,
}MY pΦq}Lp pΩq ď |Y |´1{p }Φ}Lp pΩˆY q . (1.10)
Proof. The case p “ `8 is straightforward. For p P r1, `8q, Hölder’s in-

equality implies for a.e. x P Ω,
ˇż ˇp ż
ˇ ˇ 1
|MY pΦqpxq|p “ |Y |´p ˇ Φpx, yq dy ˇ ď |Y |´p |Y |p{p |Φpx, yq|p dy,
Y Y
where p1 is the conjugate of p. Then inequality (1.10) is obtained by integra-

tion over Ω.
Proposition 1.12. Let p P p1, `8q. Suppose that a sequence twε uε is

bounded in Lp pΩq, then so is the sequence tTε pwε quε in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q. Fur-
thermore the following implications hold.
(i) If
Tε pwε q á w weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q,
then
wε á MY pwq weakly in Lp pΩq.
(ii) If twε uε converges to some w in Lp pΩq, then, up to a subsequence, there
p in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q with MY pwq
exists w p “ 0 such that
Tε pwε q á w ` w
p weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q,
and
p Lp pΩˆY q ď |Y |1{p lim
}w ` w} 1
inf }wε1 }Lp pΩq . (1.11)
ε Ñ0
The same results hold for p “ `8 with weak topology replaced by weak-˚
topology in the corresponding spaces(1).
Remark 1.13. Under the first hypotheses of Proposition 1.12, let W be the
(non-empty) set of weak limit points of twε uε in Lp pΩq and Wx be the (non-
empty) set of weak limit points of tTε pwε quε in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q. Then Proposi-
tion 1.12 implies that
x “ . x .
(
W ” MY pWq MY pψq | ψ P W
In particular, a necessary and sufficient condition for twε uε to converge

x has a single element. Then, that element is
weakly in Lp pΩq is that MY pWq
the weak limit of twε uε .
(1) See Proposition 2.33 for the case p “ 1.
13
Proof of Proposition 1.12. piq From (1.4) and Proposition 1.8(ii) applied to
1
the function wε ψ (with ψ arbitrary in Lp pΩq), it follows that
ż ż
1
wε pxq ψpxq dx ´ Tε pwε qpx, yq Tε pψqpx, yq dxdy Ñ 0. (1.12)
Ω |Y | ΩˆY
1
Note that by Proposition 1.9(i), tTε pψquε converges to ψ strongly in Lp pΩq.
Therefore, (1.12) implies
ż ż
1
wε pxq ψpxq dx Ñ r yq ψqpxq dxdy,
wpx,
Ω |Y | ΩˆY
from which (i) follows.

p be a weak limit-point for the bounded sequence tTε pwε q ´ wuε
piiq Let w
in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q, associated with the subsequence tε1 u. Then (i) applied to
the sequence tε1 u implies that MY pwq
p “ 0. Inequality (1.11) follows from
Proposition 1.8(iii).
Proposition 1.14. Suppose p P p1, `8q. Let f be in Lp pY q and tfε uε be

the sequence defined by (1.5). Let Ω be any bounded subset of RN . Then
fε |Ω á MY pf q weakly in Lploc pΩq pLp pΩq when Ω is boundedq. (1.13)
Furthermore, convergence (1.13) is strong if and only if f is constant.
Proof. Proposition 1.5 gives the strong (hence weak) convergence of the se-
quence tTε pfε |Ω quε to f in Lp pΩˆY q. Convergence (1.13) follows from Propo-
sition 1.12(i).
Assume that fε |Ω converges strongly in Lp pΩq to the constant function
MY pf q. Then Proposition 1.9(ii) implies Tε pfε |Ω q Ñ MY pf q strongly in
Lp pΩ ˆ Y q. But by (1.7), Tε pfε |Ω q Ñ f strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q. Hence
f “ MY pf q a.e. in Y .
Remark 1.15. This proof of Proposition 1.14, using the unfolding operator,
is strikingly simpler and shorter than the classical one (see for example [70],
Theorem 2.6).
Remark 1.16. Note that if twε 1Λε uε is bounded in Lp pΩq, and if tTε pwε quε
converges weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q, so does twε uε by Proposition 1.12(iii) since
the sequence twε uε is bounded in Lp pΩq.
In general, if for every ε, Λε is not a null set, there is no relation between
the behaviors of twε 1Λε uε and tTε pwε quε . Even if twε 1Λε uε converges strongly
to 0 in Lp pΩq and tTε pwε quε also converges strongly, this does not imply
the strong convergence of twε uε , as it is shown by the sequence tfε |Ω uε in
Proposition 1.14, unless f is a constant on Y .
14
Recall an elementary lemma of integration theory.
Lemma 1.17. Suppose p P p1, `8q. Let Ω be an open subset of RN and tuε uε
a weakly convergent sequence in Lp pΩq with limit u, and tφε uε a bounded
sequence in L8 pΩq with limit φ a.e. in Ω(2). Then
uε φ ε á u φ weakly in Lp pΩq.
1
Proof. Let w be an arbitrary element of Lp pΩq. By the Lebesgue domi-
nated convergence theorem, the sequence tφε wuε converges to φ w strongly
1
in Lp pΩq. Therefore, by weak/strong convergence,
ż ż
uε φε w dx Ñ u φ w dx.
Ω Ω
This implies that u φ is the weak limit of the sequence tuε φe uε .
A consequence of this result, with important applications in homogeniza-

tion theory, is the following corollary which allows to pass to the limit in
some products of (only) weakly convergent sequences under appropriate as-
sumptions.
Corollary 1.18. Suppose p P p1, `8s. Let tφε uε , tuε uε and tvε uε be bounded
1
sequences in L8 pΩq, Lp pΩq and Lp pΩq, respectively, such that (3)
Tε pφε q Ñ Φ a.e. in Ω ˆ Y,
Tε puε q á U weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q (weakly-˚ if p “ `8) ,
1
Tε pvε q Ñ V strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q.
Then
ż ż
1
uε pxq vε pxq φε pxqdx Ñ U px, yq V px, yq Φpx, yqdxdy. (1.14)
pε
Ω |Y | ΩˆY
Moreover, if ż ż
1
|uε | dx Ñ 0
p
or |vε |p dx Ñ 0, (1.15)
Λε Λε
then
ż ż
1
uε pxq vε pxq φε pxqdx Ñ U px, yq V px, yq Φpx, yqdxdy. (1.16)
Ω |Y | ΩˆY
(2) In view of the relationship between convergence in local measure and convergence
almost everywhere, this hypothesis can be replaced by the more general condition that
tφε uε converge locally in measure to φ.
(3) As in the previous lemma, the first condition below can be replaced by the more
general condition of convergence in local measure in Ω ˆ Y .
15
Proof. First observe that due to (1.4) Tε puε φε q “ Tε puε qTε pφε q, and by
Lemma 1.17, the sequence tTε puε φε quε converges weakly to U Φ in Lp pΩˆY q.
By Proposition 1.8,
ż ż
1
uε pxq vε pxq φε pxqdx “ Tε puε φε qpx, yq Tε pvε qpx, yqdxdy,
Ωpε |Y | ΩˆY
so that (1.14) follows by duality.

If (1.15) holds, by the Hölder inequality,
ż
uε pxq vε pxq φε pxq dx Ñ 0,
Λε
so that the conclusion (1.16) is a consequence of (1.14).

Recall the definition of two-scale convergence from Nguetseng [167] and
Allaire [5]:
Two-scale convergence. Suppose p P p1, `8q. A bounded sequence twε uε
in Lp pΩq, two-scale converges to some w belonging to Lp pΩ ˆ Y q whenever,
for every smooth function ϕ on ΩˆRN with bounded support in Ω with respect
to the first variable and Y -periodic in the second,
ż ´ x¯ ż
1
wε pxqϕ x, dx Ñ wpx, yq ϕpx, yq dxdy.
Ω ε |Y | ΩˆY
The next result reduces two-scale convergence of a sequence, to a mere

weak Lp pΩ ˆ Y q-convergence of the unfolded sequence.
Proposition 1.19. Suppose p P p1, `8q. Let twε uε be a bounded sequence
in Lp pΩq. Then the following assertions are equivalent :
(i) tTε pwε quε converges weakly to w in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q,
(ii) twε uε two-scale converges to w.
Proof. By Proposition 1.8(ii) and in view of the fact that, for every test-
function admissible for two-scale
` ˘ convergence ϕ (for instance, ϕ uniformly
continuous on Ω ˆ Y ), }ϕ ¨, ε¨ 1Λε }Lp1 pΩq goes to 0 with ε, it is enough to
` ` ˘˘( 1
check that Tε ϕ ¨, ε¨ ε
converges strongly to ϕ in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q. From the
definition of Tε , indeed,
´ ´ ¨ ¯¯ ´ ”xı ¯
Tε ϕ ¨ , px, yq “ ϕ ε ` εy, y ,
ε ε Y
converges uniformly to ϕ.
Remark 1.20. Proposition 1.19 shows that the two-scale convergence of
a sequence in Lp pΩq, is equivalent to the weak–Lp pΩ ˆ Y q convergence of
the unfolded sequence. The fundamental (and not easy) result of two scale-
convergence is that from a bounded sequence, one can extract a subsequence
16
which two-scale converges. This now reduces to the weak compactness of

bounded sets in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q. Also, one difficulty in two-scale convergence
is to properly define a set of test functions which is sufficiently large. The
unfolding presentation does away with this difficulty.
1.2 The local average operator

In this subsection, we consider the classical average operator associated to
the partition of Ω by ε-cells Y (setting it to be zero on the cells intersecting
the boundary BΩ).
Definition 1.21 (Local average operator). For p P r1, `8s, the local average
operator
Mε : Lp pΩq ÝÑ Lp pΩq,
is defined by
$ ż ´ ” ı ¯
& 1 φ ε
x
` εz dz p ε,
if x P Ω
Mε pφqpxq “ |Y | Y ε Y
%
0 if x P Λε .
Ăε when Ω is the whole space RN .

This operator will be denoted M
The local average Mε pφq of a function φ is piecewise constant on each

ε-cell (see Figure 1.7).
Figure 1.7: A function and its piece-wise constant local average
Remark 1.22. By convention the value of Mε pφq on the cell εpξ ` Y q

is simply denoted Mε pφqpεξq.
17
1.2. The local average operator
Note that the local average Mε is connected to the unfolding operator Tε

via the average over Y , namely
ż
1
Mε pφq “ Tε pφqp ¨ , yq dy “ MY ˝ Tε pφq. (1.17)
|Y | Y
It is easily seen that
Mε ˝ M ε “ M ε and Tε ˝ M ε “ M ε . (1.18)
Remark 1.23. The local average operator is different but somewhat related
to the well-known “Steklov smoothing” associated with Y defined as
ż
. 1
Sε pf qpxq “ f px ´ εyq dy for f locally integrable,
|Y | Y
(see [193] where the Steklov smoothing is used in the context of homogeniza-
tion).
One could conceive of an unfolding of the form f px ` εyq, for which an
integral equality similar to Proposition 1.8(i) does hold when Ω is the whole
space. For general Ω, using this alternative definition would lead to some
difficulties due to the presence of the boundary. In the case of perforated
domains as in Part II, these difficulties seem to preclude its use.
Proposition 1.24. Suppose p P r1, `8s.

(i) For any φ in Lp pΩq,
}Mε pφq}Lp pΩq ď }φ}Lp pΩq .

1
(ii) For any φ in Lp pΩq and ψ in Lp pΩq,
ż ż ż
Mε pφq ψ dx “ Mε pφq Mε pψq dx “ φ Mε pψq dx. (1.19)
Ω Ω Ω
Proof. piq Inequality (1.10) applied to the function Tε pφq, together with (iii)
of Proposition 1.8 gives
}Mε pφq}Lp pΩq ď |Y |´1{p }Tε pφq}Lp pΩˆY q ď }φ}Lp pΩq .
piiq Let ξ be in Ξε . The function Mε pφq is constant on εpξ ` Y q, hence

ż ż
Mε pφq|εpξ`Y q ψpxq dx “ εN Mε pφq|εpξ`Y q ψpεξ ` εyq dy
εpξ`Y q Y
“ εN |Y |Mε pφq|εpξ`Y q Mε pψq|εpξ`Y q .
Summing over Ξε gives the first equality. The second inequality follows by
symmetry.
18
Proposition 1.25.
(i) Suppose p P r1, `8q. Let tvε uε be a sequence such that
vε Ñ v strongly in Lp pΩq.
Then
Mε pvε q Ñ v strongly in Lp pΩq.
In particular, for every φ P Lp pΩq,
Mε pφq Ñ φ strongly in Lp pΩq. (1.20)
(ii) Suppose p P p1, `8q. If tvε uε is a bounded sequence in Lp pΩq, the fol-
lowing convergences are equivalent:
paq vε á v weakly in Lp pΩq,
pbq Mε pvε q á v weakly in Lp pΩq.
The same holds true with weak-˚ convergences in L8 pΩq(4).
Proof. (i) Note that

MY pTε pvε q ´ v1Ωp ε q ” Mε pvq ´ v1Ωp ε .
Then, applying inequality (1.10) to Tε pvε q ´ v1Ωp ε gives
› › 1 ›› ›p
›Mε pvε q ´ v1 p ›p p p εq ď Tε pvε q ´ v1Ωp ε ›Lp pΩp ˆY q .
Ωε L pΩ |Y | ε
Adding to both sides of this inequality the term

› › 1 ›› ›p
›v1Λ ›p p “ v1Λε ›Lp pΩˆY q ,
ε L pΩq
|Y |
one obtains
1
}Mε pvε q ´ v}pLp pΩq ď }Tε pvε q ´ v}pLp pΩˆY q .
|Y |
To finish, one uses (ii) of Proposition 1.9.
1
(ii) paq ñ pbq. Apply (1.19) for φ in Lp pΩq,
ż ż ż
Mε pφq Mε pvε q dx “ φ Mε pvε q dx “ Mε pφq vε dx.
Ω Ω Ω
One concludes with (i).

.
pbq ñ paq. The previous result implies that v “ weak lim Mε pvε q is the
εÑ0
only weak limit point for the sequence tvε uε .
The proof for p “ `8 uses the fact that a bounded sequence in L8 pΩq
which converges weakly in every Lploc pΩq for p finite, converges weakly-˚ in
L8 pΩq.
19
1.3. The averaging operator
1.3 The averaging operator

In this section, we introduce the averaging operator Uε which is the adjoint
of Tε (up the normalizing constant 1{|Y |). To do so, for p in r1, `8s, let v
1
be in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q and u be in Lp pΩq. Successively,
ż
1
Tε puqpx, yq vpx, yq dxdy
|Y | ΩˆY
ż
1
“ Tε puqpx, yq vpx, yq dxdy
|Y | Ωp ε ˆY
ż
1 ÿ
“ upεξ ` εyq vpx, yq dxdy
|Y | ξPΞ εpξ`Y qˆY
ż
ε
1 ÿ (1.21)
“ upεξ ` εyq vpεξ ` εz, yqεN dzdy
|Y | ξPΞ Y ˆY
ż ż
ε
1 ÿ ´ ”xı !x) ¯
“ dz upxq v ε ` εz, dx
|Y | ξPΞ Y εpξ`Y q ε Y ε Y
ż ´ 1 ż ´ ”xı
ε
!x) ¯ ¯
“ upxq v ε ` εz, dz dx.
Ωpε |Y | Y ε Y ε Y
This suggests the following definition:

Definition 1.26. For p P r1, `8s, the averaging operator
Uε : Lp pΩ ˆ Y q Ñ Lp pΩq,
is defined as follows:
$ ż ´ ”xı !x) ¯
& 1 Φ ε ` εz, dz p ε,
for a.e. x P Ω
Uε pΦqpxq “ |Y | Y ε Y ε Y
%
0 for a.e. x P Λε .
As for the unfolding operator and the local average operator, the averaging
operator corresponding to the case Ω ” RN is denoted Urε .
Observe that if Φ does not depend upon y (so it depends only on x), then
Uε pΦq “ Mε pΦq, @Φ P Lp pΩq, (1.22)
and therefore, recalling Proposition 1.25,
Uε pΦq Ñ Φ strongly in Lp pΩq. (1.23)

1
The computation (1.21), shows that for ψ in Lp pΩq and Φ in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q,
ż ż
1
Uε pΦqpxq ψpxq dx “ Φpx, yq Tε pψqpx, yq dxdy. (1.24)
Ω |Y | ΩˆY
20
From Definition 1.26 and the decomposition (1.2), it follows that Uε is

almost a left-inverse of Tε since,
Uε ˝ Tε pφq “ φ 1Ωp ε , @Φ P Lp pΩ ˆ Y q. (1.25)
Also, for every Φ in L pΩ ˆ Y q,
p
$ ż ´ ”xı ¯
’ 1
’
’ Φ ε ` εz, y dz
’
& |Y | Y
’ ε Y
Tε ˝ Uε pΦqpx, yq “ p ε ˆ Y,
for a.e. px, yq P Ω (1.26)
’
’
’
’
’
%0 for a.e. px, yq P Λε ˆ Y.
As consequence of Hölder’s inequality and of Proposition 1.8(iii), the fol-

lowing result is straightforward:
Proposition 1.27. Suppose p P r1, `8s. The averaging operator is linear
and continuous from Lp pΩ ˆ Y q to Lp pΩq and
}Uε pΦq}Lp pΩq ď |Y |´1{p }Φ}Lp pΩˆY q . (1.27)
The operator Uε`maps the space Lp pΩˆY q into Lp pΩq. It allows to replace
. ˘
the function x ÞÑ Φ ε which is meaningless in general, by a function which
always makes sense.
Remark 1.28. This and (1.24) imply that the largest set of test sequences
(
1
adapted to two-scale convergence is actually the set Uε pΦq | Φ P Lp pΩ ˆ Y q .
(i) Let tΦε uε be a sequence which converges strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q to Φ.
Then
Tε ˝ Uε pΦε q Ñ Φ strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q,
Mε ˝ Uε pΦε q Ñ MY pΦq strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q.
In particular, for every Ψ in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q,
Tε ˝ Uε pΨq Ñ Ψ strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q.
(ii) Let twε uε be a sequence in Lp pΩq and W be in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q. Then the
following assertions are equivalent:
ż
paq Tε pwε q Ñ W strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q and |wε |p dx Ñ 0,
Λε
pbq wε ´ Uε pW q Ñ 0 strongly in L pΩq.
p
(iii) In particular, if in (ii) W is independent of y, then

ż
pcq Tε pwε q Ñ W strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q and |wε |p dx Ñ 0,
Λε
is equivalent to
pdq wε Ñ W strongly in Lp pΩq.
21
1.3. The averaging operator
Proof. (i) The proof of the first assertion follows exactly the same lines as
that of (ii) of Proposition 1.9. The second follows from the first by the strong
continuity of MY .
(ii) Suppose (a) holds. Inequality (1.27) applied to Φε “ Tε pwε q´w,
p together
with (1.25), implies
wε 1Ωp ε ´ Uε pwq
p Ñ0 strongly in Lp pΩq.
ż
Then (b) holds because |wε |p dx Ñ 0.
Λε
Conversely, suppose that (b) is true. Then, by Definition 1.26 of Uε ,
ż
|wε |p dx Ñ 0.
Λε
Proposition 1.9(ii) applied to wε ´ Uε pwq

p gives
Tε pwε ´ Uε pwqq
p Ñ0 strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q.
One concludes since, by assertion (i), Tε ˝ Uε pwq

p converges strongly to w
p in
Lp pΩ ˆ Y q.
(iii) If (c) holds, by (ii) wε ´ Uε pW q Ñ 0 strongly in Lp pΩq. Since W is
independent of y, by (1.22) Uε pW q “ Mε pW q which converges strongly to
W by (1.20), hence (d). The converse is just Proposition 1.9(ii).
Remark 1.30. 1. Assertion (i) implies that for every Φ P Lp pΩ ˆ Y q,
Uε pΦq á MY pΦq weakly in Lp pΩq.
2. Assertion (ii)(b) is a corrector-type result.

3. Some authors define the notion of “strong two-scale convergence” via a
convoluted duality argument (from the weak two-scale convergence). Asser-
tion (ii)(a) of Proposition 1.29 can be seen as an equivalent direct and simpler
definition of such a notion.
Proposition 1.31. Suppose p P p1, `8q.

(i) Let tΦε uε be a sequence which converges weakly in Lp pΩ ˆY q to Φ. Then
Uε pΦε q á MY pΦq weakly in Lp pΩq.
(ii) Let tΦε uε be a sequence such that Φε á Φ weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q. Then
Tε ˝ Uε pΦε q á Φ weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q,
Mε ˝ Uε pΦε q á MY pΦq weakly in Lp pΩq.
For p “ `8, the same convergences hold for the weak-˚ topologies(5).
22
Proof. (i) The statement is obtained from Proposition 1.9(i) by duality as

1 ă p ă `8 (cf. (1.24)).
For p “ `8, the result follows since Uε pΦε q is bounded in L8 pΩq as soon
as Φε is bounded in L8 pΩ ˆ Y q, and because by the previous argument, it
converges weakly in every Lploc pΩq.
1
(ii) Observe that Tε ˝ Uε is its own adjoint. Therefore for every Ψ in Lp pΩq,
ż
1
Tε ˝ Uε pΦε qpx, yq Ψpx, yq dxdy
|Y | ΩˆY
ż
1
“ Φε px, yqTε ˝ Uε pΨqpx, yq dxdy,
|Y | ΩˆY
which gives the first convergence by Proposition 1.29(i). The second follows
from the weak continuity of MY .
For p “ `8 the same argument as in (i) applies.
Remark 1.32. The statement of Proposition 1.29(ii) does not hold for weak
convergences instead of strong ones. Indeed, weak convergence in (ii)(a)
implies weak convergence in (ii)(b) by Proposition 1.12(iv) and Proposi-
tion 1.31(i). The converse is not true as can be seen by the following counter-
example.
Consider a function wp ı 0 in Lp pY q with MY pwq p “ 0. By Proposi-
tion 1.31(i),
Uε pwq
p á MY pwq p “ 0 weakly in Lp pΩq.
This implies
wε ´ Uε pwq
p á0 weakly in Lp pΩq
for twε uε the null sequence. Hence Tε pwε q ” 0 converges to 0 weakly (and
strongly) in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q. Since w
p ‰ 0, this shows that (b) does not imply (a)
in the case of weak convergences.
Lemma 1.33. Suppose p P p1, `8q.

(i) Let Ψ P Lp pΩ ˆ Y q, such that
Uε pΨq Ñ MY pΨq strongly in Lp pΩq. (1.28)
Then Ψ is independent of y.
(ii) Let tΦε uε be a sequence in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q such that Uε pΦε q lies in a strongly
compact set of Lp pΩq and
Φε á Φ weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q. (1.29)
Then Φ is independent of y.
Proof. (i) Under hypothesis (1.28) by Proposition 1.9(ii),
Tε ˝ Uε pΦq Ñ MY pΦq strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q.
23
1.4. Unfolding and gradients
On the other hand, Proposition 1.29(i) implies that

Tε ˝ Uε pΦq Ñ Φ strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q,
therefore Φ ” MY pΦq, hence Φ is independent of y.
(ii) Hypothesis (1.29) and assertion (i) of Proposition 1.31, immediately give
Uε pΦε q á MY pΦq weakly in Lp pΩq,
hence strongly in the same space by hypothesis. Consequently, by 1.9(ii),
Tε ˝ Uε pΦε q Ñ MY pΦq strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q.
On the other hand, by (ii) from Proposition 1.31, tTε ˝Uε pΦε quε converges
to Φ weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q, so that Φ “ MY pΦq.
We complete this section with a somewhat unusual convergence property
involving the averaging operator Uε and which is applied in Theorem 5.10.
Proposition 1.34. For p P r1, `8q, suppose that α is in Lp pΩq and β in
L8 pΩ; Lp pY qq. Then, the product Mε pαq Uε pβq belongs to Lp pΩq and
Uε pαβq ´ Mε pαq Uε pβq Ñ 0 strongly in Lp pΩq. (1.30)
Proof. It suffices to prove (1.30) and to do so, consider first the function
Mε pαq Uε pβq in the set εpξ ` Y q ˆ Y, ξ P Ξε . Using the fact that òn this set
Mε pαq is constant on the cell εpξ `Y q, one has Mε pαq Uε pβq “ Uε Mε pαqβq.
Therefore,
ż ż
ˇ ` ˘ˇ
p
| Uε pαβq ´ Mε pαq Uε pβq| dx “ ˇUε βpα ´ Mε pαqq ˇp dx.
εpξ`Y q εpξ`Y q
Summing over ξ P Ξε gives

ż
ˇ ` ˘ˇ
}Uε pαβq ´ Mε pαq Uε pβq}pLp pΩq “ ˇUε βpα ´ Mε pαqq ˇp dx
Ω
1
ď }pα ´ Mε pαqqβ}pLp pΩˆY q
|Y |
1
ď }α ´ Mε pαq}pLp pΩq }β}pL8 pΩ;Lp pY qq .
|Y |
The last expression goes to 0 by (1.20).
1.4 Unfolding and gradients

Our aim is to study the properties of the restriction of the unfolding operator
to the space W 1,p pΩq. Recall the definitions of the Sobolev spaces on a
domain Ω in RN where p P r1, `8s,
(
W 1,p pΩq “ ϕ P Lp pΩq | ∇ϕ P Lp pΩqN in the sense of distributions in Ω ,
W01,p pΩq “ the closure of the space Cc8 pΩq in W 1,p pΩq.
24
1
For p ‰ `8, the dual space of W01,p pΩq is denoted W0´1,p pΩq; it is a subspace
of the space of distributions D1 pΩq ” pCc8 pΩqq1 . For p “ 2, the corresponding
spaces are usually denoted H 1 pΩq, H01 pΩq and H ´1 pΩq, respectively. They
are Hilbert spaces.
Also introduce the notations
. ˇ (
1,p
Wper pY q “ ϕ P Wloc1,p
pRN q ˇ ϕ is G- periodic ,
1,p . ( (1.31)
Wper,0 pY q “ ϕ P Wper
1,p
pY q | MY pϕq “ 0 .
Both of these spaces are isometric to closed subspaces of W 1,p pY q when

endowed with the corresponding norm. We shall consider them as subspaces
1,p
of Wloc pRN q as well as of W 1,p pY q (in the second case, its elements are
extended to RN by Y -periodicity). The second space plays a central role in
the unfolding method for gradients. For p “ 2, these spaces will be denoted
1
Hper pY q and Hper,0
1
pY q, respectively.
Recall the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality in Y (see [37]; we refer to
Subsection 2.3.1 for more detailed consequences of this deep inequality). It
is stated as follows (the constant depends only on Y and can be chosen
independent of p):
› ›
DC P R` , @ψ P W 1,p pY q, ›ψ ´ MY pψq›Lp pY q ď C}∇ψ}Lp pY q . (1.32)
The Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality implies that }∇y ϕ}Lp pY q is a norm on

1,p
Wper,0 pY q, equivalent to }ϕ}W 1,p pY q .
The next proposition states the relationship between Tε and gradients.
Proposition 1.35. Suppose p P r1, `8s. The operator Tε maps W 1,p pΩq
into Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq and
@w P W 1,p pΩq, ∇y pTε pwqq “ εTε p∇wq a.e. in Ω ˆ Y. (1.33)
Proof. Assume first p finite. Let w be any element of W 1,p pΩq and let
twn un be a sequence in C 1 pΩq X W 1,p pΩq which converges to w in W 1,p pΩq.
Formula (1.33) is straightforward for each wn . Furthermore, by Proposi-
tion 1.8(iii),
Tε pwn q Ñ Tε pwq strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q,
∇y pTε pwn qq “ εTε p∇wn q Ñ εTε p∇wq strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN .
From these convergences, it follows that ∇y pTε pwqq “ εTε p∇wq in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q,

which concludes the proof for p finite.
For p “ `8, one uses the previous argument and the fact that W 1,8 pΩq is
included in every W 1,p pΩq. This implies that (1.33) is true also for p “ `8.
From this identity follows that Tε maps W 1,8 pΩq into L8 pΩ; W 1,8 pY qq.
25
In the next subsections we first consider the case of sequences in the

space W 1,p pΩq which are bounded in Lp pΩq, while their gradients are of
order ε´1 in Lp pΩqN . Next, we consider the case of bounded sequences in
W 1,p pΩq. Finally, the intermediate case is investigated.
In Chapter 2, we shall consider the more general case of sequences which
are bounded in Lp pΩq while only some of their derivatives are of order ε´1
or bounded in Lp pΩq.
1.4.1 First case: }wε }Lp pΩq ` ε}∇wε }Lp pΩq bounded
Theorem 1.36. Suppose p P p1, `8q. Let twε uε be in W 1,p pΩq satisfying
}wε }Lp pΩq ` ε}∇wε }Lp pΩq ď C. (1.34)
Then there exist a subsequence (still denoted ε), w in Lp pΩq and w

p in
1,p
L pΩ; Wper,0
p
pY qq, such that
wε á w weakly in Lp pΩq,
ε∇wε á 0 weakly in Lp pΩqN ,
(1.35)
Tε pwε q á w ` w
p weakly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq,
Tε pε∇wε q “ ∇y pTε pwε qq á ∇y w
p weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN .
Similar results hold for p “ `8 replacing the weak topology by the weak-˚
topology on the corresponding spaces.
Proof. Up to a subsequence, convergences (1.35) are a simple consequence of

estimate (1.34) together with Propositions 1.12 and 1.35.
p Without loss of generality, we
It remains to prove the periodicity of w.
show periodicity in the bN -direction.
Let Y 1 be the N ´ 1 open parallelotope associated to pb1 , . . . , bN ´1 q. Set
y “ y 1 ` yN bN , with y 1 in Y 1 and yN P p0, 1q. The sequence tTε pwε quε is
bounded in
Lp pΩ ˆ Y 1 ; W 1,p p0, 1qq “ W 1,p pp0, 1q; Lp pΩ ˆ Y 1 qq,
so that, by the standard trace theorem, the function ts ÞÑ Tε pwε q|tyN “su u
converges to the function ts ÞÑ w|p tyN “su u in Cpr0, 1s; Lp pΩ ˆ Y 1 qq.
The periodicity in the bN -direction results from the following computa-
tion for arbitrary ψ in Cc8 pΩ ˆ Y 1 q, using Definition 1.2 of Tε , performing an
26
obvious change of variables and using Definition 1.2 again:

ż
“ ‰
Tε pwε qpx, y 1 ` bN q ´ Tε pwε qpx, y 1 q ψpx, y 1 q dxdy 1
ΩˆY 1
ż ! ´ ”xı ¯ ´ ”xı ¯)
“ wε ε ` εpy 1 ` bN q ´ wε ε ` ε y 1 ψpx, y 1 q dxdy 1
1 ε Y ε Y
żΩˆY ´ ”xı ¯“ ‰
“ wε ε ` ε y 1 ψpx ´ ε bN , y 1 q ´ ψpx, y 1 q dxdy 1 ,
1 ε Y
żΩˆY
“ ‰
“ Tε pwε qpx, y 1 q ψpx ´ ε bN , y 1 q ´ ψpx, y 1 q dxdy 1 .
ΩˆY 1
Take now the limit as ε Ñ 0 to obtain, since the last term above goes to zero,
ż
“ ‰
lim Tε pwε qpx, y 1 ` bN q ´ Tε pwε qpx, y 1 q ψpx, y 1 q dxdy 1
εÑ0 ΩˆY 1
ż
“ ‰
“ p y 1 ` bN q ´ wpx,
wpx, p y 1 q ψpx, y 1 q dxdy “ 0,
ΩˆY 1
from which the equality of the two traces follows, proving so the periodicity of
wp in the bN -direction. The proof is similar for the other basis directions.
1.4.2 Second case: twε uε bounded in W 1,p pΩq

In this case, we start with a corollary of Theorem 1.36.
Corollary 1.37. Suppose p P p1, `8q. Let twε uε be a sequence in W 1,p pΩq
such that
wε á w weakly in W 1,p pΩq.
Then
Tε pwε q á w weakly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq.
Furthermore, if
wε Ñ w strongly in Lp pΩq(6),
then
Tε pwε q Ñ w strongly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq.
Similar results hold for p “ `8 replacing the first weak convergence
by the weak-˚ convergence and the second strong convergence by the strong
convergence in every Lploc pΩ; W 1,p pY qq for p finite.
p in
Proof. By Theorem 1.36, there exist a subsequence (denoted ε) and w
Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq with
Tε pwε q á w
(1.36)
p
∇y pTε pwε qq á ∇y w weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN .
(6) Due to the Sobolev embedding theorem (see [2]), this is the case when Ω is bounded
with Lipschitz boundary.
27
Formula (1.33) implies the estimates
}∇y pTε pwε qq}Lp pΩˆY q ď εC,
so that
p “ 0 strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN .
∇y pTε pwε qq Ñ ∇y w (1.37)
p does not depend on y, and Proposition 1.12(i-ii) yields

Consequently, w
w “ MY pwq
p “ w.
p
Moreover, convergence (1.36) holds for the whole sequence tεu.

Finally, if twε uε converges strongly to w in Lp pΩq, so does tTε pwε quε ,
thanks to Proposition 1.9(ii) and to the strong convergence (1.37).
In the sequel, the following results on the local average operator Mε will
be applied to functions in W 1,p pΩq:
Proposition 1.38. Suppose p P r1, `8s. Then, for every ϕ in W 1,p pΩq,
}ϕ ´ Mε pϕq }Lp pΩp ε q ď Cε}∇ϕ}Lp pΩq ,

(1.38)
}ϕ ´ Tε pϕq}Lp pΩp ε ˆY q ď Cε}∇ϕ}Lp pΩq ,
with the constant C depending only on Y . Moreover,

1` ˘
ϕ1Ωp ε ´ Mε pϕq á 0 weakly in Lp pΩq. (1.39)
ε
The last convergence holds in L8 pΩq weakly -˚ for p “ `8.
Proof. The rescaled Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality (1.32) becomes for every

ξ in Ξε ,
}ϕ ´ Mε pϕq}pLp pεpξ`Y qq ď pCεqp }∇ϕ}pLp pεpξ`Y qq ,
from which (1.38)1 follows by summation over Ξε .

Since Tε ˝ Mε ” Mε , applying unfolding to (1.38)1 gives
}Tε pϕq ´ Mε pϕq}Lp pΩp ε ˆY q ď Cε}∇ϕ}Lp pΩq ,
which combined with (1.38)1 implies (1.38)2 .

Convergence (1.39) can be proved directly from (1.38) with a density
argument. In Corollary 1.43, a generalization of (1.39) will be proved inde-
pendently.
Proposition 1.39. Suppose p P r1, `8q. Let twε uε be a sequence in the

space W 1,p pΩq such that
wε Ñ w strongly in W 1,p pΩq.
28
Then
piq Tε p∇wε q Ñ ∇w strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q,
1´ ¯ ÿN
Bw
piiq Tε pwε q ´ Mε pwε q Ñ yjc strongly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq,
ε j“1
Bx j
where
y c “ y ´ MY pyq. (1.40)
Proof. (i) The first assertion follows directly from Proposition 1.9.
(ii) Set now
1´ ¯ ÿ N
Bw
Zε “ Tε pwε q ´ Mε pwε q ´ yjc . (1.41)
ε j“1
Bx j
Observe that due to (1.17) and to definition (1.40), the function Zε satisfies
MY pZε q “ 0. (1.42)
Then, applying the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality (1.32) gives

› ›
›Zε › p ď C}∇y Zε }Lp pΩˆY q . (1.43)
L pΩˆY q
On the other hand,

1 ` ` ˘˘ ` ˘
∇y Zε “ ∇y Tε wε ´ ∇w “ Tε ∇wε ´ ∇w. (1.44)
ε
Therefore by assertion (i), ∇y Zε converges strongly to 0 in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q.
So (1.43) entails
Zε Ñ 0 strongly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq,
whence convergence (ii).

Remark 1.40. For the case Y “ p0, 1qN
´ 1 1¯ ÿ
N
Bw
y c “ y1 ´ , . . . , yN ´ and yjc “ y c ¨ ∇w.
2 2 j“1
Bxj
In the general case, the basic periods are not orthonormal and the last quantity
is not the scalar product in the ambient space RN .
However, for simplicity, in the remainder of this book, the tensor
condensed notation y c ¨ ∇w will be used in the general case, even
though it is not connected to the scalar product of RN .
In Proposition 1.39, the sequence twε uε is strongly convergent in W 1,p pΩq.
One may ask whether with twε uε converging only weakly, there is still some
information about the sequence tTε pwε quε of its unfoldings. The answer is
given in the next result.
29
Theorem 1.41. Suppose p P p1, `8q. Let twε uε be a sequence in W 1,p pΩq
such that
1,p
p in Lp pΩ; Wper,0
Then for a subsequence, there exists some w pY qq such that
1´ ¯
piq Tε pwε q ´ Mε pwε q á y c ¨ ∇w ` w
ε
piiq p
Tε p∇wε q á ∇w ` ∇y w weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN .
Moreover
}w}
p Lp pΩ;Wper
1,p
pY qq ď C lim sup }wε }W 1,p pΩq ,
εÑ0
(1.45)
}∇w ` ∇y w}
p Lp pΩˆY q ď |Y | 1{p
lim inf }∇wε }Lp pΩq ,
εÑ0
where the constant C only depends on the Poincaré-Wirtinger constant of Y .

Proof. The function Zε defined by (1.41) as in the preceding proof, satis-
fies (1.42), (1.43) and (1.44). In this case,
› ˘
}∇Zε }Lp pΩˆY q ď C ›∇wε }Lp pΩq ` }∇w}Lp pΩq ,
so that, by the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality,

› › ` ˘
›Zε › p ď C }∇wε }Lp pΩq ` }∇w}Lp pΩq .
L pΩ;W 1,p pY qq
p in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq satisfying (1.45) and such

Consequently, there exists w
that, up to a subsequence,
Zε á w
p weakly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq.
Since by construction, MY pZε q “ 0, one has
MY pwq
p “ 0.
The last convergence above is equivalent to convergences (i) and (ii).

The Y -periodicity of w p is proved in a way similar to that in the proof
of Theorem 1.36. Recalling that Y 1 denotes the N ´ 1 open parallelotope
associated with pb1 , . . . , bN ´1 q, evaluate the limit of the function defined for
a.e. px, y 1 q P Ω ˆ Y 1 as
Zε px, y 1 ` bN q ´ Zε px, y 1 q.
On one hand, since

` ˘ ` ˘ Bw
py c ¨ ∇wq x, y 1 ` bN ´ py c ¨ ∇wq x, y 1 “ pxq,
BxN
30
one has successively for every ψ in Cc8 pΩ ˆ Y 1 q,

ż ż
“ 1 1
‰ 1 1 Bw
Zε px, y ` bN q ´ Zε px, y q ψpx, y q dxdy ` ψpx, y 1 q dxdy 1
BxN
ΩˆY 1 ΩˆY 1
ż " ´ ” ı ¯ ´ ” ı ¯*
1 x 1 x 1
“ wε ε ` εpy ` bN q ´wε ε ` εy ψpx, y 1 q dxdy 1
ε ε Y ε Y
ΩˆY 1
ż " ´ ”xı ¯ 1“ *
‰
“ pwε ε ` εy 1 ψpx ´ ε bN , y 1 q ´ ψpx, y 1 q dxdy 1
ε Y ε
ΩˆY 1
ż
1“ ‰
“ Tε pwε qpx, y 1 q ψpx ´ ε bN , y 1 q ´ ψpx, y 1 q dxdy 1 .
ε
ΩˆY 1
By Corollary 1.37, Tε pwε q converges weakly to w in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq. By the

trace theorem in W 1,p pY q, the trace of Tε pwε q on Ω ˆ Y 1 converges weakly
to w in Lp pΩ ˆ Y 1 q. Hence the last integral in the equality converges to
ż
Bψ
´ wpxq px, y 1 q dxdy 1 .
ΩˆY 1 Bx N
Consequently, passing to the limit in the equality above yields

ż
“ ‰
p y 1 q ` bN q ´ wpx,
wpx, p y 1 q ψpx, y 1 q dxdy
ΩˆY 1
ż ż
Bw Bψ
` pxq ψpx, y 1 q dxdy 1 “ ´ wpxq px, y 1 q dxdy 1 .
ΩˆY 1 Bx N ΩˆY 1 Bx N
Since by integration by parts,

ż ż
Bw 1 1 Bψ
pxq ψpx, y q dx dy “ ´ wpxq px, y 1 q dxdy 1 ,
ΩˆY 1 Bx N ΩˆY 1 Bx N
what remains is
ż
“ ‰
p y 1 ` bN q ´ wpx,
wpx, p y 1 q ψpx, y 1 q dxdy 1 “ 0,
ΩˆY 1
p is periodic in the bN -direction. By a similar

which says precisely that w
argument, the same holds for the other directions of the period.
Remark 1.42 (An apparent contradiction).
The notion of periodicity for the limit of a sequence of unfoldings is strictly
connected with the space in which the convergence occurs. For the parallelo-
tope Y , the space Lpper pY qq coincides with Lp pY q whereas Wper
1,p
pY q is strictly
smaller than W pY q. It may happen that the limit of a sequence of unfold-
1,p
ings belong to Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq without belonging to Lp pΩ; Wper1,p

pY qq. This
can occur if the original sequence is bounded in L pΩq but not in W 1,p pΩq.
p
31
For example, under the assumptions of Theorem 1.41, the unfolded se-
quence t 1ε Tε pwε ´ Mε pwε qquε of t 1ε pwε ´ Mε pwε qquε converges to a function
belonging to the space Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq but not to Lp pΩ; Wper1,p
pY qq.
This is due to the fact that the sequence t ε pwε ´Mε pwε qquε is not bounded
1
in W 1,p pΩq (it is not even included in that space !). However, if one con-
siders it as a sequence in Lp pΩq, its unfolding converges in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q ”
Lp pΩ; Lp pY qq (for p finite) which is the same as Lp pΩ; Lpper pY qq, so that the
limit is indeed Y -periodic in that weaker sense.
The next result is a complement to convergence (1.39).
Corollary 1.43. Under the assumptions of Theorem 1.41, one has
1` ˘
piq wε 1Ωp ε ´ Mε pwε q á 0 weakly in Lp pΩq,
ε
as well as
1` ˘
piiq Tε pwε q ´ wε 1Ωp ε á y c ¨ ∇w ` w
ε
Proof. First remark that
` ˘ ` ˘
Tε pwε q ´ Mε pwε q “ Tε wε ´ Mε pwε q “ Tε wε 1Ωp ε ´ Mε pwε q .
Theorem 1.41(i) implies therefore that
1 ` ˘
Tε wε 1Ωp ε ´ Mε pwε q á y c ¨ ∇w ` w
ε
The right-hand side is with zero average on Y so that by Proposition 1.12(i),
convergence (i) follows immediately. Combining it with the same convergence
(i) in Theorem 1.41, gives (ii).
˚
1.4.3 Complements
This section completes the statements of Theorems 1.36 and 1.41.
The first result generalizes these theorems. It is used in the proof of
Proposition 11.12 concerning the elastic thin plates.
The second result is a version of Theorem 1.41 for sequences converging
1,p
only in Wloc pΩq. A different setting for unfolding with two parameters is
also presented in Section 11.4.
Lemma 1.44. Suppose p P p1, `8q. Consider a sequence twε uε in W 1,p pΩq
converging weakly to some w in Lp pΩq and satisfying for some strictly positive
sequence tδpεquε converging to 0
δpεq }∇wε }Lp pΩq bounded as ε goes to 0.
32
(i) If lim ε´1 δpεq “ 0, then, up to a subsequence, there exist w P Lp pΩ ˆ Y q

εÑ0
1,p
with MY pwq “ w, and w
p in Lp pΩ; Wper,0 pY qq such that
Tε pwε q á w weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q,
δpεq ` ˘
Tε wε ´ Mε pwε q á w
ε
δpεqTε p∇wε q á ∇y w
(ii) If lim ε´1 δpεq “ `8, then,

εÑ0
Tε pwε q á w weakly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq,
∇y Tε pwε q Ñ 0 strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN .
1,p
p in Lp pΩ; Wper,0
Furthermore, there exists w pY qq such that, up to a sub-
sequence,
δpεq ` ˘
Tε wε ´ Mε pwε q á w
ε
δpεqTε p∇wε q á ∇y w
Remark 1.45. A “natural” candidate for δpεq is of course }∇wε }´1 Lp pΩq . In
many applications, the estimate appears with δpεq “ εγ , γ ě 0. Theorem 1.36
corresponds to γ “ 1 and Theorem 1.41 to γ “ 0. The lemma applies to all
other cases.
Proof of Lemma 1.44. Applying Theorem 1.41 to the sequence tδpεq wε uε ,

which is uniformly bounded in W 1,p pΩq and converges to 0 in Lp pΩq, gives a
1,p
p in Lp pΩ; Wper,0
function w pY qq such that, up to a subsequence
δpεq ` ˘
Tε wε ´ Mε pwε q á y c ¨ 0 ` w
ε ` ˘
δpεqTε ∇pwε q á 0 ` ∇y w
By Proposition 1.8(iii), }Tε pwε q}Lp pΩˆY q is bounded. Therefore, up to a

subsequence, there exists w in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q with MY pwq “ w and such that
Tε pwε q á w weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q.
This proves (i).

Under the hypothesis lim ε´1 δpεq “ `8, (1.33) implies the convergence
εÑ0
∇y Tε pwε q Ñ 0 strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q.
Consequently, ∇y w ” 0, so that MY pwq “ w which gives w “ w. By the

uniqueness of the limit, the whole sequence tTε pwε quε now converges weakly
to w in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq.
33
Another consequence of Theorem 1.41 concerns sequences converging in

1,p
Wloc pΩq. To state it, introduce the following notations:
dpY q “ the diameter of Y,

(more generally, dpOq is the diameter of O Ă RN ), (1.46)
ρpxq “ dist px, BΩq, @x P R .
N
Consider also the Banach spaces,

. (
Wρ1,p pΩq “ ϕ P Lp pΩq | ρ∇ϕ P Lp pΩqN pHρ1 pΩq for p “ 2q,
. (
Lpρ pΩ; Lp pY qq “ Φ P Lploc pΩ ˆ Y q | ρ Φ P Lp pΩ ˆ Y q , (1.47)
. (
Lpρ pΩ; W 1,p pY qq “ Ψ P Lpρ pΩ; Lp pY qq | ρ ∇y Ψ P Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
endowed respectively, with the norms

´ ¯1{p
}ϕ}Wρ1,p pΩq “ }ϕ}pLp pΩq ` }ρ∇ϕ}pLp pΩq ,
}Φ}Lpρ pΩ;Lp pY qq “ }ρ Φ}Lp pΩˆY q ,

´ ¯1{p
}Ψ}Lpρ pΩ;W p pY qq “ }ρ Ψ}pLp pΩˆY q ` }ρ ∇y Ψ}pLp pΩˆY q .
Let O be an open set in RN . For δ ą 0, we use the following notation:

. (
Oδint “ x P O | distpx, BOq ą δ . (1.48)
Theorem 1.46. Suppose p P p1, `8q. Let twε uε be a sequence in Wρ1,p pΩq,
such that
wε á w weakly in Wρ1,p pΩq.
1,p
p in Lpρ pΩ; Wper,0
Then, up to a subsequence, there exists w pY qq such that,
piq Tε pwε q á w weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q,
piiq 1Ωint
2εdpY q
p
Tε p∇wε q á ∇w ` ∇y w weakly in Lpρ pΩ; Lp pY qqN , (1.49)
piiiq Tε pρ∇wε q á ρ∇w ` ρ∇y w
Moreover, if tε∇wε uε is uniformly bounded in W 1,p pΩq, then
p
Tε p∇wε q á ∇w ` ∇y w weakly in Lpρ pΩ; Lp pY qqN . (1.50)
Proof. Since ρ is Lipschitz continuous with Lipschitz constant 1,

ˇ ´ ”xı ¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇρ ε ` εy ´ ρpxqˇ ď εdpY q for px, yq P Ω ˆ Y ,
ε Y
ρpxq ´ ”xı ¯ 3ρpxq
ďρ ε ` εy ď for px, yq P Ω2εdpY q ˆ Y .
2 ε Y 2
34
This implies that

! )
1Ωint
2εdpY q
T ε p∇w ε q is bounded in Lpρ pΩ; Lp pY qqN .
Then, there exist W in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q and F in Lpρ pΩ; Lp pY qqN such that (for a
subsequence of tεu),
Tε pwε q á W weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q,
1Ωint
2εdpY q
Tε p∇wε q á F weakly in Lpρ pΩ; Lp pY qqN .
We now shall identify W and F . To do so, let ω be a relatively compact

open subset in Ω. The sequence twε uε is bounded in W 1,p pωq and then by
hypothesis,
wε á w weakly in W 1,p pωq.
1,p
pω in Lp pω; Wper,0
Furthermore, there exists some w pY qq such that (for another
subsequence of tεu),
Tε pwε q á w weakly in Lp pω; W 1,p pY qq,

Tε p∇wε q á ∇w ` ∇y w
pω weakly in Lp pω ˆ Y qN .
As a consequence,
W “ w, pω
F “ ∇w ` ∇y w in Lp pω ˆ Y q,
which in turn, imply that W “ w in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q and that there exists w p

1,p
in Lpρ pΩ; Wper,0 p This completes the proof of
pY qq such that F ´ ∇w “ ∇y w.
assertions (i) and (ii) from (1.49).
It remains to prove convergence (1.49)(iii). At this point observe that
from Proposition 1.9(i), for every q P r1, `8q,
Tε pρq Ñ ρ strongly in Lq pΩ ˆ Y q. (1.51)
Then (1.49)(iii) is an immediate consequence of (1.49)(ii) taking into account

the facts that ρwε and ρw belong to W01,p pΩq, and ρw 1,p
p to Lp pΩ; Wper,0 pY qq.
From (1.38), we obtain
}Tε pρq ´ ρ}L8 pΩp ε q ď ε.
Therefore,
}Tε pρ∇wε q ´ ρTε p∇wε q}Lp pΩq ď Cε}∇wε }Lp pΩq .
Thus, the sequence tρTε p∇wε quε is uniformly bounded in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN . Con-

vergences (1.49)3 , (1.51) and the above estimates finally give (1.50).
35
1.4.4 Case of twε uε bounded in W k,p pΩq

Theorem 1.41 can be generalized to the case of W k,p pΩq´spaces with k ě 2
and p P p1, `8q . In order to do so, for r “ pr1 , . . . , rN q P NN with |r| “
r1 ` . . . ` rN ď k, introduce the notation Dr and Dyr ,
B |r| B |r|
Dr “ , Dyr “ rN .
Bxr11 . . . BxrNN By1r1 . . . ByN
Then the following result holds:
Theorem 1.47. Suppose p P p1, `8q. Let twε uε in be a sequence in W k,p pΩq
for k ě 1, such that
wε á w weakly in W k,p pΩq.
x in Lp pΩ; W k,p pY qq such that

Then, up to a subsequence, there exists W per
Tε pDl wε q á Dl w weakly in Lp pΩ; W k´l,p pY qq, |l| ď k ´ 1,

(1.52)
Tε pD wε q á D w `
l l x
Dyl W weakly in L pΩ ˆ Y q,
p
|l| “ k.
Furthermore, if twε uε converges strongly to w in W k´1,p pΩq(8), the above

convergences are strong in Lp pΩ; W k´l,p pY qq for |l| ď k ´ 1.
Similar statements can be made for the case p “ `8.
Proof. We give a brief proof for k “ 2. The same argument generalizes for
k ą 2.
If |l| “ 1, the first convergence in (1.52) and the final statement of the
theorem follow directly from Corollary 1.37. We now prove the second con-
vergence in (1.52). Set
1” ` ˘ı
Zε “ T ε pw ε q ´ M ε pw ε q ´ y c
¨ M ε ∇w ε .
ε2
Computing the derivatives of Zε up to order 2 gives
` ˘ 1´ ` ˘ ¯
∇y Zε “ Tε ∇wε ´ Mε p∇wε q , (1.53)
ε
and
` ˘ ` ˘
Dyl Zε “ Tε Dl wε with |l| “ 2.
Note that MY pZε q “ 0 and MY p∇y Zε q “ 0.
The sequence twε uε being bounded in W 2,p pΩq, inequality (1.32) (applied
twice) implies that tZε uε is bounded in Lp pΩ; W 2,p pY qq. Therefore, up to
(8) Due to the Sobolev embedding theorem (see [2]), this is the case when Ω is bounded
with Lipschitz boundary.
36
a subsequence, there exists Z in Lp pΩ; W 2,p pY qq such that MY pZq “ 0,

MY p∇y Zq “ 0, and
Zε á Z weakly in Lp pΩ; W 2,p pY qq,
BZε BZ
á weakly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq, (1.54)
Byi Byi
Dyl pZε q á Dyl Z weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q for |l| “ 2.
Bwε
Applying Theorem 1.41 to each derivative pi P t1, . . . , N uq, there
Bxi
pi in L pΩ; Wper pY qq such that MY pw
exist a function w p 1,p
pi q ” 0 and
1 ´ ` Bwε ˘ ` Bwε ˘¯ ´ Bw ¯
Tε ´ Mε á yc ¨ ∇ `wpi weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q.
ε Bxi Bxi Bxi
Then, from (1.53) and (1.54) we derive the equality
BZ ´ Bw ¯
“ yc ¨ ∇ `wpi .
Byi Bxi
Set
ÿN
` c c ˘ B2 w
x“Z´1
W yi yj ´ MY pyic yjc q .
2 i,j“1 Bxi Bxj
x belongs to Lp pΩ; W 2,p pY qq and verifies
By construction, the function W
x q “ 0. Furthermore,
MY pW
x
BW BZ ´ Bw ¯
“ ´ yc ¨ ∇ “w
pi ,
Byi Byi Bxi
and therefore MY p∇y Wx q “ 0 since MY pw x is Y -
pi q ” 0. This implies that W
periodic, hence belongs to L pΩ; Wper pY qq. Finally from (1.4.4), one gets
p 2,p
x
Dyl Z “ Dl w ` Dyl W for |l| “ 2,
which together with (1.54)3 , prove the last convergence of (1.52).
The next result is easily proved.
Corollary 1.48. Suppose p P p1, `8q. Let twε uε be a sequence in W 2,p pΩq,
such that
Then, up to a subsequence, there exists W x in Lp pΩ; W 2,p pY qq satisfying
per
x q “ 0, and such that, weakly in Lp pΩ; W 2,p pY qq,
MY pW
1” ` ˘ı
T ε pw ε q ´ M ε pw ε q ´ y c
¨ M ε ∇w ε
ε2
1 ÿ ´ c c ¯ B2 w
N
á yi yj ´ MY pyic yjc q x.
`W
2 i,j“1 Bxi Bxj
37
1.5. Unfolding with parameters and iterated unfolding
1.5 Unfolding with parameters and iterated

unfolding
In this section, we add a set of parameters O which is a bounded domain in
Rd (more generally an abstract σ-finite measure space). Consider the space
Lp pO ˆ Ωq. One can unfold with respect to the second variable x P Ω for
almost every t P O (see Definition 1.2), while the first variable is a parameter.
Definition 1.49 (The partial unfolding operator). For φ a measurable func-

tion on O ˆ Ω, the unfolding operator TεY is defined as follows:
$ ´ ” ı ¯
&φ t, ε x ` εy p ε ˆ Y,
for a.e. pt, x, yq P O ˆ Ω
TεY pφqpt, x, yq “ ε Y
%0 for a.e. pt, x, yq P O ˆ Λ ˆ Y. ε
In the case where O is a domain in some RM , M P N˚ , this operator maps

L pO ˆ Ωq into Lp pO ˆ Ω ˆ Y q for p P r1, `8s.
p
This is a partial unfolding and it has properties similar to the original

unfolding operator without parameters Tε . We shall only state a few of them,
listed in the next proposition (with a reference to the original statements).
Note that the partial unfolding operator commutes with any derivation with
respect to the parameter t in the case where O is a domain in some RM
(for M in N˚ ) and the original function φ is differentiable. We give some
examples in the next proposition.
The approach of partial unfolding is useful in evolution problems (where
t is the time variable) as well as in applications where iterated unfolding is
used (as exemplified in Subsection 3.1.4).
The approach we present here is also revisited with a slightly different
point of view in Chapter 7.
Proposition 1.50.
piq (cf. Proposition 1.8). For φ in L1 pO ˆ Ωq,
ż ż
1
TεY pφqpt, x, yq dxdydt “ φpt, xq dxdt.
|Y | OˆΩˆY pε
OˆΩ
Suppose p P r1, `8q.

piiq (cf. Proposition 1.8). For w in Lp pO ˆ Ωq,
1{p
}TεY pwq}Lp pOˆΩˆY q ď |Y | }w}Lp pOˆΩq .
piiiq (cf. Proposition 1.9). Let twε uε be a sequence in Lp pO ˆ Ωq converging

strongly to w. Then
TεY pwε q Ñ w strongly in Lp pO ˆ Ω ˆ Y q.
38
If twε uε converges strongly to w in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pOqq, then
TεY pwε q Ñ w strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ; W 1,p pOqq.
Suppose p P p1, `8q.

pivq (cf. Proposition 1.12). For every relatively weakly compact sequence
twε uε in Lp pO ˆ ⊗q, the corresponding sequence tTεY pwε quε is relatively
weakly compact in Lp pO ˆ ⊗ ˆ Yq.
Furthermore, if
TεY pwε q á w
p weakly in Lp pO ˆ Ω ˆ Y q,
then
wε á MY pwq
p weakly in Lp pO ˆ Ωq,
and
p Lp pOˆΩˆY q ď lim inf |Y |1{p }wε }Lp pOˆΩq .
}w}
εÑ0
pvq (cf. Theorem 1.41). Let twε uε be a sequence in Lp pO; W 1,p pΩqq, such
that
wε á w weakly in Lp pO; W 1,p pΩqq.
1,p
p in Lp pO ˆ Ω; Wper,0
Then, up to a subsequence, there exists some w pY qq such
that
TεY p∇x wε q á ∇x w ` ∇y wp weakly in Lp pO ˆ Ω ˆ Y qN .
Suppose p P p1, `8q and let O be a domain in RM for M P N˚ .
pviq (cf. Theorem 1.36). Let twε uε be a sequence in W 1,p pO ˆ Ωq, such that
wε á w weakly in Lp pO ˆ Ωq
with ε}∇x wε }Lp pOˆΩq ` }∇t wε }Lp pOˆΩq bounded. Then, up to a subsequence,
there exists some wp in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pO ˆ Y qq X Lp pO ˆ Ω; Wper
1,p
pY qq such that
TεY pwε q á w
p weakly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pO ˆ Y qq,
p
εTεY p∇x wε q á ∇y w weakly in Lp pO ˆ Ω ˆ Y qN ,
TεY p∇t wε q á ∇t w
p weakly in Lp pO ˆ Ω ˆ Y qM .
pviiq (cf. Theorem 1.41; compare also with Theorem 7.1). Let twε uε be a
sequence in W 1,p pO ˆ Ωq, such that
wε Ñ w weakly in W 1,p pO ˆ Ωq.

1,p
p in Lp pO ˆ Ω; Wper,0
Then, up to a subsequence, there exists some w pY qq such
that
TεY p∇x wε q á ∇x w ` ∇y wp weakly in Lp pO ˆ Ω ˆ Y qN ,
TεY p∇t wε q á ∇t w weakly in Lp pO ˆ Ω ˆ Y qM .
39
1.6. Scale-splitting operators
.
Let H be a second additive subgroup generated by a basis C “ pc1 , .., cN q
of R , and Z be the open parallelotope associated with this basis. Let
N
δ be given strictly positive. One can define the partial unfolding operator
TδZ which unfolds the second variable y P Y into py, zq P Y ˆ Z (with the
definitions for Ypδ and ΛYδ similar to (1.3)).
Definition 1.51 (The iterated unfolding operator). For φ in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q, the

iterated unfolding operator TδZ is defined as follows:
$ ´ ” ı ¯
&φ x, δ y ` δz for a.e. px, y, zq P Ω ˆ Ypδ ˆ Z,
TδZ pφqpx, y, zq “ δ Z
%0 for a.e. px, y, zq P Ω ˆ ΛYδ ˆ Z.
Suppose a sequence tpε, δqu in R˚` ˆ R˚` going to p0, 0q is given. Consider
a sequence twε,δ upε,δq which is bounded in W 1,p pΩq (1 ă p ă `8). In this
framework, Proposition 1.50(ii) implies the following result:
Proposition 1.52. Under the above hypotheses, up to a subsequence, there

1,p 1,p
are w0 in W 1,p pΩq, w
p1 in Lp pΩ; Wper,0 pY qq and w
p2 in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ; Wper,0 pZqq,
such that
TεY p∇wε,δ q á ∇w0 ` ∇y w

p1 weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
p1 ` ∇z w
TδZ ˝ TεY p∇wε,δ q á ∇w0 ` ∇y w p2 weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˆ ZqN ,
as well as
. 1` ˘
Wδ “ TεY pwε,δ ´ MYε pwε,δ qq á y c ¨ ∇w0 ` wp1
ε
weakly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq,
1` Z ˘
Tδ pWδ q ´ MZ
δ pWδ q á z ¨ p∇w0 ` ∇y w
c
p1 q ` w
p2
δ
weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ; W 1,p pZqq.
Remark 1.53. Similar results hold for any finite number of microscopic
scales ε, εδ1 , εδ1 δ2 , . . . , εδ1 δ2 . . . δk with pε, δ1 , δ2 , . . . , δk q Ñ p0, 0, 0, . . . , 0q
without any condition of separation of the scales.
1.6 Macro-micro decomposition and the scale-

splitting operators
In this section, we give a different proof of Theorem 1.41 which was the one
given originally in [60]. The method will be used also in the case of domains
with holes in Chapter 4).
40
The procedure is based on a splitting of functions φ in W 1,p pΩq (or in

W01,p pΩq)
for p P r1, `8s, in the form
φ “ Qε pφq ` Rε pφq,
where Qε pφq is an approximation of φ having the same behavior as φ, while

Rε pφq is a remainder of order ε.
The results of Section 1.4 can be seen as a zero order scale splitting where
the main approximation is piece-wise constant (operator Mε ). Here Qε pϕq
is always in W 1,8 pΩq which improves on some estimates.
The construction of Qε is based on the Q1 ínterpolate of some discrete
approximation, as is customary in the Finite Element Method ([56,178]). The
idea of using these type of interpolate was already present in Griso [116, 119]
for the study of truss-like structures.
For nodal values of the Q1 ínterpolate, one cannot take the values of the
considered functions (they do not make sense in general except for N “ 1
for functions in W 1,p since these functions are continuous). Therefore we
take the averages on the cells εξ ` εY (9). The explicit formulas for the Q1
interpolates (well-known in the Finite Element method) are recalled first.
Without loss of generality, we use the coordinate system on RN
associated with the basis B, i.e.,
ÿ
N
z“ zi b i ,
i“1
and for convenience, we shall write z “ pz1 , . . . , zN q. Under this convention,

ÿ
N
κ “ pκ1 , . . . , κN q P t0, 1uN is identified with κi b i .
i“1
Let Q1 pY q denote the finite dimensional space of polynomials on Y which

are the Lagrange interpolate of their values at the vertices of Y (it is the set
of all polynomials of degree less or equal to 1 separately with respect to
each variable). A basis of Q1 pY q is obtained by choosing the 2N elements
tqκ | κ P t0, 1uN u (these are the shape functions in the theory of Finite
Elements, see for example [56]) such that
qκ pκq “ 1,
qκ pκ1 q “ 0 at all other 2N ´ 1 vertices κ1 ‰ κ of Y .
Consequently, with the above conventions,
. ź κ
N
qκ pyq “ y p1 ´ y q1´κ for κ in t0, 1uN and y in Y .
“1
(9) For N “ 1 and functions in W 1,p , taking the actual Lagrange interpolate to define
the operators Qε makes for slightly simpler proofs.
41
At some point, the following notations will also be used, for 1 ď i ă j ď N ,
. ź
N
qiκ pyq “ y κ p1 ´ y q1´κ for κ in t0, 1uN and y in Y ,
“1, ‰i
as well as
. ź
N
κ pyq “
qij y κ p1 ´ y q1´κ for κ in t0, 1uN and y in Y .
“1, ‰i,j
Remark 1.54. It is well known (cf. [56]) that for all y in Y ,

ÿ
qκ pyq “ 1,
κPt0,1uN
and for all y in Y , and 1 ď i ď N ,

ÿ
qiκ pyq “ 1 where Ki “ tκ P t0, 1uN | κi “ 1u.
κPKi
It follows that for all y in Y ,

ÿ
qκ pyqκ “ y.
κPt0,1uN
Similarly, for all y in Y and 1 ď i ă j ď N ,

ÿ
κ pyq “ 1 where Kij “ tκ P t0, 1u | κi “ κj “ 1u.
qij N
κPKij
Note also that

ż ż
|Y | |Y |
qκ pyq dy “ N , qiκ pyq dy “ for 1 ď i ď N,
2 2N ´1
żY Y
(1.55)
|Y |
κ pyq dy “ N ´2
qij for 1 ď i ă j ď N.
Y 2
The gradients of elements of Q1 pY q are polynomials of degree at most one
with respect to each basis variable and furthermore, for every Ψ in Q1 pY q
BΨ
and i “ 1, . . . , N , is independent of yi and separately affine with respect
Byi
to each yj , j ‰ i.
More precisely, the following formulas hold for every y in Y and Ψ in
Q1 pY q:
ÿ
Ψpyq “ Ψpκq qκ pyq,
κPt0,1uN
BΨ
pyq “ Ψpy1 , . . . , 1, . . . , yN q ´ Ψpy1 , . . . , 0, . . . , yN q (1.56)
Byi i i
ÿ ` ˘ i
“ Ψpκ ` bi q ´ Ψpκq qκ pyq.
κPKi
42
Therefore, for every i P t1, . . . , N u,

B2 Ψ
pyq ” 0. (1.57)
Byi2
Similarly, for 1 ď i ă j ď N ,
B2 Ψ
pyq “ Ψpy1 , . . . , 1, . . . , 1, . . . , yN q´ Ψpy1 , . . . , 1, . . . , 0, . . . , yN q
Byi Byj i j i j
´ Ψpy1 , . . . , 0, . . . , 1, . . . , yN q ` Ψpy1 , . . . , 0, . . . , 0, . . . , yN q (1.58)
i j i j
ÿ ` ˘
“ Ψpκ ` bi ` bj q ´ Ψpκ ` bi q ´ Ψpκ ` bj q ` Ψpκq qij κ pyq.
κPKij
Observe that this second derivative is constant with respect to yi and yj , and
separately affine with respect to the other variables.
Lemma 1.55. Suppose p P r1, `8s. There exists a constant C depending on
N and Y (but independent of p), such that for φ P Q1 pY q and ψ P Lp pY q,
piq }φ ψ}Lp pY q ď C }φ}Lp pY q }ψ}Lp pY q ,

(1.59)
piiq }φ ´ φp0q}Lp pY q ď C }∇y φ}Lp pY q .
Proof. Let φ be in Q1 pY q and ψ P Lp pY q.

(i) For p “ `8, inequality (1.59)(i) is obvious.
For p P r1, `8q, (1.59)(i) follows from the existence of a constant C
(depending only on N and Y ) such that for every φ P Q1 pY q,
}φ}L8 pY q ď C }φ}Lp pY q ,
consequence of the fact that the space Q1 pY q is of dimension 2N so all its

norms are equivalent, C can be chosen independent of p by using the constant
for p “ 1 and applying the Hölder inequality
}φ}L1 pY q ď }φ}Lp pY q |Y |1´1{p .
(ii) The subspace of Q1 pY q consisting of elements that vanish at the origin

(of Y ), is of dimension 2N ´ 1. Hence, all its norms are equivalent. So, there
is a constant C (depending only on N and Y ) such that for every φ P Q1 pY q
with φp0q “ 0,
}φ}L8 pY q ď C }∇y φ}L1 pY q .
Consequently, for every φ in Q1 pY q the following inequality holds:
}φ ´ φp0q}L8 pY q ď C }∇y φ}Lp pY q .
As before, the constant C can be chosen independently of p.
43
1.6.1 The case of the whole space

As a tool (and to make notations easier), we first introduce a kind of averaging
map on Lp pRN q.
Definition 1.56 (Average over a line segment). Let a be in RN . For ϕ
continuous on RN , set
ż1
Ma pϕqpxq “ ϕpx ` taq dt for x P RN ,
0
which itself is continuous.

Lemma 1.57. For ϕ continuous and bounded on RN , the following inequality
holds:
}Ma pϕq}L8 pRN q ď }ϕ}L8 pRN q .
If ϕ is continuous with compact support, then,
}Ma pϕq}Lp pRN q ď }ϕ}Lp pRN q for all p P r1, `8q.
If ϕ is in C 1 pRN q, then so is Ma pφq and
Ma p∇φq “ ∇Ma pφq a.e. in RN . (1.60)
Moreover, for φ and ψ continuous (with one at least with compact support),
ż ż
Ma pφqpxq ψpxq dx “ φpxq Má pψqpxq dx. (1.61)
RN RN
Proof. The first inequality is obvious. For p “ 1, the second inequality follows
directly from Fubini’s theorem applied to the function px, tq ÞÑ |ϕpx ` taq|.
For 1 ă p ă `8, one uses in the same way Fubini’s theorem after applying
Hölder’s inequality (which implies |Ma pϕq|p ď Ma p|ϕ|p q). The third equality
is a straightforward derivation under the integral. The last equality (1.61)
follows again by Fubini’s theorem.
A density argument (weak-˚ density for p “ `8) gives
Proposition 1.58. For p P r1, `8s, the linear operator Ma has a unique
extension, still denoted Ma , from Lp pRN q into itself and with norm 1.
1
For every φ P Lp pRN q and ψ P Lp pRN q, one has
ż ż
Ma pφqpxqψpxq dx “ φpxqMá pψqpxq dx.
RN RN
Furthermore, for every ϕ in W 1,p pRN q, Ma pφq is also in W 1,p pRN q and
Ma p∇φq “ ∇Ma pφq a.e. in RN .
The next lemma is proved in a similar fashion as Proposition 1.25.
44
Lemma 1.59.
Suppose p P r1, `8q.
(i) Let twε uε be a sequence in Lp pRN q strongly convergent to w. Then
Mεa pwε q Ñ w strongly in Lp pRN q.
In particular, for every φ P Lp pRN q,
Mεa pφq Ñ φ strongly in Lp pRN q.

` ˘
(ii) For any φ P W 1,p pRN q, one has ∇ Ma pφq “ Ma p∇φq, and
}Ma pφq}W 1,p pRN q ď }φ}W 1,p pRN q .
Moreover, if twε uε is a sequence converging strongly to w in W 1,p pRN q, then
Mεa pwε q Ñ w strongly in W 1,p pRN q.

(iii) Let twε uε be a sequence in Lp pRN q weakly convergent to w. Then
Mεa pwε q á w weakly in Lp pRN q.
(iv) Let twε uε be a sequence in W 1,p pRN q weakly convergent to w. Then
Mεa pwε q á w weakly in W 1,p pRN q.
For p “ `8, (iii) and (iv) hold with the weak-˚ topologies.
Definition 1.60 (Q1 -interpolating operator). For p P r1, `8s, the operator
rε : Lp pRN q ÝÑ W 1,`8 pRN q

Q
(with the convention of Remark 1.22) is defined as follows:
for ξ P G, rε pφqpεξq “ M
Q Ăε pφqpεξq,
for x P RN , rε pφqpxq is the Q1 -interpolate of the values of Q
Q rε pφq
”xı
at the vertices of the cell ε ` εY.
ε Y
One can check the following explicit formulas for φ P Lp pRN q and for all
x in RN :
ÿ ´ ” ı ¯ ´! x ) ¯
Q rε pφqpxq “ Ăε pφq ε x
M ` εκ qκ , (1.62)
N
ε Y ε Y
κPt0,1u
45
and from (1.56), for 1 ď i ď N ,

rε pφq
BQ ÿ 1" ´ ” ı ¯
pxq “ Ăε pφq ε x
M ` εpκ ` bi q
Bxi κPKi
ε ε Y
(1.63)
´ ”xı ¯* ´! x ) ¯
Ă
´ Mε pφq ε ` εκ qκ i
,
ε Y ε Y
and from (1.58), for 1 ď i ă j ď N ,
B2 Qrε pφq ÿ 1" ´ ” ı ¯

pxq “ Ăε pφq ε x
M ` εpκ ` b i ` b j q
Bxi Bxj κPKij
ε2 ε Y
´ ” ı ¯
´M Ăε pφq ε x ` εpκ ` bi q
ε ıY
´ ”x ¯ (1.64)
Ă
´ Mε pφq ε ` εpκ ` bj q
ε Y
´ ”xı ¯* ´! x ) ¯
`M Ăε pφq ε ` εκ qij .
κ
ε Y ε Y
Remark 1.61. By construction, the function Q rε pφq is separately piece-wise

affine (with respect to the variables xi defined on the basis B) on each cell
` ˘
Ăε pφq{Bxi
ε ξ ` Y . Observe also that for anyì P t1, ˘. . . , N u, the derivative B Q
is independent of xi in each cell ε ξ ` Y , while it is separately piece-wise
affine with respect to the other variables xj , j ‰ i. A similar remark can be
made for the second order crossed derivatives.
rε pϕq and of its derivatives in
The next result gives the expressions of Q
terms of the shape functions.
Lemma 1.62.
(i) For ϕ in W 1,p pRN q, for i P t1, . . . , N u and for a.e. x P RN ,
rε pφq
BQ ÿ ´ ¯´ ” ı ¯ ´! x ) ¯
pxq “ Ăε ˝ Mεb Bφ ε x
M qiκ (1.65)
Bxi κPK
i
Bx i ε Y ε Y
i
and
` ˘
Q Ăε pφqpxq
rε ´ M
ÿ ÿ
N ´ ¯´ ” ı ¯ ´! x ) ¯
Ăε ˝ Mεκ Bφ ε x
(1.66)
“ M κi q κ .
Ni“1
Bxi ε Y ε Y
κPt0,1u
(ii) For ϕ in W 2,p pRN q, for pi, jq P t1, . . . , N u2 , i ă j, and for a.e. x P RN ,
rε pφq
B2 Q
pxq
Bxi Bxj
ÿ ´ B 2 φ ¯´ ” x ı ¯ ´! x ) ¯ (1.67)
“ Ă
Mε ˝ Mεbj ˝ Mεbi ε qij .
κPK
Bxi Bxj ε Y κ ε Y
ij
46
Proof. (i) Let φ be in DpRN q. For every ξ in G and every κ P t0, 1uN ,
1` Ă Ăε pφqpεξq
˘
Mε pφqpεξ ` εκq ´ M
ε
ż ż1
1
“ N ∇φpx ` tεκq ¨ κ dx dt
ε |Y | εξ`εY 0
` ˘ (1.68)
“M Ăε ˝ Mεκ ∇φ ¨ κ pεξq
ÿN ´ ¯
“ MĂε ˝ Mεκ Bφ κi pεξq.
i“1
Bbi
Using this formula written for κ “ bi in (1.63), gives (1.65). By density this
holds for every ϕ in Wÿ1,p
pRN q and for a.e. x in RN .
Similarly, since qκ ” 1, formula (1.62) yields,
κPt0,1uN
1` r ˘
Ăε pφqpxq
Qε ´ M
ε
ÿ 1´ ´ ” ı ¯ ´ ” ı ¯¯ ´! x ) ¯
“ Ăε pφq ε x
M Ăε pφq ε x
` εκ ´ M qκ .
N
ε ε Y ε Y ε Y
κPt0,1u
This, together with (1.68), imply (1.66). By density, it holds for every ϕ in
W 1,p pRN q and for a.e. x in RN .
(ii) Now, consider again φ in DpRN q. For ξ P G and for 1 ď i ă j ď N ,
from (1.68), after multiple applications of (1.60), we easily obtain
1 ”` Ă Ăε pφqpεξ ` εbj q
˘
2
Mε pφqpεξ ` εbi ` εbj q ´ M
ε
` ˘ı
´ M Ăε pφqpεξq
Ăε pφqpεξ ` εbi q ´ M
1´ Ă ´ Bφ ¯ ´
Ăε ˝ Mεb Bφ pεξq
¯ ¯
“ Mε ˝ Mεbi pεξ ` εbj q ´ M
ε Bxi i
Bxi
´ ´
1 Ă BMεbi pφq ¯ ´ ¯ ¯ (1.69)
“ Mε Ăε BMεbi pφq pεξq
pεξ ` εbj q ´ M
ε Bxi Bxi
´ B 2 M pφq ¯
“M Ăε ˝ Mεb εbi
pεξq
j
Bxi Bxj
´ B2 φ ¯
“M Ăε ˝ Mεb ˝ Mεb pεξq.
j i
Bxi Bxj
Consequently, equality (1.67) holds for φ P DpRN q, and by density, for ϕ in

W 2,p pRN q and a.e. for x in RN .
We use in the sequel the following notation:
47
Notation 1.63. For δ ą 0, and O a subset of RN , Vδ pOq denotes the δ-

neighborhood of O, that is,
ˇ (
Vδ pOq “ x P RN zOq ˇ dist px, BΩq ď δ. .
Proposition 1.64. Suppose p is in r1, `8s and recall that dpY q is the di-
ameter of Y .
If φ belongs to Lp pRN q, then
piq rε pφq}Lp pRN q ď }φ}Lp pRN q , }Q

}Q rε pφq}Lp pOq ď }φ}Lp pV .
2εdpY q pOqq
}∇Qrε pφq}Lp pRN q ď 2 }φ}Lp pRN q ,

piiq ε
r 2
}∇Qε pφq}Lp pOq ď }φ}Lp pV2εdpY q pOqq .
ε
If φ belongs to W 1,p pRN q and 1 ď i ă j ď N , then
rε pφq}Lp pRN q ď }∇φ}Lp pRN q ,
}∇Q
piiiq
rε pφq}Lp pOq ď }∇φ}Lp pV
}∇Q ,
2εdpY q pOqq
rε pφq ´ M
}Q Ăε pφq}Lp pRN q ď ε}∇φ}Lp pRN q ,
pivq
rε pφq ´ M
}Q Ăε pφq}Lp pOq ď ε}∇φ}Lp pV ,
3εdpY q pOqq
and
› B2 Q ›
› rε pφq › 2
› › ď }∇φ}Lp pRN q ,
Bxi Bxj Lp pRN q ε
pvq › B2 Q ›
› rε pφq › 2
› › p ď }∇φ}Lp pV3εdpY q pOqq .
Bxji Bxj L pOq ε
If φ belongs to W 2,p pRN q, then for 1 ď i ă j ď N ,
› B2 Q ›
› rε pφq ›
› › ď }∇2 φ}Lp pRN q ,
Bxi Bxj Lp pRN q
pviq › 2
›B Q rε pφq ››
› › ď }∇2 φ}Lp pV3εdpY q pOqq .
Bxi Bxj Lp pOq
› ` ˘›
›pId ´ M Ăε q ∇Q rε pφq › p N ď Cε}∇2 φ}Lp pRN q ,
L pR q
pviiq › ` ˘›
›pId ´ M Ăε q ∇Q rε pφq › p ď Cε}∇2 φ}Lp pV3εdpY q pOqq.
L pOq
The constant C depends only on N and Y .

rε pφq after scaling and summation,
Remark 1.65. Using (1.59)2 , applied to Q
it follows that
}Q Ăε pφq}Lp pRN q ď C ε}∇Q
rε pφq ´ M rε pφq}Lp pRN q ,
rε pφq ´ M
}Q Ăε pφq}Lp pOq ď C ε}∇Q
rε pφq}Lp pV ,
3εdpY q pOqq
48
with a constant C depending only on N and Y . In view of (iii), this gives

another proof of (iv), with the extra constant C, but is of interest in itself.
Proof of Proposition 1.64. Suppose first p finite.

(i) and (ii) Let φ be in Lp pRN q . Using formula (1.62), the fact that
ÿ
qκ pyq ě 0 and qκ pyq “ 1 for every y P Y ,
κPt0,1uN
implies that for all ξ in G, and for every x in εpξ ` Y q,

ÿ ` ˘ ´! ) ¯
rε pφqpxq|p ď
|Q |MĂε pφq εξ ` εκ |p qκ x ,
N
ε Y
κPt0,1u
where we used the convexity of the function t ÞÑ |t|p . Integrating with respect
to x and recalling the equality (see Remark 1.54),
ż
|Y |
qκ pyq “ ,
Y 2N
yields
ÿ εN |Y | Ă ` ˘
rε pφq}p p
}Q L pεpξ`Y qq ď 2 N
|Mε pφq εξ ` εκ |p .
κPt0,1uN
Summation over G (or over G X O) gives
rε pφq}p p N ď }M
}Q Ăε pφq}p p N ,
L pR q L pR q
rε pφq}p p
}Q r p Ă p
L pOq ď }Qε pφq}Lp pVεdpY q pOqq ď }Mε pφq}Lp pV2εdpY q pOqq .
Then inequalities in (i) are immediate consequences of Proposition 1.24(i)

applied to Ω “ RN or to Ω “ V2εdpY q pOq.
Due to the expression of the partial derivatives (1.63), and proceeding as
above, the inequalities in (ii) follow easily.
(iii) Let φ be in DpRN q. Reasoning as in the proof of (i) and using formu-
las (1.65) and (1.55) from Remark 1.54, one has for every ξ in G and x in
εpξ ` Y q,
ˇ BQ ˇ ÿ ˇˇ ´ ¯ ˇp ´! x ) ¯
ˇ rε pφq ˇp Ăε ˝ Mεb Bφ pεξ ` εκqˇˇ qi
ˇ pxqˇ ď ˇM .
Bxi κPK
i
Bxi κ
ε Y
i
Then, by integrating with respect to x,

› BQ › εN |Y | ÿ ˇˇ Ă ´ Bφ ¯ ˇp
› rε pφq ›p ˇ
› › p ď N ´1 ˇMε ˝ Mεbi pεξ ` εκqˇ .
Bxi L pεξ`εY q 2 κPK
Bxi
i
49
Due to Proposition 1.24(i) (with Ω “ RN or Ω “ VεdpY q pOq), and to Lem-

ma 1.59(i), summation over G (or over G X O) gives the inequalities in (iii)
Bφ
for p finite. By density, they hold true for φ P Lp pRN q with P Lp pRN q.
Bxi
(iv) Proceeding as in the above proofs and recalling formula (1.66), gives
›1` ˘ ›p ÿ εN |Y | ÿ ˇˇ Ă
N ´ Bφ ¯` ˘ˇp
› r Ăε pφq›› ˇ
› Qε ´ M ď ˇ M ε ˝ M εκ εξ ˇ .
ε Lp pεξ`εY q 2N i“1 Bxi
κPt0,1uN
Summing over G (and G X O, resp.) leads to

ÿN › ´ Bφ ¯›p
rε pφq ´ M
Ăε pφq}p p N ď εp ›Ă ›
}Q L pR q ›Mε ˝ Mεκ › p N ,
i“1
Bx i L pR q
ÿN › ´ Bφ ¯›p
rε pφq ´ M
Ăε pφq}p p ›Ă ›
}Q L pOq ď ε
p
›Mε ˝ Mεκ › p .
i“1
Bx i L pVεdpY q pOqq
Proposition 1.24(i) (with Ω “ RN or Ω “ VεdpY q pOq) and Lemma 1.59(ii)

end the proof of (iv)(10).
(v) and (vi) Proceed as in the proof of (iii) with φ in DpRN q and make use
of (1.67) and again of (1.55), to obtain for ξ P G and 1 ď i ă j ď N , the
following estimates:
ˇ B2 Q ˇ 2p´1 ÿ ´ˇˇ Ă ´ Bφ ¯` ˘ˇˇp
ˇ rε pφq ˇp
ˇ pxqˇ ď p ˇMε ˝ Mεbi εξ ` εκ ` εbj ˇ
Bxi Bxj ε κPK Bxi
ij
ˇ ´ Bφ ¯` ˘ˇˇp ¯ ´! x ) ¯
ˇĂ
` ˇM ε ˝ Mεbi εξ ` εκ ˇ qij ,
Bxi κ
ε Y
ˇ B2 Q ˇ
ˇ rε pφq ˇp
ˇ pxqˇ
Bxi Bxj
ÿ ˇˇ ´ B 2 φ ¯` ˘ˇˇp ´! x ) ¯
ď ˇMĂε ˝ Mb ,ε ˝ Mεb εξ ` εκ ˇ qij .
κPK
j i
Bxi Bxj κ
ε Y
ij
Now, with the same arguments as before, it is easily seen that the last
two inequalities imply (v) and (vi), respectively.
(vii) For φ P W 2,p pRN q consider the function Trε p∇Q
rε pφqq. In view of (1.57),
B ´ r ´ BQ
rε pφq ¯¯
Tε “ 0. (1.70)
Byi Bxi
Recall that for 1 ď i ă j ď N ,
B ´ r ´ BQ
rε pφq ¯¯ ´ B2 Q
rε pφq ¯
Tε “ εTrε .
Byi Bxj Bxi Bxj
(10) An alternative proof could be given by using (1.59)(ii).
50
Therefore by estimates (vi), Trε p∇Q

rε pφqq belongs to Lp pRN ; W 1,p pY qqN and
moreover,
` ˘
}∇y Trε p∇Q
rε pφqq }Lp pRN ˆY q ď Cε|Y |1{p }∇2 φ}Lp pRN q ,
` ˘
rε pφqq }Lp pOˆY q ď Cε|Y |1{p }∇2 φ}Lp pV
}∇y Trε p∇Q 2εdpY q pOqq
.
Now, applying inequality (1.59) leads to
rε pφqq ´ Mε p∇Q
}Trε p∇Q rε pφqq}Lp pRN ˆY q
` ˘
ď C}∇y Trε p∇Q rε pφqq }Lp pRN ˆY q
ď Cε|Y |1{p }∇2 φ}Lp pRN q ,

(1.71)
}Trε p∇Q rε pφqq}Lp pOˆY q
` ˘
ď C}∇y Trε p∇Q rε pφqq }Lp pOˆY q
ď Cε|Y |1{p }∇2 φ}Lp pV2εdpY q pOqq .
Then the estimates from (vii) in the case of the whole space, are immediate
by virtue of Proposition 1.8(i) applied in RN .
In the case of a general open set O, the same proposition shows that
rε pφq ´ Mε p∇Q
}∇Q rε pφqq}Lp pOq
ď |Y |´1{p }Trε p∇Q

rε pφqq}Lp pV
2εdpY q pOqˆY q
.
This, together with (1.71) applied in the open set VεdpY q pOq instead of O,
concludes the proof of estimate (vii).
All the inequalities from the statement of theorem are also satisfied in the
case p “ `8, by passing to the limit.
Corollary 1.66. Suppose p P r1, `8q. For φ in Lp pRN q, the following

convergences hold:
piq rε pφq Ñ φ
Q strongly in Lp pRN q,
(1.72)
piiq ε∇Q rε pφq Ñ 0 strongly in Lp pRN qN .
For φ in W 1,p pRN q, one has the convergence
rε pφq Ñ φ
Q strongly in W 1,p pRN q. (1.73)
For φ in W 2,p pRN q, and 1 ď i ‰ j ď N ,
rε pφq
B2 Q B2 φ
Ñ strongly in Lp pRN q. (1.74)
Bxi Bxj Bxi Bxj
51
Proof. The first convergence in (1.72) comes from the inequalities (iv) of
Proposition 1.64 and (1.38)1 when φ belongs to W 1,p pRN q, and by a density
argument (of W 1,p pRN q in Lp pRN q) together with estimate (i) of the same
Proposition 1.64.
The second convergence in (1.72) is obtained in a similar way, by using
first estimates (iii) of Proposition 1.64 for φ in W 1,p pRN q, and afterwards
estimates (ii) from the same proposition.
For ψ P Cc8 pRN q, formula (1.63) allows to obtain the strong convergence
rε pψq
BQ Bψ
Ñ strongly in L8 pRN q,
Bxi Bxi
and then in Lp pRN q for p finite, since these two partial derivatives vanish
outside a fixed bounded closed set. Again by a density argument, estimates
(iii) in Proposition 1.64 imply for φ P W 1,p pRN q, the convergence
rε pφq Ñ ∇φ
∇Q strongly in Lp pRN qN ,
for p finite. Using (1.72)1 , convergence (1.73) follows immediately.
As regarding convergence (1.74), it is obtained by using formula (1.67),
Lemma 1.59 and proceeding as above.
r ε pφq
Definition 1.67 (Remainder in the scale-splitting). The remainder R
is given by
R rε pφq
r ε pφq “ φ ´ Q for every φ P W 1,p pRN q.
Corollary 1.68. Suppose p P r1, `8s. For φ P W 1,p pRN q, one has
r ε pφq}Lp pRN q ď ε C }∇φ}Lp pRN q ,
}R
r ε pφq}Lp pRN q ď C}∇φ}Lp pRN q .
}∇R
Moreover, for p P r1, `8q,
1r r ÿN
Bφ
Tε ˝ Rε pφq Ñ ´ MY pyi q strongly in Lp pRN ˆ Y q,
ε i“1
Bxi
(1.75)
1r ÿN
Bφ
Rε pφq Ñ ´ MY pyi q strongly in L pR q.p N
ε i“1
Bx i
The constant C does not depend on ε and p.

Proof. The two estimates are obtained from Proposition 1.64(iv) and (iii)
respectively, together with (1.38)1 (with RN in place of Ω p ε ).
For φ P W 1,p pRN q formula (1.66) reads for a.e. px, yq P RN ˆ Y ,
1 r `r ˘ ÿ ÿ
N ´ ¯
Ăε pφqpx, yq “
Tε ˝ Q ε ´ M qκ pyq Ăε ˝ Mεκ Bφ pxqκi . (1.76)
M
ε i“1
Bxi
κPt0,1uN
52
For p finite, Proposition 1.25(i) and Lemma 1.59(ii) allow to pass to the limit
and obtain the following strong convergence in Lp pRN ˆ Y q:
1 r `r ˘ ÿ ´ÿN
Bψ ¯ ÿ Bψ
N
Ăε pψqp ¨ , yq Ñ
Tε ˝ Q ε ´ M qκ pyq κi “ yi .
ε i“1
Bxi i“1
Bxi
κPt0,1uN
Then, according to Proposition 1.39(ii) with RN in place of Ω, (1.75)1 is

straightforward. Proposition 1.31(vi) then easily gives (1.75)2 .
We now state convergence results concerning the sequences tQ rε pwε quε ,

tRr ε pwε quε and tTrε ˝ Q
rε pwε quε for a sequence twε uε converging weakly in
W pR q. Note that by construction Trε ˝ Q
1,p N rε pwε q belongs to the closed
subspace L pR ; Q1 pY qq of the space L pR ; W 1,p pY qq.
p N p N
Proposition 1.69. Suppose p P p1, `8q. Let twε uε be a sequence such that
wε á w weakly in W 1,p pRN q.
Then, the following convergences hold true:
piq r ε pwε q Ñ 0 strongly in Lp pRN q and weakly in W 1,p pRN q,

R
piiq Qrε pwε q Ñ w strongly in Lp pRN q and weakly in W 1,p pRN q,
loc
r r
piiiq Tε ˝ Qε pwε q Ñ w strongly in Lp pRN ; Q1 pY qq,
loc
rε pwε qq á ∇w
pivq Trε p∇Q weakly in Lp pRN ˆ Y qN .
For p “ `8, these strong convergences are the same with weak-˚ in place
of weak in (i), (ii) and (iv)(11).
Proof. (i) Convergences (i) are direct consequences of the two inequalities
given in Corollary 1.68.
(ii) Convergences (ii) follow from (i) and the weak convergence of twε uε in
W 1,p pRN q, which implies the strong convergence wε Ñ w in Lploc pRN q.
(iii) The third convergence is obtained from (ii) and Corollary 1.37.
(iv) By Propositions 1.8(iii) and 1.64(iii), and with C independent of ε,
› ´ BQ
rε pwε q ¯››
›r
›Tε › p N ď C,
Bxi L pR ˆY q
and by Propositions 1.35 and 1.64(v), and with equality (1.70),

› " ´ BQrε pwε q ¯*››
›
›∇y Trε › p N ď C.
Bxi L pR ˆY q
53
As a consequence, there exist a subsequence, still denoted ε, and Wi in

Lp pRN ; W 1,p pY qq, such that
´ BQ
rε pwε q ¯
Trε á Wi weakly in Lp pRN ˆ Y q.
Bxi
rε pwε q
BQ
By Remark 1.61, is piecewise constant with respect to xi and piece-
Bxi
wise affine with respect to the other xj . So, Wi p ¨ , yq is independent of yi
and separately affine with respect to the other yj pj ‰ iq.
On the other hand, by Proposition 1.64, one has
› B ´ BQ
rε pwε q ¯››
›
›ε › p N ď C,
Bxj Bxi L pR q
for j ‰ i, and with C independent of ε. Then one can show, as in the proof
of Theorem 1.36, that Wi p ¨ , yq is periodic with respect to the variables yj
for j ‰ i, as well as affine. This obviously implies that it is independent of
yj , for all j P t1, . . . , N u. Consequently, Wi does not depend on y so that
Wi “ MY pWi q.
But Proposition 1.12(iv) together with convergence (ii) above imply that
Bw
MY pWi q “ .
Bxi
! ´ BQrε pwε q ¯)
Now, the whole sequence Trε having a unique weak limit point,
Bxi ε
converges weakly in the space Lp pRN ˆ Y q. This proves the claim.
The case p “ `8 is treated in exactly the same fashion.
Corollary 1.70. Suppose p P p1, `8q. Let twε uε be a sequence converging
p1
weakly in W 1,p pRN q to w. Then, up to a subsequence, there exists some w
in the space Lp pRN ; Wper
1,p
pY qq such that
1r r
piq p1 weakly in Lp pRN ; W 1,p pY qq,
Tε ˝ Rε pwε q á w
ε
1 r` r ˘
piiq Tε ∇Rε pwε q á ∇y wp1 weakly in Lp pRN ˆ Y qN ,
ε
1
piiiq Trε p∇wε q á ∇w ` ∇y wp1 weakly in Lp pRN ˆ Y qN .
ε
p of Theorem 1.41 (in the case Ω “ RN q, is given by
The connection with w
w p1 ´ MY pw
p“w p1 q and p1 q “ ´∇w ¨ MY pyq(12),
MY pw (1.77)
provided the same subsequence is used.
(12) with the notation convention introduced before Theorem 1.41.
(13) See Corollary 2.39 for the case p “ 1.
54
Proof. Convergences (i), (ii) and (iii) follow from the estimates of Corol-
lary 1.68, from the convergence in Proposition 1.69(iv), and from Theo-
rem 1.36 (for Ω “ RN ).
The relation between wp1 and w p follows from (1.77). The first equality is
p and w
straightforward since w p1 having the same gradient with respect to y,
they differ by a function of x only which is determined as MY pw p1 q, because
MY pwqp ” 0.
To obtain the value of MY pw p1 q, write
1r r 1 ` ˘ `
Ăε pwε q ´ 1 Trε Q
˘
Tε ˝ Rε pwε q “ Trε wε ´ M Ăε pwε q .
rε pwε q ´ M
ε ε ε
The average over Y of the first term in the right-hand side is always 0. By
Proposition 1.25(ii), the average over Y of the second term converges to
MY pwp1 q. Use Formula (1.76) to get for a.e. px, yq P RN ˆ Y ,
1 r `r ˘ ÿ ÿ
N ´ ¯
Ăε pwε qpx, yq “
Tε ˝ Q ε ´ M qκ pyq Ăε ˝ Mεκ Bwε pxqκi .
M
ε i“1
Bxi
κPt0,1uN
Passing to the limit with Lemma 1.59(iii) gives the following weak conver-
gence in Lp pRN ˆ Y q:
1 r `r ˘ ÿ ´ÿN
Bw ¯
Tε ˝ Qε ´ MĂε pwε qp¨, yq á qκ pyq κi
ε N i“1
Bxi
κPt0,1u
ÿN
Bw
“ yi ” ∇w ¨ y.
i“1
Bx i
Taking the average over Y , finally implies (1.77).

We close this subsection with some remarkable estimates which generalize
Proposition 1.64.
Proposition 1.71. Suppose p P r1, `8s. For ψ in Lp pY q and Φ in Lp pRN q,
with Φ|εpξ`Y q in Q1 pεpξ ` Y qq for every ξ P G,
› ´! ¨ ) ¯ ›
› ›
›ψ Φ› ď C}ψ}Lp pY q }Φ}Lp pRN q .
ε Y Lp pRN q
Similarly, for every open subset O,

› ´! ¨ ) ¯ ›
› ›
›ψ Φ› ď C}ψ}Lp pY q }Φ}Lp pV2εdpY q pOqq .
ε Y Lp pOq
The constants depend only on N and Y .

Proof. As a consequence of (1.59)(i), for p P r1, `8q,
´! ¨ ) ¯
}ψ Φ}pLp pεpξ`Y qq ď C p }Φ}pLp pεpξ`Y qq }ψ}pLp pY q .
ε Y
Summation over G (and over G X O, resp.) gives the result. For p “ `8
the result is straightforward.
55
Corollary 1.72. Suppose p P r1, `8s. For ψ in Lp pY q and φ in Lp pRN q,

› ´! ¨ ) ¯ ›
› rε pφq››
›ψ Q ď C }ψ}Lp pY q }φ}Lp pRN q ,
ε Y Lp pRN q
´! ¨ ) ¯ ›
}ψ rε pφq››
Q ď C }ψ}Lp pY q }φ}Lp pV2εdpY q pOqq ,
ε Y Lp pOq
and › ´! ¨ ) ¯ ›
› rε pφq›› C
›ψ ∇Q ď }ψ}Lp pY q }φ}Lp pRN q ,
ε Y L pR q
p N ε
› ´! ¨ ) ¯ ›
› rε pφq›› C
›ψ ∇Q ď }ψ}Lp pY q }φ}Lp pV2εdpY q pOqq .
ε Y Lp pOq ε
Furthermore, if φ belongs to W 1,p pRN q, then
› ´! ¨ ) ¯ ›
› rε pφq››
›ψ ∇Q ď C }ψ}Lp pY q }∇φ}Lp pRN q ,
ε Y Lp pRN q
› ´! ¨ ) ¯ ›
› rε pφq››
›ψ ∇Q ď C }ψ}Lp pY q }∇φ}Lp pV2εdpY q pOqq .
ε Y Lp pOq
The constants C depend only on N and Y .

Proof. These estimates follow from Lemma 1.55 and Proposition 1.64.
1.6.2 The case of a subdomain

We now turn to the definitions of the maps Qε and Rε on the spaces W01,p pΩq
and W 1,p pΩq. The case of W 1,p pΩq is considered with the extra assumption
that Ω is bounded with Lipschitz boundary.
Definition 1.73 (Q1 -interpolating operator in Lp pΩq and W01,p pΩq). On
Lp pΩq, the operator
Qoε : Lp pΩq ÝÑ W 1,8 pΩq,
is defined as
r |Ω ,
rε pφq
Qoε pφq “ Q
where φr is the extension of φ by zero to RN zΩ. The same operator is used
for φ in W1,p
0 pΩq. The map Rε is defined as Id ´ Qε .
o o
Note that Q r vanishes outside of the 2εdpY q-neighborhood of Ω. In

rε pφq
particular Qoε pφq does not necessarily belong to W01,8 pΩq for φ in W01,p pΩq.
Concerning the case of W 1,p pΩq, as Ω is bounded with Lipschitz boundary,
it is then classical (see for instance [2, 37]) that there exists a continuous
extension operator
Pr : W 1,p pΩq Ñ W 1,p pRN q,
and a constant C satisfying, for all φ P W 1,p pΩq,
r Lp pRN q ď C}φ}Lp pΩq ,
}Pφ}
(1.78)
r W 1,p pRN q ď C}φ}W 1,p pΩq .
}Pφ}
56
Proposition 1.74. There exists an extension operator P from W 1,p pΩq to

W 1,p pRN q and a constant C satisfying for all φ P W 1,p pΩq,
}Pφ}Lp pRN q ď C}φ}Lp pΩq ,

}Pφ}W 1,p pRN q ď C}φ}W 1,p pΩq , (1.79)
}∇pPφq}Lp pV1 pΩqq ď C}∇φ}Lp pΩq ,
where V1 pΩq is the 1-neighborhood of Ω (cf. notation 1.63).
Proof. Let θ be positive in DpRN q with value 1 on V1 pΩq. Set

. `r ˘
Pφ “ Ppφ ´ MΩ pφqq ` MΩ pφq θ.
1
Inequality (1.79)1 follows from the fact that |MΩ pφq| ď |Ω|1{p }φ}Lp pΩq and
from (1.78)1 .
The Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality (2.24) (see Subsection 2.3.1), applied
to φ in Ω gives
}φ ´ MΩ pφq}W 1,p pΩq ď C}∇φ}Lp pΩq .
By (1.78)2 ,
r ´ MΩ pφqq}W 1,p pRN q ď C}∇φ}Lp pΩq ,
}Ppφ
so that (1.79)2 holds.
Finally, in view of the identity
r ´ MΩ pφqq|V pΩq ,
∇pPφq|V1 pΩq “ ∇Ppφ 1
the last inequality (1.79)3 is straightforward.
Definition 1.75 (Q1 -interpolating operator in W 1,p pΩq). On W 1,p pΩq, the
operator
Qε : W 1,p pΩq Ñ W 1,`8 pΩq,
rε pPφq|Ω .
Qε pφq “ Q
The map Rε is defined as Id ´ Qε .
In the case of a function in W01,p pΩq, the operators Qoε and Qε can both
be used. Their values differ only in the boundary layer Ωbl 2εdpY q (of thickness
2εdppY q) and for practical purposes, either can be used when the boundary
of Ω is Lipschitz. If BΩ is not Lipschitz, only Qoε can be used.
They essentially enjoy the same properties which are summarized below
(we only use the notation Qε but the same results hold for Qoε when applied
on W01,p pΩq).
57
Lemma 1.76. Suppose p P r1, `8s. There exists a constant C depending

only on N , Y and P, such that for every φ in W 1,p pΩq, the following estimates
hold (for 2εdpY q ď 1):
}Qε pφq}Lp pΩq ď C}φ}Lp pΩq ,
}Rε pφq}Lp pΩq ď Cε}∇φ}Lp pΩq , (1.80)
}∇Qε pφq}Lp pΩq ` }∇Rε pφq}Lp pΩq ď C}∇φ}Lp pΩq .
Proof. These inequalities follow from the estimates of Proposition 1.64 and
from estimate (1.38)1 .
Corollary 1.77. Suppose p P r1, `8q. For φ in Lp pΩq,

piq Qoε pφq Ñ φ strongly in Lp pΩq,
(1.81)
piiq ε∇Qoε pφq Ñ 0 strongly in Lp pΩqN .
For φ in W 1,p pΩq, one has the convergence
Qε pφq Ñ φ strongly in W 1,p pΩq. (1.82)
For φ in W 2,p pΩq and 1 ď i ‰ j ď N ,
B 2 Qε pφq B2 φ
Ñ strongly in Lploc pΩq(14). (1.83)
Bxi Bxj Bxi Bxj
Proof. Convergences (1.81)-(1.82) are the immediate consequences of conver-

gences (1.72)-(1.73) of Corollary 1.66.
To prove (1.83) let ω be an open set strictly included in Ω. From Lem-
ma 1.59(i) and Proposition 1.25(ii) one has, for every κ P Kij ,
´ B2 φ ¯ B2 φ
Mε ˝ Mεbj ˝ Mεbi p ¨ ` εκq1ω Ñ strongly in Lp pωq.
Bxi Bxj Bxi Bxj
rε pφq
B2 Q
Then using the explicit expression (1.64) of and equality (1.67), the
Bxi Bxj
above strong convergence implies that
rε pφq
B2 Q B2 φ
1ω Ñ strongly in Lp pωq,
Bxi Bxj Bxi Bxj
and this yields convergence (1.83).
(14) If the extension operator P also maps W 2,p pΩq continuously into W 2,p pRN q (see
[2, Chapter 5], [184, Chapter 6]) and using convergence (1.74), this convergence in Lploc pΩq
can be replaced by a strong convergence in Lp pΩq.
58
Proposition 1.78. (Theorem 1.41 revisited) Suppose p P p1, `8q. Let twε uε
be a sequence such that
p1 in Lp pΩ; Wper
Then there exists w 1,p
pY qq such that
piq Rε pwε q Ñ 0 strongly in Lp pΩq,

piiq Qε pwε q á w weakly in W 1,p pΩq,
piiiq Tε p∇Qε pwε qq á ∇w weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
1
pivq p1 weakly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq,
Tε ˝ Rε pwε q á w
ε
` ˘
pvq Tε ∇Rε pwε q á ∇y w p1 weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
pviq p1
Tε p∇wε q á ∇w ` ∇y w weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN .
The same results are true for wε in W01,p pΩq with the operators Qoε and Ro .
Similar results hold for p “ `8 with the weak-˚ topology on the corre-
sponding spaces(15).
The connection with the w p of Theorem 1.41 is given by
w p1 ´ MY pw
p“w p1 q and p1 q “ ´∇w ¨ MY pyq,
MY pw (1.84)
provided the same subsequence is used.
Proof. Convergences (i) and (ii) follow from the preceding lemma.
The function Tε p∇Qε pwε q is just the restriction to Ω p ε of Trε p∇Q
rε pw rε qq
r r
(and Tε p∇pQε ˝ Ppwε qq, respectively). Since w rε (resp. Ppwε q) converges
weakly to wr (resp. Ppwq) in W 1,p pRN q, the result follows from (iv) of Propo-
sition 1.69.
Due to Lemma 1.76 and Theorem 1.36, there exists w p1 in Lp pΩ; Wper
1,p
pY qq
such that, up to a subsequence, convergences (iv) and (v) hold. Combining
with convergence (iii), shows (vi). Relations (1.84) come from (1.77).
59
Chapter 2
Advanced topics for

unfolding
Extending the results of Chapter 1, this chapter presents various advanced

topics related to the unfolding method.
The unfolding method appears to depend upon the choice of the basis B
of macroscopic periods. But in physical problems, it is the group of periods G
which is given. So there are many way to define a basis and the corresponding
unfolding. Section 2.1 shows that the final result is actually independent of
the choice of the set Y as long as it has the paving property (equivalently
is a fundamental domain) with respect to the action of G and is connected
with Lipschitz boundary. Thus, up to a null set, Y is simply a realization of
the flat torus, i.e., the quotient of RN under the action of G (see Proposition
2.5). This section concludes with a general proof for the periodicity of some
limits of sequences of unfoldings which also applies to the case of problems
with holes in Part II.
In Section 2.2, unfolding with partial information on derivatives is studied.
The case of fields with bounded divergence or curl or symmetric gradients
are obviously of interest in Mechanics. The case of a single derivative with
respect to a direction which is not that of a period is detailed.
Section 2.3 gives the proofs of the main results for the unfolding opera-
tors for the cases of functions and sequences of functions in L1 or W 1,1 as
well as for bounded measures and sequences of bounded measures and func-
tions in BV spaces (the latter generalizing some attempts to define two-scale
convergence for measures and BV functions).
In the Lemmas, Propositions and Theorems of Sections 2.1 and 2.2, the
Lebesgue exponent p is restricted to p1, `8q.

2.1. Effect of a change of the periodicity cell
2.1 Effect of a change of the periodicity cell

This section investigates the effect of changing the reference cell on the un-
folding process. Indeed, one starts with the group G which represents the
macroscopic periods of the system. From this a basis B and the set Y are
defined (the latter is the parallelotope generated by the vectors of the basis).
The same construction can be carried out when Y is chosen in a larger
class, the set having the paving property with respect to G(1).
Definition 2.1 (Set with the paving property, also known as fundamental
domains). The bounded open set Y has the paving property with respect to
the group G when it is connected, its boundary BY is a null set and
Ť` ˘
RN “ ξ ` Y , @pξ1 , ξ2 q P G2 , ξ1 ‰ ξ2 ùñ pξ1 ` Y q X pξ2 ` Y q “ ∅.
ξPG
Observe that any translate of Y satisfies the same property and that εY has
the same paving property as Y but with G replaced by εG.
From now on, we reserve the notation Y (the reference cell) for a bounded
open set having the paving property with respect to the group G. As for the
open parallelotope generated by a basis B generating G, which was denoted
Y in Chapter 1, we use the notation
! ÿ
N )
.
P “ y P RN | y “ yi bi , py1 , . . . , yn q P p0, 1qN . (2.1)
i“1
The parallelotope P plays an important role, in particular in Subsection

4.3.2.2 for the definition of the macro-micro operators Q˚ε and R˚ε (the ana-
logues of Qε and Rε of Section 1.6) for perforated domains.
At this point we introduce the following notations:
Notation 2.2. The space LpG-per pRN q, p P r1, `8s, is defined as

. ˇ (
LpG-per pRN q “ ϕ P Lploc pRN q ˇ ϕ is G-periodic .
It can be identified with Lp pRN {Gq (where RN {G denotes the quotient flat
torus) and as such to Lp pY q for every Y having the paving property.
1,p
Similarly, the space WG-per pRN q is
. ˇ (
1,p
WG-per 1,p
pRN q “ ϕ P Wloc pRN q ˇ ϕ is G-periodic .
It can be identified with W 1,p pRN {Gq and as such to Wper 1,p
pY qq for every
Y having the paving property (the latter space is a strict closed subspace of
W 1,p pY q).
(1) These sets will play an important role in Part II (unfolding for perforated domains).
62
Chapter 2. Advanced topics for unfolding
For a set Y with the paving property, the notations are the same: rxsY is
the (“unique” for a.e. x P RN ) element ξ in G such that x belongs to ξ ` Y ,
while txuY is x ´ rxsY as in Chapter 1 (see (1.1)).
The construction of the unfolding operator is the same as in the previous
chapter, except for the proof of periodicity in Theorem 1.36 which only works
for BY -Lipschitz.
2.1.1 General proof of periodicity for unfoldings limits

Here is another proof of periodicity which is valid in the general case. It
requires a slight generalization of the unfolding operator. For simplicity, we
consider only the case Ω “ RN . All the results extend easily to the case of Ω
an open subset of RN (see for example, how this is done in Section 4.3).
Definition 2.3. For G and Y as above, consider the following extension Tε
of the unfolding operator Trε to RN ˆRN defined for every measurable function
u in RN , by
´ ”xı ¯
Tε upx, yq “ u ε ` εy for a.e. px, yq P RN ˆ RN . (2.2)
ε Y
Clearly, Trε u ” Tε u |RN ˆY and if u P Lp pRN q (p P r1, `8q) then Tε u
is bounded in Lp pRN ; Lploc pRN qq(2) uniformly with respect to ε P p0, 1s.
More precisely, it is bounded in the subspace Lp pRN ; Lploc unif pRN qq, where
Lploc unif pRN q is defined as
. (
Lploc unif pRN q “ w P Lploc pRN q | sup }w 1pt`Bq }Lp pRN q ă `8 ,
tPRN
where B is the unit ball in RN (but can equivalently be any non empty
bounded open subset of RN ). One can reformulate Theorem 1.36 in this
more general framework.
Theorem 2.4 (Theorem 1.36 revisited). Let twε uε be a sequence satisfying
wε á w weakly in Lp pRN q.
p in Lp pRN ; LpG-per pRN qq such that, up to a subsequence,

Then there exists w
Tε pwε q á w
p weakly in Lp pRN ; Lploc unif pRN qq.
Moreover, if
ε}∇wε }Lp pRN q ď C,
1,p
with C independent of ε, then w p belongs to Lp pRN ; WG-per pRN qq.
Similar results hold for p “ `8, replacing the weak topology by the weak-˚
(2) It also belongs to Lp pRN ; Lp pRN qq, but is not bounded uniformly with respect to
loc
ε P p0, 1s.
63
2.1. The effect of a change of the set Y
Proof. The proof follows along the lines of that of Theorem 1.36, except for
the G-periodicity of w. p
To prove for example, the b1 -periodicity for a function ϕ in Cc8 pRN ˆRN q,
recalling definition (2.2) write successively,
ż
` ˘
Tε pwε qpx, y ` b1 q ´ Tε pwε qpx, yq ϕpx, yq dxdy
RN ˆRN
ż ´ ´ ”xı ¯ ´ ”xı ¯¯
“ wε ε ` εy ` εb1 ´ wε ε ` εy ϕpx, yq dxdy
RN ˆRN ε Y ε Y
ż ˆ ˆ „ j ˙ ´ ” ¯˙
x ` εb1 xı
“ wε ε ` εy ´ wε ε ` εy ϕpx, yq dxdy
RN ˆRN ε ε Y
ż ´ ”xı ¯`
Y
˘
“ wε ε ` εy ϕpx ´ εb1 , yq ´ ϕpx, yq dxdy
ε Y
żR ˆR
N N
` ˘
“ Tε pwε qpx, yq ϕpx ´ εb1 , yq ´ ϕpx, yq dxdy,
RN ˆRN
which clearly converges to 0 by the regularity of ϕ.

We can now compare the unfolding results for two choices of cells Y and Z
having the paving property with respect to the same group G. To distinguish
them, we use the notations Tε Y and Tε Z respectively. The next proposition
shows that the results are independent of Y and Z but depend only upon the
group G.
Proposition 2.5. Let twε uε be a sequence in Lploc pRN q whose unfolding is
such that,
p weakly in Lp pRN ; Lploc pRN qq.
Tε Z pwε q á w
Then
Tε Y pwε q á w
p weakly in Lp pRN ; Lploc pRN qq.
In other words, even though the restrictions TrεY of Tε Y to Y , and TrεZ
of Tε Z to Z, are defined on the two different sets RN ˆ Y and RN ˆ Z, the
convergence of the sequence tTrεY pwε quε weakly in Lp pRN ˆ Y q is equivalent
to that of the sequence tTrεZ pwε quε weakly in Lp pRN ˆ Zq, the limits being
identified when extended by G-periodicity to Lp pRN ; LpG-per pRN qq.
ProofŤof Proposition 2.5. By definition, there is a finite subset J of G such
that jPJ pj ` Y q contains Z, as usual, up to a null set (the sets j ` Y are
also pair-wise disjoint up to a null set). Set
Zj “ Z X pj ` Y q, @j P J.
Then for a.e. z in Z,

rzsY “ j ðñ z P Zj .
64
Consequently for a.e. x P RN ,

txuZ P Zj ðñ txuZ “ j ` txuY ðñ x “ rxsZ ` j ` txuY
(2.3)
ðñ rxsY “ j ` rxsZ .
Let RN
j be the set defined as
. (
j “ z P R | tzuZ P Zj ,
RN N
so that up to a null set, RN is the disjoint union of the RN j ’s for j P J. With

this notation, and taking into account (2.3), compute Tε Y puq as follows:
ÿ ´ ”xı ¯ ´x¯
Tε Y puqpx, yq “ u ε ` εy 1RN
jPJ
ε Y j ε
ÿ ´ ” x ı ¯ ´x¯
“ u ε ` εj ` εy 1RN
jPJ
ε Z j ε
ÿ ´x¯
“ Tε Z puqpx ` εj, yq 1RN for x, y P RN .
jPJ
j ε
1
Testing with a function ϕ in Lp pRN ˆ RN q with compact support gives
ż
Tε Y puqpx, yq ϕpx, yq dxdy
RN ˆRN
ÿż ´x ¯
“ Tε Z puqpx, yq 1RN ´ j ϕpx ´ εj, yq dxdy.
jPJ R ˆR
N N j ε
But ´x ¯ ´x¯ ÿ
1 RN ´ j “ 1 RN and 1RN ” 1,
j ε j ε jPJ
j
so that
ż ´ ¯
Tε Y puqpx, yq ´ Tε Z puqpx, yq ϕpx, yq dxdy
RN ˆRN
ÿż ´x¯ ` ˘
“ Tε Z puqpx, yq 1RN ϕpx ´ εj, yq ´ ϕpx, yq dxdy.
jPJ R ˆR
N N j ε
ˇż
Thus, ´ ¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ Tε Y puqpx, yq ´ Tε Z puqpx, yq ϕpx, yq dxdy ˇ
RN ˆRN
› › ÿ› ›
ď ›Tε Z puq›Lp pKq ›ϕp ¨ ´ εj, ¨ q ´ ϕp ¨ , ¨ q› p1 ,
L pKq
jPJ
for K a compact containing a fixed neighborhood of the support of ϕ. The

right-hand side converge to 0 with ε, and this concludes the proof.
Remark 2.6. Note that by restriction to Y , Proposition 2.5 gives another
proof of the periodicity in Theorem 1.36.
65
2.2. Unfolding with partial information
2.2 Unfolding with partial information

The results of this section are useful when studying classical problems arising
in Fluid Mechanics, Electromagnetism and Solid Mechanics, where some first
order operators play a crucial role (divergence, curl and symmetric gradient,
see e.g. [30, 31]). The last paragraph is dedicated to the more complex case
of a single directional derivative.
Here, Y is the parallelotope associated with a basis of G and in order to
simplify the presentation, we use the notation
@ D . @ D
¨ , ¨ ΩˆY 1 “ ¨ , ¨ Lp pΩ,pW 1´1{p,p pY 1 qq1 q,Lp pΩ,W 1´1{p,p pY 1 qq . (2.4)
2.2.1 Unfolding with information on the divergence

We use the following notations of classical Banach spaces for a given domain
O P RN ( p P r1, `8s):
.
Lpdiv pOq “ tϕ P Lp pOqN | div ϕ P Lp pOqu,
endowed with the norm

}ϕ}Lpdiv pOq “ p}ϕ}pLp pOq ` }div ϕ}pLp pOq q1{p ,
for p finite (and the similar norm for p “ `8).

Recall that for a bounded set O with Lipschitz boundary, all elements of
Lpdiv pOq have normal traces on BO. This trace operator is continuous with
values in W ´1{p,p pBOq (see [151]).
In the case of Y , let Lpdiv ,per pY q be the subspace of Lpdiv pY q, defined as
! )
.
Lpdiv,per pY q “ ϕ|Y | ϕ P Lploc pRN qN , ϕ G-periodic, divy ϕ P Lploc pRN q ,
! )
.
Lpdiv 0,per pY q “ ϕ P Lpdiv,per pY q | divy ϕ “ 0 .
The space Lpdiv,per pY q is actually the subspace of Lpdiv pY q whose elements

have matching normal traces on opposite faces of Y (up to sign, since the
outward unit normals of opposite faces are opposite).
Proposition 2.7. Let wε be in Lpdiv pΩq satisfying
}wε }Lp pΩq ` ε}div wε }Lp pΩq ď C.
p P Lp pΩ; Lpdiv,per pY qq
Then there exist a subsequence (still denoted ε) and w
such that,
Tε pwε q á w
p weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
p
divy pTε pwε qq “ εTε pdivy wε q á divy w weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q.
66
Proof. The proof of the existence of w p in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN with divy w p in Lp pΩ ˆ

Y q, follows from the fact that, by hypotheses, tTε pwε quε is bounded in Lp pΩˆ
Y qN and such that tdivy Tε pwε quε is bounded in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q.
In order to show that the normal traces on opposite faces coincide (up to
their sign), consider the case of the face pair pY 1 , Y 1 ` bN q using the same
normal unit vector b˚N (3). Introduce a smooth test function ψ in DpΩ ˆ Y 1 q
and make the following computation using the notation (2.4):
@ D
wp ¨ b˚N |Y 1 `bN ´ w
p ¨ b˚N |Y 1 , ψ ΩˆY 1
@ D (2.5)
“ lim Tε pwε q ¨ b˚N |Y 1 `bN ´ Tε pwε q ¨ b˚N |Y 1 , ψ ΩˆY 1 .
εÑ0
Expression (2.5) can be computed as it was in the proof of Theorem 1.36.

We have successively,
@ D
Tε pwε q ¨ b˚N |Y 1 `bN ´ Tε pwε q ¨ b˚N |Y 1 , ψ ΩˆY 1
A ´ ”xı ¯
“ wε ε ` εbN ` εy 1 ¨ b˚N |Y 1 `bN
ε Y ´” x ı ¯ E
´ wε ` εy 1 ¨ b˚N |Y 1 , ψpx, y 1 q
ε Y ΩˆY 1
A ´ ”xı ¯ E
1 ˚ 1 1
“ wε ε ` εy ¨ bN |Y 1 , ψpx ´ εbN , y q ´ ψpx, y q
ε Y ΩˆY 1
@ ˚ 1 1
D
“ Tε pwε q ¨ bN |Y 1 , ψpx ´ εbN , y q ´ ψpx, y q ΩˆY 1 .
p on Y 1 and
The last term goes to 0 with ε so that the normal traces of w
1 p
Y ` bN coincide, i.e., w
p belongs to L pΩ; Ldiv,per pY qq.
p
Proposition 2.8. Let twε uε be a sequence converging weakly to some w in

Lpdiv pΩq. Then, up to a subsequence, there exist w in Lp pΩ; Lpdiv 0,per pY qq with
MY pwq “ w and w p in Lp pΩ; Lpdiv,per pY qq with MY pwq
p “ 0, such that
Tε pwε q á w weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
Tε pdiv wε q á div w ` divy w
p weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q.
Proof. The existence of w follows from Proposition 2.7 and the fact that
divy Tε pwε q is now bounded in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q by Cε.
To construct w, p start by lifting the sequence tdiv wε uε to a sequence of
functions tϕε uε bounded in W 2,p pΩq such that ´Δϕε ` ϕε “ div wε . This
can be achieved for example, by taking the restriction to Ω of the solution in
W 2,p pRN q of #
div wε in Ω,
´Δϕε ` ϕε “
0 in RN zΩ.
It satisfies the estimate (see [114, Theorem 9.11] with proper modifications)
}ϕε }W 2,p pRN q ď C}div wε }Lp pΩq ď C.
(3) This normal vector is not necessarily bN nor colinear to it.
67
By Theorem 1.47, there exist ϕ P W 2,p pΩq, Φ P Lp pΩ; Wper

2,p
pY qq such that
Tε pϕε q á ϕ weakly in Lp pΩ; W 2,p pY qq,
Tε p∇ϕε q á ∇ϕ weakly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qqN ,
Tε pΔϕε q á Δϕ ` Δy Φ weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q.
Since ´Δϕε ` ϕε “ div wε , ´Δϕ ` ϕ “ div w a.e. in Ω and
Tε pdiv wε q “ Tε pϕε q ´ Tε pΔϕε q,
.
passing to the limit and setting w p “ ´∇y Φ ends the proof. Note that, as
p is the gradient with respect to y of the Y -periodic function Φ, it satisfies
w
MY pwqp “ 0.
2.2.2 Unfolding with information on the curl

We use the following notation of classical Banach spaces for a given domain
O in RN :
.
Lpcurl pOq “ tϕ P Lp pOqN | curl ϕ P Lp pOqN pN ´1q{2 u,
endowed with the norm
` ˘1{p
}ϕ}Lpcurl pOq “ }ϕ}pLp pOq ` }curl ϕ}pLp pOq ,
for p finite, and the similar norm for p “ `8.
When O is bounded with Lipschitz boundary, all the elements of Lpcurl pOq
have tangential traces on BO. This trace operator is continuous with values
in W ´1{p,p pBOqN (see [151]).
In the case of Y , let the subspace Lpcurl,per pY q of Lpcurl pY q be defined as
!
.
Lpcurl,per pY q “ ϕ|Y | ϕ P Lploc pRN qN , ϕ G-periodic,
)
curly ϕ P Lploc pRN qN pN ´1q{2 .
It is the same as the subspace of Lpcurl pY q whose elements have matching

tangential traces on opposite faces of Y .
Proposition 2.9. Let twε uε be a sequence in Lpcurl pΩq satisfying
}wε }Lp pΩq ` ε}curl wε }Lp pΩq ď C.
p P Lp pΩ; Lpcurl,per pY qq such that the
Then, up to a subsequence, there exists w
following convergences hold:
Tε pwε q á w
p
curly pTε pwε qq “ εTε pcurl wε q á curly w weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN pN ´1q{2 .
68
Proof. The proof of the existence of w p in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN with curly w p belong-

N pN ´1q{2
ing to L pΩ ˆ Y q
p
, follows from the facts that under the hypothe-
sis, the sequence tTε pwε quε is bounded in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN , and the sequence
tcurly Tε pwε qquε is bounded in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN pN ´1q{2 .
In order to show that the tangential traces of w p on opposite faces coincide,
consider the case of the pair pY 1 , Y 1 ` bN q of two opposite faces, using a fixed
tangential unit vector t. Introduce a smooth test function ψ in DpΩˆY 1 q and
perform the same computations on the duality pairing as in Proposition 2.7
(by using again notation (2.4)),
@ D
p ¨ t|Y 1 `bN ´ w
w p ¨ t|Y 1 , ψ ΩˆY 1
@ D
“ lim Tε pwε q ¨ t|Y 1 `bN ´ Tε pwε q ¨ t|Y 1 , ψ ΩˆY 1 .
εÑ0
The latter limit can be computed as it was done in the proofs of Theorem 1.36
and of Proposition 2.7, and the result is
@ D
Tε pwε q ¨ t|Y 1 `bN ´ Tε pwε q ¨ t|Y 1 , ψ ΩˆY 1
A ´ ”xı ¯
“ wε ε ` εbN ` εy 1 ¨ t|Y 1 `bN
ε Y ´ ”xı ¯ E
´ wε ε ` εy 1 ¨ t|Y 1 , ψpx, y 1 q
ε Y ΩˆY 1
A ´ ”xı ¯ E
1 1 1
“ wε ε ` εy ¨ t|Y 1 , ψpx ´ εbN , y q ´ ψpx, y q
ε Y ΩˆY 1
@ 1 1
D
“ Tε pwε q ¨ t|Y 1 , ψpx ´ εbN , y q ´ ψpx, y q ΩˆY 1 .
The last term goes to zero, which completes the proof.

Proposition 2.10. Let twε uε be a sequence converging weakly to some w in
Lpcurl pΩq. Then, up to a subsequence, there exist w in Lp pΩ; Wper
1,p
pY qq with
MY pwq “ 0, and w p in L pΩ; Wper pY qq with MY pwq
p 1,p N
p “ 0 and divy w p “ 0,
such that
Tε pwε q á w ` ∇y w weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
(2.6)
Tε pcurl wε q á curl w ` curly w
p weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN pN ´1q{2 .
Proof. There exist two functions W in Lp pΩ; Lpcurl,per pY qq with curly pW q “ 0

(by Proposition 2.9) and Z in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN pN ´1q{2 (by Proposition 1.12), such
Tε pwε q á W weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
(2.7)
Tε pcurl wε q á Z weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN pN ´1q{2 .
In order to prove convergences (2.6), it remains to identify the limits W

and Z. That will be done in two steps, first for Ω bounded and then, for Ω
unbounded.
69
Step 1. Assume Ω is a bounded domain.

As in the proof of Proposition 2.8, start by lifting the sequence tdiv wε uε
which is bounded in W ´1,p pΩq, to a sequence tψε uε bounded in W 1,p pΩq by
taking the Newtonian potential of div wε , that is
Δψε “ div wε in Ω.
It is well-known that (see [114, Chapter 9])
}ψε }W 1,p pΩq ď C}div wε }W ´1,p pΩq ď C}wε }Lp pΩq .
Then, due to the above estimate and by Theorem 1.41, up to a subsequence,

1,p
there exist ψ in W 1,p pΩq and w in Lp pΩ; Wper,0 pY qq such that
ψε á ψ weakly in W 1,p pΩq,

(2.8)
Tε p∇ψε q á ∇ψ ` ∇y w weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN .
Set now,
uε “ ´∇ψε ` wε in Ω. (2.9)
The field uε is bounded in Lp pΩq and satisfies
div uε “ 0, curl uε “ curl wε and }uε }Lp pΩq ď C}wε }Lp pΩq .
Convergences (2.8) and equalities above give
uε á u weakly in Lpcurl pΩq. (2.10)
Due to the following identities, true for k P t1, . . . , N u,
ÿ B ´ Buε,k Buε,i ¯
N
Bpdiv uε q
Δuε,k “ Δuε,k ´ “ ´
Bxk i“1
Bxi Bxi Bxk
(2.11)
ÿ B ´ Bwε,k Bwε,i ¯
N
“ ´ ,
i“1
Bxi Bxi Bxk
one has
}Δuε }W ´1,p pΩq ď N 2 }∇pcurl uε q}W ´1,p pΩq “ N 2 }curl wε }Lp pΩq .
1,p
As a consequence, tuε uε belongs to Wloc pΩqN (4) and for every ω Ť Ω, there
exists a constant Cω such that
` ˘
}uε }W 1,p pωq ď Cω }Δuε }W ´1,p pΩq ` }uε }Lp pΩq
` ˘
ď Cω }uε }Lp pΩq ` }curl wε }Lp pΩq .
(4) If Ω is a bounded domain with Lipschitz boundary, an alternative way for end-
`
ing this step, would be to use the following estimate: }ρ∇uε }Lp pΩq ď C }uε }Lp pΩq `
˘
}curl wε }Lp pΩq , where the constant does not depend on ε, and then using Theorem (1.46).
70
Then, due to the above estimate of uε and by Theorem 1.41, up to a sub-

1,p
sequence, one has u in W 1,p pωqN and there exists w
pω in Lp pω; Wper,0 pY qqN
such that
uε á u weakly in W 1,p pωq,
Tε puε q á u weakly in Lp pω ˆ Y qN , (2.12)
N ˆN
Tε p∇uε q á ∇u ` ∇y w
pω weakly in L pω ˆ Y q
p
.
pω “ 0.
Since div uε “ 0, it yields divy w
Now, recalling the first convergence from (2.7), thanks to (2.9) one gets,
w “ u ` ∇ψ in Lp pωqN ,
W “ u ` ∇ψ ` ∇y wω “ w ` ∇y wω in Lp pω ˆ Y qN .
We now claim that there exits w p in Lp pΩ; Wper
1,p
pY qqN such that wp|ω “ wpω
for every subdomain relatively compact in Ω. In order to do so, let ω1 and
ω2 be two balls included in Ω. Assume that they intersect, and that the
same subsequence is used for both to obtain w pω1 and w pω2 . The difference
1,p
wpω1 ´ w
pω2 , whose restriction to ω1 X ω2 belongs to Lp pω1 X ω2 ; Wper,0 pY qqN ,
satisfies
curl y pw
pω1 ´ w
pω2 q “ 0 and divy pw
pω1 ´ w pω2 q “ 0
a.e. in pω1 X ω2 q ˆ Y . Then using the same identities as (2.11), one obtains
p ¨q “ 0 in pWper
Δy wpx, 1,p
pY qq1 for a.e. x P ω1 X ω2 . Thus
pω1 “ w
w pω2 in pω1 X ω2 q ˆ Y.
Using a countable set of balls included in Ω whose union is Ω and using a diag-
onal subsequence argument, proves that there exits w p in Lploc pΩ; Wper,0
1,p
pY qqN
p “ 0 such that w
with divy w p|ω “ w pω for every subdomain relatively compact
in Ω.
At this point, the last line of (2.12) together with (2.7)2 imply
p
Z “ curl w ` curly w in Lp pω ˆ Y qN pN ´1q{2 .
Both fields Z and curl w are in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN pN ´1q{2 , it yields that curly w
p is
in the same space. Then, using the same identities as (2.11), one obtains
p ¨q}pWper
}Δy wpx, 1,p
pY qq1 ď N }curl y wpx,
2
p ¨q}Lp pY q for a.e. x in Ω.
Hence (recall that MY pwq
p “ 0 a.e. in Ω), there exists a constant C which
only depends on N, p and Y (but not on Ω) such that
p ¨q}Lp pY q
p ¨q}W 1,p pY q ď C}curl y wpx,
}wpx, for a.e. x in Ω.
Therefore,
}w}
p Lp pΩ;Wper
1,p
pY qq ď C lim sup }curl wε }Lp pΩq .
εÑ0
Step 2. Assume Ω unbounded.
Again using a countable set of balls included in Ω whose union is Ω,
a diagonal subsequence argument and the results of Step 1, completes the
proof.
71
2.2.3 Unfolding with information on the symmetric gra-

dient
For a given domain Ω in RN , we consider sequences of vector fields w which
are bounded in Lp pΩqN , p P r1, `8s, with their symmetric gradient
. 1` ˘
epwq “ ∇w ` p∇wqT in Lp pΩqN ˆN .
2
For fields depending upon the variable y, the corresponding symmetric gra-
dient operator is denoted ey .
The following Korn-type inequalities, valid for bounded domains ω with
Lipschitz boundary, will be used below and also in Chapter 11 (see for ex-
ample [57, 115, 168]):
Proposition 2.11. There exists a constant Cpω, pq such that, for every vec-
tor field ϕ in Lp pωqN with epϕq in Lp pωqN ˆN , there exists a rigid displace-
ment R (Rpxq “ a ` A x, x P RN , where a is in RN and A is an antisym-
metric N ˆ N matrix) the following inequality holds:
}ϕ ´ R}W 1,p pωq ď Cpω, pq}epϕq}Lp pωq . (2.13)
Consequently, one also has

` ˘
}ϕ}W 1,p pωq ď Cpω, pq }ϕ}Lp pωq ` }epϕq}Lp pωq , (2.14)
and, if ϕ “ 0 on a part of Bω with non zero measure, then
}ϕ}W 1,p pωq ď Cpω, pq}epϕq}Lp pωq .
If ω is a parallelotope P, then, for every vector field ψ in Wper

1,p
pPqN ,
}ψ ´ MY pψq}W 1,p pPq ď CpP, pq}ey pψq}Lp pPq . (2.15)
Proposition 2.12. Let twε uε be a sequence in Lp pΩqN satisfying
}wε }Lp pΩq ` ε}epwε q}Lp pΩq ď C. (2.16)
p P Lp pΩ; Wper
Then there exist a subsequence (still denoted ε) and w 1,p
pY qqN ,
such that
Tε pwε q á w
(2.17)
ey pTε pwε qq “ εTε pepwε qq á ey pwq
p weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN ˆN .
Similar results hold for p “ `8 in the weak-˚ topology.

Proof. Proceeding as in Proposition 1.35, one obtains the equality
ey pTε pwε qq “ εTε pepwε qq.
72
Then, from (2.16) it follows that

}Tε pwε q}Lp pΩˆY q ` }ey pTε pwε qq}Lp pΩˆY q ď C,
with C independent of ε.
By (2.14), the sequence tTε pwε quε is bounded in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qqN . So,
p in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qqN such that, up to a subsequence,
there exists a function w
convergences (2.17) hold.
It remains to show that w p is Y -periodic. To do so, let ω be an arbitrary
bounded and Lipschitz subdomain of Ω. It is enough to show that the re-
p to ω ˆ Y is Y -periodic. Again by (2.14), there exists a constant
striction of w
Cω such that the following estimate holds in ω:
` ˘
}∇wε }Lp pωq ď Cω }wε }Lp pωq ` }epwε q}Lp pωq .
Together with (2.16), this shows that tε∇wε uε is a bounded sequence in
Lp pωqN ˆN . Then the Y -periodicity is obtained by applying Theorem 1.36
and this completes the proof.
Proposition 2.13. Let twε uε be a bounded sequence in Lp pΩqN . Assume
that tepwε quε is also bounded in Lp pΩqN ˆN . Then, up to a subsequence,
1,p 1,p
there exist w in pLp pΩq X Wloc pΩqqN and w
p in Lp pΩ; Wper,0 pY qqN , such that
1,p
wε á w weakly in pLp pΩq X Wloc pΩqqN ,
Tε pwε q á w weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
Tε pepwε qq á epwq ` ey pwq
p weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN ˆN .
Furthermore, if the domain Ω is bounded with Lipschitz boundary (so that
the Korn inequality (2.14) holds in Ω), the function w belongs to W 1,p pΩqN
and the first convergence above holds in that space.
Proof. The hypotheses on boundedness imply that there exist three vector
fields namely, w in Lp pΩqN , W in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN and E in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN ˆN such
wε á w weakly in Lp pΩqN ,
Tε pwε q á W weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
Tε pepwε qq á E weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN ˆN .
Due to (2.14), for every bounded subdomain ω of Ω with smooth boundary
the sequence twε uε is bounded in W 1,p pωqN . Then Theorem 1.41 implies that
the vector field W satisfies
W “w in ω ˆ Y quadwith w P W 1,p pωq.
1,p
pω in Lp pω, Wper,0
By the same theorem, there exists a vector field w pY qqN
such that
E “ epwq ` ey pwpω q in ω ˆ Y.
73
From this identity and due to the Korn inequality for periodic fields (2.15),
p in the same way as in the first part of the proof
one obtains a global field w
of Proposition 2.10.
˚
2.2.4 Unfolding with information on one derivative
In this paragraph, we present the case where Ω “ RN (the case Ω Ă RN
follows by restriction). In Section 1.4 of Chapter 1, the case of N directional
derivatives was considered. Here, we present the more intricate situation
associated to a single directional derivative. The cases of a domain Ω included
in RN and with k directional derivatives can be treated in the same spirit.
Definition 2.14 (Directional derivatives). For an open subset O of RN , a
non zero vector a in RN and p in r1, `8s, the a-directional derivative for a
function f in Lp pOq is defined in the distributional sense as
ż
xBa f, ϕyD1 pΩq,DpΩq “ ´ f a ¨ ∇ϕ dx, for every ϕ P DpOq.
O
For functions defined on O ˆY or O ˆRN , Ba is the directional derivative

with respect to x while Ba,y is the directional derivative with respect to the
variable y.
1,p
Definition 2.15. The Banach spaces Wa1,p pOq and Wa,loc pRN q are respec-
tively, defined as
ˇ (
Wa1,p pOq “ ϕ P Lp pOq ˇ Ba ϕ P Lp pOq ,
1,p p N ˇ
ˇ p (
loc pR q “ ϕ P Lloc pR q Ba ϕ P Lloc pR q .
N N
Wa,
Define also the space
1,p 1,p p
G-per pR q “ Wa, loc pR q X LG-per pR q.
N N N
Wa,
In the above definition, as in the remainder of this section, it is obvious
that the vector a can be replaced by any of its non zero real multiples. The
case where a is part of a basis of G is easily obtained by going back to the
proofs of Theorems 1.36 and 1.41, choosing bn ” a. When the hypotheses
hold for several vectors a1 , a2 , . . . , the results below can be combined.
We now consider the case where a is not colinear to a basic period.
1,p
G-per pR q have traces on every hyper-
N
Remark 2.16. The functions in Wa,
plane H which is transverse to the vector. These traces are in Lploc unif pHq. If
Y is a polyhedral cell with Lipschitz boundary and having the paving property
with respect to G (such as a parallelotope), the restrictions to Y of the func-
1,p
G-per pR q are in Wa pY q, and have the same traces on each
N 1,p
tions of Wa,
set of opposite faces of Y provided these faces are transverse to a.
Suppose Y is a parallelotope. A function in Wa1,p pY q is the restriction to
1,p
G-per pR q if and only if it has the same traces on
N
Y of an element of Wa,
each set of opposite faces of Y which are transverse to a.
74
Proposition 2.17. Let twε uε be a bounded sequence in Lp pRN q, with Ba wε

in Lp pRN q and satisfying
ε }Ba wε }Lp pRN q ď C.

1,p
p in Lp pRN ; Wa,
Then, up to a subsequence, there is a function w G-per pR qq
N
such that, for 1 ă p ă `8 and for every Y having the paving property with
respect to G,
1,p
Tε pwε q á w
p weakly in Lp pRN ; Wa,loc pRN qq, (2.18)
and by restriction to RN ˆ Y ,
TrεY pwε q á w
p weakly in Lp pRN ; Wa1,p pY qq.
For p “ `8, the convergence takes place in the weak-˚ topology of the
space L8 pRN ; Wa,loc
1,8
pRN qq.
Proof. From the hypotheses, as in Proposition 1.35, it follows that
}Tε Y pwε q}Lp pRN ;W 1,p ď C,

a,loc pR
N qq
with C independent of ε. Hence, up to a subsequence, there exists some w p in

1,p
Lp pRN ; Wa,loc pRN qq, such that convergences (2.18) hold. By the first state-
ment of Theorem 2.4, this convergence takes place in Lp pRN ; LpG-per pRN qqq.
The proof can be easily adapted to the case p “ `8.
We now turn to the case in which the sequence of directional derivatives
Ba wε is bounded in Lp pRN q. The result is stated in Theorem 2.23 below and
requires some preliminary notations and results. To do so, we shall make a
small detour via Algebra.
The minimal representation of a vector as linear combinations of
elements of G.
Proposition 2.18. Let a be a given non zero vector in RN and let G be as
before. Then there exits a unique minimal subspace V of RN generated by a
.
subgroup of G and which contains a. The set H “ V X G is a subgroup of
G and it generates V.
Proof. Consider all the vector subspaces of RN containing a and generated by
subgroups of G. Let r be the minimum of the dimensions of such subspaces
and V be one of these subspaces with dimension r.
By construction, there is a subgroup H1 of G with rank r (its dimension
.
as a Z-module), whose span in RN is V so that H1 is included in H “ V XG,
itself a subgroup of G. By construction, the span of H also V and H is also
of rank r. Consequently, H is the largest subgroup of G which spans V(5).
(5) Every subgroup of H with rank r, such as H1 , also generates V.
75
The space V is unique. Indeed, let V1 be another subspace having the

.
same dimension r, containing a and generated by the subgroup H1 “ V1 X G.
The subspace V ` V is generated by H ` H , while the span of H X H1 is
1 1
included in V X V1 . We claim that latter inclusion is an equality. Indeed,
dimR pV X V1 q “ dimR pVq ` dimR pV1 q ´ dimR pV ` V1 q

“ rankpHq ` rankpH1 q ´ rankpH ` H1 q
“ rankpH X H1 q,
which implies the claim that H X H1 spans V X V1 . Since V X V1 contains

a, the minimality of r gives dimR pV X V1 q “ r so that V X V1 “ V, i.e.,
V “ V1 .
This result implies the existence of a subset pp1 , . . . , pr q P Hr which is a
basis for the group H as well as a basis for its span V. Thus
ÿ
r
. ÿ
r
piq H“ Zpi , V“ Rpi ,
i“1 i“1
(2.19)
. ÿ
r
piiq a“ λi p i with pλ1 , . . . , λr q P R .
r
i“1
Lemma 2.19.
piq The real numbers λi ’s of the decomposition (2.19)(ii) of a are rationally
independent (i.e. linearly independent over Q).
piiq The subspace V is the closure H ` Ra of the subgroup H ` Ra.
piiiq There exists pr`1 , . . . , pN in G such that pp1 , . . . , pN q is a basis of G.
Proof.
(i) The case r “ 1 is obvious since a is not zero. For r ě 2, if the λi ’s were
linearly dependent, one would write one of them, say λr (by a reordering if
needed), as a rational combination of the others,
ÿ
r´1
λr “ μ i λi ,
i“1
which implies that

ÿ
r´1
a“ λi ppi ` μi pr q.
i“1
Denoting by m the product of the denominators of the μi ’s, this is just a

representation of the form
ÿ
r´1
λi
a“ pm pi ` m μi pr q.
i“1
m
As mpi ` mμi pr belongs to G, this contradicts the minimality of r.
76
(ii) The subspace V contains both H and Ra and is a closed in RN , hence,
H ` Ra Ă H ` Ra Ă V. (2.20)
řr
Then (2.19)(ii) implies that for every pk, θq P Z ˆ R, the sum i“1 k θ λi pi
belongs to Ra. Using the notation tτ u for the fractional part of the real
number τ , it follows that x
ÿ
r
tkθλi upi belongs to H ` Ra, @pk, θq P Z ˆ R.
i“1
Now, choose θ such that

1
P R z pQλ1 ‘ . . . ‘ Qλr q.
θ
With this choice, the r ` 1 real numbers 1, θλ1 , . . . , θλr are rationally inde-
pendent because the r real numbers λ1 , . . . , λr are rationally independent.
Therefore, the sequence ptkθλ1 u, . . . , tkθλr uqpk P Zq is uniformly distributed
in p0, 1qr (see [143]), hence dense in r0, 1sr . Thus
ÿ
r
r0, 1spi P H ` Ra and by scaling V P H ` Ra.
i“1
This together with (2.20) gives the claim (ii).

(iii) In the case r “ N , one can choose H ” G, so the result is obvious. In
the case where r ă N , the abelian group G{H is a free Z-module since, if
g P G is such that ng P H for some n P Z˚ , then g belongs to G X V, hence
to H (by the definition of the latter).
To end the proof, observe that if pr`1 ` H, . . . , pN ` H is a basis of G{H,
the set pp1 , . . . , pN q is a basis of G.
Remark 2.20. In reference to Remark 2.16, with the notations of (2.19),
suppose that Y is the parallelotope constructed on the basis p1 , . . . , pN , the
faces of Y which are transverse are exactly the r faces generated by the sets
tp2 , . . . , pN u, tp1 , p3 , . . . , pN u, . . . , tp1 , . . . , pr´1 , pr`1 , . . . , pN u.
Properties of periodic functions in the kernel of Ba,y .

In this context, being in the kernel of Ba,y implies a lot more for functions of
1,p
G-per pR q.
N
Wa,
Proposition 2.21. Let a and V be defined as above. Suppose Ψ belongs to
1,p
G-per pR q and is such that Ba,y Ψ ” 0. Then, Ψ satisfies Bv,y Ψ ” 0 for
N
Wa,
all v P V.
1,p
The same result holds for functions in Lp pRN , Wa, G-per pR qq. In partic-
N
ular, every weak limit point of a sequence of unfolding of a bounded sequence

in the space Wa1,p pΩq is in the kernel of all Bv,y Ψ “ 0 for v P V.
77
Lemma 2.22. The group of periods with respect to the variable y of an

element of LpG´per pRN q is closed in RN . Similarly, the group of periods with
respect to y of an element of Lp pRN ; LpG´per pRN qq is closed in RN .
Proof. We give the proof for the second case. Let Y be a periodicity cell for
p if and only if
G. The vector p is a period of w
.
hppq “ }w p ¨, ¨ ` pq}Lp pRN ˆY q “ 0.
p ´ wp
The result follows because h is continuous.
Proof of Proposition 2.21. Under the hypotheses, the group of periods of Ψ

contains Ra and G. It is closed by Lemma 2.22. Therefore, Lemma 2.19(ii)
implies that its group of periods contains V. One concludes by the fact that
it is equivalent for a function to have Rv in its group of periods, and to be
in the kernel of Bv .
We can now state the main result, with the same notations as above.
Theorem 2.23. Suppose p P p1, `8s and let a ‰ 0 be a vector in RN with

an associated subspace V. Let twε uε be a sequence in Wa1,p pRN q such that
wε á w weakly in Wa1,p pRN q.
Then, up to a subsequence and for every cell Y having the paving property
1,p
with respect to G, there exist two functions, w p in Wa1,p pRN ; Wa,G-per pRN qq
and wp in Lp pRN ; Wa1,p pY qq, (6) such that for 1 ă p ă `8,
1,p
piq Tε pwε q á w
p weakly in Lp pRN ; Wa,loc pRN qq
pby restriction, TrεY pwε q á wp weakly in Lp pRN ; Wa1,p pY qqq,
piiq MY pwq p ” w and Ba,y w p ” 0,
(2.21)
p ” 0 for every v P V,
piiiq Bv,y w
pivq Ba wp P Lp pRN ˆ Y q,
` ˘
pvq TrεY Ba wε á Ba w p
p ` Ba,y w weakly in Lp pRN ˆ Y q.
For p “ `8, the convergences are in the weak-˚ topology of L8 pRN ˆ Y q

(as well as weakly in every Lqloc pRN ; Lq pY qq for q finite).
Proof. The proof for p finite is given below, the case p “ `8 can be treated
in the same way. By Proposition 2.5, one can choose for Y the parallelotope
associated with the basis of G obtained in Lemma 2.19 (iii).
1,p
Convergence (2.21)(i) for some w p P Lp pRN;Wa,G-per pRN qq, is a direct
consequence of convergence (2.18) from Proposition 2.17. The fact that
(6) p belong to the space Lp pRN ; W 1,p N
One would expect that the function w a, G-per pR qq
but this is an open question.
78
MY pwq
p ” w follows from assertion (iii) of Proposition 1.9. Furthermore,
due to the identity ` ˘
Ba,y TrεY pwε q “ εTrεY Ba wε ,
it is immediate that Ba,y wp ” 0, whence (2.21)(ii).
1,p
The function w p belongs to Lp pRN ; Wa, G-per pR qq with Ba,y w
N
p ” 0. By
Proposition 2.21 it satisfies (2.21)(iii).
The proof of (2.21)(iv) for r “ N is straightforward. Indeed, by (2.21)(iii),
wp is independent of y, so that w p “ w and
Ba w
p “ Ba w P Lp pRN q.
The proof of (2.21)(iv) for 1 ď r ă N is more complicated and requires

extra notations.
Let Y1 and Y2 be the parallelotopes associated with the vectors p1 , . . . , pr
and pr`1 , . . . , pN , thus Y “ Y1 ˆ Y2 . Let also V1 denote the subspace
Rpr`1 ‘ . . . ‘ RpN .
In the remainder of the proof, set
x P RN , x “ x V ` xV 1 , pxV , xV1q P V ˆ V1 ,
y P Y, y “ y V ` yV 1 , pyV , yV1 q P Y1 ˆ Y2 .
By (2.21)(ii), wp does not depend upon the variables yV .

We now split the unfolding with respect to Y1 and Y2 (these are partial
unfoldings)(7). Let Trε1 : Lp pRN ˆ Y2 q ÞÑ Lp pRN ˆ Y q be the unfolding
operator which unfolds functions of xV to functions of pxV , yV q (xV1 and yV1
being parameters):
´ ”x ı ¯
@Φ P Lp pRN ˆ Y2 q, Trε1 pΦqpx, yV , yV1 q “ Φ ε V ` εyV ` xV1 , yV1 .
ε Y
Similarly, Trε2 : Lp pRN ˆ Y1 q ÞÑ Lp pRN ˆ Y q unfolds functions of xV1 to

functions of pxV1 , yV1 q:
´ ”x ı ¯
Trε2 pΨqpx, yV , yV1 q “ Ψ xV ` ε V
1
@Ψ P Lp pRN ˆ Y1 q, ` εyV1 , yV .
ε Y
For φ P Lp pRN q, clearly,
´ ”xı ¯ ´ ”x ı ”x ı ¯
TrεY pφqpx, yq “ φ ε
1
` εy “ φ ε V `ε V ` εyV ` εyV1
ε Y ε Y ε Y
“ Trε1 ˝ Trε2 pφqpx, yq for a.e. px, yq P RN ˆ Y.
.
Set Θε “ Trε2 pwε q. By hypothesis,
.
Trε1 pΘε q “ Trε pwε q á w
p weakly in Lp pRN ˆ Y q.
(7) See Part III for a general discussion of partial unfoldings.
79
So, using the equivalent of Proposition 1.9(iii) for the partial unfolding Trε1 ,
Θε á MY1 pwq
p weakly in Lp pRN ˆ Y2 q.
p does not depend on yV , hence MY1 pwq

But w p ” pwq
p and
Trε2 pwε q á w
Since a belongs to V, Ba Trε2 pwε q ” Trε2 pBa wε q and by the hypotheses, the
latter is bounded in Lp pRN ˆ Y2 q. Therefore,
Ba Trε2 pwε q á Ba w
Taking into account that Ba w p does not depend upon yV , it follows that Ba wp
belongs to Lp pRN ˆ Y q, which completes the proof of (2.21)(iv).
To prove (2.21)(v), first let W be the pN ´ 1q-dimensional subspace of
RN generated by p2 , . . . , pN . Without loss of generality, one can assume that
a´p1 belongs to W. Indeed, recalling the representation of a in (2.19), where
all the λj ’s are different from zero, one can replace a by p1{λ1 qa.
For ϕ P Lp pRN q, define the function M Ăε,a pϕq P Lp pRN q by
ż1
. ` ˘
MĂε,a pϕqpx1 ` εkb1 q “ ϕ x1 ` εkb1 ` εta dt, k P Z, for a.e. x1 P W,
0
and then extend it to be constant on the line intervals
rx1 ` εkb1 , x1 ` εkb1 ` εaq, k P Z and for a.e. x1 P W.

Ăε,a pϕq belongs to Lp pRN q and
As in the proof of Proposition 1.24(i), M
Ăε,a pϕq}Lp pRN q ď }ϕ}Lp pRN q .

}M (2.22)
If ϕ belongs to Wa1,p pRN q, the one dimensional Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality

implies
}ϕ ´ M Ăε,a pϕq}Lp pRN q ď Cε}Ba ϕ}Lp pRN q (8), (2.23)
with a constant independent of ε. Consider the function
Ăε,a pwε q ¯ y c ¨ a
´w ´ M
Zε “ TrεY
ε
´ p
Ba w.
ε |a|2
From (2.23), it follows that tZε uε is uniformly bounded in Lp pRN ˆY q. Recall

p is independent of yV therefore By,a Ba w
that Ba w p “ 0, so a direct computation
shows that
Ba,y Zε “ TrεY pBa wε q ´ Ba w
p a.e. in RN ˆ Y,
which is bounded in Lp pRN ˆ Y q.
(8) To prove (2.22) and (2.23), one can proceed as in Lemma 1.57 and Proposition 1.58
starting with a function ϕ P Cc pRN q.
80
Consequently, }Zε }Lp pRN ;Wa1,p pY qq is bounded independently of ε. Therefore,

up to a subsequence, there exists w p in Lp pRN ; Wa1,p pY qq such that
p
Zε á w weakly in Lp pRN ; Wa1,p pY qq,
p weakly in Lp pRN ˆ Y q,
Ba,y Zε á Ba,y w
and this proves (2.21)(v).
2.3 Unfolding in L1 and for measures

This section gives complements concerning the various unfolding operators
for the case of the space L1 pΩq, as well as some results concerning the space of
bounded measures M1 pΩq and the corresponding L1 pΩˆY q and M1 pΩˆY q.
For the case of weak compactness in L1 in particular, the Poincaré-Wirtinger
inequality is used to its fullest.
2.3.1 About the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality

Recall the definition of the mean value over a bounded domain:
Definition 2.24. Let O be a bounded domain in RN and ϕ integrable over

O. The average (also called the mean value) of ϕ over O is defined as
ż
1
MO pϕq “ ϕpxq dx,
|O| O
where |O| “ measurepOq is the Lebesgue measure of the set O.
The following inequality was recalled in (1.32):
Definition 2.25 (The Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality). A bounded open set O

in RN satisfies the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality for the exponent p P r1, `8s
if there exists a constant Cp such that
@u P W 1,p pOq, }u ´ MO puq}Lp pOq ď Cp }∇u}Lp pOq . (2.24)
If this holds, we say that O is a PW-domain for the exponent p.
Obviously, for O to satisfy the above condition for some p, it has to be

connected. But this condition is far from being sufficient. A simple sufficient
condition is that the Sobolev embedding from W 1,p pOq to Lp pOq be compact,
the proof of the inequality in this situation is obtained by contradiction.
A large class of domains for which this compactness holds is that of
bounded domains O Ă RN with the property that there exists a continu-
ous linear extension operator from W 1,p pOq to W 1,p pRN q (by Rellich’s theo-
rem). This class includes the so-called Jones-domains and in particular, the
domains with Lipschitz boundary (see [2, 37]).
81
2.3. Unfolding in L1 and for measures
A larger class of domains which satisfy the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality

is that of John-domains. These domains were introduced by Fritz John in
one of his important papers on elasticity in particular, in connection with the
Korn inequality, see [157]. The class of John-domains is strictly larger than
the class of Jones-domains. Indeed, there are examples of John-domains with-
out Lipschitz boundary. They can be constructed explicitly using sequences
of “rooms and corridors” (see a discussion in [88] and references therein).
It is remarkable that the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality is very stable.
Indeed, it is equivalent to many variants as explained in the next proposition.
Proposition 2.26. Let O be a bounded domain. If it is a PW-domain-

domain for the exponent p P r1, `8s, then for every measure μ such that
1
μpOq “ 1 and with finite energy pi.e. μ belonging to M1 pOq X W ´1,p pOqq,
the following variant of the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality holds for some
other constant C 1 :
› ż ›
› ›
@u P W 1,p pOq, ›u ´ u dμ› p ď C 1 }∇u}Lp pOq . (2.25)
O L pOq
Conversely, if inequality (2.25) holds, the domain O is a PW-domain for

the exponent p.
Proof. Assuming inequality (2.24) holds, by integration with respect to μ,

ˇż ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ u dμ ´ MO puqˇ ď Cp }∇u}Lp pOq .
O
Combining this inequality with (2.24) itself implies (2.25). The converse is
proved by a similar argument.
Remark 2.27. The previous result can be used to show that if two bounded
open sets with non empty intersection O1 and O2 are PW-domains for the
same exponent p, then their union O1 Y O2 is also a PW-domain for p.
More generally, let two bounded connected open sets O1 and O2 be PW-
domains for the same exponent p. Assume that pO1 X O2 q contains a portion
.
of a Lipschitz graph. Then the domain O “ interior pO1 Y O2 q is a PW-
domain for the same exponent p.
The Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality has several deep consequences. To list

some of them, for p P r1, `8s, consider the spaces,
1,p (
WM pOq “ ψ P W 1,p pOq | MO pψq “ 0 ,
1,p
Zp pOq “ t∇ψ | ψ P WM pOqu Ă Lp pOqN u.
Proposition 2.28. Assume that O is a bounded connected domain in RN

and that p is given in r1, `8s.
(i) The following assertions are equivalent:
82
paq O is a PW-domain for the exponent p,

pbq Zp pOq is closed in Lp pOqN .
1,p
(ii) On the space WM pOq, the function ψ ÞÑ }∇ψ}Lp pOq is an equivalent
norm.
1,p
(iii) The map ∇ is an isomorphism from WM pY q to Zp pOq and it has a
continuous linear inverse Lp . Actually, if Lp and Lq exist for two values
q ď p, the map Lp is the restriction to Zp of the map Lq .
Proof. (i) Clearly,
}∇ψ}Lp pY q ď C }ψ}W 1,p pOq , (2.26)
so that the gradient operator is linear continuous from W pOq to Zp pOq.
1,p
1,p
Since O is connected, the gradient map is continuous bijective from WM pOq
to Zp pOq. If the latter is closed in Lp pOqN , it is a Banach space, and by the
Banach isomorphism theorem, ∇ has a continuous inverse Lp , which implies
that there is a constant C such that
1,p
@u P WM pOq, }u}W 1,p pOq ď C }∇u}Lp pOq .
.
For v in W 1,p pOq, applying the previous inequality to u “ v ´ MO pvq,
entails that O is a PW-domain for the exponent p.
The converse follows from the considerations below where it is assumed
that O is a PW-domain for the exponent p.
1,p
(ii) For ψ in WM pOq, by the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality
}ψ}W 1,p pOq ď }ψ}Lp pOq ` }∇ψ}Lp pOq ď p1 ` Cp q}∇ψ}Lp pOq .
This, together with (2.26) gives the equivalence of the norms.

(iii) Assertion (ii) implies that the space Zp pOq is complete since a Cauchy
sequence in Zp pOq is the image by the gradient map of a Cauchy sequence
1,p
in WM pOq. Its limit is therefore the gradient of the corresponding limit in
W 1,p pOq.
The fact that, for 1 ď q ď p ď `8, the restriction of Lq to Zp pOq is Lp ,
follows from the same property of the gradient map.
Remark 2.29. In [191] a more general situation is proposed with the notion
of p-connectedness.
We conclude this paragraph with a remark concerning another kind of
Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality with a shift in the order of derivation (see for
example [183] Theorem 14).
Proposition 2.30. Let O be a connected bounded domain in RN with Lips-
chitz boundary. Then for every p P p1, `8q, there is a constant CpO, pq such
that
}u ´ MO puq}Lp pOq ď CpO, pq}∇u}W ´1,p pOq , @u P Lp pOq.
83
ż
1
As a consequence, for g in Lp pOq such that gpxq dx “ 1, and for u in
O
L pOq
p
› ż › ´ ¯
› ›
›u ´ upxqgpxq dx› ď CpO, pq 1 ` }g}Lp1 pOq |O|1{p }∇u}W ´1,p pOq .
O Lp pOq
This last inequality is obtained in the same way as the variant inequal-
ity (2.25) was derived from the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality (2.24).
2.3.2 Unfolding in L1
Concerning weak-compactness and weakly convergent sequences, one needs
a characterization of weakly compact sets in the space L1 pOq for a domain
O in RN . Here we shall use the so-called “de la Vallée-Poussin criterion”,
defined as follows:
Definition 2.31 (De la Vallée-Poussin criterion). A sequence twε uε (or a
set) of measurable functions on O satisfies the de la Vallée-Poussin criterion
whenever there exists a non-decreasing convex function F : R` ÞÑ R` , such
that
"ż *
Fptq
Fp0q “ 0, lim “ `8 and the set F ˝ |wε |pxq dx is bounded.
tÑ`8 t O
The function F is a de la Vallée-Poussin function for the sequence twε uε .

One of the main classical results concerning this criterion is the next
proposition.
Proposition 2.32 (cf. [97, 105]). If |O| is finite, the de la Vallée-Poussin
criterion is equivalent to the relative weak compactness in L1 pOq.
If |O| “ `8, the de la Vallée-Poussin criterion is equivalent to the re-
lative weak compactness in L1loc pOq. Furthermore, together with the equi-
integrability at `8, which is defined as
´ ż ¯
lim sup |wε pxq|dx “ 0,
RÑ`8 ε OzOXBp0,Rq
it implies the relative weak compactness in L1 pOq. In this definition, Bp0, Rq

stands for the ball in RN with center 0 and radius R.
Proposition 2.33 (Proposition 1.9 for p “ 1). For every relatively weakly
compact sequence twε uε in L1 pΩq, the corresponding tTε pwε quε is relatively
weakly compact in L1 pΩ ˆ Y q. Furthermore, if
Tε pwε q á w
p weakly in L1 pΩ ˆ Y q,
then
wε á MY pwq
p weakly in L1 pΩq
and
}w}
p L1 pΩˆY q ď |Y | lim inf }wε }L1 pΩq .
84
Proof. Let F be a de ż la Vallée-Poussin function for the sequence twε uε . Un-

folding the integral F ˝ |wε |pxq dx and using Proposition 1.8(ii), give
Ω
ż ż
1 ` ˘ 1 ` ˘
F |Tε pwε qpx, yq| dxdy “ Tε F ˝ |wε | px, yq dxdy
|Y | ΩˆY |Y | ΩˆY
ż
ď F ˝ |wε |pxq dx.
Ω
Hence the sequence

"ż *
` ˘
F |Tε pwε qpx, yq| dxdy is bounded,
ΩˆY ε
and this completes the proof of weak compactness of tTε pwε quε in L1 pΩ ˆ Y q
in the case of Ω with finite measure.
For the case where the measure of Ω is not finite and recalling that dpY q
is the diameter of Y (see (1.46)), the inequality given in Proposition 1.8(iii)
applied to
|wε |1ΩzΩXBp0,R´εdpY qq ,
shows that the equi-integrability at infinity of the sequence twε uε carries over
to the sequence tTε pwε quε .
Now, suppose the following convergence holds:
Tε pwε q á w
p weakly in L1 pΩ ˆ Y q,
and let ψ be in Cc8 pΩq. For ε sufficiently small, one has

ż ż
1
wε pxq ψpxq dx “ Tε pwε qpx, yq Tε pψqpx, yq dxdy.
Ω |Y | ΩˆY
In view of Proposition 1.9(i), one can pass to the limit in the right-hand side
to obtain
ż ż " ż *
1
lim wε pxq ψpxq dx “ p yq dy ψpxq dx,
wpx,
εÑ0 Ω Ω |Y | Y
which is the claim. The last statement follows from the weak lower semi-
continuity of the L1 -norm and from the inequality (iii) of Proposition 1.8
applied for p “ 1.
Proposition 2.34 (Proposition 1.25(ii) for p “ 1). If tvε uε is a sequence
included in a weakly compact subset of L1 pΩq, the following convergences are
equivalent:
paq vε á v weakly in L1 pΩq,
pbq Mε pvε q á v weakly in L1 pΩq(9) .
(9) If the sequence tvε uε is only bounded in L1 pΩq, Proposition 2.51 applies.
85
Proof. We first prove that if tvε uε is included in a weakly compact subset of

L1 pΩq, so is tMε pvε quε . More precisely, if the de la Vallée-Poussin criterion
is satisfied by the sequence tvε uε with a function F, it is also satisfied by
the sequence tMε pvε quε , with the same F, since for F non-decreasing and
convex, the monotonicity and Jensen’s inequality imply for a.e. x P Ω,
Fp|Mε pvε qpxq|q ď FpMε p|vε |qpxqq ď Mε pFp|vε pxq|qq.
Hence, from Proposition 1.24(i) one gets

ż ż ż
Fp|Mε pvε qpxq|qdx ď Mε pFp|vε pxq|qqdx ď Fp|vε pxq|qdx.
Ω Ω Ω
The condition of equi-integrability near `8 is also easily checked in the case

where |Ω| “ 8.
At this point, the equivalence of (a) and (b) is obtained by testing with a
function in DpΩq and using the same arguments as in the proof of Proposition
1.25(ii).
Proposition 2.35 (Proposition 1.31(i)-(ii) for p “ 1). Let tΦε uε be a se-

quence in L1 pΩ ˆ Y q such that
Φε á Φ weakly in L1 pΩ ˆ Y q.
Then
ż
1
piq Uε pΦε q á MY pΦq “ Φp ¨ , yq dy weakly in L1 pΩq,
|Y | Y
piiq Tε ˝ Uε pΦε q á Φ weakly in L1 pΩ ˆ Y q.
Proof. Let F be a de la Vallée-Poussin function for the sequence tΦε uε . The

monotonicity and the Jensen inequality give for a.e. x P Ωpε
´ˇ 1 ż ´ ”xı ! x ) ¯ ˇ¯
ˇ ˇ
F ˇ Φε ε ` εz, dz ˇ
|Y | Y ε Y ε Y
ż ´ˇ ´ ” x ı ! x ) ¯ˇ¯
1 ˇ ˇ
ď F ˇΦε ε ` εz, ˇ dz.
|Y | Y ε Y ε Y
Hence, `ˇ ˇ˘ ` ˘
F ˇUε pΦε qpxqˇ ď Uε F ˝ |Φε | pxq for a.e. x in Ω.
By integration and using inequality (1.27), it follows that
ż ż
`ˇ ` ˘ ˇ˘ ` ˘ 1
F ˇUε Φε pxqˇ dx ď Uε F ˝ |Φε | pxqdx ď }F ˝ |Φε |}L1 pΩˆY q .
Ω Ω |Y |
The condition of equi-integrability near `8 is also easily checked in the case

|Ω| “ 8. This proves (i). The proof of (ii) is similar making use of (1.26).
86
Proposition 2.36 (Theorem 1.41 for p “ 1). Let twε uε be a sequence in

W 1,1 pΩq, such that
wε á w weakly in W 1,1 pΩq.
1,1
p in L1 pΩ; Wper,0
Then, up to a subsequence, there exists some w pY qq such that
1´ ¯
piq Tε pwε q ´ Mε pwε q á w
p ` y c ¨ ∇w weakly in L1 pΩ; W 1,1 pY qq,
ε
piiq p
Tε p∇wε q á ∇w ` ∇y w weakly in L1 pΩ ˆ Y qN .
Proof. The proof is essentially the same as that of Theorem 1.41. The only
difference is in how to establish the weak compactness, which, for L1 -based
spaces, does not simply follow from bounds.
By hypothesis, t∇wε uε is weakly convergent in L1 pRN qN . Therefore by
Proposition 2.33, the corresponding sequence tTrε p∇wε quε is in a weakly com-
pact subset of L1 pRN ˆ Y qN . Up to a subsequence, we can assume that it is
weakly convergent.
Now, Trε p∇wε q “ ∇y Zε , with
1` ˘
Zε “ Tε pwε q ´ Mε pwε q ,
ε
(see proof of Theorem 1.41). By Proposition 2.28, the map ∇y is an isomor-
1,1
phism between the space L1 pRN ; WM pY qq and L1 pRN ; X1 pY qq. The latter
space is itself a closed subspace of L pRN ; L1 pY qq, which, by Fubini’s theo-
1
rem, is the same as L1 pRN ˆ Y q.

Consequently, the weak convergence of Trε p∇wε q in L1 pRN ˆ Y qN is equi-
(
valent to that of the sequence Trε pZε q ε in L1 pRN ; WM1,1
pY qq. We can define
p by (i) which is equivalent to (ii).
w
From these weak convergences, the Y -periodicity of w p1 follows is the same
way as in the proof of Theorem 1.41.
Corollary 2.37 (Corollary 1.37 for p “ 1). Let twε uε be a sequence in

W 1,1 pΩq, such that
wε á w weakly in W 1,1 pΩq.
Then
Tε pwε q á w weakly in L1 pΩ; W 1,1 pY qq.
Furthermore, if
wε Ñ w strongly in L1 pΩq(10),
then
Tε pwε q Ñ w strongly in L1 pΩ; W 1,p pY qq.
(10) This is automatically the case when Ω is bounded with Lipschitz boundary.
87
Proof. Indeed, by (i) of Proposition 2.36,

Tε pwε q ´ Mε pwε q Ñ 0 strongly in L1 pΩ; W 1,1 pY qq.
If twε uε converges weakly, Proposition 2.34 implies that
Mε pwε q á w weakly in L1 pΩq,
hence in L1 pΩ; W 1,1 pY qq, and this gives the first result.
If twε uε converges strongly, the second result follows in the same way
from Proposition 1.25(i).
Proposition 2.38 (Proposition 1.69 for p “ 1). Let twε uε be a sequence in
W 1,1 pRN q, such that
wε á w weakly in W 1,1 pRN q.
Then the following convergences hold:
piq r ε pwε q Ñ 0 strongly in L1 pRN q,
R
piiq Qrε pwε q á w strongly in L1 pRN q and weakly in W 1,1 pRN q,
loc
piiiq r r
Tε ˝ Qε pwε q Ñ w strongly in L1 pRN ; Q1 pY qq,
loc
pivq rε pwε qq á ∇w
Trε p∇Q weakly in L1 pRN ˆ Y qN .
Proof. The proofs of (i), (iii) and of the first statement of (ii) are similar to
those of Proposition 1.69 in view of the compact embedding of W 1,1 pRN q in
L1loc pRN q (the sequence twε uε being bounded in W 1,1 pRN q).
In view of the first statement in (ii), to prove the second one it remains
to show that ∇Q rε pwε q is relatively weakly compact in L1 pRN qN . Let F be a
de la Vallée-Poussin function for which }F ˝ |∇wε |}L1 pΩˆY q is bounded. Due
to the monotonicity and the convexity of F, by Jensen’s inequality, one has
for every j P t1, . . . , N u,
ż ż ˇ M pw qp ¨ ` εb q ´ M pw q ˇ
` ˘ ˇ ε ε j ε ε ˇ
F |∇Qε pwε q ¨ bj |pxq dx “ F ˝ˇ ˇpxqdx
RN RN ε
ż ´ ˇ w p¨ ` εb q ´ w ˇ¯
ˇ ε j εˇ
ď Mε F ˝ ˇ ˇ pxqdx
RN ε
ż ˇ w p¨ ` εb q ´ w ˇ
ˇ ε j εˇ
ď F ˝ˇ ˇpxqdx
ε
żR
N
ď F ˝ |∇wε ¨ bj |pxqdx.
RN
The condition of equi-integrability near `8 is also easily checked. This

completes the proof of (ii).
For the proof of (iv), as was just shown, ∇Qrε pwε q converges weakly to ∇w
in L pR q . Hence, by Proposition 2.33, Tε p∇Q
1 N N r rε pwε qq is weakly compact
in L pR ˆ Y q . The remainder of the proof is the same as that of (iv) of
1 N N
Proposition 1.69.
88
Corollary 2.39 (Corollary 1.70 for p “ 1). Let twε uε be a sequence in

W 1,1 pRN q, such that
wε á w weakly in W 1,1 pRN q.
p1 in the space L1 pRN ; Wper

Then, up to a subsequence, there exists some w 1,1
pY qq
such that the following convergences hold:
` ˘
piq r ε pwε q á ∇y w
Trε ∇R p1 weakly in L1 pRN ˆ Y qN ,
piiq Trε p∇wε q á ∇w ` ∇y w

p1 weakly in L1 pRN ˆ Y qN .
Proof. Since ` ˘ ` ˘
Trε ∇R r ε pwε q “ Trε p∇wε q ´ Trε ∇Q
rε pwε q ,
` ˘
the sequence tTrε ∇R r ε pwε q uε is weakly compact in L1 pRN ˆ Y q as difference
of two weakly compact sequences (the former by Proposition 2.33 and the
latter by Proposition 2.38 (iv)). Therefore, there exists a W x 1 in L1 pRN ˆ Y qq
such that, up to a subsequence,
` ˘ ´ ` ˘¯
r ε pwε q ” ∇y Trε 1 R
Trε ∇R r ε pwε q á W
x 1 weakly in L1 pRN ˆY qN . (2.27)
ε
The same argument as in the proof of Proposition 2.36 applied here, shows
that convergence (2.27) is equivalent to the following weak convergence:
´1 ¯ ´ ´ ¯¯
Trε R r ε pwε q ´ MY Trε 1 R
r ε pwε p1
áw 1,1
weakly in L1 pRN ; WM pY qq.
ε ε
p1 is obtained proceeding as in the proof
From this fact, the Y -periodicity of w
of Theorem 1.41.
As a consequence, the following result for the case of a domain Ω holds:
Proposition 2.40 (Proposition 1.78 for p “ 1). Let twε u be a sequence

converging weakly to w in W 1,1 pΩq or in W01,1 pΩq. Then
piq Rε pwε q Ñ 0 strongly in L1 pΩq,

piiq Qε pwε q á w weakly in W 1,1 pΩq,
piiiq Tε p∇Qε pwε qq á ∇w weakly in L1 pΩ ˆ Y qN .
˚
2.3.3 Unfolding for measures
In this section, we denote by Yr the semi-closed parallelotope defined as
!ÿ
N
ˇ )
.
Yr “ yj b j ˇ 0 ď y j ă 1 ,
j“1
89
Ť
so that RN is exactly the disjoint union pξ ` Yr q (not only up to a set of
ξPG
Lebesgue measure 0 as with Y ).

The notations rxsYr and txuYr are now meant for every x in RN without
ambiguity. In particular, (1.2) becomes
´” x ı !x) ¯
x“ε `
ε Yr ε Yr
for every x P RN . Consequently, the unfolding operator (still denoted Trε ) is
defined everywhere for a function defined everywhere. For example, it can
be applied to a Borel function on RN to obtain a Borel function on RN ˆ Yr .
The definition for the modified local average operator M Ăε follows easily.
The modified averaging operator U rε is defined in a similar way for Borel
functions on RN ˆ Y , and yields a Borel function on RN . The algebraic
properties of these operators (proved above) still hold with these modified
version.
Here, we mostly present the results for bounded Borel measures on RN
(the corresponding space is denoted M1 ). Similar results hold for positive
σ-finite Borel measures and for signed Radon measures on RN . The case of
measures on a Borel subset Ω of RN is treated simply by considering the
corresponding measures on RN which are supported in Ω.
The notion of unfolding for measures extends the two-scale convergence
for measures for which we refer to [32], where only Example 2.53 is used
(the abstract results of Section 2 of [32] follow easily from Proposition 2.47
below). It also extends the “generalized ” two-scale convergence of [192].
Definition 2.41. The unfolding Trε pμq of a Borel measure μ P M1 pRN q is
defined by duality for every bounded Borel function Φ on Ω ˆ Y , as
. rε pΦq y.
x Trε pμq, Φ y “ |Y | x μ, U
Proposition 2.42. Let μ be in M1 pRN q. Then
Trε pμq P L1 X L8 pRN ; M1 pYr qq, (2.28)

is piecewise constant with respect to x P RN , and satisfies
}Trε pμq}L1 pRN ;M1 pYr qq ď |Y | }μ}M1 pΩq
1 (2.29)
}Trε pμq}L8 pRN ;M1 pYr qq ď }μ}M1 pΩq .
εN
More precisely, for every x P RN ,
Trε pμqpxq “ με,r x s , (2.30)
Ă
ε Y
where με,ξ P M1 pYr q denotes the translate of the scaled restriction to εpξ ` Yr q
of μ, defined, for ϕ a bounded Borel function on Yr , as
ż ´! ) ¯
1 x
με,ξ pϕq “ N ϕ 1 r pxq μpdxq. (2.31)
ε ε Yr εξ`εY
90
A similar result holds for μ a Radon measure on RN , in which case Trε pμq
1 r
belongs to L8
loc pR ; M pY qq.
N
For μ a σ-finite positive Borel measure on RN , Trε pμq is a piece-wise con-

stant map from RN to the set of σ-finite positive Borel measures on Yr , taking
for each x the value με,x which is the σ-finite Borel positive measure defined
on Yr by the following formula for each Borel subset A of Yr :
1 ´ ”xı ¯
με,x pAq “ N μ ε ` εA .
ε ε Yr
Example 2.43. The formulas above show that Trε pdxq is simply the product
1
Lebesgue measure dx b dy on RN ˆ Yr . More generally, if μ is with
|Y |
density ρ with respect to dx, its unfolding is with density Trε pρq with respect
1
to dx b dy. This is in agreement with the unfolding of functions.
|Y |
Proof of Proposition 2.42. The following estimate is straightforward for μ
positive and extends to signed μ:
1
}με,ξ }M1 pYr q ď |μ|pεξ ` εYr q. (2.32)
εN
This implies that the map x ÞÑ με,r xε sYĂ is in L1 X L8 pRN ; M1 pYr qq with the
bound (2.29) above (since the Lebesgue measure of εξ ` εYr is εN |Y |).
It remains to show that it is actually Trε pμq. To do so, it is enough to
consider μ positive. Testing against a bounded Borel function Φpx, yq, making
multiple use of Fubini’s theorem, the result is obtained from the following
computation:
ż
x Trε pμq, Φ y “ |Y | rε pΦqpxqμpdxq
U
RN
ż ´ ”xı !x) ¯
“ Φ ε ` εz, μpdxqdz
RN ˆYr ε Yr ε Yr
ÿ ż ´ !x) ¯
“ Φ εξ ` εz, μpdxqdz
r
ξPG εpξ`Y qˆY
r ε Yr
ÿż ` ˘
“ εN Φ εξ ` εz, y με,ξ pdyqdz (2.33)
r r
ξPG Y ˆY
ÿż
“ Φpx, yq με,ξ pdyqdx
r r
ξPG Y ˆεpξ`Y q
ż
“ Φpx, yq dμε,r x s pyqdx
RN ˆYr Ă
ε Y
ż
` ˘
“ με,r x s Φpx, ¨ q dx.
Ă
RN ε Y
91
For μ a Radon measure, the same formulas hold for Φ compactly sup-
ported in RN . The fact that Trε pμq belongs to L8 1 r
loc pR ; M pY qq follows by
N
formula (2.32). A similar proof holds for μ sigma-finite.
For each ε ą 0, introduce a special involution Xε of RN ˆ Yr , which is

piecewise affine (hence Borel),
”xı !x)
Xε px, yq “ px1 , y 1 q where x1 “ ε ` εy and y 1 “ .
ε Yr ε Yr
It is straightforward that Xε´1 “ Xε .
One can describe the unfolding of the measure μ with the use of the
involution Xε .
Proposition 2.44. The following identity holds:
Trε pμq ” Xε˚ pμ b dyq.
Proof. The second line of formula (2.33) reads

ż ´ ”xı !x) ¯ ż
Φ ε ` εy, dμpxqdy “ Φ ˝ Xε px, yq dμpxqdy,
RN ˆYr ε Yr ε Yr RN ˆYr
whence the claim.
Definition 2.45. The averaging operator U rε , applied to a Borel measure Σ

1 N r
in M pR ˆ Y q, is the Borel measure on RN defined by duality for every
bounded Borel function φ, as
ż ´ ”xı ¯
@ D . 1 @ D 1
r
Uε pΣq, φ “ r
Σ, Tε pφq “ φ ε ` εy Σpdx, dyq.
|Y | |Y | RN ˆYr ε Yr
Consequently, from (iii) of Proposition 1.8 applied to bounded Borel func-

tions, it follows that
rε pΣq}M1 pRN q ď 1
}U }Σ}M1 pRN ˆYr q .
|Y |
As for the unfolding operator, one can describe the averaging operator by
using the map Xε .
ż
r 1
Proposition 2.46. Uε pΣq “ X ˚ pΣqp ¨ , dyq.
|Y | Yr ε
Proposition 2.47. The following properties hold for μ in M1 pRN q and Σ

in M1 pRN ˆ Yr q:
(i) Trε pφμqpxq “ Trε pφqTrε pμq for every φ bounded Borel function on RN
or more generally locally integrable with respect to μ,
92
1 r
(ii) x Tε pμq, Trε pφq y “ x μ, φ y for every φ bounded Borel function on RN
|Y |
or more generally integrable with respect to μ,
rε ˝ Trε pμq “ μ,
(iii) U
ż ż
1 “x‰
r r
(iv) x Tε ˝ Uε pΣq, Φ y “ dz Φpε ` z, yq Σpdx, dyq for every
|Y | Y RN ˆYr ε Yr
Φ bounded Borel function on RN ˆ Yr .
Similar results hold for positive Borel measures and for Radon measures.
Proof.
piq Computing formulas (2.30) and (2.31) for the Radon measure φμ on RN ,
leads to
ż ´! 1 ) ¯
1 x
x Trε pφμqpxq, ϕ y “ N ϕ 1 x 1 1
r px qφpx q μpdx q
1
ε ε Yr εr ε sYĂ `εY
ż ´! 1 ) ¯ ´ ”xı ! x1 ) ¯
1 x
“ N ϕ 1εr x sĂ `εYr px1 qTrε pφq ε ` εp μpdx1 q
ε ε Yr ε Y ε Yr ε Yr
A ´ ”xı ¯ E
“ Trε pμqpxq, φ ε ` ε ¨ ϕp ¨ q ,
ε Yr
for every ϕ bounded Borel function on Yr , and for every x P RN . This gives
the result.
piiq By definition,
1 r
x Tε pμq, Trε pφq y “ x μ, U
rε ˝ Trε pφ y “ x μ, φ y,
|Y |
where (1.25) is used for the Borel function φ.

piiiq From Propositions 2.44 and 2.46, one gets
ż ż
rε ˝ Trε pμq “ 1
U Xε˚ pTrε pμqqp ¨ , dyq “
1
X ˚ ˝ Xε˚ pμpdxq b dyqp¨, dyq.
|Y | Yr |Y | Yr ε
Since Xε is an involution, so is Xε˚ , and the last integral becomes

ż
1
μp ¨ q b dy “ μ.
|Y | Yr
pivq By definition,
x Trε ˝ U
rε pΣq, Φ y “ x Σ, Trε ˝ U
rε pΦ y.
The result follows by Fubini’s theorem and formula (1.26) which holds for
bounded Borel maps on RN ˆ Yr .
93
Remark 2.48. Proposition 2.47(ii) implies that Trε defines a continuous li-
near map from Lp pRN , μq to Lp pRN ˆ Yr , Trε pμqq with a norm bounded above
by |Y |1{p . This is also true for μ a non negative Borel measure on RN , and
generalizes the result (iii) of Proposition 1.8.
Definition 2.49 (Average of a measure over Y ). The average MY pνq of a
measure ν P M1 pRN ˆ Yr q on RN , is the element of M1 pRN q defined as the
linear map ż
8 1
ϕ P Cc pR q ÞÑ
N
ϕpxq dνpx, yq.
|Y | RN ˆY
It is the projection of ν over RN up to the factor 1{|Y |.
Definition 2.50 (Local average of a measure). For μ P M1 pRN q, the local
Ăε pμq is the average over Y of its unfolding:
average M
1 ´ ”xı ¯
Ăε pμq “ .
M MY pTrε pμqq “ N μ ε ` εYr ,
ε |Y | ε Yr
which belongs to L1 X L8 pRN q by (2.28).

The next result corresponds to Proposition 1.9 for bounded measures,
weak-˚ convergence here is also called vague convergence.
Proposition 2.51.
(i) For μ in M1 pRN q, the following convergence holds:
Ăε pμq á μ
M weakly-˚ in M1 pRN q.
(ii) If tμε uε is a bounded sequence in M1 pRN q, the following convergences

are equivalent:
paq με á μ weakly-˚ in M1 pRN q,

Ăε pμε q á μ
pbq M weakly-˚ in M1 pRN q.
(iii) Let tμε uε be a bounded sequence of Borel measures such that tTrε pμε quε
converges vaguely to some measure ν in M1 pRN ˆ Yr q. Then, the sequence
tμε uε itself converges vaguely to MY pνq on Ω.
Similar results hold for sequences of Radon measures.
Proof.
(i) Clearly, (ii) implies (i).
(ii) paq ñ pbq Let ϕ be in Cc8 pRN q. Then, by the definitions,
ż ÿż
Ăε pμε qpxqϕpxq dx ” 1
M με pεξ ` εYr qϕpxq dx
RN εN |Y | ξPG εξ`εY
ÿ @ D
“ Ăε pϕq .
με pϕ1εξ`εYr q “ με , M
ξPG
94
Ăε pϕq converges uniformly to ϕ in RN , one concludes using the weak-˚

Since M
convergence of με to μ. The converse is obtained as in the cases p P r1, `8q
from the uniqueness of the weak-˚ limit point for the sequence tμε uε .
(iii) Similarly, the following equalities hold:
1 @ D 1 @ D
ν, ϕ “ lim Trε pμε q, ϕ
|Y | |Y |
@ D
“ lim με , Urε pϕq “ limx με , ϕ y,
εÑ0
and this concludes the proof.
Proposition 2.52 (Proposition 1.31 for measures).

(i) Let tΣε u be a bounded sequence in M1 pRN ˆ Yr q converging vaguely
to some measure Σ in M1 pRN ˆ Yr q. Then, for every bounded uniformly
continuous function φ on RN ,
rε pΣε q, φ y “ 1 x Σ, φ y,
lim x U
εÑ0 |Y |
which express the fact that

ż
rε pΣε q converges vaguely to 1
U Σp ¨ , dyq.
|Y | Yr
(ii) Under the same hypotheses, and for every bounded continuous function
Φ on RN ˆ Yr ,
lim x Trε ˝ U
rε pΣε q, Φ y “ x Σ, Φ y,
εÑ0
i.e.,
rε pΣε q converges vaguely in the sense of measures to Σ.
Trε ˝ U
Proof. The statements follow directly from formulas (ii) and (iii) of Propo-
sition 2.47 and from the fact that for every bounded uniformly continuous
function φ on RN ,
|φpxq ´ Trε pφqpx, yq| ď pεdpY qq Ñ 0,
where is the modulus of continuity of φ.
Example 2.53. Let ν be a given element of M1 pYr q. It can be extended

by periodicity to RN as a Radon measure νr. Consider its image ν ε via the
scaling ε, which is the εYr -periodic Radon measure defined for ψ continuous
and with compact support in RN as
ÿ
x ν ε , ψ y “ εN x νr, ψpε ¨ q y “ εN x ν, ψpεξ ` ε ¨ q y.
ξPG
95
We now unfold the measure ν ε . By formula (2.31), for every x P RN ,

ż ´! 1 ) ¯
r 1 x 1 1
x Tε pν qpxq, ϕ y “ N ϕ
ε
1 x r px q ν pdx q “ x ν, ϕ y.
ε
ε ε Yr εr ε sYĂ `εY
Hence Trε pν ε q is the constant map ν from RN to M1 pYr q (it can be seen also
as the measure dx b ν on RN ˆ Yr ).
Note that these are the sequences of measures used in [32,192] with respect
to which two-scale convergence is defined for sequences of functions. With the
viewpoint of the unfolding method, this two-scale convergence is just the weak
convergence of the sequence of unfolded functions with respect to the fixed
measure ν. In Section 4.4, there is an example of such measures, where ν is
a restriction of the Hausdorff measure of codimension 1.
Remark 2.54. With the unfolding point of view, it is very easy to consider
simultaneously sequences of measures and functions depending upon ε, ma-
king use of (i) of Proposition 2.47.
Remark 2.55 (Generalization to Lipschitz domains Ω in RN ). To consider
the unfolding of a measure μ P M1 pΩq for Ω a strict subdomain of RN ,
according to (i) of Proposition 2.47, one can set
.
Tε pμq “ Trε p1Ωp ε μq “ 1Ωp ε Trε pμq,
p ε ; M1 pYr qq. Here Ω

which belongs to L1 X L8 pΩ p ε denotes precisely the set
Ť ˇ (
ˇ
εξ ` εYr ˇ εξ ` εYr Ă Ω .
ξPG
The results concerning the unfolding of measures on RN can then be ap-
plied, using test functions ϕ having compact supports in Ω so that, for ε small
enough, 1Ωp ε ϕ ” ϕ.
We close this section with the equivalent of Theorem 1.41 for the case
of the space BV pΩq for a bounded open subset Ω of RN with Lipschitz
boundary. Recall that in such a situation, the embedding from BV pΩq to
L1 pΩq is compact. See, for example, [18] for general properties of BV spaces.
Recall that the weak-˚ convergence of a sequence in M1 pΩ; BV pY qq is
actually defined by the weak-˚ convergence in M1 pΩ ˆ Y qN `1 of the image
of the sequence by the map φ ÞÑ pφ, ∇φq.
Theorem 2.56. Let twε uε be a bounded sequence in BV pΩq. For a subse-
quence, there exist w in BV pΩq, w p in M1 pΩ; BVper pY qq with MY pwq
p “ 0,
such that
1` ˘
Tε pwε q ´ MY ˝ Tε pwε q á y c ¨ ∇w ` w
p weakly-˚ in M1 pΩ; BV pY qq,
ε
and
p
Tε p∇wε q á ∇w ` ∇y w weakly-˚ in M1 pΩ ˆ Y qN .
96
Proof. By the compact embedding of BV pΩq in L1 pΩq, one can assume that
wε converges strongly to some w in L1 pΩq. Therefore, up to a subsequence,
its unfolding converges strongly to the same limit w in L1 pΩ ˆ Y q.
Since Y is with Lipschitz boundary, it satisfies the Poincaré-Wirtinger ine-
quality for the exponent 1. By the density of the regular functions in BV pY q
for the intermediate convergence (i.e. weak-˚ density plus convergence of the
norms), it follows that the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality holds for the space
BV pY q. Therefore, it is straightforward that
›1` ˘››
›
› Tε pwε q ´ Mε pwε q › 1 ď C}∇wε }M1 pΩq ,
ε L pΩ;BV pY qq
which is bounded. The first convergence then follows for a subsequence.

Applying the gradient operator gives the second convergence. As
` ˘
MY Tε pwε q ´ MY ˝ Tε pwε q “ 0,
by the weak-˚ continuity of MY , one gets MY pwq

p “ 0.
It remains to show that the measure w p is Y periodic. This cannot be
proved by comparing traces because a periodic BV pΩq function does not
necessarily have the same traces on opposite faces of Y . The proof can
be given in the same way as for the case of perforated domains in Part II
Theorem 4.28.
Remark 2.57 (Generalization to RN or unbounded domains therein). The

previous result holds provided the L1 -convergence is replaced by the L1loc -
convergence.
97
Chapter 3
Homogenization in fixed
domains
This chapter is devoted to examples of the application of the unfolding
method to the homogenization of some partial differential equations with
highly oscillating coefficients.
All examples are elliptic problems, but the method applies readily to evo-
lution problems with coefficients oscillating in space (using partial unfolding
in space). The case of oscillating coefficients in space-time can be also treated
by a global unfolding.
The homogenization of linear second order elliptic diffusion equations is
presented in details in Section 3.1, for the case of homogeneous Dirichlet con-
ditions on the boundary (subsection 3.1.1). Nonhomogeneous Dirichlet con-
ditions as well as Neumann boundary conditions are easily adapted.The case
of the Fredholm alternative with homogeneous Neumann boundary condition
is also discussed (subsection 3.1.2). The notion of frame-periodic oscillating
coefficients is introduced as a generalization of oscillating periodic coefficients
and their homogenization is obtained again via unfolding (subsection 3.1.3).
Subsection 3.1.4 shows how to use the unfolding method for an example
of multiscale linear diffusion (this is an example of iterated unfolding) and
subsection 3.1.5 gives an example of treatment when the right-hand side only
converges weakly. This section closes with a first result for correctors using
the unfolding operators (these are much improved upon in Chapter 14).
In Section 3.2, homogenization of nonlinear diffusion problems involv-
ing Višik-Leray-Lions type operators is treated using the unfolding method
(with a brief presentation of the necessary convergence theory for maximal
monotone operators).
Finally, Section 3.3 shows how the unfolding method can be used to study
the Γ-convergence of oscillating functionals of gradients.
Other types of transmission conditions on the boundary of ε-periodically
distributed subdomains, themselves of size ε, have been treated with the

3.1. Homogenization of linear diffusion problems
unfolding method. An example of such conditions concerns the homoge-

nization of problems with equi-valued surfaces when these surfaces are small
and ε-periodically distributed – e.g., the torsion problem (see [67] for de-
tails). Another example concerns imperfect heat transmission conditions (see
[101, 102]).
3.1 Homogenization of linear diffusion problems

Definition 3.1. Let α, β P R, such that 0 ă α ă β and O be an open subset
of RN . M pα, β, Oq is the set of the N ˆ N matrices A “ paij q1ďi,jďN with
coefficients in L8 pOq such that for any λ P RN and for a.e. x in O, the
following two inequalities hold:
piq pApxqλ, λq ě α|λ|2 ,
(3.1)
piiq |Apxqλ|2 ď β pApxqλ, λq.
Remark 3.2. Inequality (3.1)(ii) implies that
|Apxqλ| ď β|λ|. (3.2)
The converse is true in case of positive symmetric matrices (and is often taken
as an alternate second condition, even in the general case). It will be shown
that the sets M pα, β, Oq (with the definition used above) are stable under
homogenization. This is not be the case with the alternate definition (3.2).
Let Ω be a bounded domain in RN and Aε “ paεij q1ďi,jďN a sequence of
matrices in M pα, β, Ωq. Many different diffusion problems can be set in Ω
with diffusion matrix field Aε . We will consider the classical Dirichlet and
Neumann problems.
For fε given in H ´1 pΩq, consider the homogeneous Dirichlet problem
#
´div pAε ∇uε q “ fε in Ω,
(3.3)
uε “ 0 on BΩ.
Its variational formulation is: Find uε in H01 pΩq such that

ż
Aε ∇uε ∇v dx “ xfε , vyH ´1 pΩq,H01 pΩq , @v P H01 pΩq. (3.4)
Ω
It admits a unique solution by the Lax-Milgram theorem. Using the stan-

dard Poincaré inequality (which holds in Ω), there is a uniform estimate (i.e.
independent of εq, which states that
1
}uε }H01 pΩq ď }fε }H ´1 pΩq . (3.5)
α
Consequently, assuming the sequence tfε uε is bounded in H ´1 pΩq, there exist
u0 in H01 pΩq and a subsequence, still denoted ε, such that
uε á u0 weakly in H01 pΩq.
100
Chapter 3. Homogenization in fixed domains
The homogeneous Neumann problem for fε in L2 pΩq with MΩ pfε q “ 0

(known as the Fredholm condition), is
$
&´div pA ∇uε q “ fε in Ω,
ε
’
Aε ∇uε ¨ n “ 0 on BΩ, (3.6)
’
%
MΩ puε q “ 0.
Its variational formulation

ż ż
A ∇uε ∇v dx “
ε
fε v dx, @v P H 1 pΩq,
Ω Ω
admits a unique solution by the standard Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality in Ω

and the Lax-Milgram theorem. Moreover, there is a uniform estimate,
1
}uε }H 1 pΩq ď }fε }L2 pΩq .
α
So, assuming the sequence tfε uε is bounded in L2 pΩq, there exist u0 in H 1 pΩq
u ε á u0 weakly in H 1 pΩq.
In each case, assuming that the matrix Aε is ε-periodic, the classical

problem of homogenization is to find an equation satisfied by every weak
limit-point of the corresponding sequence of solutions. If the homogenized
problem has a unique solution, this also implies that the whole sequence
converges weakly.
Remark 3.3 (A general remark). Second order variational problems exhibit

invariance under bi-Lipschitz diffeomorphisms(1) (the coefficients are ob-
viously modified but stay in the same general class; this also holds for higher
order problems with higher regularity for the diffeomorphism used as change
of variable). Therefore, every result stated in the periodic case can be extended
to the case of bi-Lipschitz equivalent to periodic.
We do not give any explicit examples of such problems (as for instance,
problems which are periodic with respect to polar or cylindric coordinates).
Note that these global bi-Lipschitz diffeomorphisms can be combined with the
local bi-Lipschitz change of variables which we introduce in Subsection 3.1.3
under the terminology of “frame-periodic”.
3.1.1 Homogenization of the Dirichlet problem

We are now interested to find a limit problem, the “homogenized” problem,
satisfied by u0 in the case of (3.3). This is called standard homogenization
(1) A bi-Lipschitz diffeomorphism is a bijection which is Lipschitz continuous as well as
its inverse.
101
and the answer, for some classes of Aε , can be found in many works, starting
with the classical book of Bensoussan, Lions and Papanicolaou [21] (see, for
instance Cioranescu and Donato [70] and the references therein). We recall
this result below (Theorem 3.4) for the case of a single scale (i.e. there exists
a single small scale of order ε in the problem), then give the proof in a more
general setting using the unfolding method.
Theorem 3.4. (Standard single scale periodic homogenization).
Let A “ paij q1ďi,jďN belong to M pα, β, Y q, and be extended to the whole RN
by Y -periodicity. Set
´ ´ x ¯¯
Aε pxq “ aij for a.e. x in Ω. (3.7)
ε 1ďi,jďN
Let f in H ´1 pΩq and consider the problem
#
´div pAε ∇uε q “ f in Ω,
uε “ 0 on BΩ,
Then the whole sequence tuε uε converges weakly in H01 pΩq to a limit u0
which is the unique solution of the homogenized problem
$
’
’ ÿN
B 2 u0
&´ a0ij “ f in Ω,
Bxi Bxj (3.8)
’
’
i,j“1
%
u0 “ 0 on BΩ,
where the homogenized constant matrix A0 “ pa0ij q1ďi,jďN is elliptic and

given by
´ ÿN
pj ¯
Bχ
a0ij “ MY aij ` aik . (3.9)
k“1
Byk
In (3.9), the functions χ pj pj “ 1, . . . , N q, often referred to as correctors,
are the solutions of the cell problems
$
’ ÿ B ´ χj pyq ` yj q ¯
N
’
&´ Bpp
aik pyq “ 0 in D1 pRN q,
By i By k (3.10)
’
’
i,k“1
%
MY pp χj q “ 0, pj G-periodic.
χ
1
The correctors belong to Hper,0 pY q X L8 pRN q (see Proposition 3.7 below).
As will be seen below, using the periodic unfolding method, the proof of
this theorem is elementary! Actually, with the same proof, a more general re-
sult can be obtained, with a general sequence of matrices tAε uε in M pα, β, Y q
(that is, such that Tε pAε q converges a.e. in Ω ˆ Y ). The proof also works for
problem (3.4) with strongly convergent right-hand sides fε in H ´1 pΩq.
The case of weakly convergent right-hand sides in H ´1 pΩq is more
elaborate. It is treated in Subsection 3.1.5.
102
Theorem 3.5 (Single scale periodic homogenization via unfolding). Let Ω

be a bounded domain in RN and uε be the solution of problem (3.3) with fε
in H ´1 pΩq and Aε “ paεij q1ďi,jďN in M pα, β, Ωq. Suppose that
fε Ñ f strongly in H ´1 pΩq,
and that there exists a matrix B such that
. ` ˘
B ε “ Tε Aε Ñ B a.e. in Ω ˆ Y (2). (3.11)
Then there exists u0 P H01 pΩq pPL
and u 2
pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq such that
u ε á u0 weakly in H01 pΩq,

Tε puε q Ñ u0 strongly in L2 pΩ; H 1 pY qq, (3.12)
Tε p∇uε q á ∇u0 ` ∇y u
p weakly in L pΩ ˆ Y q ,
2 N
pq is the unique solution of the problem

and the pair (u0 , u
$ ż
’ 1 “ ‰“ ‰
’
’ Bpx, yq ∇u0 pxq ` ∇y u ppx, yq ∇Ψpxq ` ∇y Φpx, yq dxdy
& |Y | ΩˆY
(3.13)
’
’ “ xf, ΨyH ´1 pΩq,H01 pΩq ,
’
%
@Ψ P H0 pΩq, @Φ P L pΩ; Hper,0
1 2 1
pY qq.
Problem (3.13) is the unfolded formulation of the homogenized problem.
It is of standard variational form in the space
H “ H01 pΩq ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq
endowed with the norm }pv, vpq}H “ p}∇v}2L2 pΩq ` }∇y vp}2L2 pΩˆY q q1{2 . Note
that for every pv, vpq P H, due to the Y -periodicity of vp, MY p∇y vpq “ 0 and
the following equality holds:
}∇v ` ∇y vp}2L2 pΩˆY q “ |Y | }∇v}2L2 pΩq ` }∇y vp}2L2 pΩˆY q . (3.14)
Remark 3.6.
1. Hypothesis (3.11) implies that B belongs to M pα, β, Ω ˆ Y q.
2. If Aε is of the form (3.7), then Bpx, yq “ Apyq. In the case where
´x¯
Aε pxq “ A1 pxqA2 one has Bpx, yq “ A1 pxqA2 pyq.
ε
3. Note that every matrix B P M pα, β, ΩˆY q can be approached by a sequence
of matrices tTε pAε quε with Aε in M pα, β, Ωq. One of many such matrices can
be defined as follows: #
Uε pBq in Ω pε
Aε “
αIn in Λε ,
where Uε is the averaging operator from Definition 1.26.
(2)
` ˘
This condition can be generalized to the convergence in measure in Ω ˆ Y of Tε Aε
to B, see footnote of Lemma 1.17.
103
Proof of Theorem 3.5. By estimate (3.5), the sequence tuε uε is uniformly

bounded in H01 pΩq. By weak compactness, there exists u0 in H01 pΩq such
that, up to a subsequence, convergence (3.12)1 holds. Since Ω is bounded, this
convergence is strong in L2 pΩq. Corollary 1.37 implies convergence (3.12)2 .
By Theorem 1.41, there exist a sub-subsequence and u p in L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq,
such that convergence (3.12)3 holds.
Choose Ψ in H01 pΩq as test function in (3.4). By Corollary 1.18, using
hypothesis (3.11), the convergences of (3.12) and passing to the limit gives
ż
1 “ ‰
ppx, yq ∇Ψpxq dxdy
Bpx, yq ∇u0 pxq ` ∇y u
|Y | ΩˆY (3.15)
“ xf, ΨyH ´1 pΩq,H01 pΩq .
For given Ψ in Cc8 pΩq and ψ in Cper

1
pY q, consider now the test function
´x¯
vε pxq “ εΨpxqψ .
ε
The sequence tvε uε converges to 0 uniformly in Ω. Evidently, its gradient
´x¯ ´x¯
∇vε pxq “ ε∇Ψpxqψ ` Ψpxq∇y ψ , (3.16)
ε ε
is bounded in L2 pΩqN . Therefore,
vε á 0 weakly in H01 pΩq.
Unfolding the expression (3.16) leads to the convergence
Tε p∇vε q Ñ Ψ ∇y ψ strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN .
Taking vε as test function in (3.4) and passing to the limit, by Corol-

lary 1.37 one gets
ż
1 “ ‰
ppx, yq Ψpxq∇y ψpyq dxdy “ 0.
Bpx, yq ∇u0 pxq ` ∇y u (3.17)
|Y | ΩˆY
The density of Cc8 pΩq b Cper

1
pY q in L2 pΩ; Hper
1
pY qq implies
ż
1 “ ‰
Bpx, yq ∇u0 pxq ` ∇y u ppx, yq ∇y Φpx, yq dxdy “ 0,
|Y | ΩˆY
for every Φ in L2 pΩ; Hper

1
pY qq. This, together with (3.15), yields (3.13).
Observe that due to the properties of the matrix B (see Remark 3.6.1)
and equality (3.14), the Lax-Milgram theorem applies to problem (3.13)
which, therefore, has a unique solution. Consequently, the whole sequence
tpuε , Tε p∇uε quε converges weakly in the space H01 pΩq ˆ L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN to the
limit pu0 , ∇u0 ` ∇y upq, and this concludes the proof.
104
One can now give the standard form of the homogenized equation.
Proposition 3.7. The function u0 is the unique solution of the following
homogenized problem:
ż
Ahom ∇u0 ∇v dx “ xf, vyH ´1 pΩq,H01 pΩq , @v P H01 pΩq, (3.18)
Ω
The matrix field Ahom , given by its coefficients

´ ÿN
Bχ
pj ¯
ahom pxq “ M Y b ij px, ¨ q ` b ik px, ¨ q px, ¨ q , (3.19)
ij
k“1
Byk
for a.e. x P Ω, belongs to Mpα, β, Ωq.

Here the correctors χ pj for j “ 1, . . . , N , are the unique solutions in
L8 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq of the cell-problems
$ż
’ ÿ
N ´ Bχ
pj ¯ Bϕ
’
& bik p ¨ , yq p ¨ , yq ` δjk pyq dy “ 0,
Y i,k“1 Byk Byi (3.20)
’
’
%
@ϕ P Hper,0 pY q.
1
Proof. Step 1. Proof of (3.18)-(3.19).

By the Lax-Milgram Theorem applied in L2 pΩ; Hper,0 1
pY qq, problem (3.20)
has a unique solution in that space for each j “ 1, . . . , N . Since B belongs
pj px, ¨q}L2 pY q is bounded for a.e. x
to Mpα, β, Ω ˆ Y q, this implies that }∇y χ
in Ω by a constant independent of x and j. Consequently, all the χ pj ’s are in
L8 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq.(3)
Equation (3.13) with Ψ ” 0 now gives u p in terms of ∇u0 and these
correctors:
ÿN
Bu0
ppx, yq “
u pxqp
χi px, yq for a.e. px, yq P Ω ˆ Y. (3.21)
i“1
Bxi
Using formula (3.21) in (3.13) with Φ ” 0 gives (3.18) with

ż
. 1 “ ‰
Ahom ∇u0 “ pp ¨ , yq dy for a.e. in Ω.
Bp ¨ , yq ∇u0 ` ∇y u (3.22)
|Y | Y
Formula (3.19) follows and shows that Ahom is in L8 pΩqN ˆN .

Step 2. Consider the map G which to f in H ´1 pΩq assigns u0 , the first
component of the solution of problem (3.13). We claim that its image is
dense in H01 pΩq.(4)
(3) Lemma 3.29 further implies that }χ pj px, ¨q}L8 pY q is also uniformly bounded for a.e. x
in Ω and every j “ 1, . . . , N , which implies that all the norms }χ pj }L8 pΩˆY q are bounded.
(4) Actually, at the end of this proof, one can see that this image is the whole space
H01 pΩq, since G is also the solution map of the homogenized problem (3.18).
105
To do so, let g P H ´1 pΩq be such that

xg, Gpf qyH ´1 pΩq,H01 pΩq ” 0, @f P H ´1 pΩq.
Let pv0 , vpq be in H01 pΩq ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper,0

1
pY qq the unique solution of the
adjoint problem
$ ż
’ 1 “ ‰“ ‰
’
’ Bpx, yq ∇Ψpxq ` ∇y Φpx, yq ∇v0 pxq ` ∇y vppx, yq dxdy
& |Y | ΩˆY
(3.23)
’
’ “ x g, Ψ yH ´1 pΩq,H01 pΩq ,
’
%
@Ψ P H01 pΩq, @Φ P L2 pΩ; Hper,01
pY qq.
The Lax-Milgram theorem implies that this problem has a unique solution.
Let f be in H ´1 pΩq and pu0 , u
pq be the solution of problem (3.13). Choos-
ing in (3.23) Ψ “ u0 and Φ “ u p implies
@f P H ´1 pΩq, xf, v0 yH ´1 pΩq,H01 pΩq “ xg, Gpf qyH ´1 pΩq,H01 pΩq ” 0,
hence v0 ” 0. Consequently, vp “ 0 (choose Ψ “ 0 and Φ “ vp in (3.23)), so
that g “ 0. This implies the density of the range of G.
Step 3. Ahom belongs to Mpα, β, Ωq.
In (3.13), let Ψ “ u0 and Φ “ u p. This gives
ż
1 “ ‰“ ‰
Bpx, yq ∇u0 pxq ` ∇y u ppx, yq ∇u0 pxq ` ∇y uppx, yq dxdy
|Y | ΩˆY
ż
“ xf, u0 yH ´1 pΩq,H01 pΩq “ Ahom ∇u0 ∇u0 dx.
Ω
As noted in Remark 3.2, B P Mpα, β, Ω ˆ Y q, so it is α-elliptic. Thus,

ż
α ›› ›2
›
∇u0 ` ∇y u
p L2 pΩˆY q ď Ahom ∇u0 ∇u0 dx.
|Y | Ω
ż
Since by periodicity pp ¨ , yq dy ” 0,
∇y u
Y
1 ›› ›2 1
p›L2 pΩˆY q “ }∇u0 }2L2 pΩq `
∇u0 ` ∇y u p}2L2 pΩˆY q .
}∇y u
|Y | |Y |
Consequently, for u0 in H01 pΩq,
ż
α}∇u0 }2L2 pΩq ď Ahom ∇u0 ∇u0 dx. (3.24)
Ω
By the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality in (3.22)

› 1 ż “ ‰ ››2
›
} Ahom ∇u0 }2L2 pΩq “ › pp ¨ , yq dy ›
Bp ¨ , yq ∇u0 ` ∇y u
|Y | Y L2 pΩq
(3.25)
1 ›› “ ‰›2
ď B ∇u0 ` ∇y u p ›L2 pΩˆY q .
|Y |
106
Inequality (3.1)(ii) from Definition 3.1 of M pα, β, Ω ˆ Y q, written for B gives

ˇ “ ‰ˇ2
ˇBpx, yq ∇u0 pxq ` ∇y uppx, yq ˇ
` ˘` ˘
ď βBpx, yq ∇u0 pxq ` ∇y uppx, yq ∇u0 pxq ` ∇y u ppx, yq ,
for a.e. px, yq P Ω ˆ Y . This, used in (3.25) yields
ż
} Ahom ∇u0 }2L2 pΩq ď β Ahom ∇u0 ∇u0 dx. (3.26)
Ω
The conclusion, namely Ahom P M pα, β, Ω ˆ Y q, now follows by applying

.
Lemma 3.8 below, successively for F “ Ahom ´ αI (using (3.24)), and for
. T
F “ pβI ´ Ahom qAhom (using (3.26)).
Lemma 3.8. Let F be a matrix field in L8 pΩqN ˆN and suppose that for
every θ in a dense subset of H01 pΩq the following inequality holds:
ż
` ˘
F pxq∇θpxq, ∇θpxq dx ě 0. (3.27)
Ω
Then, for almost every x in Ω and every λ in RN , pF pxqλ, λq ě 0.

Proof. First, note that by density, (3.27) holds for every θ in H01 pΩq.
Now, let λ ‰ 0 be given in RN , ϕ in Cc8 pΩq, and ψptq “ |t ´ 1{2| defined
on r0, 1s and extended by periodicity to R. We choose as reference cell
Y “ p0, μ1 q ˆ . . . ˆ p0, μN q,
where for i “ 1, . . . , N ,
#
|λi |´1 if λi ‰ 0,
μi “
1 otherwise.
In (3.27), taking ´ x¯
θε pxq “ εψ λ ¨ ϕpxq,
ε
unfolding and letting ε Ñ 0, give
ż
1 ` ˘
F pxqλ, λ ψ 1 pλ ¨ yq2 ϕpxq2 dxdy ě 0.
|Y | ΩˆY
Since ψ 12 ” 1, this is simply
ż
pF pxqλ, λq ϕpxq2 dx ě 0 for every ϕ P Cc8 pΩq.
Ω
By density, we obtain
ż
pF pxqλ, λq Φpxq dx ě 0 for every Φ P L1 pΩq` .
Ω
Choosing Φpxq “ pF pxqλ, λq´ concludes the proof.
107
Proposition 3.9 (Convergence of the energy). Under the hypotheses of

Theorem 3.5,
ż ż
lim A ∇uε ∇uε dx “
ε
Ahom ∇u0 ∇u0 dx. (3.28)
εÑ0 Ω Ω
Proof. Since
ż
Ahom ∇u0 ∇u0 dx “ xf, u0 yH ´1 pΩq,H01 pΩq ,
Ω
the result is straightforward from the equality,

ż
Aε ∇uε ∇uε dx “ xfε , uε yH ´1 pΩq,H01 pΩq ,
Ω
and the convergence of its right-hand side to xf, u0 yH ´1 pΩq,H01 pΩq .
Corollary 3.10. The following convergences hold:
piq Tε p∇uε q Ñ ∇u0 ` ∇y u

p strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
ż
(3.29)
piiq |∇uε |2 dx Ñ 0.
Λε
For the proof, we use the classical result stated (and proved) below.
Lemma 3.11. Let tDε uε be a sequence of N ˆ N matrix fields in M pα, β, Oq

for some open set O, such that Dε Ñ D a.e. on O (or more generally, in
measure in O).
If the sequence of vector fields tζε uε converges weakly to ζ in L2 pOqN ,
then ż ż
lim inf Dε ζε ζε dx ě Dζ ζ dx.
εÑ0 O O
Furthermore, if ż ż
lim sup Dε ζε ζε dx ď Dζ ζ dx,
εÑ0 O O
then
ż ż
Dζ ζ dx “ lim Dε ζε ζε dx and ζε Ñ ζ strongly in L2 pOqN .
O εÑ0 O
Proof. In the statements, it is clear that only the symmetric part of the
matrix fields Dε and D play a role. It is therefore enough to assume that Dε
and D are symmetric. Set
ż ż
. 1 . 1
Φε pζq “ Dε ζ ζ dx and Φpζq “ Dζ ζ dx.
2 O 2 O
108
They are equivalent Hilbert norms and convex continuous functions on the
space L2 pOqN . By a classical computation, their conjugate convex functions
are respectively,
ż ż
. 1 . 1
Φ˚ε pηq “ Dε´1 η η dx and Φ˚ pηq “ D´1 η η dx.
2 O 2 O
In particular (biconjugation is the identity for l.s.c. convex functions, so it is

in this case),
´ż ¯
Φε pζε q “ sup ζε η dx ´ Φ˚ε pηq .
ηPL2 pOq O
Going to the limit yields

´ż ¯
lim inf Φε pζε q ě sup ζ η dx ´ Φ˚ε pηq “ Φpζq,
εÑ0 ηPL2 pOq O
whence the first inequality in the statement of the lemma.

Assuming the second inequality holds, it obviously implies the following
equality at the limit:
Φpζq “ lim Φε pζε q.
εÑ0
Due to the fact that Φε is a quadratic form and Dε is in Mpα, β, Oq,

ż
α}ζε ´ ζ}L2 pOq ď 2Φε pζε ´ ζq “ 2Φε pζε q ` 2Φε pζq ´ 4 Dε ζ ζε dx. (3.30)
O
The convergence a.e. (or in measure) in O of Dε to D, and the fact that they
are all uniformly (essentially) bounded, imply that
ż ż
Φε pζq Ñ Φpζq and Dε ζ ζε dx Ñ Dζ ζ dx.
O O
Using these convergences in the right-hand side of (3.30) shows that ζε con-
verges strongly to ζ in L2 pOqN .
Proof of Corollary 3.10. Making use of Lemma 3.11, it is enough to show

that
ż
1 ` ˘ ` ˘
lim B ε Tε ∇uε Tε ∇uε dx dy
εÑ0 |Y | ΩˆY
ż
1 “ ‰“ ‰
“ p ∇u0 ` ∇y u
B ∇u0 ` ∇y u p dx dy.
|Y | ΩˆY
Indeed, one successively obtains (note that the fourth inequality comes
from the α-coercivity of the matrix fields Aε ),
109
ż
1 “ ‰“ ‰
B ∇u0 ` ∇y u p ∇u0 ` ∇y u p dx dy
|Y | ΩˆY
ż
1 ` ˘ ` ˘
ď lim inf B ε Tε ∇uε Tε ∇uε dx dy
εÑ0 |Y | ΩˆY
´ż ż ¯
“ lim inf A ∇uε ∇uε dx ´
ε
Aε ∇uε ∇uε dx
εÑ0 Ω Λε
ż
1 ` ˘ ` ˘
ď lim sup B ε Tε ∇uε Tε ∇uε dx dy
εÑ0 |Y | ΩˆY
´ż ż ¯
“ lim sup A ∇uε ∇uε dx ´
ε
Aε ∇uε ∇uε dx
εÑ0 Ω Λε
ż ż
ď lim A ∇uε ∇uε dx “
ε
A hom
∇u0 ∇u0 dx (by (3.28))
εÑ0 Ω
ż Ω
1 “ ‰“ ‰
“ B ∇u0 ` ∇y u p ∇u0 ` ∇y u p dx dy,
|Y | ΩˆY
the last equality coming from the definition of Ahom (see (3.22)). Hence
all inequalities above are equalities. This, by Lemma 3.11, gives conver-
gence (3.29)(i) and implies that
ż
lim Aε ∇uε ∇uε dx “ 0.
εÑ0 Λ
ε
Then, convergence (3.29)(ii) follows from the α-coerciveness of Aε .

The convergence of the energy is the main tool used to obtain corrector
results which are described in subsection 3.1.6 below.
3.1.2 Homogenization of a Neumann problem

Let Ω be a bounded domain in RN on which we consider a pure Neumann
problem (i.e., without zero order term) which is traditionally associated with
the Fredholm alternative.
For fε given in L2 pΩq, consider the homogeneous Neumann problem (3.6)
$
’
’ ´div pAε ∇uε q “ fε in Ω,
’
&
Aε ∇uε ¨ n “ 0 on BΩ,
’ ż
’
’
% uε dx “ 0,
Ω
where the sequence of matrix fields tAε uε in Mpα, β, Ωq.

The Fredholm alternative implies that this problem has a unique solu-
tion (up to a constant), provided Ω is bounded, connected with Lipschitz
boundary and if and only if MΩ pfε q “ 0 (the Fredholm condition).(5)
(5) More generally, Ω can be multiply connected provided f is with zero average on each
of its connected components.
110
Without this condition, an alternative is to consider the Hilbert space

. (
V pΩq “ w P H 1 pΩq | MΩ pwq “ 0 , (3.31)
.
endowed with the norm }w}V pΩq “ }∇w}L2 pΩq (which is equivalent to the
H pΩq norm by the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality on Ω for p “ 2; cf. Sec-
1
tion 2.3.1). Then, by the Lax-Milgram theorem, the corresponding varia-

tional formulation
ż ż
Aε ∇uε ∇ϕ dx “ fε ϕ dx, @ϕ P V pΩq, (3.32)
Ω Ω
has a unique solution irrespective of the Fredholm condition ! But the strong
formulation is actually
#
´div pAε ∇uq “ fε ´ MΩ pfε q in Ω,
Aε ∇u ¨ n “ 0 on BΩ.
The homogenization result for problem (3.32) is stated below. We skip

its proof since it is entirely similar to that of the Dirichlet case.(6) Note that
the correctors are the same as in the Dirichlet case.
Theorem 3.12. Let Ω be a bounded domain in RN with a Lipschitz boundary

and uε be the solution of problem (3.32). Assume that fε converges weakly
to f in L2 pΩq. Then there exists u10 P V pΩq and up1 P L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq such
that $ 1
&uε á u0 weakly in V pΩq,
’
Tε puε q Ñ u10 strongly in L2 pΩ; H 1 pY qq,
’
%
Tε p∇uε q Ñ ∇u10 ` ∇y u
p1 strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
and the pair (u10 , u
p1 q is the unique solution of the following problem: Find
1 1
p q in V pΩq ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper,0
pu0 , u 1
pY qq satisfying
$ ż
’ 1 “ ‰“ ‰
’
’
’ Apyq ∇u10 pxq ` ∇y u
p1 px, yq ∇Ψpxq ` ∇y Φpx, yq dxdy
& |Y | ΩˆY
’
ż
’
’ “ f Ψ dx,
’
’
’
%
Ω
@Ψ P H 1 pΩq, @Φ P L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq.
The function u10 P V pΩq is the unique solution of the homogenized problem
ż ż
1
A hom
∇u0 ∇ϕ dx “ f ϕ dx @ϕ P V pΩq, (3.33)
Ω Ω
where the homogenized matrix Ahom is given by the same formulas (3.19).
(6) Equality (3.14) holds also for every pv, vpq in V pΩq ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper.0
1 pY qq.
111
3.1.3 The case of frame-periodic coefficients

In this section we define frame-periodic (or approximate periodic) coefficients.
They appear as “local perturbations” of periodic coefficients. We introduce
a condition so they satisfy hypothesis (3.11). Recall that as in the case of
one dimension, the functions r¨sY and tüY can be defined everywhere in RN
(instead of only almost everywhere).
In this section, DiffLip pY q denotes the group of Lipschitz continuous
homeomorphisms of Y with Lipschitz inverse(7), and DiffLip pY ; BY q the set
of Lipschitz diffeomorphisms of Y leaving each point of the boundary BY
invariant.
Definition 3.13 (Convergence in the group DiffLip pY q). We say that a

sequence in tθε uε converge to an element θ0 in DiffLip pY q if it converges to
θ0 in C 0,1 pY qN and its inverse sequence converges to θ0´1 in C 0,1 pY qN .
This implies that the sequence of jacobians tJacpθε quε converges for al-
most every y P Y to Jacpθ0 q with the same property for the sequence of the
Jacobian of their inverses.
Definition 3.14 (Sequences of frame-periodic deformations). Let Mε be the

set of maps Θ in L8 pΩ; DiffLip pY qq such that,(8)
piq Θpx, ¨q “ IdY (the identity of Y ) for a.e. x in Λε ,

piiq for every ξ in Ξε , Θpx, ¨q is independent of x for a.e. x in εpξ ` Y q.
To each element Θ in Mε is associated a map FpdpΘq defined by

! ˇ !x) ) ! ˇ !x) )
FpdpΘq : x P Ω ˇ P Y ÞÝÑ x P Ω ˇ PY ,
”xı ε Y ´ !x) ¯ ε Y
.
FpdpΘqpxq “ ε ` ε Θ x, ,
ε Y ε Y
which we call an ε-frame-periodic deformation of Ω (the set where it is
defined differs from Ω by a set of zero Lebesgue measure). If Θpx, ¨q ” IdY
for a. e. x P Ω, FpdpΘqpxq “ x a.e. in Ω.
Let S denote the set of all sequences tΘε uε of maps from Ω to DiffLip pY q
such that for each ε, Θε belongs to Mε . A sequence of ε-frame-periodic
deformations of Ω is therefore naturally associated with every element of S.
Note that an ε-frame-periodic deformation is not necessarily continuous
across the boundaries of the ε-cells unless the corresponding Θ’s all have
their image in DiffLip pY ; BY q, in which case the deformation is a bi-Lipschitz
diffeomorphism of Ω. Such global deformations will be used in Section 5.3.
(8) Note that every bi-Lipschitz diffeomorphism of Y is actually the restriction to Y of a
bi-Lipschitz diffeomorphism of Y . The definition could therefore be expressed in terms of

diffeomorphisms of Y .
112
Example. To a single map θ belonging to CpΩ; DiffLip pY qq, one can asso-
ciate a element of S by setting
$ ´ ” ı ¯
&θ ε x , ¨ p ε,
for x in Ω
Θε px, ¨ q “ ε Y (3.34)
%Id for x in Λ .
Y ε
We now show that using the sequences tΘε uε , one can construct more
examples of sequences of coefficients satisfying hypothesis (3.11).
Proposition 3.15. Suppose the following properties are satisfied by the se-
quence tΘε uε in S:
(i) there exists a map Θ0 in L8 pΩ; DiffLip pY qq such that for a.e. x P Ω,
Θε px, ¨q converges to Θ0 px, ¨ q in DiffLip pY q,
(ii) the sequences of functions t|JacpΘε |uε and t|Jac´1 pΘε q|uε are bounded
above by a fixed function in L1 pΩ ˆ Y q.
Let Aε be in M pα, β, Ωq. Assume that Tε pAε q converges in measure to A0
.
in Ω ˆ Y . Consider the modified sequence x ÞÑ B ε “` Aε ˝ FpdpΘ ˘ ε q.Then
. 0
Tε pB q converges in measure to px, yq ÞÑ Bpx, yq “ A x, Θ0 px, yq .
ε
Proof. Reasoning component-wise reduces the proof to the scalar case, so

that without changing notations, we assume Aε to be a scalar valued function.
Since Θε is constant with respect to x on each ε-cell, the unfolding of B ε is
given by ` ˘ ´ ”xı ¯
Tε B ε px, yq “ Aε ε ` ε Θε px, yq 1Ωp ε .
ε Y
We will show first that it converges weakly to B in L2 pΩ ˆ Y q, then that the
convergence is actually strong. This will imply the claimed convergence in
measure.
Let ϕ be a smooth function on Ω ˆ Y with compact support. Perform-
ing the bi-Lipschitz change of variable Θε px, ¨q on each ε-cell, and denoting
Θ´1
ε px, ¨q the inverse map of Θε px, ¨q in the space DiffLip pY q, we get
ż ´ ”xı ¯
Aε ε ` ε Θε px, yq 1Ωp ε pxq ϕpx, yqdxdy
ΩˆY ε Y
ÿ ż ´ ` ˘¯
“ Aε εξ ` ε Θε εξ, y ϕpx, yqdxdy
ξPΞε εpξ`Y qˆY
ÿ ż ´ ¯ ` ˘ˇ ` ´1 ˘` ˘ˇ
1 ˇ
“ Aε εξ ` εy 1 ϕ x, Θ´1
ε pεξ, y q Jac Θε εξ, y 1 ˇdxdy 1
ξPΞε εpξ`Y qˆY
ÿ ż ´ ”xı ¯ ` ˘ˇ ` ´1 ˘` ˘ˇ
1 ˇ
“ Aε ε ` εy 1 ϕ x, Θ´1
ε px, y q Jac Θε x, y 1 ˇdxdy 1
ξPΞε εpξ`Y qˆY ε Y
ż
` ˘ˇ
1 ˇ
` ´1 ˘` ˘ˇ
“ Tε pAε qpx, y 1 q ϕ x, Θ´1
ε px, y q Jac Θε x, y 1 ˇ1Ωp ε pxqdxdy 1 .
ΩˆY
113
` ˘ ` ˘
Under the hypotheses, tϕ x, Θ´1 ε px, y 1 q uε converges to ϕ x, Θ´1 1
0 px, y q ,
` ´1 ˘` ˘ ` ˘` ˘
tJac Θε x, y 1 uε converges to Jac Θ´1 0 x, y 1 whereas tTε pAε qpx, y 1 quε
converges to A0 px, y 1 q a.e. in Ω ˆ Y . The integrand is bounded by a fixed
L1 pΩżˆ Y q function, so by the Lebesgue theorem,
lim Tε pB ε qpx, yq ϕpx, yqdxdy
εÑ0 ΩˆY
ż
` ˘ˇ
1 ˇ
` ´1 ˘` ˘ˇ
“ A0 px, y 1 qϕ x, Θ´1
0 px, y q Jac Θ0 x, y 1 ˇdxdy 1 .
ΩˆY
Performing the change of variable Θ´1 1
0 with respect to the variable y yields
ż ż
lim Tε pB ε qpx, yq ϕpx, yqdxdy “ A0 px, Θ0 px, yqq ϕpx, yqdxdy,
εÑ0 ΩˆY ΩˆY
which gives the claimed weak convergence in every Lp pΩˆY q for p in p1, `8q,
and in the weak-˚ topology of L8 pΩ ˆ Y q. A similar computation shows
that the L2 pΩ ˆ Y q-norm of Tε pB ε q converges to that of its weak limit
A0 px, Θ0 px, yqq, whence the strong convergence in L2 and the convergence
in measure.
Remark 3.16. In the case of the sequence generated by a single map as
in (3.34), the hypothesis of Proposition 3.15 is satisfied with limit θ.
Example. Let A be an element in M pα, β, Y q extended by Y -periodicity and
. `x˘
set Aε pxq “ A ε . In this case, given an element tΘε uε of S, the previous
. ` ˘
construction reduces to B ε pxq “ A ˝ Θε x, t xε uY .
Figure 3.1: A two-component layered material under a frame-periodic defor-

mation and a global bi-Lipschitz transformation
114
Note that this sequence has an εY - periodic frame, but varies “slowly”
from ε-cell to neighboring ε-cells (see Figure 3.1 for an example). Under the
hypothesis of Proposition 3.15 for Θε , it follows that Tε pB ε q converges in
measure to A ˝ Θ0 in Ω ˆ Y .
Remark 3.17. For variational problems of second order, one can further-
more apply a fixed global bi-Lipschitz diffeomorphism to obtain a situation
without apparent periodicity. For higher order problems, the diffeomorphism
has to be more regular.
3.1.4 Homogenization of multiscale diffusion

The periodic unfolding method turns out to be particularly well-adapted to
multi-scales problems as it can be iterated. A simple example of a problem
with two different small scales is presented here. This a particular case of
the use of unfolding with parameters discussed in Section 1.5. Consider two
periodicity cells Y and Z (parallelotopes each associated to its set of periods).
Suppose that Y is “partitioned” in two non-empty disjoint open subsets Y1
and Y2 , i.e. such that Y1 X Y2 “ ∅ and Y “ Y 1 Y Y 2 . Let Aε,δ be a matrix
field defined by
$ ´! x ) ¯ !x)
’
’A for P Y1
& 1
ε Y ε Y
Aε,δ pxq “ ˆ" x ( * ˙ !x)
’
’
%A2
ε Y
for P Y2 ,
δ Z ε Y
where A1 is in M pα, β, Y1 q and A2 in M pα, β, Zq (cf. Definition 3.1).
Here, there are two small scales, namely ε and εδ, associated respectively
to the cells Y and Z (see Figure 3.2).
Figure 3.2: A domain with two small periodic scales ε and εδ.
115
Consider the problem

$ż ż
& Aε,δ ∇uε,δ ∇w dx “ f w dx,
Ω Ω
%
@w P H01 pΩq,
with f in L2 pΩq. As before, the Lax-Milgram theorem gives the existence

and uniqueness of uε,δ in H01 pΩq satisfying the estimate
1
}uε,δ }H01 pΩq ď }f }L2 pΩq .
α
So, by Proposition 1.52, for any sequence εpδq going to 0 with δ (for simplicity
we will suppress the dependence of ε upon δ in the formulas), there is a
subsequence extracted from δ and some u0 P H01 pΩq, u1 P L2 pΩ; Hper,0 1
pY qq
and u2 P L pΩ ˆ Y ; Hper,0 pZqq such that
2 1
uε,δ á u0 weakly in H01 pΩq

TεY puε,δ q á u0 weakly in L2 pΩ; H 1 pY qq,
TδZ ˝ TεY puε,δ q á u0 weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y ; H 1 pZqq, (3.35)
` ˘
TεY ∇uε,δ á ∇u0 ` ∇y u1 in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
` ˘
TδZ ˝ TεY ∇uε,δ á ∇u0 ` ∇y u1 ` ∇z u2 in L2 pΩ ˆ Y ˆ ZqN .
The limit functions u0 , u1 and u2 are characterized in the next result.

Theorem 3.18. Under the assumptions above,
u0 P H01 pΩq, u1 P L2 pΩ; Hper,0

1
pY qq, u2 P L2 pΩ ˆ Y2 ; Hper,0
1
pZqq
are the unique solutions of the variational problem

$ ż ż ż ! )! )
’ 1
’
’ |Y }Z| A pzq ∇u `∇ u `∇ u ∇Ψ `∇ Φ `∇ Θ dxdydz
’
’
2 0 y 1 z 2 y z
’
’
Ω Y2 Z
ż ż ! )! )
’
’ 1
’
’ ` A1 pyq ∇u0 ` ∇y u1 ∇Ψ ` ∇y Φ dxdy
& |Y | Ω Y1
ż
’
’
’
’ “ f Ψ dx,
’
’
’
’ Ω
’
’
’
%@Ψ P H01 pΩq, @Φ P L2 pΩ; Hper,0 1
pY qq, @Θ P L2 pΩ ˆ Y2 ; Hper,0
1
pZqq.
Proof. The proof uses test functions of the form

´ x¯ ´ x 1 ¯
Ψpxq ` εΦ x, ` εδ Θ x, , x ,
ε ε εδ
where Ψ is in DpΩq, Φ in DpΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq and Θ in DpΩ ˆ Y2 ; Hper,0
1
pZqq.
116
Unfolding with the operators from (3.35) and passing to the limit, gives
ż ż ż ! )! )
1
A1 pyq ∇u0 `∇y u1 `∇z u2 ∇Ψ `∇y Φ `∇z Θ dx dy dz
|Y }Z| Ω Y1 Z
ż ż ż ! )! )
1
` A2 pzq ∇u0 `∇y u1 `∇z u2 ∇Ψ `∇y Φ `∇z Θ dx dy dz
|Y }Z| Ω Y2 Z
ż
“ f Ψ dx.
Ω
By density, this holds for all Ψ in H01 pΩq, Φ in L2 pΩ; Hper,0

1
pY qq and Θ in
L pΩ ˆ Y2 ; Hper,0 pZqq.
2 1
Choosing in particular Ψ “ 0, Φ “ 0, and Θ “ u2 1Y1 implies that ∇z u2 ” 0

in Ω ˆ Y1 ˆ Z.
Since the limit problem does not depend on the δ-sequence nor on the
sequence εpδq, this implies the convergence for the full pε, δq Ñ p0, 0q.
Proposition 3.9 (convergence of the energy) and Corollary 3.10 extend
without any difficulty to the multiscale case.
Proposition 3.19. The convergence for the energy is given by
ż
lim Aε,δ ∇uε,δ ∇uε,δ dx
ε,δÑ0 Ω
ż ż ż ” ı” ı
1
“ A2 pzq ∇u0 ` ∇y u1 ` ∇z u2 ∇u0 ` ∇y u1 ` ∇z u2 dx dy dz
|Y }Z|
Ω Y2 Z
ż ż ” ı” ı
1
` A1 pyq ∇u0 ` ∇y u1 ∇u0 ` ∇y u1 dx dy.
|Y | Ω Y1
Corollary 3.20. The following strong convergences hold true:

` ˘
TεY ∇uε,δ á ∇u0 ` ∇y u1 strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y1 qN ,
` ˘
TδZ ˝ TεY ∇uε,δ á ∇u0 ` ∇y u1 ` ∇z u2 strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y2 ˆ ZqN .
Remark 3.21. Theorem 3.18 and Proposition 3.9 can be extended to the
case of any finite number of distinct scales, by a simple reiteration.
Remark 3.22. A corrector result, similar to that of Theorem 3.27 below,
can be obtained in the case of finitely many scales.
3.1.5 The case of weakly convergent right-hand side

In this subsection, we again consider Problem (3.3) with a right-hand side
fε which converges weakly to f in H ´1 pΩq. All the other hypotheses are the
same as before. Of course, fε is bounded in H ´1 pΩq, so that the solutions uε
are bounded in H01 pΩq. We shall see however, that the weak convergence for
the full sequence of solutions does not necessarily hold.
117
To understand this phenomenon, we have to digress into how to treat the

unfolding of elements of H ´1 pΩq.
Recall that due to the Poincaré inequality in H01 pΩq, every element f of
´1
H pΩq can be written uniquely in the form f “ ´Δw with win H01 pΩq and
}w}H01 pΩq “ }f }H ´1 pΩq . The weak convergence to w of a sequence twε uε in
H01 pΩq is equivalent to the weak convergence to Δw of the corresponding
.
fε “ Δwε in H ´1 pΩq. Instead of detailing the unfolding for fε in H ´1 pΩq,
we will unfold the corresponding wε in H01 pΩq.
The question of convergence of the whole sequence uε is answered in the
next theorem.
Theorem 3.23. Consider the following problem:

#
´div pAε ∇uε q “ fε in Ω,
uε “ 0 on BΩ.
Assume that
fε á f weakly in H ´1 pΩq.
Let wε be defined as above as the solution in H01 pΩq of
´Δwε “ fε .
Thus, wε á w in H01 pΩq where w is the solution in H01 pΩq of ´Δw “ f .

p in L2 pΩ; Hper,0
Assume furthermore that there exists a w 1
pY qq such that
p
Tε p∇wε q á ∇w ` ∇y w weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN (9). (3.36)
Then the sequence tuε uε converges to the solution u of the problem

$ż ` ` ˘˘
’
’ p0 px, ¨q ∇vpxq dx
Ahom pxq∇u0 pxq ` MY Bpx, ¨q∇y χ
’
’
&
Ω
(3.37)
’
’ “ xf, vyH ´1 pΩq,H01 pΩq ,
’
’
%
@v P H01 pΩq.
In this formulation, Ahom is the same as in Proposition 3.7, while χ p0 is the

solution in L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq of the following problem for a.e x in Ω :
$ż ż
& Bpx, yq∇y χp0 px, yq ∇y ψpyq dy “ p yq∇y ψpyq dy
∇y wpx,
Y Y (3.38)
%
@ψ P Hper,0
1
pY q.
(9) This hypothesis is not generally satisfied for the full sequence but holds up to a
subsequence by Theorem 1.41.
118
Proof. The proof follows along the lines of that of Theorem 3.4, up to for-
mula (3.18). The change arises when using the test function
´x¯
v ε pxq “ εΨpxqψ , Ψ P Cc8 pΩq and ψ P Hper,0
1
pY q.
ε
Indeed, going to the limit in the left-hand side of the variational formulation
of (3.37) remains unchanged. But in order to go to the limit in its right-hand
side, more computations have to be performed. First, one uses unfolding (for
ε small enough so that Λε does not intersect the support of Ψ) to compute
the right-hand side as follows:
ż
xfε , v yH ´1 pΩq,H01 pΩq “
ε
∇wε ∇v ε dx
Ω
ż
1
“ Tε p∇wε qTε p∇v ε q dxdy.
|Y | ΩˆY
The last formula passes to the limit by (3.36) and the fact (already used to
pass to the limit in the left-hand side) that Tε p∇v ε q converges strongly to
Ψpxq∇y ψpyq, gives
ż
1 “ ‰
ppx, yq Ψpxq∇y ψpyq dxdy
|Y | ΩˆY
ż ´ ¯
1
“ p yq ∇y ψpyqΨpxq dxdy,
∇wpxq ` ∇y wpx,
|Y | ΩˆY
which replaces (3.17) in this setting.

Now, by the same density argument, the limit unfolded formulation be-
pq P H01 pΩq ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper,0
comes: the pair (u0 , u 1
pY qq is the unique solution of
the problem
$ 1 ż “ ‰“ ‰
’
’ Bpx, yq ∇u0 pxq ` ∇y u ppx, yq ∇Ψpxq ` ∇y Φpx, yq dxdy
’
’ |Y |
’
& ΩˆY
ż
1 ` ˘
’ “ xf, Ψy ´1 1
H pΩq,H0 pΩq ` p yq ∇y Φpx, yq dxdy,
∇wpxq ` ∇y wpx,
’
’ |Y | ΩˆY
’
’
%@Ψ P H 1 pΩq, @Φ P L2 pΩ; H 1 pY qq.
0 per,0
p as
To obtain the corresponding homogenized formulation, one expresses u
in (3.21), but with an extra term as follows:
ÿN
Bu0
u p0 `
p“χ pi ,
χ
i“1
Bxi
where the χ p0 is the solution for a.e.

pi ’s are, as before, given by (3.20), while χ
x P Ω, of problem (3.38). Lax-Milgram’s theorem applies again. Finally, the
variational formulation for the homogenized problem becomes (3.37).
119
Remark 3.24. A new term has appeared in the right-hand side. In the strong
formulation, it is written as
` ` ˘˘
p0 p¨, yq .
´div MY Bp¨, yq∇y χ
It belongs to H ´1 pΩq and depends explicitly upon both B and wp but not on w,
p0 “ 0, this term disappears. By (3.38) this is equivalent
that is not on f . If χ
to wp ” 0. There are no other obvious sufficient conditions for it to vanish.
As a consequence, the weak convergence of tfε uε in H ´1 pΩq alone does
not imply in general, the weak convergence of the whole sequence tuε uε in
H01 pΩq. This fact is made very clear by the use of the unfolding method.
Remark 3.25. If in Theorem 3.23 one makes the extra assumption(10):
ż
p strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN and
Tε p∇wε q Ñ ∇w ` ∇y w |∇wε |2 dx Ñ 0,
Λε
one can show that

ż
1
lim xfε , uε yH ´1 ,H01 “ xf, u0 yH ´1 ,H01 ` p yq∇y u
∇y wpx, ppx, yq dxdy,
εÑ0 |Y | ΩˆY
which implies that the convergence of the energy (Proposition 3.9) still holds
true. Therefore Corollary 3.10, as well as the corresponding parts of The-
orem 3.27, hold true also. This is a case where a corrector result can be
obtained despite the weak convergence of the right-hand side.
Example 3.26. Suppose that tfε uε is a sequence in L2 pΩq such that tεfε uε
and Mε pfε q are bounded in L2 pΩq. We claim that tfε uε is bounded in
H ´1 pΩq. Indeed,
ż
xfε , ϕyH ´1 pΩq,H01 pΩq “ fε pxqϕpxq dx
żΩ ż
“ fε pxqϕpxq dx ` pεfε qpxqpε´1 ϕqpxq dx.
pε
Ω Λε
The last integral is bounded by C}εfε }L2 pΩq }∇ϕ}L2 pΩbl q thanks to the
εdpY q
Poincaré inequality applied in Ωbl

(which contains Λε ). Consequently it
εdpY q
converges to 0.
The first integral in the right-and side is computed as follows:
ż ż ż
` ˘
fε pxqϕpxq dx “ fε pxq ϕpxq ´ Mε pϕqpxq dx ` Mε pfε qpxq ϕpxq dx
pε
Ω pε
Ω Ω
ż ż
` ˘
“ rεfε pxqε´1 ϕpxq ´ Mε pϕqpxq dx ` Mε pfε qpxq ϕpxq dx.
pε
Ω Ω
(10) In view of Proposition 1.29(ii), this is equivalent to ∇w ´∇wÚ p∇ wq

ε ε y p Ñ 0 strongly
in L2 pΩq.
120
By (1.38)1 , it is bounded by C}εfε }L2 pΩq }∇ϕ}L2 pΩq ` }Mε pfε q}L2 pΩq }ϕ}L2 pΩq .
So, fε is bounded in H ´1 pΩq by C}εfε }L2 pΩq ` }Mε pfε q}L2 pΩq .
Now, assuming that Mε pfε q á F in L2 pΩq and Tε pεfε q á fp in L2 pΩˆY q,
unfolding the previous equality implies that fε á f in H ´1 pΩq where
ż ´ ¯
` ˘
xf, ϕyH ´1 pΩq,H01 pΩq “ MY fppx, yq y c ¨ ∇ϕpxq ` F pxq ϕpxq dx.
Ω
Up to a subsequence,
p
Tε p∇wε q á ∇w ` ∇y w in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN .
Theorem 3.23 now applies.

The equality fε “ ´Δwε implies that
divy Tε p∇wε q “ εTε p´Δwε q “ Tε pεfε q,
which at the limit, gives

.
Tε pεfε q á fp “ ´divy p∇w ` ∇y wq
p “ ´Δy w
p weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y q.
p belongs to L2 pΩ; Hper,0

Hence w 1
pY q X H 2 pY qq and
´Δw “ f “ F ´ div pMY pfpp¨, yq y c q “ F ` div pMY pΔy wp¨,

p yq y c q,
in H ´1 pΩq.This is an additional information relating Δw and Δy w.

p
3.1.6 A general corrector result

We return to the setting of the beginning of this section. Under additional
regularity assumptions on the homogenized solution u0 and the cell-functions
pj , the strong convergence for the gradient of u0 with a corrector is known
χ
(cf. [21, Chapter 1, Section 5], [70, Chapter 8, Section 3], and references
therein). More precisely, suppose that ∇y χ pj P Lr pY qN , j “ 1, . . . , N and
∇u P L pΩq with 1 ď r, s ă `8 and such that 1{r ` 1{s “ 1{2. Then
0 s
ÿN
Bu0 ´¨¯
∇uε ´ ∇u0 ´ pj
∇y χ Ñ 0 strongly in L2 pΩqN .
j“1
Bx j ε
However, making use of the unfolding operators, one can obtain a general
corrector result without any regularity assumption on χ pj and with a
very short proof.
Theorem 3.27. Under the hypotheses of Theorem 3.5, one has
ÿ
N ´ Bu ¯
0
∇uε ´ ∇u0 ´ Mε pi q Ñ 0
Uε p∇y χ strongly in L2 pΩqN . (3.39)
i“1
Bxi
121
´x¯ ÿ
N ´ Bu ¯ ´ ¨ ¯
0
If Aε pxq “ A , then u0 ` ε Qε pi
χ belongs to H 1 pΩq, and
ε i“1
Bxi ε
ÿ
N ´ Bu ¯ ´ ¨ ¯
0
uε ´ u0 ´ ε Qε pi
χ Ñ0 strongly in H 1 pΩq. (3.40)
i“1
Bxi ε
Proof. From (3.29) and Proposition 1.29(ii), one immediately has

` ˘ ` ˘
∇uε ´ Uε ∇u0 ´ Uε ∇y u p Ñ 0 strongly in L2 pΩqN .
Since ∇u0 belongs to L2 pΩqN , by (1.23)

` ˘
Uε ∇u0 Ñ ∇u0 strongly in L2 pΩqN .
On the other hand, thanks to (3.21),
` ˘ ÿ N ´ Bu ¯
0
Uε ∇y u
p “ Uε pi .
∇y χ
i“1
Bxi
We are now in position to apply Proposition 1.34 with

Bu0
αi “ and pi ,
β i “ ∇y χ @i P t1, . . . , N u,
Bxi
to get
` ˘ ÿN ´ Bu ¯ ` ˘
0
p ´
U ε ∇y u Uε pi Ñ 0
Uε ∇y χ strongly in L2 pΩqN .
i“1
Bx i
Bu0
This together with (1.22) (applied to ) proves (3.39).
Bxi
From Corollary 1.72 (applied three times!), it follows that
ÿ
N ´ Bu ¯ ´ ¨ ¯
0
u0 ` ε Qε pi
χ P H 1 pΩq.
i“1
Bxi ε
Then, (3.21) implies

` ˘ ” ÿN ´ Bu ¯ ´ ¨ ¯ı
0
∇u0 ` Uε ∇y u
p ´ ∇ u0 ` ε Qε pi
χ
i“1
Bx i ε
N ”
ÿ ´ Bu ¯ ´ Bu ¯ı ´¨¯
0 0
“´ Qε ´ Mε pi
∇y χ
i“1
Bxi Bxi ε
ÿ
N ” ´ Bu ¯ı ´ ¨ ¯
0
´ ε∇ Qε pi
χ .
i“1
Bx i ε
Using Corollary 1.72, Proposition 1.25(i) and Corollary 1.77, one immediately
gets the strong convergence to 0 in L2 pΩq of the right-hand side in the above
equality. Together with (3.39), this implies (3.40).
122
The next result concerns some estimates for the solutions of cell-problems
of the type (3.20) defining the correctors χ pi pi “ 1, . . . , N q. It will be used
below in order to improve convergence (3.40) (see Corollary 3.31). It is also
a key ingredient in the proof of Theorem 14.3 giving error estimates which
show the speed of convergences (3.40) with respect to ε, as well as in the
proof of Corollary 3.31.
For δ ą 0, set (see also Subsection 12.1)
. (
δ “ x P Ω | ρpxq ă δ .
Ωbl
Recall that for every φ P H 1 pΩq and δ ą 0,
` ˘
}φ}L2 pΩbl
δ q
ď C δ 1{2 }φ}L2 pBΩq ` δ}∇φ}L2 pΩq . (3.41)
The constant does not depend on δ (in Proposition 12.2 we detail several
estimates of this type).
Lemma 3.28. Let d and f be in elements of L2 pY qN and L2 pY q, respectively,
extended by Y -periodicity to the whole of RN . Suppose they satisfy for every
1
ϕ in Hper pY q
ż ż
dpyq ¨ ∇y ϕpyq dy “ f pyq ϕpyq dy.(11)
Y Y
For ε ą 0, let ´¨¯ ´¨¯

. .
dε “ d and fε “ f .
ε ε
Then,
1
´ div dε “ fε in D1 pRN q.
ε
Proof. Let φ be in DpRN q. Using the unfolding identity, one obtains
ż
` ˘
ε dε pxq ¨ ∇φpxq ` fε pxqφpxq dx
RN
ż ´ ¯
1
“ dpyq ¨ ∇y Trε pφqpx, yq ` f pyqTrε pφqpx, yq dxdy
|Y | RN ˆY
ż ” ´ż ¯ ż ı
1
“ dpyq ¨ ∇y Trε pφqpx, yqdx ` f pyq Trε pφqpx, yqdx dy.
|Y | Y RN RN
The last integral vanishes since

ż ÿ
Tε pφqpx, yqdx “ εN φpεξ ` εyq P Hper
1
pY q,
RN ξPG
the summation being actually finite.

(11) By Green’s formula, this equivalent to the following strong formulation:
$
’ ´div d “ f in D 1 pY q,
&
the normal trace d ¨ n belongs to H ´1{2 pBY q and
’
%
it takes opposite values on the N pairs of opposite faces of Y .
123
Lemma 3.29. Let A be in M pα, β, Y q, F in L8 pY qN and χ in Hper,0

1
pY q
the solution of
$ż ` ˘
& Apyq∇y χpyq ` F pyq ∇y ϕpyq dy “ 0,
Y (3.42)
%
@ϕ P Hper,0
1
pY q.
Then the following estimates hold:
}χ}L2 pY q ď C}F }L2 pY q ,

}∇χ}L2 pY q ď C}F }L2 pY q , (3.43)
}χ}L8 pY q ď C}F }L8 pY q .
Furthermore, for every w in H 1 pRN q,

ż ˇ ´x¯ ˇ2
ˇ ˇ
ˇ∇y χ wpxqˇ dx
R N ε
(3.44)
` ˘
ď C}F }2L8 pY q }w}2L2 pRN q ` ε2 }∇w}2L2 pRN q .
All the constants depend only upon Y, α and β and are independent of ε.
If Ω is a bounded domain with a Lipschitz boundary, then
ż ˇ ´x¯ ˇ2
ˇ ˇ ` ˘
ˇ∇y χ wpxqˇ dx ď C}F }2L8 pY q }w}2L2 pΩq`ε2 }∇w}2L2 pΩq (3.45)
Ω ε
and (recall that dpY q is the diameter of the cell Y )
ż ˇ ´x¯ ˇ2
ˇ ˇ
ˇ∇y χ wpxqˇ dx
Ωbl ε
εdpY q (3.46)
` ˘
ď C}F }2L8 pY q ε}w}2L2 pBΩq ` ε2 }∇w}2L2 pΩbl q ,
2εdpY q
for every w P H 1 pΩq. All the constants depend only upon α β and BΩ; they
are independent of ε.
The following is a consequence of estimates (3.45) and (3.43)
1
Corollary 3.30. Let χ in Hper,0 pY q be the solution of (3.42). Then, for
every w P H pR q (resp., H pΩq),
1 N 1
´¨¯
χ w belongs to H 1 pRN q, (resp., H 1 pΩqq.
ε
More precisely, there is a constant C (independent of ε) such that
› ´¨¯ › ` ˘
› ›
›χ w› ď C}F }L8 pY q ε´1 }w}L2 pRN q ` }∇w}L2 pRN q ,
ε 1
H pR q
N
› ´¨¯ › ` ˘
› ›
›χ w› ď C}F }L8 pY q ε´1 }w}L2 pΩq ` }∇w}L2 pΩq .
ε 1
H pΩq
124
Proof of Lemma 3.29.

Step 1. Proof of (3.43).
The Lax-Milgram theorem applied to (3.42) implies that }χ}Hper,0 1 pY q is
bounded above by a constant multiple of }F }L2 pY q . This gives (3.43)1-2 .
.
Lemma 3.28 applied to d “ Apyq∇y χpyq ` F pyq (with ε “ 1) shows that
´div pApyq∇y χpyq ` F pyqq “ 0 in D1 pRN q,
where F is extended by Y -periodicity to RN . Now, (3.43)3 is a direct con-
sequence of the regularity of solutions of second order elliptic equations in
divergence form (Theorem of Moser-Stampacchia, see Theorem 8.18 in [114]).
We start by proving (3.44) for w in DpRN q. First apply Lemma 3.28 to
´¨¯
d “ Apyq∇y χpyq ` F pyq, f “ 0, with the test function φ “ εχ w2 .
ε
Note that φ is in H 1 pRN q with compact support. The result is
ż ” ´ ¯ ´x¯ ´ x ¯ı ” ´x¯ ´x¯ ı
x
A ∇y χ `F ∇y χ w2 pxq`2εχ wpxq∇wpxq dx “ 0,
RN ε ε ε ε ε
which is rewritten as
ż ´ x ¯” ´x¯ ı” ´x¯ ı
A ∇y χ wpxq ∇y χ wpxq dx
RN ε ε ε
ż ´ x ¯” ´x¯ ı ´x¯
“ ´2ε A ∇y χ wpxq χ ¨ ∇wpxq dx
ε ε ε
żR ´ ¯
N
x ” ´x¯ ı (3.47)
´ F wpxq ¨ ∇y χ wpxq dx.
RN ε ε
ż ´x¯ ´x¯
´ 2ε F χ wpxq ¨ ∇wpxqdx.
RN ε ε
By the ellipticity of A, the left-hand side is bounded below as follows:
ż ˇ ´x¯ ˇ2 ż ´ x ¯” ´x¯ ı” ´x¯ ı
ˇ ˇ
α ˇ∇y χ wpxqˇ dx ď A ∇y χ wpxq ∇y χ wpxq dx.
RN ε RN ε ε ε
We now estimate the three integrals of the right-hand side of (3.47). For
the first one, use successively estimate (3.2) and Young’s inequality, to get
ż ´ x ¯” ´x¯ ı ´x¯
2ε A ∇y χ wpxq χ ¨ ∇wpxqdx
RN ε ε ε
ż ˇ ´x¯ ˇ ˇ ´x¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇˇ ˇ
ď 2β ˇ∇y χ wpxqˇ ˇε χ ∇wpxqˇdx
R N ε ε
ż ˇ ´x¯ ˇ2 ż ˇ ´x¯ ˇ2
α ˇ ˇ 4β 2 ˇ ˇ
ď ˇ∇y χ wpxqˇ dx ` ε2 ˇχ ∇wpxqˇ dx
4 RN ε α RN ε
ż ˇ ´x¯ ˇ2 ż
α ˇ ˇ
ď ˇ∇y χ wpxqˇ dx ` C}F }2L8 pY q ε2 |∇wpxq|2 dx,
4 RN ε RN
where we also used estimate (3.43).
125
For the second integral, by Young’s inequality and (3.43) again, it is easily
seen that
ż ´x¯ ” ´x¯ ı
F wpxq ¨ ∇y χ wpxq dx
RN ε ε
ż ˇ ´ ¯ ˇ2 ż ˇ ´x¯ ˇ2
1 ˇ x ˇ α ˇ ˇ
ď ˇF wpxqˇ dx ` ˇ∇y χ wpxqˇ dx
α RN ε 4 RN ε
ż ż ˇ ´x¯ ˇ2
α ˇ ˇ
ď C}F }2L8 pY q |wpxq|2 dx ` ˇ∇y χ wpxqˇ dx.
R N 4 R N ε
Similarly, the last integral is estimated as
ż ´x¯ ´x¯
ε F χ wpxq ¨ ∇wpxqdx
RN ε ε
”ż ż ı
ď C}F }2L8 pY q |wpxq|2 dx ` ε2 |∇wpxq|2 dx .
RN RN
Note that all the constants in the estimates above do not depend on ε, they
only depend on A (via α and β) and on Y and N .
For w in DpRN q, the estimates above combined with (3.47) give (3.44).
By density, (3.44) holds for w in H 1 pRN q.
Step 3. Proof of (3.45) and (3.46).
To prove (3.45), choose w in H 1 pΩq and extend it as a function belonging
to H 1 pRN q (using the extension operator P from Subsection 1.6.2, Proposi-
tion 1.74). The conclusion follows by estimates (1.79) and (3.44) since
ż ˇ ´x¯ ˇ2 ż ˇ ´x¯ ˇ2
ˇ ˇ ˇ ˇ
ˇ∇y χ wpxqˇ dx ď ˇ∇y χ Ppwqpxqˇ dx.
Ω ε R N ε
To prove (3.46), choose w P H 1 pΩq and consider the map

„ ˘ j
´ distpx, Ωbl ¯
. εdpY q
x ÞÑ wε pxq “ wpxq 1 ´ inf 1, .
εdpY q
The function wε belongs to H 1 pΩq and satisfies

#
w in Ωbl εdpY q ,
wε “ bl
0 in ΩzΩ2εdpY q .
From (3.41) one gets

` ˘
}wε }2L2 pΩq ` ε2 }∇wε }2L2 pΩq ď C }w}2L2 pΩbl q ` ε }∇w}L2 pΩbl
2 2
q
2εdpY q 2εdpY q
` ˘
ď C ε}w}2L2 pBΩq ` ε2 }∇w}2L2 pΩbl q ,
2εdpY q
where the constant does not depend on ε. Together with (3.45), this implies
estimate (3.46) and the proof is complete.
126
` ˘
Corollary 3.31. Under the hypotheses of Theorem 3.27, if Aε pxq “ A x{ε ,
the strong convergence (3.40) can be improved as follows:
ÿ Bu0 ´ ¨ ¯
N
u ε ´ u0 ´ ε pi
χ Ñ0 1
strongly in Hloc pΩq.
i“1
Bxi ε
If u0 belongs to H 2 pΩq, one has the global result,
ÿ Bu0 ´ ¨ ¯
N
u ε ´ u0 ´ ε pi
χ Ñ0 strongly in H 1 pΩq.
i“1
Bxi ε
Proof. Under the assumptions of the Theorem 3.27, the solution u0 of prob-
lem (3.8) belongs to Hloc2
pΩq. The correctors χ
pi are solutions of (3.20), a
problem of type (3.42). Due to the second estimate in Lemma 1.76 we get,
for ω Ť Ω and for all i P t1, . . . , N u,
› ´ Bu ¯ Bu ›
› 0 0›
›Qε ´ › ď Cε}u0 }H 2 pωq ď Cε}f }L2 pΩq ,
Bxi Bxi L2 pωq
which concludes the proof with (3.45), since the sets
! ´ Bu ¯ ´ ¨ ¯) ! Bu ´ ¨ ¯)
0 0
∇Qε pi
χ and ∇ pi
χ ,
Bxi ε ε Bxi ε ε
are bounded independently of ε in L2 pωq. This, together with (3.40), con-

cludes the proof of the first statement.
If u0 is in H 2 pΩq, the previous reasoning applies directly in Ω and gives
the second statement.
Remark 3.32. The corrector results given here are interior correctors. For
correctors up to the boundary, see Chapter 14.
3.2 Homogenization for non linear diffusion

In this section, we consider the periodic homogenization of second order non
linear diffusion problems of the type introduced by Višik in [188] and [189] and
further studied by Leray and Lions in [148] (the corresponding operators are
often called Leray-Lions operators). Higher order problems can be studied by
the same methods. We refer to [91] for a general study of the homogenization
of monotone problems (see also [108]).
The starting point is a simplified form of the result of Leray and Lions
[148]. The space RN is given here with a euclidean scalar product denoted
x¨, ÿ RN .
Theorem 3.33. Let p be in p1, `8q, O be a bounded domain in RN , m in
1
L1 pOq, and f in W ´1,p pOq. Let A be a map from O ˆ RN to RN which
satisfies the following hypotheses:
127
3.2. Homogenization for non linear diffusion
(i) A is of Caratheodory type (i.e., measurable with respect to x P O and

continuous with respect to ξ P RN ).
(ii) For a.e. x P O, the map ξ ÞÑ Apx, ξq is strictly monotone, i.e.,
@ξ1 ‰ ξ2 P RN , xξ1 ´ ξ2 , Apx, ξ1 q ´ Apx, ξ2 qy RN ą 0.
(iii) There exists a strictly positive number α such that for all ξ in RN ,
ˆ 1 ˙
|ξ|p |Ap ¨ , ξq|p
α ` ď xAp ¨ , ξq, ξy RN ` m a.e. in O.
p p1
Then the following problem has a unique solution:

#
´div Ap ¨ , ∇uq “ f in D1 pOq,
(3.48)
u P W01,p pOq.
The variational formulation of this problem is, of course

$ż
& Apx, ∇upxqq ∇φpxq dx “ xf, φy ´1,p1
W pΩq,W 1,p pΩq , 0
Ω
%
@φ P W01,p pΩq.
3.2.1 Maximal monotone operators

We start by recalling the definition of (multivalued) maximal monotone op-
erators on a real reflexive Banach space X with dual denoted X 1 .
Consider set-valued operators A : X Ñ X 1 , that is, maps which take
every point ξ P X to some set Aξ Ă X 1 . These applications are simply called
operators when no confusion may occur. Similarly, when no ambiguity arises,
A will also denote the graph of the operator A, which is the set

graph A “ pξ, ηq P X ˆ X 1 | η P Aξu.
The domain of a graph A and its range RpAq are the sets
(
DpAq “ x P X | Ax ‰ ∅ ,
Ť
RpAq “ Ax.
xPX
Definition 3.34. The operator A is called single-valued on a set C Ă X, if
@ξ P C, Aξ contains at most one element.
The operator A is called nonexpansive or Lip1 , if

` ˘
}η1 ´ η2 }X 1 ď }ξ1 ´ ξ2 }X , @ pξ1 , η1 q, pξ2 , η2 q P pgraph Aq2 .
128
Every nonexpansive operator is clearly single-valued on X.

For operators A, B, we write A Ď B whenever Aξ Ď Bξ for every ξ P X.
Definition 3.35. The` set A Ă X ˆ X˘1 is a monotone graph (or monotone
operator) if for every pξ1 , η1 q, pξ2 , η2 q P pgraph Aq2 ,
xη1 ´ η2 , ξ1 ´ ξ2 yX 1 ,X ě 0.
The monotone graph A is a maximal monotone graph (or maximal monotone

operator), if for every monotone graph B Ă X ˆ X 1 , the inclusion A Ď B
implies A “ B.
The following result is an easy direct consequence of maximality:
Proposition 3.36. Let A be a maximal monotone graph from X to X 1 . As-
sume that tpξn , ηn qunPN converges weakly to pξ, ηq in X ˆX 1 . If, furthermore,
lim inf xηn , ξn yX 1 ,X ď xη, ξyX 1 ,X ,

nÑ`8
then pξ, ηq belongs to A and
xη, ξyX 1 ,X “ lim inf xηn , ξn yX 1 ,X .

nÑ`8
In particular, it is so if one of the convergences is strong (so-called demi-

closure of maximal monotone operators).
Proof. For every pα, βq P A, by the monotonicity of A,
xβ ´ ηn , α ´ ξn yX 1 ,X ě 0.
Therefore
0 ď lim inf xβ ´ ηn , α ´ ξn yX 1 ,X ď xβ ´ η, α ´ ξyX 1 ,X .

nÑ`8
Since A is maximal and pα, βq P A is arbitrary, it follows that pξ, ηq P A.

The fact that pξ, ηq P A and the monotonicity of A now imply
lim inf xηn , ξn yX 1 ,X ě lim xηn , ξyX 1 ,X ` lim xη, ξn yX 1 ,X ´ xη, ξyX 1 ,X
nÑ`8 nÑ`8 nÑ`8
“ xη, ξyX 1 ,X .
It is known that a continuous (defined on the whole space) monotone map

is maximal monotone. A famous result of Minty ([159]) in the case where X
is a real Hilbert space H, characterizes the maximal monotone maps as the
monotone maps A such that Id ` A is onto (RpId ` Aq “ H).
In order to generalize the result of Theorem 3.33 to the case of maximal
monotone graphs on RN , including multivalued graphs, we recall below the
notions of convergence of maximal monotone maps, of measurable maximal
monotone-valued maps in that setting, and of the natural extension of a
129
measurable maximal monotone-valued map to the spaces Lp pO; RN q(cf. [84]

and [91] for a detailed study in the general framework of reflexive Banach
spaces). To characterize these properties, since we are dealing with maximal
monotone graphs on RN , we will use the Cayley transform (this is simpler
than the resolvent families used in [84] and [91] for the general reflexive
Banach space setting). More generally, this is valid on a general Hilbert
space (RN being a particular case of Hilbert space !).
The set of all maximal monotone operators on a Hilbert space H will be
denoted MpHq.
Definition 3.37 (Cayley transform for maximal monotone graphs). For A
in MpHq its Cayley transform, denoted CpAq, is the single-valued map defined
by its graph in H ˆ H as follows:
. ˇ (
CpAq “ pξ ` η, ξ ´ ηq ˇ pξ, ηq P A .
In other words, CpAq “ pId ´ Aq ˝ pId ` Aq´1 , the latter being defined on the
whole space precisely by Minty’s theorem.
The converse map is given by
!´ 1 ¯ˇ )
1 ˇ
A“ pId ` CpAqqpxq, pId ´ CpAqqpxq ˇ x P H . (3.49)
2 2
The fact that A is monotone is equivalent to saying that CpAq is 1-
Lipschitz on its domain RpId ` Aq. The maximality of A is then equivalent
to the fact that CpAq is defined on the whole space H (by Minty’s theorem).
The Cayley transform is therefore a bijection between the set of all maximal
monotone operators on the Hilbert space H and the set Lip1 pHq defined as
ˇ (
Lip1 pHq “ h : H ÞÑ H ˇ h 1-Lipschitz . (3.50)
3.2.2 Convergence of maximal monotone graphs

Following Brezis [36] and Attouch [16], the convergence of maximal monotone
graphs is defined as follows:
Definition 3.38. Let An pn P Nq and A be maximal monotone graphs from
the reflexive Banach space X to its dual space X 1 . The sequence tAn unPN
is said to converge to A as n Ñ `8, (convergence denoted An A), if
for every pξ, ηq in A there exists a sequence tpξn , ηn qunPN P An such that
pξn , ηn q Ñ pξ, ηq in X ˆ X 1 as n Ñ `8.
In the case of a Hilbert space H, one can give an equivalent formulation
in terms of the Cayley transform.
Proposition 3.39. Let An pn P Nq and A be maximal monotone graphs in H.
The sequence tAn unPN converges to A as n Ñ `8, if and only if tCpAn qunPN
converges to CpAq pointwise (since they are in Lip1 pHq, by Ascoli’s theorem,
this is equivalent to their local uniform convergence).
130
Proof. For the“ if” part, it is easy to see that for given pξ, ηq P A, the sequence
tpξn , ηn qunPN defined by
. 1` ˘ . 1` ˘
ξn “ Id ` CpAn q pξ ` ηq, ηn “ Id ´ CpAn q pξ ` ηq,
2 2
belongs to An and converges to pξ, ηq (see (3.49)).

To prove the converse implication, for x P H, let tpξn , ηn qunPN P An be
such that ξn ` ηn “ x. For each n P N, this pair is unique (by monotoni-
city). Similarly, let pξ, ηq P A be such that ξ ` η “ x. The convergence of
CpAn qpxq “ ξn ´ ηn to CpAqpxq “ ξ ´ η follows from the convergence of ξn to
ξ which we will now show.
Let tpξrn , ηrn qunPN P An be a sequence converging to pξ, ηq given by the
hypothesis An A. By the monotonicity of An ,
xξn ´ ξrn , ηn ´ ηrn yX 1 ,X ě 0.
.
Setting zn “ ξn ´ ξrn and replacing ηn by its value x ´ ξn , gives
xzn , x ´ ξrn ´ ηrn ´ zn yX 1 ,X ě 0.
From this inequality it follows that }zn }X 1 ď }x´ξrn ´r

ηn }X . But by definition,
ξrn ´ ηrn converges to ξ ´ η “ x, so that zn Ñ 0. This in turn implies the
claim.
Remark 3.40. Note that if the sequence tCpAn qunPN converges pointwise, its
limit automatically belongs to Lip1 pHq (see (3.50)) and is therefore associated
with some maximal monotone operator A such that An A. This is why
the Cayley transform is a very useful tool.
It is now easy to extend Proposition 3.36 to the case of a converging

sequence of maximal monotone operators (the proof is similar).
Proposition 3.41. Let An pn P Nq, A Ă X ˆ X 1 be maximal monotone

graphs, and let pξn , ηn q P An and pξ, ηq P X ˆ X 1 . Assume that, as n Ñ `8,
An A, ξn á ξ weakly in X, ηn á η weakly in X 1 ,
and
lim inf xηn , ξn yX 1 ,X ď xη, ξyX 1 ,X .
nÑ`8
Then,
pξ, ηq P A and lim inf xηn , ξn yX 1 ,X “ xη, ξyX 1 ,X .
nÑ`8
131
3.2.3 Measurable families of maximal monotone graphs

In this section we introduce the definition of measurable maps from a measure
space tO, μu to the set of maximal monotone operators on a separable Hilbert
space H with inner product p¨, ¨qH , and give an equivalent definition via the
Cayley transform.
Definition 3.42. The map A : O Ñ MpHq is measurable if and only if
for every open set U Ă H ˆ H (respectively, closed set, Borel set, open ball,
closed ball), the set (
t P O | Aptq X U ‰ ∅ ,
is measurable in O.
The following gives an equivalent formulation which we take as an alter-
nate definition.
Definition 3.43. The map A : O Ñ MpHq is measurable if and only if its
Cayley transform CpAq is a Caratheodory function on Ω ˆ H with values in
Lip1 pHq, i.e.,
piq for every x P H, the map t ÞÑ CpAqpt, xq is measurable on Ω,
piiq for a.e. t P O, the map x ÞÑ CpAqpt, xq belongs to Lip1 pHq.
Given a measurable map A : O Ñ MpHq and p in p1, `8q, one can
1
define a monotone graph from Lp pO; Hq to Lp pO; Hq which is the canonical
1
extension of A as a map on Lp pO; Hq with values in Lp pO; Hq.
Definition 3.44. Let A : O Ñ MpHq, the canonical extension of A from
Lp pO; Hq to Lp1 pO; Hq is defined by
ˇ` ˘ (
A “ pu, vq P Lp pO; Hq ˆ Lp1 pO; Hq ˇ uptq, vptq P Aptq for a.e. t P O .
One readily checks that A is monotone.
Proposition 3.45. Let A : O Ñ MpHq be measurable. If A ‰ ∅, then A is
maximal monotone.
Proof. Since A ‰ ∅, there exists pα, βq P A. Suppose that pu, vq belongs to
Lp pO; Hq ˆ Lp1 pO; Hq and is such that, for every pu1 , v 1 q P A,
ż
` 1 ˘
v ptq ´ vptq, u1 ptq ´ uptq H dμ ě 0.
O
For almost every t in O, set

zptq “ uptq ` vptq,
and
1
u˚ ptq “ pId ` CpAptqqpzptqq
2
1
v˚ ptq “ pId ´ CpAptqqpzptqq.
2
132
By construction, pu˚ ptq, v˚ ptqq belongs to Aptq for almost every t P O. Fur-
thermore, both maps are measurable, since t ÞÑ zptq is measurable and
pt, zq ÞÑ CpAptqqpzq is Caratheodory.
For k ą 0, introduce the set Ok ,
ˇ (
Ok “ t P O ˇ u˚ ptqH ď kuptqH and v˚ ptqH ď kvptqH ,
and set
puk , vk q “ χOk pu˚ , v˚ q ` χOzOk pα, βq.
Clearly, puk , vk q belongs to A, so that
ż
xvk ptq ´ vptq, uk ptq ´ uptqyH dμ ě 0,
O
which reads
ż
xv˚ ptq ´ vptq, u˚ ptq ´ uptqyH dμ
Ok
ż
` xβptq ´ vptq, αptq ´ uptqyH dμ ě 0.
OzOk
Since by construction,
u˚ ptq ` v˚ ptq “ zptq “ uptq ` vptq,
the last inequality implies the following one:

ż ż
uptq ´ u˚ ptq2H dμ “ vptq ´ v˚ ptq2H dμ
Ok O
ż k
` ˘` ˘
ď βptq ´ vptq αptq ´ uptq dμ.
OzOk
Lebesgue’s monotone convergence theorem applied to the two left terms,

and Lebesgue’s dominated convergence theorem applied to the third term,
together imply
ż ż
uptq ´ u˚ ptq2H dμ “ vptq ´ v˚ ptq2H dμ “ 0.
O O
Consequently pu, vq “ pu˚ , v˚ q belongs to A.
Remark 3.46. The maximality of Aptq for almost every t P O is not suffi-
cient to ensure the maximality of A because the latter can be empty. Here is
such a trivial example,
1(
O “ p0, 1q and Aptq “ pξ, ηq P R ˆ R | η “ t´1{p .
133
We conclude this section with a convergence for the canonical extensions

of measurable maximal monotone maps (see Definition 3.44).
For measurable maps An pn P Nq, A : O Ñ MpHq and their canonical ex-
tensions An and A, this result gives conditions under which the pointwise
convergence An ptq Aptq for almost every t P O implies the convergence of
the extension graphs An A.
Theorem 3.47. Let An pn P Nq, A : O Ñ MpHq be measurable. Assume that
piq for almost every t P O, An ptq Aptq,
piiq A and An are maximal monotone,
1
piiiq there exists pαn , βn q P An , pα, βq P Lp pO; Hq ˆ Lp pO; Hq such that
1
pαn , βn q Ñ pα, βq strongly in Lp pO; Hq ˆ Lp pO; Hq.
Then An A.
Remark 3.48. Assumption (iii) cannot be dropped. Indeed, one can have
An ptq Aptq for every t P O, while An A. Here is such an elementary
example. For H “ R, O “ p0, 1q and n P N , define the operators
1 ( (
An ptq “ px, yq P R2 : y “ n1{p χp0,1{nq ptq and Aptq “ px, yq P R2 : y “ 0 .
Clearly, for for every t P p0, 1q, An ptq Aptq. On the other hand, for every
pun , vn q P An and pu, vq P A,
1
vn Lp1 “ 1 and vLp1 “ 0 ùñ vn Û v strongly in Lp pOq.
Hence, An A is impossible!
Proof of Theorem 3.47. Let pu, vq P A. For a.e. t P O, let zptq “ uptq ` vptq
so that
´1 1 ¯
puptq, vptqq “ pId ` CpAptqqqzptq , pId ´ CpAptqqqzptq .
2 2
For n P N, define
´ ¯
. 1 1
pun ptq, vn ptqq “ pId ` CpAn ptqqqzptq , pId ´ CpAn ptqqqzptq .
2 2
By hypothesis (i), the sequence tpun , dn qun converges a.e. to pu, vq. Set
ˇ (
O1 “ t P O ˇ un ptqH ď 2uptqH and vn ptqH ď 2vptqH ,
and for n ě 1,
#` ˘
` ˚ ˘ un ptq, vn ptq if t P O1 ,
un ptq, vn˚ ptq “ ` ˘
αn ptq, βn ptq if t P OzO1 .
By construction, pu˚n , vn˚ q belongs to An . Then, the Lebesgue dominated
convergence theorem implies the strong convergence,
1
pu˚n , vn˚ q Ñ pu, vq strongly in Lp pO; Hq ˆ Lp pO; Hq,
134
3.2.4 Convergence results

We return to the nonlinear diffusion problems generalizing problem (3.48).
Theorem 3.49. Let O be a bounded domain in RN and p P p1, `8q. Let
A, An : O Ñ MpRN q be measurable with associated canonical extensions An
and A and assume that the hypotheses of Theorem 3.47 are satisfied. Let
1
tfn unPN be a sequence converging strongly to f in W ´1,p pOq.
Suppose that for each n P N, un is a solution of
$
’ ´div dn “ fn in D1 pOq,
& ` ˘
∇un pxq, dn pxq P An pxq for a.e. x P O,
’
%
un P W01,p pOq.
Then every weak limit point pu, dq (if any) of the sequence tpun , dn qun in the
1
space W01,p pOq ˆ Lp pOq, is a solution of
$
’ ´div d “ f in D1 pOq,
& ` ˘
∇upxq, dpxq P Apxq for a.e. x P O,
’
%
u P W01,p pOq.
Proof. Without loss of generality, we may assume that tpun , dn qun converges
weakly to pu, dq. ` ˘
The only difficult point is to show that ∇upxq, dpxq P Apxq ` for
˘ a.e.
x in O. In view of the definition of A, it suffices to show that ∇u, d P A.
This follows from the convergence
lim xdn , ∇un yLp1 pOq,Lp pOq “ lim xfn , un yW ´1,p1 pOq,W 1,p pOq
nÑ8 nÑ8 0
“ xf, uyW ´1,p1 pOq,W 1,p pOq “ xd, ∇uyLp1 pOq,Lp pOq ,
0
and from Proposition 3.41.
3.2.5 A general existence result

Definition 3.50. For O a bounded domain in RN , p P p1, 8q, q P r1, pq,
α ą 0 and m in L1 pOq, let VLLpO, p, q, α, mq(12) denote the set of measurable
maps Apx, vq from O ˆ R to MpRN q which are continuous with respect to
their second argument v (13) and satisfy the inequality
´ |ξ|p |η|p ¯
1
α ` ď xη, ξy RN ` m ` |v|q , (3.51)

p p1
a.e. in O, for every v P R, and for all pξ, ηq P Apx, vq.
(12) VLL stands for Višik - Leray - Lions.
(13) In terms of the Cayley transform, this is equivalent to the fact that CpApx, vqqpξq is
Caratheodory measurable with respect to x, continuous with respect to v and 1-Lipschitz
with respect to ξ.
135
Definition 3.51. A sequence tAn unPN in VLLpO, p, q, α, mq is said to con-

verges uniformly to some A, convergence denoted
An A, An
A
whenever for a.e. x P O and every ξ P RN , CpAn px, vqqpξq converges to

CpApx, vqqpξq locally uniformly with respect to v P R.
This is equivalent to the following convergence:
for a.e. x P O, for every convergent sequence vn Ñ v in R,
An px, vn q converges to Apx, vq in MpRN q.
Clearly, if An A, the limit A belongs to VLLpO, p, q, α, mq.

Theorem 3.52. Let tAn unPN be a sequence in VLLpO, p, q, α, mq as defined
1
above, tfn unPN a sequence converging to f in W ´1,p pOq and suppose that for
each n P N, un is a solution of
$
’ ´div dn “ f in D1 pOq,
& ` ˘
∇un pxq, dn pxq P An px, un pxqq, (3.52)
’
% 1,p
un P W0 pOq.
Suppose furthermore that the sequence tAn unPN converges to some A in the
sense of the convergence defined above, An A.
1
Then the sequence tpun , dn qun is bounded in the space W01,p pOq ˆ Lp pOq,
and each of its weak limit points, say pu, dq, is a solution of
$
’ ´div d “ f in D1 pOq,
& ` ˘
∇upxq, dpxq P Apx, upxqq, (3.53)
’
% 1,p
u P W0 pOq.
Proof. The fact that tpun , dn qunPN is bounded follows from inequality (3.51).
Indeed, it implies
ˆ 1 ˙
}∇un }pLp pOq }dn }pLp1 pOq
α `
p p1
ż
ď xfn , un yW ´1,p1 pOq,W 1,p pOq ` mpxq dx ` c}un }qLp pOq .
0
O
One then can conclude using the Poincaré inequality for W01,p pOq.
At this point, without loss of generality (by going to a subsequence),
one can assume that the sequence tpun , dn qun converges to pu, dq weakly in
1
W01,p pOq ˆ Lp pOq. By the compact Sobolev embedding, one can also assume
that un converges to u for a.e. x P O. The remainder of the proof then
.
follows by applying Theorem 3.49 for the sequence Bn pxq “ An px, un pxqq
which, for a.e. x P O satisfies Bn Apx, upxqq in MpR q.
N
136
We finally give a proof of existence for solutions of (3.53).

Proposition 3.53. Under the hypotheses of Theorem 3.33, problem (3.53)
has at least one solution.
By Theorem 3.52, it is enough to construct an approximating sequence
tAn px, vqun of A for which problem (3.52) has a solution. There is a standard
way to achieve this. It involves the Yoshida approximations of a maximal
monotone graph (see Lemma 4.3 of [91] for details).
.
In the following, Fp pξq “ |ξ|p´2 ξ denote the duality map of RN (associated
to the gauge | ¨ |p ).
Lemma 3.54.
(i) Let B be a maximal monotone graph on RN . For λ ą 0, the Yosida
approximation Bλ of B is defined as
. 1 ` ˘
Bλ “ Fp Id ´ pFp ` λBq´1 .
λ
It is a single valued, everywhere defined, continuous and maximal monotone
map. Furthermore, it converges to B in the sense of maximal monotone
graphs as λ Ñ 0` .
(ii) Let α ą 0, λ0 ą 0 and m P R be such that for every pξ, ηq P B,
ˆ p 1 ˙
|ξ| |η|p
α ` 1 ď xη, ξy RN ` m.
p p
Then for every δ ą 0, there is λ0 ą 0 such that for every ξ P RN , 0 ă λ ă λ0 ,
ˆ ˙
|ξ|p |Bλ ξ ` λFp pξq|pp
1
@ D
pα ´ δq ` ď Bλ ξ ` λFp pξq, ξ RN ` m. (3.54)
p p1
Proof of Proposition 3.53. Following Lemma 3.54 above, choose
1
An px, ¨ q “ Apx, ¨ q1{n ` Fp p ¨ q.
n
It clearly satisfies all the hypotheses of Theorem 3.52.
It remains to show that for each fixed n P N, problem (3.52) has a solution.
This can be done by using a Galerkin method, as in [148]. Instead, we shall
use the Schauder’s fixed point theorem for the map S which to v given in
Lp pOq, assigns the solution u˚ (given by Theorem 3.33) of the problem
$
’ ´div d˚ “ f in D1 pOq,
& ` ˘
∇u˚ pxq, d˚ pxq P An px, vpxqq,
’
% ˚
u P W01,p pOq.
From inequality (3.54), it is easy to check that there is a ball in Lp pOq
which is left invariant by S. By Theorem 3.49, S is continuous for the Lp pOq
topology. It is also compact by the compactness of the embedding of W01,p pOq
into Lp pOq.
137
3.2.6 Homogenization
In this section we state the main homogenization result in the context of
nonlinear diffusion. First we give the result and the proof of the convergence
of solutions. Then we study the properties of the homogenized operator.
Finally we give some energy convergence and a corrector result.
Theorem 3.55. Assume p in p1, `8q, α ą 0, Ω a bounded domain of RN ,
and m in L1 pΩq. Let Aε be in VLLpΩ, p, q, α, mq for some q P r1, pq.
Suppose that there exists a cell Y Ă RN such that Tε pAε q converges in
VLLpΩ ˆ Y, p, q, α, mq
r to some B and for some m r in L1 pΩ ˆ Y q. Suppose
furthermore, that this convergence is uniform with respect to the second ar-
1
gument v. Let fε P W ´1,p pΩq such that
1
fε Ñ f0 strongly in W ´1,p pΩq.
Consider a (not necessarily unique) solution uε P W01,p pΩq of the problem

$
’ ´div dε “ fε in D1 pΩq,
& ` ˘
∇uε pxq, dε pxq P Aε px, uε pxqq (3.55)
’
% 1,p
uε P W0 pΩq.
1
Then the sequence tpuε , dε quε is weakly compact in W01,p pΩq ˆ Lp pΩqN .
Furthermore, if pu0 , d0 q is one of its limit points, i.e., there is a subse-
quence tεn u of ε converging to 0 and such that
u ε n á u0 weakly in W01,p pΩq,

1
d ε n á d0 weakly in Lp pΩqN ,
it follows that $
’ ´div d0 “ f0 in D1 pΩq
& ` ˘
∇u0 pxq, d0 pxq P Ahom px, u0 pxqq, (3.56)
’
%
u0 P W01,p pΩq
where, for almost every x P Ω and every v P R,
! ˇ
ˇ p P W 1,p pY q ˆ Lp1 pY qN ,
Ahom px, vq “ pξ,ηq P RN ˆ RN ˇ Dppu, dq per,0
p “ 0, ´divy dˆ “ 0 in pC 8 q1 pY q such that

MY pdq (3.57)
per
` ˘ )
ξ ` ∇p p
upyq, η ` dpyq P Bpx, y, vq for a.e. y P Y .
Moreover, Ahom belongs to VLLpΩ, p, q, α, mq, where m “ MY pmq.

r
1
A short proof. The fact that tpuε , dε quε is bounded in W01,p pΩq ˆ Lp pΩqN
follows as before from the hypothesis that Aε belongs to VLLpΩ, p, q, α, mq
and from the Poincaré inequality for W01,p pΩq.
138
So, one can assume that, up to a subsequence,

1
u ε á u0 weakly in W01,p pΩq and dε á d0 weakly in Lp pΩqN .
Up to a further subsequence, one can therefore suppose that uε pxq Ñ u0 pxq

for a.e. x P Ω.
1,p
p in Lp pΩ; Wper,0
By Theorem 1.41, there exists u pY qq such that
Tε p∇uε q á ∇u0 ` ∇y u
Similarly, by Proposition 1.9 (iii), there exists dp P Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN such that

1
Tε pdε q á d0 ` dp
1
weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN .
Consider the variational formulation of problem (3.55),

ż
pdε , ∇uε q dx “ xfε , uε yW ´1,p1 pΩq,W 1,p pΩq . (3.58)
0
Ω
Unfolding its left-hand side, gives

ż ż
1
Tε pdε q ¨ Tε p∇uε q dxdy ` pdε , ∇uε q dx “ xfε , uε yW ´1,p1 pΩq,W 1,p pΩq .
|Y | ΩˆY Λε
0
For the second term on the left-hand side, recalling (3.51), one has the
estimate ˆż ˙ ż
´ pmpxq ` |uε pxq| q dx ď
q
pdε , ∇uε q dx.
Λε Λε
Note that the left-hand side integral goes to 0 since |Λε | goes to 0. Conse-
quently, ż
lim inf pdε , ∇uε q dx ě 0, (3.59)
εÑ0 Λε
and
ż
1
lim sup Tε pdε q ¨ Tε p∇uε q dxdy ď xf0 , u0 yW ´1,p1 pΩq,W 1,p pΩq . (3.60)
|Y | 0
ΩˆY
Unfolding (3.58) and going to the limit along the considered sequences as
in Section 3.1, leads to
$ 1 ż ` ˘
’
’ p yq, ∇Ψpxq ` ∇y Φpx, yq dxdy
d0 pxq ` dpx,
’
& |Y | ΩˆY
“ xf, ΨyW ´1,p1 pΩq,W 1,p pΩq (3.61)
’
’
’
%
0
@Ψ P W01,p pΩq,
which is the unfolded limit problem (3.56).
139
Since MY pdpq “ 0 and MY p∇y u pq “ 0 (by the periodicity of u p), from

equality (3.61) it follows in particular that
ż ż
1 ` ˘
p yq,∇u0 pxq ` ∇y u
d0 pxq ` dpx, ppx, yq dxdy
Ω |Y | ΩˆY (3.62)
“ xf, u0 yW ´1,p1 pΩq,W 1,p pΩq .
0
` ˘
On the other hand, unfolding the condition ∇uε pxq, dε pxq P Aε px, uε pxqq,
yields
` ˘ ` ˘
Tε p∇uε qpx, yq, Tε pdε qpx, yq P Tε pAε q x, y, Tε puε qpx, yq .
Recalling that Tε puε q converges strongly to u0 in Lp pΩ ˆ T q, therefore a.e.

in Ω ˆ Y (at least for a subsequence), the hypothesis on Tε pAε q implies
Tε pAε qpx, y, Tε puε qpx, yqq Bpx, y, u0 pxqq.Tε pAε qpx, y, Tε puε qpx, yqq.
Then, in view of Proposition 3.41, inequalities (3.59), (3.60) and (3.62),

´ ¯
p yq, ∇u0 pxq ` ∇y u
d0 pxq ` dpx, ppx, yq P Bpx, y, u0 pxq for a.e. px, yq P Ω ˆ Y ,
and ż
lim pdε , ∇uε q dx “ 0.
εÑ0 Λ
ε
Finally, formula (3.57) of Ahom follows from (3.61) .

It remains to show that Ahom belongs to VLLpΩ, p, q, α, mq. r To do so,
first check the monotonicity of Ahom px, vq for fixed v P R and for a.e. x P Ω.
pi andżdpi be associated with
For i “ 1, 2, let pξi , ηi q P Ahom px, vq, and let u
pξi , ηi q by definition (3.57). By the periodicity of u
pi , pi p¨, yq dy “ 0 so
∇y u
Y
that
@ D
η 1 ´ η 2 , ξ1 ´ ξ 2 RN
ż
1 @ D
“ η1 ` dp1 pyq ´ η2 ´ dp2 pyq, ξ1 ` ∇p
u1 pyq ´ ξ2 ´ ∇p
u2 pyq RN dy.
|Y | Y
The monotonicity of Bpx, vq implies that the term in the right-hand side is
nonnegative. Therefore Ahom px, vq is monotone.
To prove that Ahom is in VLLpΩ, p, q, α, mq,
r it is enough to show that
it is the limit of a sequence of single valued elements of VLLpΩ, p, q, α, mq.
r
This is achieved by using the approximation given by Lemma 3.54. More
precisely, for fixed v P R, consider
.
rn px, y, vq “ 1
B Bpx, y, vq1{n ` Fp ,
n
which is single valued, uniformly monotone, of Caratheodory type with re-
spect to ppx, yq, vq in VLLpΩ ˆ Y, p, q, α ´ δn , mq
r (for some δn ě 0 which goes
140
to 0 as n Ñ `8) and converges to B in the sense VLLpΩ ˆ Y, p, q, α1 , mq,r

uniformly with respect to v P R (for 0 ă α1 ă α and n large enough).
Then set
! ˇ
ˇ p P W 1,p pY q ˆ Lp1 pY ; RN q,
Bnhom px, vq “ pξ,ηq P RN ˆ RN ; ˇ Dpp
u, dq per
MY pp p “ 0, ´divy dˆ “ 0 in pC 8 q1 pY q,
uq “ MY pdq per
` ˘ )
such that ξ ` ∇p p r
upyq, η ` dpyq P Bn px, y, vqa.e. y P Y .
rn , it is clear that B hom px, vq is single valued and

From the properties of B n
of Caratheodory type with respect to px, vq, and in VLLpΩ, p, q, α ´ δn , mq. r
r
Also, Bn converges to A hom 1
in VLLpΩ, p, q, α , mq,
r uniformly with respect to
v P R. Hence, Ahom in VLLpΩ, p, q, α1 , mqr for every α1 ă α, which is enough
for concluding the proof.
Remark 3.56 (Convergence of the energy). As in Section 3.1, one can

establish that (at least for a subsequence),
ż ż
Tε pdε q¨Tε p∇uε q dxdy Ñ p yq, ∇u0 pxq`∇y u
pd0 pxq`dpx, ppx, yqq dxdy.
ΩˆY ΩˆY
However, in general, this does not imply a corrector result. Only in the case of
uniformly monotone graphs (in the sense of Lp ),(14) can one give a corrector
in the same fashion as in Section 3.1.
3.3 Unfolding of integral functionals acting on

gradients
By considering the subdifferentials of convex functions, the results of the
previous section can be applied in connection with the Mosco convergence
of the associated functionals (see [92]). In this section, we show how the
unfolding method applies to the study of the Γ-convergence of sequences of
convex functionals.(15) The result presented here was published in its original
form in [64] (see also [65] and [66] for some generalizations).
Recall the definition of Γ-convergence of a sequence which will be used in
this chapter.
(14) In this setting, this means there is a constant α ą 0 such that for every v P R, j “ 1, 2
j
and every pξj , ηj q P Aε pvj q, the following inequality holds a.e. in Ω and for every ε:
xη1 ´ η2 , ξ1 ´ ξ2 yRN ` |v1 ´ v2 |p ě α |ξ1 ´ ξ2 |pRN .
(15) Γ-convergence, introduced by De Giorgi and his school, is often more general than
Mosco-convergence (see [95, 96]).
141
3.3. Unfolding and Γ-convergence
Definition 3.57 (cf.[20, 21, 34, 45, 82, 96]). Let X be a topological space,
tfn unPN a sequence of functions defined on X with values in R. The function
f : X Ñ R is the Γ-limit (technically the Γ-limit inf ) of the sequence tfn unPN ,
whenever
piq For every x P X, there is a sequence txn unPN converging to x, with
lim inf fn pxn q “ f pxq.
nÑ`8
piiq For every converging sequence tyn unPN in X,

lim inf fn pyn q ě f p lim yn q.
nÑ`8 nÑ`8
Denote by A0 the class of bounded open subsets of RN having a Lipschitz

boundary, and by Y the unit reference cell p0, 1qN (16).
Consider a Caratheodory energy density f satisfying
$
&f : px, zq P R ˆ R ÞÑ f px, zq P r0, `8q,
N N
’
f p¨, zq Lebesgue measurable, Y -periodic @z P RN , (3.63)
’
%
f px, ¨q convex for a .e. x P R .
N
For p P r1, `8q, and M ą 0, introduce the two following growth conditions:
D a P L1 pY q` and Y -periodic, such that f px, zq ď apxq ` M |z|p

(3.64)
for a.e. x P RN and every z P RN ,
and
D h P Lp pY q` and Y -periodic, such that |z|p ď M f px, zq ` hpxq
(3.65)
for a.e. x P RN and every z P RN .
Theorem 3.58. Let f satisfy (3.63) and assume that (3.64) holds for some
p P p1, `8q. Let Ω be in A0 . For v P W 1,p pΩq, set
ż ´ ¯
. x
Fε pvq “ f , ∇vpxq dx.
Ω ε
Then the Γ-limit of the sequence tFε uε for the weak topology of W 1,p pΩq,
is given by
"ż *
. ˇ
F puq “ inf ˇ
f py, ∇upxq ` ∇y V px, yqq dx dy V P L pΩ; Wper pY qq .
p 1,p
ΩˆY
In addition, if (3.65) holds (with the same p as for (3.64)), this Γ-limit is
represented as an integral,
ż
p
F puq “ fhom p∇upxqq dx,
Ω
(16) The results hold for any parallelotope Y ; this just simplifies the notations. In partic-
ular, |Y | “ 1.
142
with density defined by

!ż ˇ )
p
fhom : z P RN ÞÑ min f py, z ` ∇vpyqq dy ˇ v P Wper
1,p
pY q , (3.66)
Y
1,p
where Wper pY q was defined in (1.31).
Furthermore, F is also the Γ-limit of the same sequence for the strong
topology of Lp pΩq.
The original proof, technical and delicate, of this theorem can be found in
[155] and [46], where an abstract measure-theoretical Γ-convergence method
is used.
We shall give here a proof making use of the unfolding method which
as for the other applications in this chapter, is short and rather easy. But
before proceeding, we first recall a standard result of convex analysis and
give afterwards a lemma that will be needed in the sequel.
Proposition 3.59. For a bounded open set Ω in RN , let FΩ denote the

functional
ż
` ˘
FΩ : V ÞÝÑ f y, V px, yq dxdy, (3.67)
ΩˆY
defined on Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN with values in R` .

Then, for every bounded open set Ω,
(i) Under hypothesis (3.63), FΩ is convex lower semicontinuous for the

strong topology of Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN . Hence, it is also weakly sequentially
lower semicontinuous on Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN .
(ii) Under hypotheses (3.63) and (3.64), FΩ is continuous for the strong
topology of Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN .
(iii) If hypothesis (3.65) is also satisfied, FΩ is coercive on Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN .
Proof. The proof of the first point is a well-known consequence of Fatou’s

lemma (for the strong lower semi-continuity) and the fact that for convex
functions in Banach spaces, the notions of weak and strong lower semi-
continuity are equivalent. The second point follows from the Lebesgue con-
vergence theorem. The last assertion is straightforward.
From Theorem (3.58) it follows that actually,

(
F puq “ inf FΩ p∇u ` ∇y V q | V P Lp pΩ; Wper
1,p
pY qq . (3.68)
Technically, F depends on both p and Ω. We suppressed this dependence for

simplicity, as no ambiguity occurs.
143
Lemma 3.60. Let Ω P A0 . Assume that f satisfies (3.63) and that (3.64)
hold for some p in p1, `8q. Let u be in W 1,p pΩq and U in C 1 pRN ˆ RN q
with U px, ¨ q Y -periodic for x P Ω. For every ε and for a.e. x P Ω, set
´ x¯
uε pxq “ upxq ` ε U x, .
ε
Then, the following convergence holds:
ż ´x ¯
f , ∇uε pxq dx Ñ 0.
Λε ε
Proof. By (3.63) and that (3.64), it is enough to show that

ż ´x¯ ż
a dx Ñ 0 and |∇uε pxq|p dx Ñ 0. (3.69)
Λε ε Λε
For the convergence of the first integral above, see (1.7).

For the second integral in (3.69), the convergence to 0 follows from the
Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem. Indeed, on the one hand, |Λε | Ñ 0
as observed in Remark 1.1. On the other hand, the elements of the sequence
t|∇uε pxq|p uε are bounded above by a fixed function in Lp pΩq (for example,
|∇up ¨ q| ` 2}U }C 1 pΩˆY q for ε ď 1).
Remark 3.61. By density, the result of this lemma holds true for U in
Lp pΩ; Wper
1,p
pY q.
We are now in position to give the proof of homogenization Theorem 3.58.

It is contained in the three propositions given below.
Proposition 3.62. Let Ω be in A0 and p in r1, `8q. Assume that f satis-

fies (3.63). Then, for every u P W 1,p pΩq and every sequence tuε uε converging
weakly to u in W 1,p pΩq,
ż ´x ¯
lim inf f , ∇uε dx ě F puq.
εÑ0 Ω ε
Proof. It is enough to assume that, up to a subsequence,

ż ´ ¯
x
lim f , ∇uε pxq dx exists and is finite.
Ω ε
Up to a further subsequence, Theorem 1.41(ii) implies that there exists U in

Lp pΩ; Wper
1,p
pY qq with
Tε p∇uε q á ∇u ` ∇y U weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN . (3.70)
144
According to Proposition 1.8 (i) and using definition (3.67), we have succes-
sively,
ż
` ˘
f y, Tε p∇uε qpx, yq dxdy “ FΩ pTε p∇uε qq
ΩˆY
ż ż
` ˘ ` ˘
“ f y, Tε p∇uε qpx, yq dx ` f y, Tε p∇uε qpx, yq dxdy
p
żΩε ˆY ” ´ ¯ı
Λε ˆY
ż
x ˘ `
“ Tε f , ∇uε pxq px, yq dxdy ` f y, 0qpx, yq dxdy
p ε
żΩε ˆY´ ¯ ż
Λε ˆY
(3.71)
x `
“ f , ∇uε pxq dx ` f y, 0qpx, yq dxdy
p ε Λ ˆY
żΩε ´ ¯ ż ε ´ ¯
x x
“ f , ∇uε pxq dx ´ f , ∇uε pxq dx
Ω ε Λε ε
ż
`
` f y, 0qpx, yq dxdy.
Λε ˆY
Consequently,
ż ´ ¯ ż ´x ¯
x
f , ∇uε pxq dx “ FΩ pTε p∇uε qq ` f , ∇uε pxq dx
Ω ε ε
żΛε (3.72)
`
´ f y, 0qpx, yq dxdy.
Λε ˆY
The second integral in the right-hand side converges to 0 by Lemma 3.60

(see also Remark 3.61). Since the Lebesgue measure of Λε converges to 0, by
hypothesis (3.64) the last integral also converges to 0.
Therefore, using convergence (3.70) together with Proposition 3.59 in
equality (3.72), we get
ż ´ ¯
x ` ˘
lim inf f , ∇uε dx ě FΩ y, ∇u ` ∇y U ě F puq,
εÑ0 Ω ε
which concludes the proof.
Proposition 3.63. Let Ω be in A0 . Assume that f satisfies (3.63) and

that (3.64) holds for some p P p1, `8q. Then, for every u P W 1,p pΩq, there
is a sequence twε uε converging weakly to u in W 1,p pΩq, such that
ż ´ ¯
x
lim f , ∇wε pxq dx “ F puq.
εÑ0 Ω ε
Proof. Let u in W 1,p pΩq and U in C 1 pRN ˆ RN q with U px, ¨q Y -periodic for
x P Ω. For every ε and for a.e. x P Ω, set
´ x¯
uε pxq “ upxq ` ε U x, .
ε
145
Then
´ x¯ ´ x¯
∇uε pxq “ ∇upxq ` ε∇ U x, ` ∇y U x, for a.e. x P Ω. (3.73)
ε ε
As before (see the preceding proof), going back to formulas (3.71)-(3.72) and
using (3.73), implies
ż ´ ¯
x
f , ∇uε pxq dx
ε
Ω
ż ´ ´ ”xı ¯ ´ ”xı ¯¯
“ f y, Tε p∇uqpx, yq`ε∇U ε ` εy, y `∇y U ε ` εy, y dxdy
ΩˆY ε Y ε Y
ż ´x ¯ ż
`
´ f , ∇uε pxq dx ` f y, 0qpx, yq dxdy.
Λε ε Λε ˆY
We have seen at the end of the proof of the preceding proposition that
the last two integrals converge to 0 (the first one by Lemma 3.60, the latter
by the properties of f and by the fact that |Λε | Ñ 0).
It remains to pass to the limit in the first integral in the right-hand
side. Due to continuity properties of ∇x U and to the periodicity of ∇y U
(cf. Proposition 1.9(iii)), the following convergences hold:
´ ¨¯
ε∇x U ¨ , Ñ 0 uniformly in RN ,
´ ε
´ ¨ ¯¯
Tε ε∇x U ¨ , Ñ 0 uniformly in Ω ˆ Y,
εż
´ ¨¯
∇y U ¨ , á ∇y U p ¨ , yq dy “ 0 weak-˚ in L8 pRN q,
ε
´ ´ ¨ ¯¯ Y
Tε ∇ y U ¨ , á ∇y U weak-˚ in L8 pΩ ˆ RN q.
ε
This implies that
uε á u weakly in W 1,p pΩq,
as well as
Tε p∇uε q Ñ ∇u ` ∇y U strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
since Tε p∇uq converges strongly to ∇u in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q. Therefore, due to the
continuity of FΩ ,
ż ´ ¯
x
f , ∇uε pxq dx Ñ FΩ p∇u ` ∇y Uq.
Ω ε
Because of the density of the smooth functions in Lp pΩ; Wper 1,p
pY q, and
of the continuity of FΩ again, given some positive δ, it is easy to find U in
C 1 pRN ˆ RN q with U px, ¨ q Y -periodic for every x P Ω, such that
FΩ p∇u ` ∇y U q ď F puq ` δ.
The corresponding sequence tuδε uε almost satisfies the required condition.
It remains to apply a diagonal procedure to construct a sequence with the
.
required property, by setting wε “ uεε .
146
Proposition 3.64. Let Ω P A0 . Assume that f satisfies (3.63) and both

conditions (3.64) and (3.65) for the same p in p1, `8q. Then, for every
u in W 1,p pΩq, ż
p ` ˘
F puq “ fhom ∇upxq dx,
Ω
p
where the function fhom is defined in (3.66).
Here one uses a non trivial result due to Castaing on measurable selec-
tions. Let Ω, X be sets, and Γ a multifunction from Ω to X. A function
σ : Ω Ñ X is said to be a selection of Γ if σpxq P Γpxq for every x P Ω.
The measurable selection result below is proved in [51] (Theorem III. 6 and
Proposition III. 11).
Theorem 3.65. [51]. Let X be a separable metric space, pΩ; Mq a mea-

surable space, and Γ a multifunction from Ω to X. Assume that for every
x P Ω, Γpxq is nonempty and complete in X. Assume moreover, that for
every closed subset F of X, the subset tx P Ω | Γpxq X F ‰ ∅u belongs to M.
Then Γ admits a M-measurable selection.
Proof of Proposition 3.64. From definition (3.66), for u in W 1,p pΩq and V in
Lp pΩ; Wper
1,p
pY qq, the following inequality holds for a.e. x P Ω:
ż
` ˘
f y, ∇upxq ` ∇y V px, yq dy
!ż `
Y
˘ ˇ )
ě inf f y, ∇upxq ` ∇vpyq dy ˇ v P Wper
1,p p
pY q “ fhom p∇upxqq.
Y
Integrating over Ω, taking the infimum of the left-hand side, recalling

definition (3.67) and equality (3.68), give
ż
p
F puq ě fhom p∇upxqq dx. (3.74)
Ω
ż
p
The reverse inequality is obvious if fhom p∇upxqq dx “ `8.
ż Ω
p
To prove it in the case where fhom p∇upxqq dx ă `8, we make use of
Ω
Castaing’s selection theorem above.
p
Note first, that due to (3.63) and (3.64), fhom is convex and continuous on
R . By (3.65) and the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality, the infimum defining
N
p
fhom in (3.66) is achieved for every z P RN . This implies that the set where
this infimum is reached, denoted Γpzq, is nonempty, bounded, convex and
closed. We claim that the multi-application
! ż )
p
Γ : z P RN ÞÑ v P Wper 1,p
pY q | MY pvq “ 0, f py, z ` ∇vpyqqdy “ fhom pzq
Y
147
has a BpRN q-measurable selection, where BpRN q denotes the Borel σ-algebra
of RN .
To do so, it is enough to prove the same for the restriction of Γ to every
ball in RN . The image of a ball by Γ is bounded, thus included in a closed
1,p
ball of Wper pY q. These balls are metrizable for the weak topology (since the
dual space of Wper 1,p
pY q is separable). Therefore, by Theorem 3.65, in order
to establish the existence of a measurable selection of Γ, it is enough to show
that for every bounded and weakly closed subset F of the space Wper 1,p
pY q,
. (
Γ´ pF q “ ζ P RN | Γpζq X F ‰ ∅ ,
belongs to BpRN q.
We now claim that Γ´ pF q is actually closed. To do so, let tzn u Ă Γ´ pF q,
z P RN with zn Ñ z. For every n P N, let vn P Γpzn q X F . The continuity
p
and the finiteness of fhom imply that
ż ż
lim sup |zn ` ∇vn pyq|p dy ď lim f py, zn ` ∇vn pyqq dy
nÑ`8 Y nÑ`8 Y
“ lim f p pzn q p
“ fhom pzq ă `8,
nÑ`8 hom
so that, by the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality for W 1,p pY q, the sequence tvn un

is bounded in Wper1,p
pY q. Hence, there is a subsequence tvnk uk and some v8
such that
vnk á v8 weakly in W 1,p pY q.
Since F is weakly closed, the limit v8 is in F . Moreover, MY pv8 q “ 0.
p
From the continuity of fhom and the lower-semicontinuity of the mapping
ż
w ÞÑ f py, wpyqq dy,
Y
we get
ż ż
p
fhom pzq ď f py, z ` ∇v8 pyqq dy ď lim inf f py, zhk ` ∇vhk pyqq dy
Y kÑ`8 Y
p p
“ lim fhom pzhk q “ fhom pzq.
kÑ`8
Thus v8 belongs to Γpzq X F and z belongs to Γ´ pF q, proving that the latter

is closed. Consequently, Γ admits a measurable selection σ.
For a given u such that
ż
p
fhom p∇upxqq dx ă `8,
Ω
let us define the function U as,
U pxq “ σp∇upxqq for a.e. x P Ω.
148
1,p
Then U is Lebesgue measurable, with values in Wper pY q and, by the definition
of Γ,
ż
p
fhom p∇upxqq “ f py, ∇upxq ` ∇y U pxqpyqq dy for a.e. x P Ω. (3.75)
Y
Integrating (3.75) over Ω and taking into account (3.68) yields

ż
FΩ p∇u ` ∇y U q “ f py, ∇upxq ` ∇y U pxqpyqq dxdy
ΩˆY
ż
p
“ fhom p∇upxqq dx ă `8.
Ω
Therefore, due to (3.65), ∇y U is in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN . By the Poincaré-Wirtinger

inequality, U actually belongs to Lp pΩ; Wper
1,p
pY qq. Consequently,
ż ! )
p
fhom p∇upxqq dx ě inf FΩ p∇u ` ∇y V q | V P Lp pΩ; Wper 1,p
pY qq “ F puq.
Ω
This, together with (3.74), completes the proof of Proposition 3.64 and con-
cludes that of Theorem 3.58.
149
Part II
Unfolding in Perforated
Domains
Part II Unfolding in Perforated Domains
In this second part, the unfolding method is adapted to the case of pe-
riodically perforated domains, where the holes are of the same size ε as the
period.
The unfolding method is very well suited for these kind of problems be-
cause although the solution for each ε-problem is in a functional space which
depends wildly upon ε, the unfolded sequence is in a fixed functional space.
There is no need to introduce extension operators into the holes (which re-
quire more regularity on the boundaries of the holes).
The convergence results can then be expressed in fixed spaces and in
a simple form for the unfolded solutions and then translated in convenient
forms for the original solutions (for example by extending them by 0 into
the holes, or better yet by extending them by their local average into these
holes; see Chapter 6 for such an example). This reason, in itself, justifies the
method, which was originally presented in a preliminary form in [59].
Chapter 4 introduces the variants of all the unfolding operators adapted
to the case of perforated domains. Most of the results are equivalent to those
in Chapter 1. However, one technical hypothesis, which is automatically sat-
isfied in the case of fixed domains has to be introduced (see Definition 4.30).
The scale-splitting operators play a more central role (see Section 4.3.2). The
Q1 -interpolate has the extra property of being defined on the whole domain
including the holes. In order to take into account boundary terms on the
boundaries of the perforations, one also introduces a boundary unfolding
operator. Chapters 5 and 6 present several applications.
The methods of Section 1.5 (unfolding with parameters and multiscales)
are easily generalized to the perforated case.
In this part, due to connectedness requirements, the domains are in RN
for N ě 2.
153
Chapter 4
Unfolding operators in
perforated domains
In the case of periodic problems with holes (of the same size as the period),
the first difficulty arises from the fact the functions (e.g. the solutions of
elliptic problems) are defined on domains Ω˚ε varying with ε (see (4.2)).
What kind of convergence can be expected for a sequence tuε uε of such
functions ? One approach for sufficiently smooth holes not intersecting the
boundary of Ω is to use uniformly bounded extension operators Pε from
H 1 pΩ˚ε q to H 1 pΩq (see [20, 38, 52, 77, 78, 89, 135]). The weak convergence of
tPε puε quε in the fixed space can then be proved.
The choice of the cell Y can be critical. For example, Figure 4.1 shows
two possible choices of unit cell, which differ only by the position of the cell
with respect to the origin of RN (the hole S is the same in both cases). The
problems are therefore identical. But for the one on the left, provided the hole
is with Lipschitz boundary, one can construct such an extension operator. For
the choice on the right no such extension operator can be constructed on a
single cell!
Figure 4.1: Two versions of Y ˚ “ Y zS (in blue) for the same perforations
In absence of extension operators, one cannot speak about “convergence”

of the sequence tuε uε in a fixed space. As in the case without holes, an
unfolding operator Tε˚ is introduced (with the notations from Section 4.1),

4.1. Definitions and notations
for perforated domains in Section 4.2. This operator maps functions defined
on Ω˚ε to functions on the fixed domain ΩˆY ˚ (see Definition 4.1). Therefore
neither extension operator nor regularity hypothesis on the geometry of the
holes are needed.
Subsections 4.2.2 and 4.2.3 introduce the corresponding local and aver-
aging operators for perforated domains. Section 4.3 considers the case of
sequences in W 1,p pΩ˚ε q. In particular, in Subsection 4.3.2 the case where
t}uε }W 1,p pΩ˚ε q uε bounded is treated.
The two sequences tTε˚ puε quε and tTε˚ p∇uε quε are bounded in the fixed
spaces Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY ˚ qq and Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ qN , thereby allowing the use of stan-
dard convergences. In order to identify the possible limits of these two se-
quences and their relationships, a Poincaré-Wirtinger hypothesis in Y ˚ is
needed (in a way similar to that of [10]). When S is not compact in Y
(the case of non-isolated holes), an extra condition in terms of a Poincaré-
Wirtinger inequality is required for the union of the reference cell and its
translates by a period (Hypothesis (Hp ), see Definition 4.30).
In order to treat non-homogeneous Neumann conditions on the boundaries
of the holes, a boundary unfolding operator is defined in Section 4.4.
Section 4.5 considers the case of cracks instead of holes, since the Poincaré-
Wirtinger hypothesis does not necessarily require that Y ˚ be only on one side
of its boundary.
The method also applies for situations where no choice of the basis of
.
periods gives a parallelotope Y with Y ˚ “ Y zS connected, a condition which
is necessary for the validity of the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality in Y ˚ . In
such situations (see Section 4.6), what is required is the existence of a re-
ference cell (not necessarily a parallelotope) having the paving property with
respect to the period basis, and in which the part occupied by the material
is connected. An example is given in Figure 4.4 below. For an analogous
geometry but treated differently, we refer the reader [1].
Results similar to those of Section 2.3 (for the case p “ 1 and for measures)
can be obtained for periodically perforated domains.
In this chapter the domains are in RN for N ě 2 because of the connect-
edness condition.
4.1 Definitions and notations

We use the general notations of Part I, in particular Definition 2.1 of a set
having the paving property with respect to the group G.
From now on, we reserve the notation Y (the reference cell) for a bounded
open set having the paving property with respect to the group G.
We also use the notation P for the open parallelotope generated by the
basis B, which was denoted Y in Section 1.1, and defined by (2.1), i.e.,
! ˇ ř )
. ˇ N
P “ y P RN ˇ y “ yi bi , py1 , . . . , yn q P p0, 1qN . (4.1)
i“1
156
Chapter 4. Unfolding operators in perforated domains
It plays an important role in Section 4.6 for the definition of the macro-micro
operators Q˚ε and R˚ε (the analogues of Qε and Rε of Section 1.6).
Let S be a closed strict subset of Y and denote by Y ˚ the part occupied
by the material,
Y ˚ “ Y zS.
Along this chapter, the sets S and Y ˚ will be called the reference hole and
the perforated cell, respectively.
Let Ω be a given domain in RN . The perforated domain Ω˚ε is obtained
by removing from Ω the set of holes Sε , i.e.,
ď ` ˘
Ω˚ε “ ΩzSε where Sε “ ε ξ`S . (4.2)
ξPG
The following notations will be used (see Figure 4.2):

p˚ “ Ω
Ω p ε zSε ,
ε
Λ˚ “ Ω˚ zΩp ˚ “ Λε zSε , (4.3)

ε ε ε
p ε X Sε ,
Spε “ Ω
p
where the sets Ωε and Λε are defined, as before, by (1.3). The holes in the
set Spε do not intersect BΩ. The boundary of the set of holes in Ω is BSε X Ω,
while B Spε is the boundary of the holes that are included in Ω
p ε.
p ˚ (in dark blue) and Λ˚ (in light green)

Figure 4.2: The sets Ω˚ε , Ω ε ε
We will also use similar notations when applied to the whole of RN ,

ď
pRN q˚ “ RN z pξ ` Sq, pRN q˚ε “ RN zSε , (4.4)
ξPG
so that pRN q˚ is nothing else than RN perforated G-periodically by S, while

pRN q˚ε is the RN perforated by εG-periodically by εS. Consequently, another
157
4.1. Definitions and notations
equivalent definition for Ω˚ε is the following one:

Ω˚ε “ pRN q˚ε X Ω.
In Figure 4.2 above, the cell Y is a parallelotope, this is the simplest
classical situation. In general periodically perforated domains, the situation
can be more complicated for problems involving derivatives. In Section 4.3
the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality is used for Y ˚ which requires it to be con-
nected (see Definition 4.30 for Hypothesis Hp ). In the example of Figure 4.3,
there is no choice of a parallelotope Y leading to a connected Y ˚ . Neverthe-
less, in this case, it happens that there are many possible cells Y with Y ˚
connected.
Figure 4.3: An example of “strangely” perforated domain in two dimensions
An example in dimension 2 is given in Figure 4.4. Obviously, such situ-

ations can occur in higher dimensions.
Figure 4.4: An example of Y ˚ (in dark blue); P in light beige
158
In dimension 2, the fact that Y ˚ is connected implies that S is included

in Y (not only in Y ). In dimensions higher than 2, this is not the case. This
can be seen in the example in dimension 3 from Figure 4.5 below,
Figure 4.5: An example of set Sε in R3
Figure 4.6: The corresponding unit cell.

Actually, in this situation (see Figure 4.6), the roles of Y ˚ and S can be
exchanged (since both are connected) !
159
4.2. The operators for unfolding in periodically perforated domains
4.2 The operators for unfolding in periodically

perforated domains
4.2.1 The unfolding operator
In this subsection, we define an unfolding operator Tε˚ specific to perforated
domains. The first characteristic of this operator is that it maps functions
defined on the oscillating domain Ω˚ε to functions defined on the fixed domain
Ω ˆ Y ˚.
The definitions used here differ slightly from those introduced originally
in [72]-[73]. They follow the usage for fixed domains (see Part 1, Section 1.1).
This allows to treat more general situations (such as in Section 4.6).
Definition 4.1 (The unfolding operator Tε˚ ). For any function φ Lebesgue-
measurable on Ω˚ε , the unfolding operator Tε˚ is defined by
$ ´ ” ı ¯
&φ ε x ` εy p ε ˆ Y ˚,
˚
Tε pφqpx, yq “ ε Y
%0 for a.e. px, yq P Λ ˆ Y ˚ .
ε
Obviously, for v, w P Lp pΩ˚ε q,
Tε˚ pv wq “ Tε˚ pvq Tε˚ pwq.
For φ Lebesgue-measurable on Ω p ˚ , we extend it by zero in Ω˚ zΩ

p ˚ , so the
ε ε ε
above definition makes sense.
In the framework of unfolding with holes, it is convenient to connect the
unfolding operators in the case of holes with those of Chapter 1. In order to
do so, in [59], the functions defined in Ω˚ε are extended by 0 into the holes
(i.e. ΩzΩ˚ε ). This is the operator defined below. This procedure works for
weak convergences in the space Lp pΩq
Definition 4.2 (Extension by 0 into the holes). For p P r1, `8s, the exten-
sion operator
Eε0 : Lp pΩ˚ε q ÝÑ Lp pΩq,
is defined for w in Lp pΩ˚ε q, as follows:
#
w a.e. in Ω˚ε ,
Eε0 pwq “
0 a.e. in ΩzΩ˚ε ” Ω X Sε .
For simplicity, when there is no ambiguity, we may write r̈ ε in place of Eε0 p¨q.
At the level of Y ˚, the extension into the hole S is denoted ES0 . For Ψ in
Lp pY ˚ q, this means that
#
Ψ in Y ˚ ,
ES pΨq “
0
0 in S,
160
while for Ψ in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q,
#
Ψ in Ω ˆ Y ˚ ,
ES0 pΨq “
0 in Ω ˆ S.
Remark 4.3. The relationship between Tε and Tε˚ is
Tε ˝ Eε0 “ ES0 ˝ Tε˚
For w defined on Ω˚ε ,
Tε˚ pwq “ Tε ˝ Eε0 pwq|ΩˆY ˚ “ Tε pw

rε q|ΩˆY ˚ . (4.5)
Actually, these last equalities still hold with every extension of w from Ω˚ε
into Ω. In particular, for w defined on Ω,
Tε˚ pw| q “ Tε pwq|ΩˆY ˚ .

Ω˚
ε
Because of relationship (4.5), the operator Tε˚ enjoys properties which

follow directly from those of Tε listed in Proposition 1.8.
Proposition 4.4. Suppose p P r1, `8s. The operator Tε˚ is linear and
continuous from Lp pΩ˚ε q to Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q. For φ in L1 pΩ˚ε q and w in Lp pΩ˚ε q,
}Tε˚ pwq}Lp pΩˆY ˚ q “ |Y | }w 1Ωp ˚ε }Lp pΩ˚ε q ď |Y | }w}Lp pΩ˚ε q ,

1{p 1{p
ż ż ż ż (4.6)
1 ˚
Tε pφqpx, yq dx dy “ φpxq dx “ φpxq dx ´ φpxq dx.
|Y | ΩˆY ˚ Ωp˚
ε Ω˚ε Λ˚
ε
Suppose p P r1, `8q. Let twε uε be a sequence in Lp pΩq such that
wε Ñ w strongly in Lp pΩq.
Then
Tε˚ pwε q Ñ w strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q. (4.7)
In particular, if wε “ w, then
Tε˚ pwq Ñ w strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q.
Corollary 4.5. Let tφε uε be a sequence with φε P L1 pΩ˚ε q satisfying

ż
|φε | dx Ñ 0.
Λ˚
ε
Then ż ż
1
φε dx ´ Tε˚ pφε q dx dy Ñ 0.
Ω˚
ε
|Y | ΩˆY ˚
Proof. This convergence follows from (4.6).
161
Definition 4.6 (The mean value operator MY ˚ ). The mean value operator
for p P r1, `8s,
MY ˚ : Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q ÝÑ Lp pΩq,
ż
1
MY ˚ pΦqpxq “ Φpx, yq dy for a.e. x P Ω.
|Y ˚ | Y˚
The proof of the next proposition is the same as in the case without holes
(see Proposition 1.11).
Proposition 4.7. Suppose p P r1, `8s. For every Φ P Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q,
}MY ˚ pΦq}Lp pΩq ď |Y ˚ |´1{p }Φ}Lp pΩˆY ˚ q .
As a consequence of Definition 4.6, Remark 4.3 and Proposition 1.8, the
following results hold:
(i) For every w in Lp pΩq,
Tε˚ pwq Ñ w strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q.
(ii) Let twε uε be a sequence with wε in Lp pΩ˚ε q such that }wε }Lp pΩ˚ε q ď C. If
Tε˚ pwε q á w
p weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q,
then
|Y ˚ |
Eε0 pwε q á MY ˝ ES0 pwq
p “ MY ˚ pwq
p weakly in Lp pΩq.
|Y |
The last convergence is still valid for p “ `8 for weak-˚ convergences.
Remark 4.9. The statement (ii) above, implies that for a sequence twε uε
with wε in Lp pΩ˚ε q and such that }wε }Lp pΩ˚ε q is uniformly bounded, the fol-
lowing assertions are equivalent:
1. There is w in Lp pΩq satisfying
|Y ˚ |
Eε0 pwε q á w weakly in Lp pΩq.
|Y |
2. All the weak limit points W in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q of the sequence tTε˚ pwε quε
(which is bounded) have the same average over Y ˚ (this average MY ˚ pwq
simply being w).
( (
Corollary 4.10. Suppose p P r1, `8s. Both sequences 1Ω˚ε ε and 1Ωp ˚ε ε
˚
converge weakly-˚ in L8 pΩq to the constant |Y|Y | | . Consequently, if Ω has
finite measure,
˚
p ˚ | “ |Y | |Ω|.
lim |Ω˚ε | “ lim |Ω (4.8)
εÑ0 εÑ0
ε
|Y |
162
Proof. Applying Proposition 4.4 and convergence (4.7) to a function ϕ in

DpΩq for ε small enough, gives
ż ż
1
ϕ dx “ Tε˚ pϕq dxdy
Ω˚ |Y | ΩˆY ˚
ε
ż ż
1 |Y ˚ |
Ñ ϕ dxdy “ ϕ dx,
|Y | ΩˆY ˚ |Y | Ω
which is precisely convergence (4.8).
4.2.2 The local average operator

As in the case without holes, the unfolding operator Tε˚ allows to define the
local average operator specific to perforated domains;
Definition 4.11. For p in r1, `8s, the local average operator M˚ε is defined
from Lp pΩ˚ε q to Lp pΩq as
ż
˚ 1
Mε pφq “ ˚ T ˚ pφqp¨, yq dy “ MY ˚ ˝ Tε˚ pφq.
|Y | Y ˚ ε
Ă˚ when Ω is the whole space RN .
This operator will be denoted Mε
Remark 4.12. By convention the value of M˚ε pφq on the cell εpξ ` Y q
is simply denoted M˚ε pφqpεξq.
M˚ε ˝ M˚ε ” M˚ε and Tε˚ ˝ M˚ε ” M˚ε .
The following statements, given without proofs, are direct consequences
of the definition of M˚ε .
Proposition 4.13. Suppose p P r1, `8s.
(i) For any φ in Lp pΩ˚ε q,
´ |Y | ¯1{p
}M˚ε pφq}Lp pΩq ď }φ}Lp pΩ˚ε q .
|Y ˚ |
1
(ii) For any φ P Lp pΩ˚ε q and ψ P Lp pΩ˚ε q,
ż ż ż
|Y ˚ |
M˚ε pφq ψ dx “ M˚ε pφq M˚ε pψq dx “ φ M˚ε pψq dx. (4.9)
Ω˚
ε
|Y | Ω Ω ˚
ε
(iii) Suppose p P p1, `8q. Let twε u be a sequence with wε in Lp pΩ˚ε ˆ Y ˚ q

and w p in Lp pΩq such that
Tε˚ pwε q á w
p weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q.
Then
M˚ε pwε q á MY ˚ pwq
p weakly in Lp pΩq.
The same holds true for the weak-˚ convergence in L8 pΩq.
163
Remark 4.14. Equalities (4.9) show that M˚ε is formally self adjoint.
Proposition 4.15. Suppose p P r1, `8q. Let tvε uε be a sequence converging

strongly to v in Lp pΩq. Then
M˚ε pvε q Ñ v strongly in Lp pΩq.
In particular, for every φ P Lp pΩq,
M˚ε pφq Ñ φ strongly in Lp pΩq.
The proof is the same as in Proposition 1.25.
Remark 4.16. Contrary to Proposition 1.25(ii), if the sequence tvε uε con-

verges weakly to v in Lp pΩq, in general, the sequence tM˚ε pvε quε does not
converge to v. For example,
|Y ˚ |
1Ω˚ε á ,
|Y |
whereas M˚ε p1Ω˚ε q ” 1 and M˚ε p1 ´ 1Ω˚ε q ” 0.
4.2.3 The averaging operator

We now determine the adjoint of Tε˚ . To do so, let v be in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q and
1
u in Lp pΩ˚ε q. The computation (1.21) can be repeated replacing the set Y
by Y ˚ . It gives
ż ż ´ż ´ ”xı !x) ¯ ¯
Tε˚ puqpx, yq vpx, yq dx dy “ upxq v ε ` εz, dz dx,
ΩˆY ˚ Ω˚
ε Y˚ ε Y ε Y
from which the definition of the averaging operator Uε˚ is hinted clearly as
follows:
Definition 4.17. For p P r1, `8s, the averaging operator
Uε˚ : Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q ÝÑ Lp pΩ˚ε q,
is defined as
$ ż ´ ”xı !x) ¯
& 1 Φ ε ` εz, dz p ˚,
for a.e. x P Ω
Uε˚ pΦqpxq “ |Y | Y
ε
ε Y ε Y
%
0 for a.e. x P Λ˚ε .
For Ω “ RN , the averaging operator is denoted UĂ˚

ε.
Note that if Φ belongs to Lp pΩ ˆ Y q, then
Uε˚ pΦ|ΩˆY ˚ q “ Uε pΦq| ,

Ω˚
ε
164
and consequently,
Uε˚ pvq “ Uε pvq| , (4.10)
Ω˚
ε
where v is any extension of v to Ω ˆ Y .

Also, for Ψ independent of x,
´! ¨ ) ¯
Uε˚ pΨq ” Ψ 1Ωp ˚ε , (4.11)
ε Y
and for ϕ independent of y,
Uε˚ pϕq “ M˚ε pϕq. (4.12)
A consequence of the duality (Hölder’s inequality) and of estimate (4.6),

is the next result.
Proposition 4.18. Suppose p P r1, `8s. The averaging operator is linear
and continuous from Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q to Lp pΩ˚ε q and
´1{p
}Uε˚ pΦq}Lp pΩ˚ε q ď |Y | }Φ}Lp pΩˆY ˚ q .
For a sequence independent of y, Proposition 4.15(i) and (4.12) obviously

imply the following:
Proposition 4.19. Suppose p P r1, `8q. For every strongly converging
sequence tϕε uε in Lp pΩq with limit ϕ,
› ›
› ϕ ´ Uε˚ pϕε q› p ˚ Ñ 0.
L pΩ q ε
As in the case without holes, Uε˚ is almost a left-inverse of Tε˚ . On the

one hand, for every φ in Lp pΩ˚ε q,
#
p ˚,
φpxq for a.e. x P Ω
˚ ˚
Uε ˝ Tε pφqpxq “ ε
0 for a.e. x P Λ˚ε .
On the other hand, for every Φ in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q,

$ ż ´ ” ı ¯
’ 1 x
’
’ Φ ε ` εz, y dz
’
& |Y | Y
’ ε Y
Tε˚ ˝ Uε˚ pΦqpx, yq “ p ε ˆ Y ˚,
for a.e.px, yq P Ω
’
’
’
’
’
%0 for a.e.px, yq P Λε ˆ Y ˚ .
Proposition 4.20 (Properties of Uε˚ in connection with Tε˚ , M˚ε and Eε0 ).
(i) Let tΦε uε be a sequence such that Φε á Φ weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q. Then
Tε˚ ˝ Uε˚ pΦε q á Φ weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q,

M˚ε ˝ Uε˚ pΦε q á MY ˚ pΦq weakly in Lp pΩq.
165
The same holds true for strong convergences. For p “ `8, the corresponding
convergences hold for the weak-˚ topologies.
(ii) Let tΦε uε be a bounded sequence in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q which converges weakly
to Φ in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q. Then
|Y ˚ |
Eε0 ˝ Uε˚ pΦε q á MY ˚ pΦq weakly in Lp pΩq.
|Y |
In particular, for every Φ P Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q,
|Y ˚ |
Eε0 ˝ Uε˚ pΦq á MY ˚ pΦq weakly in Lp pΩq.
|Y |
Let twε uε be a sequence with wε P Lp pΩ˚ε q and w

p in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q. Then,
(iii) The following assertions are equivalent:
paq Tε˚ pwε q Ñ w

p strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q,
pbq }wε ´ Uε˚ pwq}
p Lp pΩp ˚ε q Ñ 0.
(iv) The following assertions are equivalent:

ż
pcq Tε˚ pwε q Ñw
p strongly in L pΩ ˆ Y q and
p ˚
|wε |p dx Ñ 0,
Λ˚
ε
pdq }wε ´ Uε˚ pwq}

p Lp pΩ˚ε q Ñ 0.
p is independent of y, then (b) and (d) resp.,

(v) If in (iii) and (iv) resp., w
can be replaced by
pb1 q }wε ´ w}
p Lp pΩp ˚ε q Ñ 0,
and
pd1 q }wε ´ w}
p Lp pΩ˚ε q Ñ 0, respectively.
Proof. (i) The proof is the same as for Propositions 1.29(i) and 1.31(ii).
(ii) Applying (i) and using the equivalence of Proposition 4.8(ii), gives the
result.
(iii) It is immediate that
Eε0 pwε 1Ωp ˚ε q “ Eε0 pwε q1Ωp ˚ε and ES0 ˝ Tε˚ pwε 1Ωp ˚ε q “ Tε ˝ Eε0 pwε 1Ωp ˚ε q,
so that (a) is equivalent to
Tε ˝ Eε0 pwε 1Ωp ˚ε q Ñ ES0 pwq

p strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q.
This, by Proposition 1.29(ii), is equivalent to
}Eε0 pwε 1Ωp ˚ε q ´ Uε ˝ ES0 pwq}

p Lp pΩq Ñ 0 strongly in Lp pΩq,
which is another way of writing (b).
166
(iv) The proof is a simple variant of (iii), taking into account the fact that
ż
}wε ´ Uε˚ pwq}
p pLp pΩ˚ q “ }wε ´ Uε˚ pwq}
p pLp pΩp ˚ q ` |wε |p dx.
Λ˚
ε ε
ε
p does not depend upon y, by virtue of Remark 4.19, (b) is

(v) In the case w
equivalent to (b’), and (d) to (d’).
Remark 4.21. Statements (iii)(b) and (iv)(d) are corrector–type results.
4.2.4 Extension by local average

There is another extension procedure into the holes, the extension by local
average Eε . This extension was introduced in [152] for the specific case of the
pressure in the homogenization of the Stokes equation (see Chapter 6). It can
be used as an alternate to Eε0 to prove the results of this section, by relating
them to the corresponding results of Chapter 1. In particular, the use of Eε
simplifies the proofs of the properties of the macro-micro scale operators (see
Subsection 4.3.2.2 and Remark 4.33).
Definition 4.22 (Extension by local average). For p P r1, `8s, the extension
operator
Eε : Lp pΩ˚ε q ÝÑ Lp pΩq,
is defined for w in Lp pΩ˚ε q, as follows:
#
w a.e. in Ω˚ε ,
Eε pwq “
M˚ε pwq a.e. in Ω X Sε .
Note that by definition,
Eε pwq “ w on Λ˚ε ,
and, since M˚ε pwq “ 0 on Λε ,
Eε pwq “ 0 on Λε zΛ˚ε .
A simple computation shows that for p P r1, `8s and w in Lp pΩ˚ε q,

´ |Y | ¯1{p
}Eε pwq}Lp pΩq ď }w}Lp pΩ˚ε q . (4.13)
|Y ˚ |
Remark 4.23 (Connections between Tε˚ , M˚ε , Eε0 , Tε , Mε and Eε ). The fol-
lowing formulas are straightforward consequences of the definitions:
M˚ε ˝ Mε “ Mε , M˚ε ˝ M˚ε “ M˚ε , Mε ˝ Eε “ M˚ε , Eε ˝ M˚ε “ M˚ε .
167
For every w in Lp pΩ˚ε q,

# ˚
Tε pwq a.e. in Ω ˆ Y ˚ ,
Tε ˝ Eε pwq “
M˚ε pwq a.e. in Ω ˆ S,
while #
Tε˚ pwq a.e. in Ω ˆ Y ˚ ,
Tε ˝ Eε0 pwq “
0 a.e. in Ω ˆ S.
Finally,
|Y ˚ | ˚ |Y ˚ |
Mε ˝ Eε0 “ Mε “ Mε ˝ Eε (1) .
|Y | |Y |
The next result is a corollary of Proposition 1.25 and of the the third
formula above.
Corollary 4.24.
(i) Suppose p P r1, `8q. Let twε u be a sequence with wε in Lp pΩ˚ε q, and w
in Lp pΩq such that,
Eε pwε q Ñ w strongly in Lp pΩq.
Then
M˚ε pwε q Ñ w strongly in Lp pΩq.
(ii) Suppose p P p1, `8q. Let twε u be a sequence with wε in Lp pΩ˚ε q, and
such that }wε }Lp pΩ˚ε q is bounded, and let w be in Lp pΩq. The following con-
vergences are equivalent:
Eε pwε q á w weakly in Lp pΩq,
M˚ε pwε q á w weakly in Lp pΩq.
The same holds true for weak-˚ convergences in L8 pΩq.
The previous result (i) cannot hold with Eε0 in place of Eε , indeed the
identity Eε0 pwε qp1 ´ 1Ω˚ε q ” 0 implies that the limit of a strongly convergent
sequence tEε0 pwε quε in Lp pΩq is 0. However, a version of (ii) holds for Eε0 , due
to the following proposition:
Proposition 4.25 (Weak convergences with Eε and Eε0 ). Suppose p P p1,`8q.
Let twε uε be a sequence with wε in Lp pΩ˚ε q, and w be in Lp pΩq. The following
convergences are equivalent:
Eε pwε q á w weakly in Lp pΩq,
|Y ˚ |
Eε0 pwε q á w weakly in Lp pΩq.
|Y |
The same holds true for weak-˚ convergences in L8 pΩq.
(1) This follows from the equalities
ż
1 |Y ˚ | ˚
Mε ˝ Eε0 pwq “ MY ˝ Tε ˝ Eε0 pwq “ Tε˚ pwqdy “ Mε pwq.
|Y | Y ˚ |Y |
168
1
Proof. For ϕ in Lp pΩq, by definition of the extension operators and us-
ing (4.9) and (1.19), and the equalities of Remark 4.23, one obtains
ż ż
Eε0 pwε qMε pϕq dx “ Mε ˝ Eε0 pwε q Mε pϕq dx
Ω Ω
ż
|Y ˚ |
“ Mε ˝ Eε pwε q Mε pϕq dx
|Y | Ω
ż
|Y ˚ |
“ Eε pwε q Mε pϕq dx.
|Y | Ω
Then convergence (1.20) allows to conclude the proof of the equivalence.
The next proposition clarifies the relationship of Eε with Tε˚ for strong
convergence (for the reason stated above, there is no equivalent for Eε0 ).
Proposition 4.26 (Strong convergences for Tε˚ ). Suppose p P r1, `8q. Let
twε uε be a sequence with wε P Lp pΩ˚ε q, and let w
p be in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q. Then,
the following convergences are equivalent:
paq Tε˚ pwε q Ñ w p strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q,

pbq Tε ˝ Eε pwε q Ñ ES pwq
p strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q,
where ES is the extension by average from Y ˚ to S, defined for ϕ in Lp pY ˚ q

by #
. ϕ in Y ˚ ,
ES pϕq “
MY ˚ pϕq in S.
Finally, the strong convergence involving Eε is explained by making use

of Propositions 4.20(v) and 4.8.
Proposition 4.27 (Strong convergences for Eε ). Suppose p P r1, `8q. Let

twε u be a sequence with wε P Lp pΩ˚ε q, and let w be in Lp pΩq.
(i) The following assertions are equivalent:
paq }wε ´ w}Lp pΩp ˚ε q Ñ 0,

pbq Eε pwε q1Ωp ε Ñ w strongly in Lp pΩq,
pcq Tε ˝ Eε pwε q Ñ w strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q.
(ii) The following assertions are equivalent:
pdq }wε ´ w}Lp pΩ˚ε q Ñ 0,

peq Eε pwε q Ñ w strongly in Lp pΩq,
ż
pf q Tε ˝ Eε pwε q Ñ w strongly in L pΩ ˆ Y q and
p
|wε |p dx Ñ 0.
Λ˚
ε
169
4.3 Unfolding and gradients

In this section, we use the following notations (similar to those from(1.31)) :
. ˇ (
1,p
Wper pY ˚ q “ ϕ P Wloc
1,p
ppRN q˚ q ˇ ϕ is G-periodic ,
. (
1,p
Wper,0 pY ˚ q “ ϕ P Wper
1,p
pY ˚ q | MY ˚ pϕq “ 0 .
Both of these spaces are isometric to closed subspaces of W 1,p pY ˚ q when

endowed with the corresponding norm. For p “ 2, these spaces are denoted
1
Hper pY ˚ q and Hper,0
1
pY ˚ q, respectively(2) .
˚
For w in W pΩε q, as in the case without holes, the equivalent of Propo-
1,p
sition 1.35 holds, that is,
∇y pTε˚ pwqq “ εTε˚ p∇wq a.e. in Ω ˆ Y ˚ . (4.14)
This implies that Tε˚ maps W 1,p pΩ˚ε q into Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY ˚ qq.
We consider sequences twε uε such that for each ε, wε belongs to W 1,p pΩ˚ε q.
As in Chapter 1, two cases are considered.
4.3.1 First case: }wε }Lp pΩ˚ε q ` ε}∇wε }Lp pΩ˚ε q bounded
The main result of this subsection is the following theorem:
Theorem 4.28. Suppose p P p1, `8q. Let twε uε be a sequence with wε in
W 1,p pΩ˚ε q, satisfying
}wε }Lp pΩ˚ε q ` ε}∇wε }Lp pΩ˚ε q ď C. (4.15)
p P Lp pΩ; Wper
Then, there exists some w 1,p
pY ˚ qq, such that, up to a subsequence,
Tε˚ pwε q á w
p weakly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY ˚ qq,
(4.16)
εTε˚ p∇wε q p
á ∇y w weakly in L pΩ ˆ Y q .
p ˚ N
The proof is very close to that of Theorem 1.36. The delicate point is
p If the reference cell Y is a parallelotope and S Ă Y ,
the Y -periodicity of w.
one can simply argue as in the case without holes comparing the traces on
opposite faces of Y (see [62]).
However, in the general case, Y is not a parallelotope. If Y ˚ is included
in Y , i.e., BY X BY ˚ is empty, there is no periodicity condition to verify.
If BY X BY ˚ is not empty, the boundary of S may not be Lipschitz or the
way it intersects BY can be such that traces are not even meaningful.
(2) ˚
In the case where Y is included in Y , these spaces do not differ from W 1,p pY ˚ q
and W01,p pY ˚ q.
170
To circumvent this difficulty, we use an approach which avoids the use

of traces. We introduce an auxiliary bigger cell Y (the union of Y and the
˚
2N ´1 contiguous copies of Y ) and use a new operator TεY (see an alternative
approach for a similar result in RN in Subsection 2.1.1).
We stress the fact that this operator is not the unfolding operator corre-
sponding to unit cell Y, but is a “natural” way to extend the operator Tε˚
with values in Ω ˆ Y ˚ , to an operator with values in the set Ω ˆ Y ˚ .
The formal definition of Y uses the notations
.
K “ the set of vertices of P
! ř
N )
” P RN | “ ki bi , pk1 , . . . , kn q P t0, 1uN ,
i“1
Ť` ˘(
Y “ interior `Y .
PK
p Y and ΛY are defined as in Part I, that is

The corresponding sets Ω ε ε
(
ΞYε “ ξ P Ξε | εpξ ` Yq Ă Ω . (4.17)
Ť ` ˘(
p Y “ interior ε ξ`Y , ΛY pY
Ω ε ε “ ΩzΩε . (4.18)
ξPΞY
ε
This definition implies that if ξ is in ΞY ε , then for all in K, ξ ` belongs

to Ξε . Consequently, if a cell εpξ `Y q is included in Ωp Y , then all its translates
ε
εpξ ` ` Y q with in K, are in Ω p ε (see Figure 4.7). Also note that
pY
Ω pY
ε Ă Ωε . (4.19)
p Y (in dark blue) and Y (in dark blue and green)

Figure 4.7: The set Ω ε
We also introduce the notation

` ˘˚
Y ˚ “ Y X RN . (4.20)
171
˚
For φ Lebesgue-measurable on Ω˚ε , the unfolding operator TεY pφq corre-
sponding to Y is defined as follows:
$ ´ ” ı ¯
˚
&φ ε x ` εy p Y ˆ Y ˚,
Y ε
Tε pφqpx, yq “ ε Y (4.21)
%0 for a.e. px, yq P ΛY ˚
ε ˆY .
Due to the” definition p Y , formula (4.21) makes sense. Note here

(4.18)”ofıΩ
xı
ε
x
the use of and not of .
ε Y ε Y
˚
From (4.21), it is easy to check that if w belongs to Lp pΩ˚ε q, then TεY pwq
is in the space Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q and
˚
}TεY pwq}Lp pΩˆY ˚ q ď p2N |Y |q1{p }w}Lp pΩ˚ε q .
If w belongs to W 1,p pΩ˚ε q, formula (4.14) holds also in Y ˚

˚ ˚
∇y pTεY pwqq “ εTεY p∇wq a.e. in Ω ˆ Y ˚ .
The main properties relating TεY

˚
p Y and every
with Tε˚ are, for x P Ω ε
vector of the basis B “ pb1 , . . . , bn q,
˚
TεY pφqpx, yq “ Tε˚ pφqpx, yq for a.e. y P Y ˚,
˚
(4.22)
TεY pφqpx, y ` bk q “ Tε˚ pφqpx ` εbk , yq for a.e. y P Y ˚.
In particular, if ω is a relatively compact open subset of Ω, then for ε suffi-

ciently small,
˚
TεY pφqpx, y ` bk q “ Tε˚ pφqpx ` εbk , yq a.e. on ω ˆ Y ˚ . (4.23)
Proof of Theorem 4.28.

Using estimate (4.6)(ii), (4.14) and (4.15), it follows that tTε˚ pwε qu is
bounded in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY ˚ qq, so that convergences (4.16) hold (up to a sub-
sequence).
It remains to prove that w p is periodic. To do so, consider the function
˚
TεY pwε q. By the same argument as just above, up to a subsequence, there
exists w in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY ˚ qq, such that
˚
TεY pwε q á w weakly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY ˚ qq, (4.24)
or weak-˚ for p “ `8.

Let ω be an open bounded set whose closure is included in Ω. From (4.22)
and (4.16) it follows that
wpx, yq “ wpx,
p yq for a.e. px, yq P ω ˆ Y ˚ .
172
Now, let Φ be in Dpω ˆ Y ˚ q. From (4.23) for ε small enough and for every
k in t1, . . . , N u, one has
ż
˚
TεY pwε qpx, y ` bk qΦpx, yq dx dy
ωˆY ˚
ż
“ Tε˚ pwε qpx ` εbk , yqΦpx, yq dx dy
ωˆY ˚
ż
“ Tε˚ pwε qpx, yqΦpx ´ εbk , yq dx dy.
ωˆY ˚
Passing to the limit and using (4.16) and (4.24) gives

ż ż
wpx, y ` bk qΦpx, yq dx dy “ p yqΦpx, yq dx dy,
wpx,
ωˆY ˚ ωˆY ˚
hence
wpx, y ` bk q “ wpx,
p yq for a.e. px, yq P ω ˆ Y ˚ .
Since this holds for every ω Ť Ω, it is also true in Ω ˆ Y ˚ .
Therefore,`w is˘ actually B-periodic and can be extended by periodicity to
˚
the whole of RN . Furthermore, w p is the restriction of w to Y ˚ , proving
˚
that it belongs to L pΩ; Wper pY qq.
p 1,p
Proposition 4.29. Suppose p P p1, `8s. Let twε uε be a sequence with wε

in Lp pΩ˚ε q, such that wε and its gradient in the direction of a vector a satisfy
}wε }Lp pΩ˚ε q ` ε }Ba wε }Lp pΩ˚ε q ď C.
1,p ˚
p in Lp pRN ; Wa,
Then, up to a subsequence, there exists w G-per pY qq, such
that
Tε˚ pwε q á w
εTε˚ pBa wε q “ Ba,y Tε˚ pwε q á Ba,y w

or weak-˚ for p “ `8.
1,p ˚ ˚
G-per pY q consists of all functions w in L pY q whose
p
Here the space Wa,
` N ˘˚
G-periodic extension w p to R p of this
as well as the a-derivative Ba,y w
`` ˘˚ ˘
extension, both belong to Lploc RN .
Proof. The proof is done by arguments similar to those of the proof of Propo-
sition 2.17.
4.3.2 Second case: }wε }W 1,p pΩ˚ε q or }∇wε }Lp pΩ˚ε q bounded
We consider the space W 1,p pΩ˚ε q or, for Γ0 non empty open subset of BΩ, its
subspace denoted W01,p pΩ˚ε ; Γ0 X BΩ˚ε q of functions vanishing on Γ0 X BΩ˚ε .
173
For the latter case, we suppose that there is an Ω1 open subset of RN such
that Ω Ă Ω1 and Γ0 “ BΩ X Ω1 (the black line in Figure 4.8) and then
ˇ
W01,p pΩ; Γ0 q “ φ PW 1,p pΩq ˇ Dφ1 P W 1,p pΩ1 q,
( (4.25)
φ “ φ1|Ω , φ1 “ 0 in Ω1 zΩ .
This holds for example, if Γ0 has a Lipschitz neighborhood in BΩ.

In the context of definition (4.25), the space W01,p pΩ˚ε ; Γ0 X BΩ˚ε q is de-
scribed as follows:
ˇ
W01,p pΩ˚ε ; Γ0 X BΩ˚ε q “ ψ PW 1,p pΩ˚ε q ˇ Dψ 1 P W 1,p ppΩ1 q˚ε q,
( (4.26)
ψ “ ψ|1 ˚ , ψ 1 “ 0 in pΩ1 q˚ε zΩ˚ε ,
Ωε
where, recalling definition (4.2) of Sε ,
pΩ1 q˚ε “ Ω1 zSε . (4.27)
By this construction obviously (see Figure 4.8),
Ω˚ε “ pΩ1 q˚ε X Ω.
Figure 4.8: The sets Ω and Ω˚ε (green), Ω1 and pΩ1 q˚ε (green & beige)
In order to use the macro-micro decomposition as in the case without

holes, a geometric condition is needed here, which will be expressed in terms
of the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality.
4.3.2.1 The Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality and Hypothesis (Hp )
We now recall Definition 2.25 (see also (1.32)).

Definition. A bounded open set O satisfies the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequa-
lity for the exponent p P r1, `8s, if there exists a constant Cp such that
}u ´ MO puq}Lp pOq ď Cp }∇u}Lp pOq , @u P W 1,p pOq.
174
This requires that O be connected. Conversely, there are extra conditions

for this property to hold (e.g. for John domains, see [88]). The simplest one
is that the boundary of O be Lipschitz (by the compactness of the Rellich
theorem), but it is far from being necessary (see subsection 2.3.1 for more
details on the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality).
Let now state the geometric condition.
Definition 4.30 (Geometrical Hypothesis (Hp )). One says that (Hp )
is verified if the open set Y ˚ has the following properties:
(i) the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality holds for the exponent p (p P r1, `8s),
(ii) there is a basis B for the group G such that for every vector bi of B,
(i P t1, . . . , N u), the interior of Y ˚ Y pbi ` Y ˚ q is connected (3).
Note that under Hypothesis (Hp ) and owing to Remark 2.27, the open
set Y ˚ defined by (4.20) satisfies the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality for the
same exponent p as Y ˚ .
Should BY ˚ X BY be Lipschitz – so traces exist – one could use the ap-
proach of Section 3 of [62] with the relative compactness of the sequence
of local averages obtained via the Kolmogorov criterion (as in the proof of
Lemma 2.3 of [10]), and the Y -periodicity of the function w p by comparing
traces on opposite faces of Y ˚ . Here, we do not assume such regularity,
allowing in particular, BS and BY to intersect in an arbitrary fashion. We
therefore use the approach of Section 1.6, i.e. the macro-micro decomposition
but without any extension outside of Ω˚ε .
To simplify the presentation, we consider the case where Y is a parallelo-
tope. The general case, where Y cannot be chosen as the parallelotope P,
exhibits extra geometric complexities and is presented in Section 4.6.
4.3.2.2 The macro-micro operators Q˚ε and R˚ε when the reference
cell Y is a parallelotope
As in the case without holes, the macro approximation will be defined at
most of the points of Ξε by an average, and then extended to the set Ω p Y by
ε
Q1 -interpolation (continuous and piece-wise polynomials of degree ď 1 with
respect to each coordinate). The notations Y, K, . . . , are those of Subsec-
tion 4.3.1. The local average operator M˚ε was given by Definition 4.11.
Definition 4.31. The operator
p Y q,
Q˚ε : Lp pΩ˚ε q ÝÑ W 1,8 pΩ ε
for p P r1, `8s, is defined as

ż
1
Q˚ε pφqpεξq “ φpεξ ` εzq dz “ M˚ε pφqpεξq(4) for all ξ in ΞY
ε ` K,
|Y ˚ | Y ˚
(3) The latter condition easily implies that pRN q˚ is connected.
(4) With the convention of Remark 4.12.
175
and for every x P ΩpY,

ε
$
˚
& Qε pφqpxq is the Q1 -interpolate of the values of Q˚ε pφq at the vertices
”xı
% of the cell ε ` εY.
ε Y
pε
Remark 4.32. Using other averages, one can extend Q˚ε to the whole of Ω
without changing its properties.
Remark 4.33. Due to Remark 4.23, note that for every φ in Lp pΩ˚ε q
Q˚ε pφq “ Qε ˝ Eε pφq pY .

in Ω (4.28)
ε
As a consequence, one can transpose all the results in Section 1.6 involving
functions in Lp pΩq, p P r1, `8s to functions of Lp pΩ˚ε q (but not of W 1,p pΩ˚ε q).
An example is the next proposition.
Proposition 4.34 (Properties of Q˚ε ). Suppose p P r1, `8s. For φ in
Lp pΩ˚ε q, the following estimates hold:
ˆ N ˙1{p
2 |Y |
}Q˚ε pφq}Lp pΩp Y q ď }φ}Lp pΩ˚ε q ,
ε |Y ˚ | (4.29)
˚ 1
}Qε pφq}L8 pΩp Y q ď N {p ˚ 1{p }φ}Lp pΩ˚ε q
ε ε |Y |
As in Section 1.6, explicit formulas for φ in Lp pΩ˚ε q hold. For instance,
ÿ ´ ”xı ¯ ´! x ) ¯
Q˚ε pφqpxq “ M˚ε pφq ε ` εκ qκ p Y . (4.30)
, @x P Ω ε
N
ε Y ε Y
κPt0,1u
(
Set Kj “ κ P t0, 1uN | κj “ 1 , 1 ď j ď N . Then another example is
BQ˚ε pφq
pxq
Bxj
´ ”xı ¯ ´ ”xı ¯
˚
` εpκ ` bj q ´ M˚ε pφq ε ´! x ) ¯ (4.31)
ÿ Mε pφq ε ` εκ
“ ε Y ε Y qjκ ,
κPK
ε ε Y
j
where the functions qκ and qjκ were defined at the beginning of Section 1.6.
In the remainder of this subsection we assume that Hypothesis
(Hp ) holds for some p P r1, `8s.
Proposition 4.35. There is a constant C independent of ε such that, for
every φ P W 1,p pΩ˚ε q,
#
}φ ´ Q˚ε pφq}Lp pΩp Y q ď Cε }∇φ}Lp pΩ˚ε q ,
piq ε
}M˚ε pφq ´ Q˚ε pφq}Lp pΩp Y q ď Cε }∇φ}Lp pΩ˚ε q ,

ε
piiq }∇Q˚ε pφq}Lp pΩp Y q ď C }∇φ}Lp pΩ˚ε q .

ε
176
Proof. (i) For ψ P W 1,p pY ˚ q, by the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality in Y ˚ one

has
}ψ ´ MY ˚ pψq}Lp pY ˚ q ď C}∇ψ}Lp pY ˚ q .
For φ in W 1,p pΩ˚ε q and ξ P ΞY
ε , from this inequality by a scaling argument,
it follows that
}φ ´ Q˚ε pφqpεξq}Lp pεξ`εY ˚ q ď Cε}∇φ}Lp pεξ`εY ˚ q . (4.32)
Together with (4.34), this implies for every in K,
}φ ´ Q˚ε pφqpεξ ` εq}Lp pεξ`εY ˚ q ď Cε}∇φ}Lp pεξ`εY ˚ q ,
}M˚ε pφqpεξq ´ Q˚ε pφqpεξ ` εq}Lp pεξ`εY q ď Cε}∇φ}Lp pεξ`εY ˚ q .
These estimates and equality (4.30) finally give
}φ ´ Q˚ε pφq}Lp pεξ`εY ˚ q ď Cε}∇φ}Lp pεξ`εY ˚ q ,
}M˚ε pφq ´ Q˚ε pφq}Lp pεξ`εY q ď Cε}∇φ}Lp pεξ`εY ˚ q ,
from which inequalities (i) follow by summation over ΞY ε.

(ii) For ψ P W 1,p pY ˚ q, apply the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality in the domain
Y ˚ to obtain
}ψ ´ MY ˚ pψq}Lp pY ˚ q ď C}∇ψ}Lp pY ˚ q . (4.33)
Integrating ψ ´ MY ˚ pψq over Y ˚ and Y ˚ ` for in K, and using the above

inequality give, respectively,
1
|MY ˚ pψq ´ MY ˚ pψq| ď }ψ ´ MY ˚ pψq}Lp pY ˚ q ď C}∇ψ}Lp pY ˚ q ,
|Y ˚ |1{p
and
1
|MY ˚ ` pψq ´ MY ˚ pψq| ď ˚ |1{p
}ψ ´ MY ˚ pψq}Lp pY ˚ q ď C}∇ψ}Lp pY ˚ q .
|Y
The constant C depends on the Poincaré-Wirtinger constant in (4.33) and
on |Y ˚ |. Therefore, for every in K,
|MY ˚ ` pψq ´ MY ˚ pψq| ď C}∇ψ}Lp pY ˚ q .
For φ in W 1,p pΩ˚ε q and ξ P ΞY

ε , this inequality applied to the function
.
ψpyq “ φpεξ ` εyq gives
ˇ ` ˘ˇˇp
ˇ ˚ ` ˘
ˇQε pφq εξ ` ε ´ Q˚ε pφq εξ ˇ ď εpŃ C p }∇φ}Lp pεξ`εY ˚ q ,
p
(4.34)
which, in combination with (4.31), yields

}∇Q˚ε pφq}pLp pεξ`εY q ď C p }∇φ}pLp pεξ`εY ˚ q .
Estimate (ii) then follows by summation over ΞY

ε.
177
Corollary 4.36. There is a constant C independent of ε such that, for every

φ in W 1,p pΩ˚ε q,
}Eε pφq ´ Q˚ε pφq}Lp pΩp Y q ď Cε }∇φ}Lp pΩ˚ε q . (4.35)
ε
Proof. This is a simple consequence of Proposition 4.35(i).

With the properties of the operator Q˚ε in mind, every function φ in
L pΩ˚ε q is decomposed on the set
p
. ˚ pY
p ˚˚ “
Ω ε Ω ε X Ωε ,
into the sum
φ “ Q˚ε pφq ` R˚ε pφq p ˚˚ ,
a.e. in Ω (4.36)
ε
which defines the remainder operator R˚ε . Its properties are described in the
next result.
Proposition 4.37. There is a constant C independent of ε such that, for
every φ in W 1,p pΩ˚ε q,
piq }R˚ε pφq}Lp pΩp ˚˚
ε q
ď Cε }∇φ}Lp pΩ˚ε q ,
piiq }∇R˚ε pφq}Lp pΩp ˚˚

ε q
ď C }∇φ}Lp pΩ˚ε q .
Proof. Estimates (i) and (ii) are simple rewrites of Proposition 4.35.
A consequence of Proposition 4.37, is a uniform Poincaré inequality which
is useful for applications. It is based on the micro-macro decomposition
(carried out here on a neighborhood of Ω, which we may take to be the
whole of RN ). Let us point out that it extends to the case of non-smooth
holes the result of Lemma A4 of [10].
Theorem 4.38 (Uniform Poincaré inequality). Assume that Ω is bounded
in one direction and with Lipschitz boundary. Then, there exists a constant
C independent of ε such that,
}φ}Lp pΩ˚ε q ď C }∇φ}Lp pΩ˚ε q , @ φ P W01,p pΩ˚ε ; BΩ X BΩ˚ε q. (4.37)
Proof. We extend φ P W01,p pΩ˚ε ; BΩ X BΩ˚ε q by zero to the whole of pRN q˚ε
(see (4.4)), extension still denoted φ. Then, for the macro and micro operators
Qr˚ and R r ˚ associated with pRN q˚ , Propositions 4.35 and 4.37 give
ε ε ε
˚ 1
rε pφq}Lp pRN q ` }R r ˚ pφq} p N ˚ ď C }∇φ} p ˚ .
}∇Q L ppR qε q L pΩε q
ε ε
The domain Ω being bounded in one direction, for ε small enough, the support
of Qr˚ pφq is contained in the neighborhood V1 pΩq (see Notation 1.63) and
ε
bounded in the same direction. Hence, by the Poincaré inequality in V1 pΩq,
r˚ pφq}Lp pRN q ď C}∇Q
}Q r˚ pφq}Lp pRN q ď C }∇φ} p ˚ ,
ε ε L pΩε q
r˚ pφq ` R
from which (4.37) follows, since φ “ Q r ˚ pφq, a.e. in pRN q˚ .
ε ε ε
178
A similar (but more involved) computation leads to the existence of a

uniform Sobolev-Poincaré inequality in Ω˚ε with a constant independent of ε.
Remark 4.39 (Uniform Sobolev-Poincaré inequality). Assume that Ω is
bounded and with Lipschitz boundary. Suppose also that the following Sobolev-
Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality holds for the set Y ˚ , i.e.,
}ψ ´ MY ˚ pψq}Lp˚ pY ˚ q ď C}∇ψ}Lp pY ˚ q , @ψ P W 1,p pY ˚ q,
.
where 1{p˚ “ 1{p ´ 1{N (this assumes N ą p) and C does not depend on ε.
Then, there exists a constant C independent of ε, such that
}φ}Lp˚ pΩ˚ε q ď C}∇φ}Lp pΩ˚ε q , @ φ P W01,p pΩ˚ε ; BΩ X BΩ˚ε q(5).
4.3.2.3 Convergence results

In this subsection, it is assumed that p is in p1, `8s and that Hypothesis pHp q
holds. For p “ `8, all the stated weak convergences are to be understood
as weak-˚ convergences.
Consider sequences twε uε with wε P W 1,p pΩ˚ε q, such that
}wε }W 1,p pΩ˚ε q ď C or }∇wε }Lp pΩ˚ε q ď C.
The main results in this subsection are Theorems 4.43 and 4.44 below. To
state them, we need some notations and preliminary lemmas.
Notation 4.40 (Extension by zero).
To express some convergence results, it will very often be convenient to con-
sider the extension by 0 to Ω of functions defined on a subset of Ω, which
differ from it by a boundary layer of order ε (such as Ω pY, Ω
p ˚˚ “ Ω˚ X ΩpY
ε ε ε ε
int
and Ωkε dpY q ). For the extension by zero of a function Φ defined on such a
subset D of Ω, we will use the (somewhat incorrect but simple) notation Φ1D .
Actually, Φ1D can even be considered as defined on the whole space RN .
Recall that
pY
3ε dpY q Ă Ωε Ă Ω
Ωint and 3ε dpY q , BΩq “ 3ε dpY q.
distpΩint
Lemma 4.41. Let twε uε be a sequence in W 1,p pΩ˚ε q, satisfying

}wε }W 1,p pΩ˚ε q ď C. (4.38)
Then, there exists w in W 1,p pΩq such that, up to a subsequence,

Eε pwε q á w weakly in Lp pΩq, (strongly in Lploc pΩq),
Q˚ε pwε q1Ωint
3ε dpY q
áw weakly in Lp pΩq, (strongly in Lploc pΩq), (4.39)
` ˘
∇Q˚ε pwε q 1Ωint
3ε dpY q
á ∇w weakly in L pΩq .
p N
(5) In the proof, one uses the well-known fact that the Sobolev-Poincaré-Wirtinger in-
equality is scale-invariant, i.e. the constant is the same for Y ˚ and for εY ˚ when p ă N .
179
Moreover
`“ ‰ ˘
Tε ∇Q˚ε pwε q 1Ωint
3ε dpY q
á ∇w weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN . (4.40)
Furthermore, assuming that Γ0 is a non empty open subset of BΩ, if for

every ε the function wε belongs to W01,p pΩ˚ε ; Γ0 X BΩ˚ε q (see (4.26)), then w
belongs to W01,p pΩ; Γ0 q (i.e., the trace of w vanishes on Γ0 ).
Proof. All the convergences of this proof are up to a subsequence. First, from
estimates (4.13) and (4.29), both sequences tEε pwε quε and tQ˚ε pwε q1Ωp Y uε are
ε
bounded in Lp pΩq. Hence, due to estimate (4.35)2 , there exists w in Lp pΩq
such that
Q˚ε pwε q1Ωp Y á w weakly in Lp pΩq,
ε
Eε pwε q á w weakly in Lp pΩq.

` ˘
Now, from Proposition 4.35(ii), the sequence t ∇Q˚ε pwε q 1Ωp Y uε is bounded
ε
in Lp pΩqN . Hence, there exists F P Lp pΩqN such that
` ˘
∇Q˚ε pwε q 1Ωp Y á F weakly in Lp pΩqN .
ε
Let ω be a relatively compact open subset in Ω and ε be small enough

p Y . Then, by (4.28), convergence (ii) from Proposi-
so that ω is included in Ω ε
tion 1.78 gives
` ˘
Q˚ε pwε q|ω “ Qε ˝ Eε pwε q |ω Ñ w strongly in Lp pωq,
` ˘ ` ˘
∇Q˚ε pwε q |ω “ ∇Qε ˝ Eε pwε q |ω á ∇w weakly in Lp pωqN .
Consequently F “ ∇w, and w belongs to W 1,p pΩq.

Convergence (iii) from Proposition 1.78 and the ones above allow to obtain
convergence (4.40).
It remains to prove the last assertion of the theorem. Let wε be in
˚
W01,p pΩ˚ε ; Γ0 X BΩ˚ε q in the sense of (4.26). We extend it by zero in pΩ1 qε zΩ˚ε
(see (4.27) and Figure 4.8). This extension is still denoted wε . It is clear from
Notation 4.40 and the definition of Q˚ε pwε q1Ω x1 Y , that the above convergences
ε
hold in Lp pΩ1 q. It follows that w “ 0 on Γ0 , since it is the restriction to Ω of
a function defined in Ω1 and vanishing in Ω1 zΩ).
We now prove a convergence result concerning the sequence tR˚ε pwε quε .
Lemma 4.42. Let twε uε be a sequence with wε P W 1,p pΩ˚ε q satisfying
}∇wε }Lp pΩ˚ε q ď C.
p1 in Lp pΩ; Wper
Then, there exists w 1,p
pY ˚ qq such that, up to a subsequence,
`“ ‰ ˘
Tε˚ ∇R˚ε pwε q 1Ωint
3ε dpY q
p1
á ∇y w weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ qN . (4.41)
180
Proof. Due to Proposition 4.37, the sequence t ε1 Tε˚ pR˚ε pwε q1Ωp ˚˚
ε
quε is boun-
˚ 1 ˚
ded in L pΩ; W pY qq. So there exits w
p 1,p
p in L pΩ; W pY qq such that the
p 1,p
following convergences hold:
1 ˚` ˚ ˘
Tε Rε pwε q1Ωp ˚˚ áw p1 weakly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY ˚ qq,
ε ` ε
˘
Tε˚ R˚ε pwε q1Ωp ˚˚ Ñ 0 strongly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY ˚ qq,
`“ ‰
ε
˘
Tε˚ ∇R˚ε pwε q 1Ωp ˚˚ ε
p1 weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ qN .
á ∇y w
To show that wp1 is actually in Lp pΩ; Wper

1,p
pY ˚ qq, let ω be any relatively com-
pact open subset of Ω. The restriction of ε R˚ε pφq to ωε˚ belongs to W 1,p pωε˚ q.
1
1
Applying Theorem 4.28 to this restriction shows that w p|ωˆY ˚ belongs to
˚
L pω; Wper pY qq. The conclusion follows due to the arbitrariness of the open
p 1,p
subset ω.
We are now in a position to state the main results of this section.
Theorem 4.43. Suppose that the sequence twε uε , wε P W 1,p pΩ˚ε q, satisfies
}wε }W 1,p pΩ˚ε q ď C.
Then, there exist w in W 1,p pΩq and w 1,p

p in Lp pΩ; Wper,0 pY ˚ qq such that, up to
a subsequence,
# ˚
Tε pwε q Ñ w strongly in Lploc pΩ; W 1,p pY ˚ qq,
piq
Tε˚ pwε q á w weakly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY ˚ qq,
piiq Tε˚ p∇wε q á ∇w ` ∇y wp weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ qN , (4.42)

#
Eε pwε q Ñ w strongly in Lploc pΩq,
piiiq
@ω Ť Ω, }wε ´ w}Lp pΩ˚ε Xωq Ñ 0.
Moreover, assuming that Γ0 is non empty open subset of BΩ, if for every ε,
the function wε belongs to W01,p pΩ˚ε ; Γ0 X BΩ˚ε q (with Hypothesis (4.25)), then
w belongs to W01,p pΩ; Γ0 q (i.e., the trace of w vanishes on Γ0 ).
Proof. Convergences (4.42)(i) are consequences of (4.39)1 . Convergence (ii) is

. 1
derived from (4.40) and (4.41) with wp“w p ´ MY ˚ pwp1 q. As for (iii), one uses
first (i) and Proposition 4.26, and then the equivalence of Proposition 4.27(i)
applied in ω Ť Ω).
Theorem 4.44. Let Ω be bounded. Suppose that the sequence twε uε with
wε P W01,p pΩ˚ε ; BΩ X BΩ˚ε q, satisfies
181
Then, there exist w in W01,p pΩq and w 1,p

p in Lp pΩ; Wper,0 pY ˚ qq such that, up to
a subsequence,
piq Tε˚ p∇wε q á ∇w ` ∇y w

p weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ qN ,
piiq Tε˚ pwε q Ñ w strongly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY ˚ qq,
# (4.43)
Eε pwε q Ñ w strongly in Lp pΩq,
piiiq
}wε ´ w}Lp pΩ˚ε q Ñ 0.
Proof. By Theorem 4.38 (Uniform Poincaré inequality), estimate (4.38) is

satisfied, that is
}wε }W 1,p pΩ˚ε q ď C.
Then convergence (i) of (4.43) is obtained from Theorem 4.43(ii).
In order to obtain (ii) and (iii), without changing notations, we extend
` ˘˚
wε by zero to the whole of RN ε (see (4.4) for its definition). Using the
unfolding operator Trε˚ associated with RN , the convergence result (4.42)(i) of
Theorem 4.43 implies that Trε˚ pwε q converges strongly in Lploc pRN ; W 1,p pY ˚ qq.
Note that Tε˚ pwε q “ Trε˚ pwε q|Ωp ε ˆY ˚ . This implies (4.43)(ii).
Convergences (iii) follow first from (i) and Proposition 4.26, and then by
the equivalence of Proposition 4.27(i) (applied in RN ).
We complete this subsection with a convergence result concerning the

unfolding of the difference between the general term of a sequence and its
local average, in the spirit of Theorem 1.41.
Proposition 4.45. Let twε uε be a bounded (independently of ε) sequence in

W 1,p pΩ˚ε q. Assume that there exist w in W 1,p pΩq and w 1,p
p in Lp pΩ; Wper,0 pY ˚ qq
such that,
Tε˚ p∇wε q á ∇w ` ∇y w
p weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ qN .
Then
1´ ˚ ¯
Tε pwε q ´ M˚ε pwε q á y c ˚ ¨ ∇w ` w
p weakly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY ˚ qq,
ε
where y c ˚ “ y ´ MY ˚ pyq.
Proof. Let
1´ ˚ ¯
Zε “ Tε pwε q ´ M˚ε pwε q .
ε
By construction, MY ˚ pZε q “ 0. On the other hand,
1
∇y pZε q “ ∇y Tε˚ pwε q “ Tε˚ p∇wε q á ∇w ` ∇y w
ε
182
Applying to Zε the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality in W 1,p pY ˚ q, it follows

that the sequence tZε u is bounded in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY ˚ qq. Since Y ˚ is con-
nected, there is a unique element in this space with zero average on Y ˚ ,
p This element is nothing else
whose gradient with respect to y is ∇w ` ∇y w.
than y c ˚ ¨ ∇w ` w.
p
4.4 The boundary unfolding operator

In this section, we suppose that p is in r1, `8s. As before, weak convergences
in the case of p “ `8 are to be replaced by weak-˚ convergences.
Assume that BY ˚ and BS are Lipschitz (so they have a finite number
of connected components). In this setting, Hypothesis (Hp ) (see Defini-
tion 4.30) is automatically satisfied for every p if and only if for every vector
bi , i P t1, . . . , N u, of the basis B, the interior of Y ˚ Y pbi ` Y ˚ q is connected.
The boundary of the set of holes in Ω is BSε XΩ. Recall that the boundary
of the holes which are included in Ω p ε is B Spε as defined by (4.3).
Since each component of BS has a Lipschitz boundary, there is a canoni-
cal surface measure on BS denoted σ (similarly, we use σε for the superficial
measure on BSε ). A well-defined and continuous trace operator also exists
from W 1,p pY ˚ q to W 1´1{p,p pBSq. Consequently, a well-defined and continu-
ous trace operator exists from W 1,p pΩ p ˚ q to W 1´1{p,p pB Spε q.
ε
The aim here is to give a meaning to the unfolding operator for such traces,
and to obtain estimates and convergence results for sequences of functions in
W 1,p -type spaces. To do so, we define a boundary unfolding operator which
was introduced in a slightly different form in [72] and [73]. It extends the
results obtained via two-scale convergence in [9] and [165].
Definition 4.46. For ϕ Lebesgue-measurable on B Spε , the boundary unfolding
operator
Tεb : Lp pB Spε q ÝÑ Lp pΩ ˆ BSq,
$ ´ ” ı ¯
&φ ε x ` εy for a.e. p ε ˆ BS,
px, yq P Ω
Tεb pφqpx, yq “ ε Y
%0 for a.e. px, yq P Λε ˆ BS.
Like Tε˚ , the operator Tεb transforms an integral on the rapidly oscillating
set B Spε into an integral on a fixed set Ω ˆ BS as shown below.
Proposition 4.47. For ϕ in L1 pB Spε q, the integration formula reads
ż ż
1
ϕpxq dσε pxq “ T b pϕqpx, yq dx dσpyq. (4.44)
BSpε ε|Y | ΩˆBS ε
For ϕ in Lp pB Spε q,
}Tεb pϕq}Lp pΩˆBSq “ ε1{p |Y |1{p }ϕ}Lp pBSpε q . (4.45)
183
4.4. The boundary unfolding operator
If ϕ belongs to W 1,p pΩ˚ε q, then

Tεb pϕq “ Tε˚ pϕq|ΩˆBS , (4.46)
and there is a constant C such that
` ˘
}ϕ}Lp pBSpε q ď ε´1{p C }ϕ}Lp pΩ˚ε q ` ε}∇ϕ}Lp pΩ˚ε q . (4.47)
The presence of a power of ε in (4.44) and (4.45) requires a normalization

for boundary terms, this differs from that in the bulk. Therefore, the conver-
gence of such boundary integrals are significantly different significantly from
the convergence of integrals in the bulk (see Propositions 4.53 and 4.57).
Proof of Proposition 4.47. The proof of (4.44) is straightforward and it im-
plies (4.45). For ϕ in W1,p pΩ˚ε q, by the standard trace theorem in Y ˚ applied
to the map y ÞÑ Tε˚ pϕqp¨, yq, one has
` ˘
}Tεb pϕq}Lp pΩ;W 1´1{p,p pBSqq ď C }Tε˚ pϕq}Lp pΩˆY ˚ q ` }∇y Tε˚ pϕq}Lp pΩˆY ˚ q .
With equality (4.45), estimate (4.6)(ii) and (4.14), this implies (4.47).
Definition 4.48 (Local average of g P Lp pB Spε q). Let p be in r1, `8s. For ϕ
in Lp pB Spε q, the local average is defined as
ż
. 1
Mε pgq “
b
T b pgqp¨, yq dσpyq.
|BS| BS ε
It belongs to Lp pΩq and satisfies
´ |Y | ¯1{p
}Mbε pgq}Lp pΩq ď ε1{p }g}Lp pBSpε q .
|BS|
4.4.1 The boundary averaging operator

Definition 4.49. For Φ in Lp pΩ ˆ BSq, p P r1, `8s, the boundary unfolding
operator Uεb is defined as follows:
$ ż ´ ”xı !x) ¯
& 1 Φ ε ` εz, dz for a.e. x P B Spε ,
.
Uεb pΦqpxq “ |Y | Y ε Y ε Y
%
0 for a.e. x P BSε X Λ˚ε .
The operator Uεb is linear and continuous from Lp pΩ ˆ BSq into Lp pB Spε q.
For Φ P Lp pΩ ˆ BSq one has
}Uεb pΦq}Lp pBSpε q ď ε´1{p |Y |´1{p }Φ}Lp pΩˆBSq . (4.48)
This operator is the adjoint of Tεb . Indeed, it is easily seen that for Φ in
Lp pΩ ˆ BSq and ψ in Lp pB Spε q,
1
ż ż
1
Uε pΦqpxq ψpxq dσε pxq “
b
Φpx, yq Tεb pψqpx, yq dxdσpyq.
pε
BS ε|Y | ΩˆBS
184
Then from its definition, it follows that Uεb is a left-inverse of Tεb , since
Uεb ˝ Tεb pφq “ φ, (4.49)
for every φ in Lp pB Spε q, whereas

$ ż ´ ”xı ¯
’ 1 p ε ˆ BS,
’
&|Y | Φ ε ` εz, y dz for a.e. px, yq P Ω
ε Y
Tε ˝ Uε pΦqpx, yq “
b b Y
’
’
%0 for a.e. px, yq P Λε ˆ BS.
4.4.2 Convergence for the boundary unfolding

Proposition 4.50. Suppose that v belongs to W 1,p pΩ˚ε q and that g is in
Lp pB Spε q. Then,
1
ˇż ˇ ´ ¯
ˇ ˇ C
piq ˇ gv dσε pxqˇ ď 1{p }g}Lp1 pBSpε q }v}Lp pΩ˚ε q ` ε}∇v}Lp pΩ˚ε q ,
pε
BS ε
ˇż ˇ ´
ˇ ˇ
piiq ˇ gv dσε pxqˇ ď C }Tεb pgq}Lp1 pΩˆBSq }∇v}Lp pΩ˚ε q
pε
BS
1› › ¯
` ›Mbε pgq›Lp1 pΩq }v}Lp pΩ˚ε q .
ε
Proof. By Hölder’s inequality, one has
ˇż ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ gv dσε pxqˇ ď }g}Lp1 pBSpε q }v}Lp pBSpε q .
pε
BS
Applying (4.47) gives inequality (i).

Now, in view of (4.44) and (4.46), one can write
ż ż
1
g v dσε pxq “ Tεb pgqpx, yq Tε˚ pvqpx, yqdx dσpyq. (4.50)
p
B Sε ε|Y | ΩˆBS
Thanks to Definition 4.48, this becomes

ż ż
1 ` ˘
g v dσε pxq “ Tεb pgq Tε˚ pvq ´ M˚ε pvq dx dσpyq
pε
BS ε|Y | ΩˆBS
ż (4.51)
|BS|
` Mb pgqM˚ε pvq dx.
ε|Y | Ω ε
Again, by Hölder’s inequality,

ˇż ˇ C
ˇ ˇ
ˇ g v dσε pxqˇ ď }Tεb pgq}Lp1 pΩˆBSq }Tε˚ pvq ´ M˚ε pvq}Lp pΩˆBSq
p
B Sε ε
C› ›
` ›Mbε pgq›Lp1 pΩq }M˚ε pvq}Lp pΩq .
ε
185
Due to the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality in Y ˚ ,
}Tε˚ pvq ´ M˚ε pvq}Lp pΩˆBSq ď C}∇y Tε˚ pvq}Lp pΩˆY ˚ q ď Cε}∇v}Lp pΩ˚ε q .
Then, thanks to the obvious estimates
}M˚ε pvq}Lp pΩq ď C}Tε˚ pvq}Lp pΩˆY ˚ q ď C}v}Lp pΩ˚ε q ,
inequality (ii) follows.

A simple consequence of formula (4.50) is the next convergence result.
Proposition 4.51. Let twε uε be a sequence in W 1,p pΩ˚ε q and tgε uε a se-
quence in Lp pB Spε q, such that
1
piq Tε˚ pwε q á w weakly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY ˚ qq,

1 (4.52)
piiq Tεb pgε q Ñ g strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ BSq.
Then
ż ż
1
ε gε pxqwε pxq dσε pxq Ñ gpx, yq wpx, yq dxdσpyq.
pε
BS |Y | ΩˆBS
Remark 4.52.
1. It is obvious that strong and weak convergences in Proposition 4.51 can be
interchanged.
1
2. For every g in Lp pΩ ˆ BSq, there is always a sequence tgε uε satisfy-
ing (4.52)(ii)(see also Remark 4.55 below for a more general statement).
3. In Proposition 4.51, if w isż independent of y and MBS pgq “ 0(6) , then
ε gε wε dσε Ñ 0.
pε
BS
4. The convergence of the boundary unfolding of a sequence gives another

proof of the boundary two-scale convergence (see [9, 165])
The last result of Remark 4.52, for w independent of y and MBS pgq “ 0,
was already observed in [72]. ż
At this point, one may ask if the integral gε wε dσε , itself could con-
pε
BS
verge. Under some additional assumptions the answer is positive, as shown
in the next result.
Proposition 4.53. Let twε uε be a sequence with wε in W 1,p pΩ˚ε q. Suppose
there exist w in W 1,p pΩq and w 1,p
p in Lp pΩ; Wper,0 pY ˚ qq such that,

(4.53)
(6) Recall that MBS is the average operator on BS.
186
Suppose also that the following two convergences hold for the sequence tgε uε
with gε in Lp pB Spε q:
1
1 b 1
M pgε q Ñ G strongly in Lp pΩq,
ε ε (4.54)
1
Tεb pgε q Ñ g strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ BSq.
Then, recalling that y c ˚ “ y ´ MY ˚ pyq, one has

ż ż ż
|BS| |BS|
gε wε dσε Ñ G w dx ` MBS py c ˚ gq ¨ ∇w dx
|Y | |Y |
pε
BS Ω Ω
ż (4.55)
1
` p dxdσ.
gw
|Y |
ΩˆBS
Proof. Formula (4.51) yields

ż ż
1 ` ˘
g v dσε pxq “ Tεb pgq Tε˚ pvq ´ M˚ε pvq dx dσpyq
pε
BS ε|Y | ΩˆBS
ż
|BS|
` Mb pgqM˚ε pvq dx,
ε|Y | Ω ε
as well as
ż ż
|BS| 1 b
gε pxqwε pxq dσε “ M pgε qpxqM˚ε pwε qpxq dx
|Y | Ω ε ε
pε
BS
ż
1 1´ ˚ ¯
` Tε pwε q ´ M˚ε pwε q px, yq Tεb pgε qpx, yq dx dσpyq.
|Y | ε
ΩˆBS
Then convergence (4.55) is obtained due to the fact that M˚ε pwε q converges
weakly in Lp pΩq to w (since Tε˚ pwε q itself converges to w which is independent
of y) for the first term, and from Proposition 4.45 for the second term (which
itself gives two terms in the limit).
Remark 4.54. Actually, Proposition 4.53 can be stated with the same con-
clusion with four different sets of hypotheses by exchanging weak and strong
convergences in (4.53) and (4.54). We will use the same reference for these
alternate versions. An interesting case is when convergence (4.53)1 is strong.
Then convergence (4.55) holds assuming only a weak convergence in (4.54)1 .
Remark 4.55. Note that if the sequence tgε uε , gε P Lp pB Spε q, is such that
1
1
Tεb pgε q á g weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ BSq,
1 b 1
M pgε q á G weakly in Lp pΩq,
ε ε
187
then one has

MBS pgq “ 0 for a.e. x P Ω.
The above convergences also hold for p1 “ `8 with the weak convergences
replaced by weak-˚ convergences.
1
For p1 finite, for every g in Lp pΩ ˆ BSq with MBS pgqpxq “ 0 for a.e.
1
x P Ω, and G in Lp pΩq, there exists a sequence tgε uε satisfying (4.54). An
example of such a sequence is given by
gε “ Uεb pgq ` ε Mε pGq|BSpε ,
where Uεb is the boundary averaging operator (see Definition 4.49).

1
In the case where wε belongs to W01,p pΩ˚ε ; BΩ X BΩ˚ε q and gε to Lploc pBS ε q,
the statements of Propositions 4.50 and 4.53 are modified (with the notations
TĂ Ăb
ε and Mε corresponding to the boundary unfolding operator and the local
b
average for pRN q˚ε ), as follows:
Proposition 4.56. Assume that Ω is bounded with Lipschitz boundary. Let

w belong to the space W01,p pΩ˚ε ; BΩ X BΩ˚ε q and g to p1 loc pBS ε q. Then, for ε
small enough,
ˇż ˇ ` ˘
ˇ ˇ C
ˇ g w dσε ˇ ď 1{p }g}Lp1 pBS ε X Ωq }w}Lp pΩ˚ε q ` ε}∇w}Lp pΩ˚ε q ,
BS ε XΩ ε
ˇż ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ g w dσε ˇ ď C}TĂ
ε pgq}Lp1 pVεdpY q pΩqˆBSq }∇w}Lp pΩ˚
b
εq
BS ε XΩ
C ›› Ăb ››
` Mε pgq Lp1 pV }w}Lp pΩ˚ε q ,
ε εdpY q pΩqq
where VεdpY q pΩq denotes the εdpY q-neighborhood of Ω (see Notation 1.63).
Proposition 4.57. Let Ω be a bounded domain with Lipschitz boundary and

let twε uε be a sequence in W01,p pΩ˚ε ; BΩ X BΩ˚ε q satisfying
Suppose that there exist w in W01,p pΩq and w 1,p

p in Lp pΩ; Wper,0 pY ˚ qq such that,
Tε˚ pwε q Ñ w strongly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY ˚ qq,

(4.56)
1
Let tgε uε be a sequence in Lploc pBS ε q and suppose furthermore that
1 Ăb 1
Mε pgε q á G weakly in Lploc pRN q,
ε (4.57)
TĂ
1
ε pgε q Ñ g
b strongly in Lploc pRN ˆ BSq.
188
Then
ż ż
|BS|
gε wε dσε Ñ MBS py c ˚ gq ¨ ∇w dx
BS ε XΩ |Y | Ω
ż ż (4.58)
|BS| 1
` G w dx ` p g dxdσ.
w
|Y | Ω |Y | ΩˆBS
For p “ `8, the weak convergence in (4.56) is to be replaced by a weak-˚

convergence.
Proof of Propositions 4.56 and 4.57. Extend w and wε by 0 to the whole

pRN q˚ε , to get ż ż
gε wε dσε “ gε wε dσε ,
BS ε XΩ pε q1
pBS
where pB Spε q1 is the B Spε associated with V1 pΩq instead of Ω (with a similar
relation for w). The results then follow from Propositions 4.50 and 4.53
applied in the domain V1 pΩq.
Remark 4.58. In the literature, there are two standard examples of periodic
1
functions gε , deriving from a function g in Lp pBSq.
For Hypothesis (4.57), gε is defined as
` . ˘
1. gε “ ε g t ε uY if MBS pgq ‰ 0,
` . ˘
2. gε “ g t ε uY if MBS pgq “ 0.
For Hypothesis (4.54), since the functions gε have to vanish outside of

p
B Sε , the formulas are
` . ˘
3. gε “ ε g t ε uY 1Spε if MBS pgq ‰ 0,
` . ˘
4. gε “ g t ε uY 1Spε if MBS pgq “ 0.
At the limit, in cases 1 and 3, g “ 0, G “ MBS pgq, whereas in cases 2

and 4, g “ g and G “ 0. Note that there is no way to have both g and G
non zero by simply using the periodic approach. One can compare with the
statement in Remark 4.55.
4.4.3 Unfolding of the space of traces

In this section we assume that S is strictly included in Y .
We recall that the space H 1{2 pBSq is the subspace of L2 pBSq containing
the functions satisfying
ż ż
|vpy 1 q ´ vpyq|2
dσpy 1 qdσpyq ă `8.
BS BS |y 1 ´ y|N
189
This space is equipped with the semi-norm

ˆż ż ˙1{2
|vpy 1 q ´ vpyq|2 1
|||v|||H 1{2 pBSq “ dσpy qdσpyq ,
BS BS |y 1 ´ y|N
and the norm
´ ¯1{2
2
}v}H 1{2 pBSq “ }v}2L2 pBSq ` |||v|||H 1{2 pBSq .
We define H 1{2 pB Spε q as the subspace of L2 pB Spε q containing the functions

whose restrictions to every connected component of B Spε belong to the space
H 1{2 of this connected component. This space is equipped with the semi-
norm
ˆ ÿ ż ż ˙1{2
|vpxq ´ vpx1 q|2 1
|||v|||H 1{2 pBSpε q “ dσε px qdσε pxq ,
ξPΞ εpξ`BSq εpξ`BSq |x ´ x1 |N
ε
and the norm

´ ¯1{2
2
}v}H 1{2 pBSpε q “ }v}2L2 pBSp q ` ε|||v|||H 1{2 pBSpε q . (4.59)
ε
Using the above definitions, by a change of variable
}Tεb pvq}L2 pΩ;H 1{2 pBSqq “ ε1{2 |Y |1{2 }v}H 1{2 pBSpε q , @v P H 1{2 pB Spε q. (4.60)
This equality justifies the presence of ε in definition (4.59) of the H 1{2 -norm.
Denote H ´1{2 pB Spε q the dual space of H 1{2 pB Spε q equipped with the dual
norm. Since S is strictly included in Y , for Φ P L2 pΩ; H 1{2 pBSqq, the function
Uεb pΦq belongs to H 1{2 pSε q (it is not always the case if S X BY has a non null
measure). This remark allows to make the following definition:
Definition 4.59. For g P H ´1{2 pB Spε q, the operator
Tεb : H ´1{2 pB Spε q ÝÑ L2 pΩ; H ´1{2 pBSqq,
is defined by duality for Φ P L2 pΩ; H 1{2 pBSqq as follows:

.
x Tεb pgq, ΦyL2 pΩ;H ´1{2 pBSqq,L2 pΩ;H 1{2 pBSqq “ ε|Y |x g, Uεb pΦqyH ´1{2 pBSpε q,H 1{2 pBSpε q .
Observe that this definition makes sense because Uεb pΦq belongs to H 1{2 pB Spε q.
Also, due to (4.49), for every φ P H 1{2 pB Spε q, one has
@ b D
Tε pgq,Tεb pφq L2 pΩ;H ´1{2 pBSqq,L2 pΩ;H 1{2 pBSqq
(4.61)
“ ε|Y | x g, φ yH ´1{2 pBSpε q,H 1{2 pBSpε q .
By construction, if g belongs to L2 pB Srε q, then Definition 4.59 coincides with

Definition 4.46.
190
Remark 4.60. As for the other unfolding operators, this unfolding operator
vanishes on Λε ˆ BS and is constant on the cells of Ω p ε ˆ BS. Indeed, let
pg, ϕ, ψq be in H ´1{2 p
pB Sε q ˆ L pΩq ˆ H pBSq. Choose Φ in L2 pΩ; H 1{2 pBSqq
2 1{2
defined by Φpx, yq “ ϕpxqψpyq for a.e. px, yq P Ω ˆ BS, and set

´! x ) ¯
ψε pxq “ ψ for a.e. x P BSε .
ε Y
Then one has successively,
ż
ϕpxq x Tεb pgqpx, ¨q, ψyH ´1{2 pBSq,H 1{2 pBSq dx
Ω
“ x Tεb pgq, ΦyL2 pΩ;H ´1{2 pBSqq,L2 pΩ;H 1{2 pBSqq
“ ε|Y |x g, Uεb pΦqyH ´1{2 pBSpε q,H 1{2 pBSpε q
“ ε|Y |x g, Mε pϕqψε yH ´1{2 pBSpε q,H 1{2 pBSpε q
“ x Tεb pgq, Mε pϕqψyL2 pΩ;H ´1{2 pBSqq,L2 pΩ;H 1{2 pBSqq

ż
“ Mε pϕqpxq x Tεb pgqpx, ¨q, ψyH ´1{2 pBSq,H 1{2 pBSq dx
ż Ω
“ ϕpxq Mε pxTεb pgqpx, ¨q, ψyH ´1{2 pBSq,H 1{2 pBSq q dx.
Ω
Hence, one has the following equality:

xTεb pgqpx, ¨q, ψyH ´1{2 pBSq,H 1{2 pBSq “ Mε pxTεb pgqpx, ¨q, ψyH ´1{2 pBSq,H 1{2 pBSq ,
p ε for
and consequently, vanishes on Λε and is constant on the ε-cells of Ω
every ψ in H pBSq.
1{2
Lemma 4.61. The operator Tεb is linear and continuous from H ´1{2 pB Spε q
into L2 pΩ; H ´1{2 pBSqq. For any g in H ´1{2 pB Spε q
}Tεb pgq}L2 pΩ;H ´1{2 pBSqq “ ε1{2 |Y |1{2 }g}H ´1{2 pBSpε q .
Proof. For Φ in L2 pΩ; H 1{2 pBSqq one has
x Tεb pgq, ΦyL2 pΩ;H ´1{2 pBSqq,L2 pΩ;H 1{2 pBSqq

ď ε|Y | }g}H ´1{2 pBSpε q } Uεb pΦq}H 1{2 pBSpε q .
On the other hand, (4.48) leads to

} Uεb pΦq}L2 pBSpε q “ ε´1{2 |Y |´1{2 }Φ}L2 pΩˆBSq .
By unfolding we get
ˇˇˇ b ˇˇˇ ˇˇˇ ˇˇˇ
ˇˇˇ Uε pΦqˇˇˇ 1{2 p “ |Y |´1{2 ˇˇˇTεb ˝ Uεb pΦqˇˇˇ 2
H pBSε q L pΩ;H 1{2 pBSqq
ď |Y |´1{2 |||Φ|||L2 pΩ;H 1{2 pBSqq .
191
This inequality implies that
}Tεb pgq}L2 pΩ;H ´1{2 pBSqq ď ε1{2 |Y |1{2 }g}H ´1{2 pBSpε q .
Now, due to (4.61), for φ in H 1{2 pB Spε q,
1
x g, φyH ´1{2 pBSpε q,H 1{2 pBSpε q “ xT b pgq, Tεb pφqyL2 pΩ;H ´1{2 pBSqq,L2 pΩ;H 1{2 pBSqq .
ε|Y | ε
Therefore,
1
xg, φyH ´1{2 pBSpε q,H 1{2 pBSpε q ď }T b pgq}L2 pΩ;H ´1{2 pBSqq }Tεb pφq}L2 pΩ;H 1{2 pBSqq ,
ε|Y | ε
which, together with (4.60), yields
}g}H ´1{2 pBSpε q ď ε´1{2 |Y |´1{2 }Tεb pgq}L2 pΩ;H ´1{2 pBSqq ,
and this concludes the proof of the lemma.
Definition 4.62 (Local average of g in H ´1{2 pB Spε q). By Lemma 4.61, for g
in H ´1{2 pB Spε q, the map
1
ϕ P L2 pΩq ÞÑ x T b pgq, ϕyL2 pΩ;H ´1{2 pBSqq,L2 pΩ;H 1{2 pBSqq
|BS| ε
ż
1
“ ϕpxq x Tεb pgqpx, ¨q, 1yH ´1{2 pBSq,H 1{2 pBSq dx,
|BS| Ω
defines an element of L2 pΩq which is the local average, denoted Mbε pgq, of g
over B Spε . It coincides with this notion for g smooth as
. 1
Mbε pgq “ x T b pgq, 1yH ´1{2 pBSq,H 1{2 pBSq ,
|BS| ε
and satisfies
´ |Y | ¯1{2
}Mbε pgq}L2 pΩq ď ε1{2 }g}H ´1{2 pBSpε q .
|BS|
The next proposition is then the generalization of Proposition 4.53 to this

framework and allows for gε in H ´1{2 pB Spε q.
Proposition 4.63. Let twε uε be a sequence in H 1 pΩ˚ε q. Suppose there exist

w in H 1 pΩq and w
p in L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY ˚ qq such that,
Tε˚ pwε q á w weakly in L2 pΩ; H 1 pY ˚ qq,

(4.62)
p weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y ˚ qN .
192
Moreover, assume that the following two convergences hold for the sequence
tgε uε with gε in H ´1{2 pB Spε q:
Tεb pgε q Ñ g strongly in L2 pΩ; H ´1{2 pBSqq,
and
1 b
M pgε q Ñ G strongly in L2 pΩq(7) .
ε ε
Then,
ż
|BS|
x gε , wε yH ´1{2 pBSpε q,H 1{2 pBSpε q Ñ G w dx
|Y | Ω
1
` x g, w
p yL2 pΩ;H ´1{2 pBSqq,L2 pΩ;H 1{2 pBSqq
|Y |
ż
1
` x g, y c ˚ yH ´1{2 pBSq,H 1{2 pBSq ¨ ∇w dx.
|Y | Ω
Proof. Proposition 4.15(ii), convergences (4.62) and Proposition 4.45, imply
M˚ε pwε q á w weakly in L2 pΩq,
1 ˚` ˘
Tε wε ´ M˚ε pwε q á wp ` y c ˚ ¨ ∇w weakly in L2 pΩ; H 1 pY ˚ qq.
ε
Hence,
1 ˚` ˘
Tε wε ´ M˚ε pwε q á wp ` y c ˚ ¨ ∇w weakly in L2 pΩ; H 1{2 pBSqq.
ε
On the other hand, we can write
x gε , wε yH ´1{2 pBSpε q,H 1{2 pBSpε q “ x gε , M˚ε pwε qyH ´1{2 pBSpε q,H 1{2 pBSpε q
` x gε , wε ´ M˚ε pwε qyH ´1{2 pBSpε q,H 1{2 pBSpε q .
We unfold the right-hand side terms and pass to the limit. We obtain
x gε , M˚ε pwε qyH ´1{2 pBSpε q,H 1{2 pBSpε q
1
“ xT b pgε q, M˚ε pwε qyL2 pΩ;H ´1{2 pBSqq,L2 pΩ;H 1{2 pBSqq
ε|Y | ε
ż ż
|BS| 1 b ˚ |BS|
“ M pgε q Mε pwε q dx Ñ G w dx.
|Y | Ω ε ε |Y |
Ω
and also
x gε , wε ´ M˚ε pwε qyH ´1{2 pBSpε q,H 1{2 pBSpε q
1 1 ` ˘
“ xTεb pgε q, Tε˚ wε ´ M˚ε pwε q yL2 pΩ;H ´1{2 pBSqq,L2 pΩ;H 1{2 pBSqq
|Y | ε
1
Ñ p ` y c ˚ ¨ ∇wyL2 pΩ;H ´1{2 pBSqq,L2 pΩ;H 1{2 pBSqq ,
x g, w
|Y |
and this ends the proof of the last statement of the proposition.
(7) This implies that xgpx, ¨q, 1yH ´1{2 pBSq,H 1{2 pBSq “ 0 for a.e. x P Ω.
193
4.5. Unfolding for cracks
4.5 Unfolding for cracks

In this section, we briefly consider the case of cracks instead of holes, indi-
cating the slight changes in the theory. A combination of holes and cracks
can also be considered.
The framework is the same as in the beginning of this chapter up to
and including Paragraph 4.4 with the singular difference that the reference
cell Y ˚ is not Lipschitz. It is assumed that S is a finite union of compact
pieces of Lipschitz hyper-surfaces (of codimension 1) in Y which belong to
the boundary of Lipschitz subdomain of Y (hence S is orientable and has
two sides). Because of this property, the space W 1,p pY ˚ q is well defined in
the usual way, namely
.
W 1,p pY ˚ q “ tw P Lp pY ˚ q | ∇w P Lp pY ˚ qN u,
and so is the subspace of Y -periodic functions Wper 1,p

pY ˚ q. Here the gradient
˚
is taken in Y , not in Y . Under these conditions, the Poincaré-Wirtinger
inequality is satisfied in W 1,p pY ˚ q. Note that since S is a null set, one can
identify Lp pY ˚ q to Lp pY q. This identification does not hold for W 1,p pY ˚ q.
In order to define the jump across the cracks, consider each connected
component Sj of cracks of S as part of the Lipschitz boundary Srj of a subdo-
main of Y . There are then two traces (from each side) in W 1´1{p,p pSrj q and
their restrictions are in W 1´1{p,p pSj q. Furthermore, the two traces coincide
on the complement of Srj zSj so that their difference, which represents the
jump across Sj of the element of W 1,p pY ˚ q and is denoted r¨sSj (and is well-
defined once a unit normal is selected), belongs to the subspace sometimes
1´1{p,p
denoted W00 pSj q (see [151]). For our purpose, however, these traces
being in Lp pSj q will be enough.
The same principle applies for the following spaces:
.
W 1,p pΩ˚ε q “ tw P Lp pΩ˚ε q | ∇w P Lp pΩ˚ε qN u,
.
W01,p pΩ˚ε ; BΩq “ tw P W 1,p pΩ˚ε q | w ” 0 a.e. on BΩu,
and their trace spaces(8) .

Under these hypotheses, every integral on a crack is to be considered as
the sum of the two integrals obtained on each side of the crack (the usual
notation uses a subscript ` or ´, once a unit normal is chosen). Furthermore,
the data on the crack can also be given on each side (g` , g´ , gε` . . .).
All this is in accordance with results obtained by passing to the limit
via an approximation of each crack by a “fattened crack”, which is then the
boundary of a regular open subset, as in the previous section (see [17]).
Consequently, Proposition 4.29, Theorems 4.38, 4.43 and 4.45 hold with the
obvious changes of notation.
(8) As above, M pα, β, Ω˚ 2 ˚ 2
ε q can be identified to M pα, β, Ωq and L pΩε q to L pΩq.
194
Figure 4.9: The setting of the unilateral problem for cracks
Figure 4.9 presents the simple setting with a single crack in Y in the
case of a homogeneous Dirichlet condition on the outer boundary BΩ (for
a Neumann boundary condition on BΩ, the cracks are suppressed near BΩ).
More general situations can easily be considered with several holes and cracks
in Y . For a specific application to cracks in the scalar case, see Section 5.6.
4.6 What if the periodicity cell is not a paral-

lelotope
In this section, the set Y is not a parallelotope but has the paving property
with respect to G. We use the notations P (introduced in (4.1)) for a refer-
ence parallelotope and K is the set of all vertices of P. Recall the definition
of ΞY
ε , introduced in (4.17):
! )
ΞY
ε “ ξ P Ξε | εpξ ` Yq Ă Ω .
Just as in 4.3.2.2, the macro approximation of a function at the points of

ΞYε is constructed by an average and is then extended by Q1 -interpolation in
the parallelotopes εpξ ` Pq, ξ P ΞY ε . This macro-approximation is naturally
defined on the set
! ď ` ˘)
pP
Ωε “ interior ε ξ ` P .
ξ P ΞY
ε
Note that Ωp P is not necessarily included in Ω (for example, this can occur if
ε
Y is offset with respect to P).
Definition 4.64. The operator Q˚ε : Lp pΩ˚ε q ÞÑ W 1,8 pΩp P q, for p P r1, `8s,
ε
is defined as follows
ż
1
Q˚ε pφqpεξq “ φpεξ ` εzq dz “ Mεξ`εY ˚ pφq for all ξ P ΞY ε ` K,
|Y ˚ | Y ˚
195
4.6. What if the periodicity cell is not a parallelotope
and for every x P ΩpP,

ε
$
& Q˚ε pφqpxq is the Q1 interpolate of the values of Q˚ε pφq at the vertices
”xı
% of the parallelotope ε ` εP.
ε Y
We can easily check that the results given in Propositions 4.34 and 4.35 are
p Y by Ω
still valid replacing Ω p P . However, the remainder R˚ pφq “ φ ´ Q˚ pφq
ε ε ε ε
˚
is now defined only on Ωε X Ω pP.
ε
To go further, we need to estimate the Lp -norm of R˚ε pφq only in terms of
the gradient of φ. But this is not always possible on Ω˚ε X Ω p P (since this set
ε
˚
is not always a union of cells of the type εpξ ` Y ). We are therefore led to
consider a subset of Ω˚ε X Ωp P defined as a union of cells of the type εpξ ` Y ˚ q
ε
˚
included in Ωε . Since this subset will play the same role as Ω p ˚˚ in the previous
ε
p ˚˚
case (see (4.36)), we will still denote it Ωε . To give its new definition, we use
the facts that the parallelotope P satisfies the paving property (2.1) and that
Y is a bounded domain. Thus, the latter can be covered by a finite union
of G-translates of P. More precisely, let tb11 , b12 , . . . , b1k u be the subset of G
defined as follows:
tb P G | pb ` Pq X Y ‰ ∅u.
p defined as
Then (see Figure 4.10), the set P
. k `
`Ť ˘˘
Pp “ interior b1i ` P p
is connected and Y Ă P. (4.63)
i“1
P p
P Y Y
p Y and Y
Figure 4.10: The sets P, P,
196
Without loss of generality, we assume that
P X Y ‰ ∅. (4.64)
Hence, one of the vectors b1i , i “ 1, . . . , k, is equal to zero. As a consequence,
. Ť
k (
Y Ă Y Ă Y1 where Y 1 “ interior εpb1i ` Yq .
i“1
Now set 1 . (
ΞY 1 Y
ε “ ξ P Ξε | εpξ ` Y q Ă Ω Ă Ξε .
1 1
From the definition of ΞY Y
ε , for each ξ P Ξε and every i “ 1, . . . , k,
εpξ ` Y 1 q “ εpξ ` b1i ` Yq Ă Ω,
so that Q˚ε pφq can be defined on εpξ ` b1i ` Pq. Thus, by (4.63), it is defined
on εpξ ` Y q.
In conclusion, Q˚ε pφq is defined on the set
. Ť ` ˘(
Ωp1 “ interior ε ξ`Y ĂΩ p ε.
ε
1
ξPΞY
ε
p 1 is included in Ω
Due to assumption (4.64), the open set Ω p ε.
ε
Introduce the set
. ˚ p1
p ˚˚ “
Ω Ω XΩ ,
ε ε ε (4.65)
and observe that actually,
Ť ` ˘(
p ˚˚
Ω p1
ε “ Ωε zSε “ interior ε ξ`Y˚ .
1
ξPΞY
ε
This is a generalization of the situation of Subsection 4.3.2 since for Y “ P,

p 1 and Ω
the sets Y and Y 1 (as well as Ω p Y ) coincide.
ε ε
Note that
p1
εcpY q Ă Ωε Ă Ω,
Ωint
p depends only on Y .
where cpY q “ dpPq
As in (4.36), for φ in Lp pΩ˚ε q and p in r1, `8s, write
φ “ Q˚ε pφq ` R˚ε pφq p ˚˚ ,

a.e. in Ω ε
p ˚˚
with Ω p
ε defined here by (4.65). On this set, one can get the L -estimate for
˚
Rε pφq. The result below is similar to Proposition 4.37.
Proposition 4.65. There is a constant C independent of ε such that for
every φ in W 1,p pΩ˚ε q,
piq }R˚ε pφq}Lp pΩp ˚˚

ε q
ď ε C}∇φ}Lp pΩ˚ε q ,
piiq }∇R˚ε pφq}Lp pΩp ˚˚

ε q
ď C }∇φ}Lp pΩ˚ε q .
197
4.6. What if the periodicity cell is not a parallelotope
Proof. Inequality (ii) is immediate from Proposition 4.35.

To prove inequality (i), let φ be in W 1,p pΩ˚ε q. In this setting, inequal-
1
ity (4.32) still holds for every ξ P ΞY
ε and implies, for every i “ 1, . . . , k,
}φ ´ Q˚ε pφqpεξq}Lp pεpξ`Y ˚ qq ď Cε}∇φ}Lp pεpξ`Y ˚ qq . (4.66)
Now, using inequality (4.34) and definition (4.30) of Q˚ε pφq, we get, for
1
every ξ in ΞY
ε ,
}Q˚ε pφq ´ Q˚ε pφqpεξq}Lp pεpξ`Y ˚ qq ď }Q˚ε pφq ´ Q˚ε pφqpεξq}Lp pεpξ`Y qq
ď }Q˚ε pφq ´ Q˚ε pφqpεξq}Lp pεpξ`Pqq

p
ď Cε}∇Q˚ε pφq}Lp pεpξ`Pqq

p
(4.67)
ÿ
k
ď Cε }∇Q˚ε pφq}Lp pεpξ`b1i `Pqq
i“1
ÿ
k
ď Cε }∇φ}Lp pεpξ`b1i `Y ˚ qq ,
i“1
Combining (4.66) and (4.67) gives
}φ ´ Q˚ε pφq}Lp pεpξ`Y ˚ qq “ }R˚ε pφq}Lp pεpξ`Y ˚ qq

ÿ
k
ď Cε }∇φ}Lp pεpξ`b1i `Y ˚ qq .
i“1
p ˚˚ , inequality (i) follows by summation

Finally, using definition (4.65) of Ω ε
Y1
over Ξε , and this ends the proof of Proposition 4.65.
Note that in the computation (4.67) we used the rescaled version of the
following result applied to Q˚ε pφq:
Lemma 4.66. There exists a constant C such that, for every p P r1, `8s and
every continuous function ψ in P p which is Q1 in each parallelotope b1 ` P
i
for i “ 1, . . . , N ,
p ď C}∇ψ}Lp pPq
}ψ ´ ψp0q}Lp pPq p .
Proof. This can be obtained by a standard contradiction argument, making

p is connected. An alternate proof is available by finite
use of the fact that P
induction connecting adjacent parallelotopes.
198
Chapter 5
Homogenization in
perforated domains
Using the notations of Chapter 4, this chapter presents the applications of the
periodic unfolding method in the case of periodically (or frame-periodically)
perforated domains. The various examples show the flexibility of the method
as well as its ease of use. The main difficulty arising in these problems is the
fact that each ε-problem is posed in a different space. Therefore, convergence
of the sequence of solutions has to be interpreted in a specific way. The
usual extension by zero into the holes is not very useful (as the holes oscillate
wildly), and the usual method (assuming the existence of bounded extensions
operators in H 1 may be too restrictive). The method has the advantage of
having the unfoldings of all the solutions (for all ε) belong to a fixed space
where their convergence is natural (see the discussion at the beginning of
Section 5.1).
Sections 5.1 and 5.2 give the full treatment for second order linear prob-
lems in variational form. Section 5.1 concerns the Dirichlet-Neumann case
(Dirichlet on the outer boundary, Neumann on the boundary of the small
holes). The original treatment of this problem was via the method of oscil-
lating test functions (see for example [69, 77]). Section 5.2 presents the case
of a full Neumann problem. The limit unfolded problems are established, the
homogenized limits as well and the correctors are given (making use of the
convergence of the energy). The boundary unfolding operator is an essential
tool in the treatment of the Neumann condition on the boundary of the holes.
Section 5.3 present the variant for frame-periodic distribution of the holes.
In Section 5.4, the geometrically more complex case of the Fredholm al-
ternative for the Neumann problem (without zero order term) is presented
in details. A uniform Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality needed for the sequence
of perforated domains is established.
Finally, Section 5.6 treats a problem with periodically distributed cracks
or fissures with a non-linear boundary condition on the cracks. The homo-

5.1. The Dirichlet-Neumann problem
genized problem is shown to be a Leray-Lions type problem.

As in Chapter 3, we recall that second order variational problems exhibit
invariance under bi-lipschitz diffeomorphisms. Therefore, every result stated
in the periodic case can be extended to the case of bi-lipschitz equivalent to
periodic. This can also be combined with the local bi-lipschitz changes of
variables of Section 5.3; an example where the latter combined with a global
bi-lipschitz diffeomorphism can be used is the second part of [38] (where the
treatment is different since it predates the unfolding method).
The method can be applied in many situations such as, among others, the
heat equation (see for example [104]), the wave equation ([103]) or quasilinear
elliptic problems (see [41, 100]).
In this chapter Ω is a bounded domain in RN with Lipschitz boundary
and Hypothesis pH2 q is assumed (see Definition 4.30). The dimension N is
greater or equal to 2 (because of the connectedness condition).
5.1 The Dirichlet-Neumann problem

Let f be in L2 pΩq and Aε “ paεij q1ďi,jďN be a matrix field in the set
M pα, β, Ωq (see Definition 3.1)
The Dirichlet-Neumann problem is
$
&´div pA ∇uε q “ f
’ ε
in Ω˚ε ,
uε “ 0 on BΩ˚ε X BΩ, (5.1)
’
%
A ∇uε ¨ nε “ gε
ε
on BSε X Ω,
where gε is given in L2 pBSε X Ωq.
The variational formulation of (5.1) is

$
’
’ Find uε P H01 pΩ˚ε ; BΩ X BΩ˚ε q such that
’
&ż ż ż
Aε ∇uε ∇v dx “ f v dx ` gε v dσε , (5.2)
’
’ Ω˚ Ω˚ BS ε XΩ
’
%
ε ε
@v P H01 pΩ˚ε ; BΩ X BΩ˚ε q.
When studying the asymptotic behavior of (5.1), the first point is to obtain
a uniform bound for uε solution of (5.2). To do so, first choose an extension
of gε to BSε X V1 pΩq (still using the notation gε for this extension)(1).
(1) Recall that V pΩq is the 1-neighborhood of Ω (see Notation 1.63). Any extension in
1
L2 pBSε XV1 pΩqq will do. We usually choose either the periodic extension (if gε is periodic),
or its extension by 0.
200
Chapter 5. Homogenization in perforated domains
Then choose uε as a test function in (5.2). From the resulting formula,

making use of Proposition 4.56 and Theorem 4.38 (for p “ 2), one can esta-
blish the uniform bound
´
}uε }H 1 pΩ˚ε q ď C }f }L2 pΩ˚ε q ` ε1{2 }gε }L2 pBS ε XV1 pΩqq
1› › ¯ (5.3)
` ›Mbε pgε q›L2 pV1 pΩqq .
ε
In view of this estimate, the natural assumption on the function gε is
1› ›
ε1{2 }gε }L2 pBS ε XV1 pΩqq ` ›Mbε pgε q›L2 pV pΩqq ď C (5.4)
ε 1
where the constant C does not depend on ε. Condition (5.4) leads to a

uniform bound for }uε }H 1 pΩ˚ε q . We can now state the homogenization result.
Theorem 5.1. Let uε be the solution of Problem (5.1). Suppose that
. ` ˘
B ε “ Tε˚ Aε Ñ B a.e. in Ω ˆ Y ˚(2). (5.5)
Suppose furthermore that the sequence tgε uε satisfies (5.4) and that there
exist g in L2 pΩ ˆ BSq and G in L2 pΩq satisfying
Tεb pgε q á g weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ BSq,

1 b (5.6)
M pgε q á G weakly in L2 pΩq.
ε ε
Then there exist u0 P H01 pΩq and u p0 P L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY ˚ qq such that,
#
Eε puε q Ñ u0 strongly in L2 pΩq,
piq
}uε ´ u0 }L2 pΩ˚ε q Ñ 0,
(5.7)
piiq Tε˚ puε q Ñ u0 strongly in L2 pΩ; H 1 pY ˚ qq,
piiiq Tε˚ p∇uε q á ∇u0 ` ∇y u
p0 weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y ˚ qN ,
p0 q in H01 pΩq ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper,0

and the pair (u0 , u 1
pY ˚ qq is the unique solution of
the homogenized problem
$ ż
’ 1 “ ‰“ ‰
’
’ Bpx, yq ∇u0 pxq ` ∇y u p0 px, yq ∇Ψpxq ` ∇y Φpx, yq dxdy
’
’ |Y |
’
’ ΩˆY ˚
ż ż
’
’ |Y ˚ | |BS|
’
’
’
& “ f Ψ dx ` MBS pyM gq ¨ ∇Ψ dx
|Y | Ω |Y |
Ω (5.8)
’
’ ż ż
’
’ |BS| 1
’
’ ` G Ψ dx ` g Φ dx dσpyq,
’
’ |Y | |Y | ΩˆBS
’
’
’
’
Ω
%
@Ψ P H01 pΩq, @Φ P L2 pΩ; Hper 1
pY ˚ qq.
(2) or more generally, in measure in Ω ˆ Y ˚ .
201
Remark 5.2. As in the case of fixed domains (see Remark 3.6), every matrix
field B belonging to M pα, β, ΩˆY ˚ q can be approached (in the sense of (5.5))
by the sequence of matrices Aε in M pα, β, Ω˚ε q with Aε defined as follows:
#
Uε pBq in Ω p˚
A “
ε ε
αIn in Λ˚ε .
Remark 5.3. Making use of the results of Subsection 4.4.3, one can assume
that gε belongs to H ´1{2 pBSε q and that the first convergence of (5.6) holds
in L2 pΩ; H ´1{2 pBSqq. This remark also applies for Proposition 5.9, Theo-
rem 5.14 and Proposition 5.18.
The following is the equivalent of (3.14)in the case of a perforated Y ˚ .(3)
Lemma 5.4. There exists a strictly positive constant c depending only upon
Y ˚ such that for every pv, vpq in H 1 pΩq ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY ˚ qq,
` ˘
c }∇v}2L2 pΩq ` }∇y vp}2L2 pΩˆY ˚ q ď }∇v ` ∇y vp}2L2 pΩˆY ˚ q
(5.9)
ď p}∇v}L2 pΩq ` }∇y vp}L2 pΩˆY ˚ q q2 .
Proof. The second inequality is obvious. As for the first, it is enough to show
for that every pζ, vpq in RN ˆ Hper,0
1
pY ˚ q, the following inequality holds for
some strictly positive c:
` ˘
c |ζ|2 ` }∇y vp}2L2 pY ˚ q ď }ζ ` ∇y vp}2L2 pY ˚ q . (5.10)
. ` ˘
Set wpyq “ vppyq ` ζ ¨ y ´ MY ˚ pyq .
First, apply the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality to w in H 1 pY ˚ q. This gives
}w}H 1 pY ˚ q ď CP W }ζ ` ∇y vp}L2 pY ˚ q .
Since ζj p“ ζ ¨ bj q “ wpy ` bj q ´ wpyq for a.e. y in Y ˚ and for every j “

1, . . . , N , it follows that |ζ| ď C}w}L2 pY ˚ q , so
|ζ| ď C}ζ ` ∇y vp}L2 pY ˚ q hence }∇y vp}L2 pY ˚ q ď p1 ` Cq}ζ ` ∇y vp}L2 pY ˚ q .
Then, (5.10) easily follows.
Proof of Theorem 5.1. First, in view of Lemma 5.4 and the ellipticity of the
matrix field B (arising from Aε in M pα, β, Ωq), problem (5.8) has a solution
which is unique by direct application of the Lax-Milgram theorem in the
space H01 pΩq ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY ˚ qq.
Estimates (5.3) and (5.4) imply that }uε }H 1 pΩ˚ε q is uniformly bounded.
Then, Theorems 4.43 and 4.44 imply convergences (5.7), at least for a subse-
quence. The uniqueness of the solution of the limit problem will eventually
imply the convergence of the whole sequence.
(3) The same proof applies to the case of W 1,p spaces both for Y and Y ˚ .
202
Let Ψ and ϕ be in Cc8 pΩq and ψ in Hper,0

1
pY ˚ q. We choose in (5.2) the
test function ´x¯
vε “ Ψ ` εϕ ψε and ψε pxq “ ψ .
ε
Since ´¨¯
∇vε “ ∇Ψ ` εψε ∇ϕ ` ϕ ∇y ψ ,
ε
by Proposition 4.8 (i),
Tε˚ pvε q Ñ Ψ strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q,

Tε˚ pϕ ψε q Ñ ϕ ψ strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q, (5.11)
Tε˚ p∇vε q Ñ ∇Ψ ` ϕ∇y ψ ˚ N
strongly in L pΩ ˆ Y q .
2
Then, for ε small enough, in view of the fact that the support of vε remains
in a fixed compact subset of Ω, Proposition 4.4 (i) and (5.7) allow passing to
the limit to get
ż ż
1
A ∇uε ∇vε dx “
ε
T ˚ pAε qTε˚ p∇uε q Tε˚ p∇vε q dxdy
Ω˚ |Y | ΩˆY ˚ ε
ε
ż (5.12)
1 “ ‰“ ‰
Ñ B ∇u0 ` ∇y u p0 ∇Ψ ` ϕ∇y ψ dxdy,
|Y | ΩˆY ˚
as well as
ż ż ż
1 |Y ˚ |
f vε dx “ Tε˚ pf qTε˚ pvε q dxdy Ñ f Ψ dx. (5.13)
Ω˚ε
|Y | ΩˆY ˚ |Y | Ω
Similarly, for ε small enough, the surface integral in (5.2) takes the form
ż ż ż
gε vε dσε “ gε Ψ dσε ` ε gε ϕ ψε dσε .
BS ε XΩ xε
BS xε
BS
To pass to the limit here, we use the results of Section 4.4. In view of
Hypotheses (5.6) and convergences (5.11), we can apply Proposition 4.53 in
the form of Remark 4.54 to the first integral in the right-hand side to obtain
ż ż ż
|BS| |BS|
gε Ψ dσε Ñ MBS pyM gq ¨ ∇Ψ dx ` G Ψ dx. (5.14)
xε
BS |Y | Ω |Y | Ω
For the second integral, Proposition 4.51 and (5.11) again give
ż ż
1
ε gε ϕψε dσε Ñ gpxq ϕpxqψpyq dxdσpyq. (5.15)
xε
BS |Y | ΩˆBS
Collecting convergences (5.12), (5.13), (5.14) and (5.15), and due to the
density of Cc8 pΩq in H01 pΩq and that of the tensor product Cc8 pΩq b Hper
1
pY ˚ q
˚
in L pΩ; Hper pY qq, we get the unfolded limit formulation (5.8).
2 1
203
We now obtain the homogenized limit problem in terms of u0 alone. We

p0 in terms of u0 .
begin by expressing u
p0 in Theorem 5.1 is given in terms of u0
Proposition 5.5. The function u
by the expression
ÿN
Bu0
p0 px, yq “
u p˚i px, yq ` χ
pxq χ p˚0 px, yq, (5.16)
i“1
Bx i
where the corrector functions χ p˚j P L8 pΩ ; Hper,01

pY ˚ qq, j “ 1, . . . , N are the
solutions of the cell problems (a.e. in Ω),
$ż
’ ÿ
N ´ Bχp˚j ¯ Bϕ
’
& bik p ¨ , yq p ¨ , yq ` δjk pyq dy “ 0,
Y ˚ i,k“1 Byk Byi (5.17)
’
’
%
@ϕ P Hper,0
1
pY ˚ q,
and the corrector function χ p˚0 P L2 pΩ; Hper,0

1
pY ˚ qq is the solution of the cell
problem (a.e. in Ω),
$ż ż
’
’ ÿ
N
p˚0
Bχ Bϕ
& bik p ¨ , yq p ¨ , yq pyq dy “ gp ¨ , yq ϕpyq dσpyq,
Y ˚ i,k“1 Byk Byi BS (5.18)
’
’
% ˚
@ϕ P Hper,0 pY q.
1
Proof. The proof is straightforward once the existence and uniqueness of the
p˚i , i “ 1, . . . , N , and χ
“correctors” χ p˚0 , is shown. For all of them, this follows
from the Lax-Milgram theorem.
The case of system (5.18), which takes care of the nonhomogeneous Neu-
mann boundary condition, requires special attention, since to apply the Lax-
Milgram theorem a compatibility condition is needed. This condition is
ż
gpx, yq dσpyq “ 0 for a.e. x P Ω,
BS
and it is satisfied due to convergences (5.6) and Remark 4.55.

The classical homogenization result for problems with holes is recovered
here without the condition that the holes do not intersect the outer boundary
and without the use of extension operators into the holes.
Theorem 5.6. The homogenized formulation associated to system (5.8) from
Theorem 5.1 is
$
’ |BS| |BS| ` ˘
’
’ ´div pAhom ∇u0 q “ f ` ˚ G ´ ˚ div MBS pyM gq
’
& |Y | |Y |
` ˘
’ p˚0 px, ¨ q in Ω,
` div MY ˚ Bpx, ¨ q∇y χ (5.19)
’
’
’
%
u0 “ 0 on BΩ,
204
p˚0 is given by (5.18).

where χ
The homogenized matrix (4) Ahom “ pahom
ij q1ďi,jďN is elliptic and defined
by
´ ÿN
p˚j ¯
Bχ ´ÿN
p˚j ¯
Bχ
ahom “ MY ˚ bij ` bik “ MY ˚ pbij q ` MY ˚ bik .
ij
k“1
Byk k“1
Byk
p˚j are given by (5.17) for j “ 1, . . . , N .

where the χ
Remark 5.7. For g ” 0, this is the standard result (where, with the different
normalization, there is an extra factor |Y ˚ |{|Y |).
Proof of Theorem 5.6. Inserting formula (5.16) into (5.8), and taking Φ “ 0
gives the result.
In the case of a periodic gε (see Remark 4.58 for the notations), arising
from g in L2 pBSq, the two cases give different results. In case 1, g “ 0,
G “ MBS pgq, so that χp˚0 “ 0 and the limit problem is
$
&´div pAhom ∇u0 q “ f ` |BS| MBS pgq in Ω,
|Y ˚ |
%
u0 “ 0 on BΩ.
In case 2, g “ g and G “ 0, so the limit problem is

# ` ` ˘˘
´div pAhom ∇u0 q “ f ` div MY ˚ Bpx, ¨ q∇y χ p˚0 px, ¨ q in Ω,
u0 “ 0 on BΩ,
p˚0 given by (5.18) associated with g.

with χ
One can remark that in the latter case, if B does not depend on x (this
holds in the pure periodic case), χ p˚0 itself is independent of x. Then, the
second term in the right-hand side of the homogenized problem vanishes and
g does not contribute to the limit problem, i.e. the limit equation is the same
as that of the homogeneous Dirichlet-Neumann case.
Remark 5.8. In problem (5.1) one can easily consider a sequence tfε uε
which converges weakly to f in L2 pΩq.
However, one cannot choose a fixed f in H ´1 pΩq, simply because it cannot
be restricted to Ω˚ε in a meaningful way. A more general condition can be
}εfε }L2 pΩ˚ε q and }M˚ε pfε q}L2 pΩq both uniformly bounded.
Using arguments similar to those of Example 3.26 and assuming that Tε˚ pεfε q
converges weakly to some fp in L2 pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q and M˚ε pfε q converges to F in
(4) The definition of the homogenized matrix used here differs from the “classical” one
|Y ˚ |
by a factor of , and simplifies the right-hand side by the same factor.
|Y |
205
ż
|Y ˚ |
L2 pΩq, the first integral f Ψ dx in the right-hand side of (5.8) is
|Y | Ω
replaced by
ż ´ ¯ ż
|Y ˚ | ` ˘ 1
MY ˚ fpp¨, yq y c ¨ ∇Ψ ` F Ψ dx ` fp Φ dxdy.
|Y | Ω |Y | ΩˆY ˚
As in Theorem 3.23, an extra term appears in the definition (5.18) of χ p˚0 (due
p
to f ) and the term f in the right-hand side of the homogenized problem (5.19)
is replaced by ` ˘
F ´ div MY ˚ fpp¨, yq y c .
5.1.2 Convergence of the energy and correctors

Under stronger assumptions on the data, a convergence result stronger than
(iii) of (5.7) holds for the sequences of solutions tuε uε of Problem (5.1). It is
based on the convergence of the energy for this problem.
Proposition 5.9. Assume that the hypotheses of Theorem 5.1 are satisfied.
Moreover, assume that the convergences in (5.6) are strong, i.e.,
Tεb pgε q Ñ g strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ BSq,

(5.20)
1 b
M pgε q Ñ G strongly in L pV1 pΩqq.
2
ε ε
Then
ż ż
1 “ ‰“ ‰
lim Aε ∇uε ∇uε dx “ p0 ∇u0 ` ∇y u
B ∇u0 ` ∇y u p0 dxdy (5.21)
εÑ0 Ω˚
ε
|Y | ΩˆY ˚
and the following strong convergence holds:
Tε˚ p∇uε q Ñ ∇u0 ` ∇y u

p0 strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y ˚ qN . (5.22)
Moreover, ż
lim |∇uε |2 dx “ 0. (5.23)
εÑ0 Λ˚
ε
Proof. By Proposition 4.4 (i) and the ellipticity of Aε ,

ż
` ˘ ` ˘
Tε˚ pAε q Tε˚ ∇uε Tε˚ ∇uε dxdy
ΩˆY ˚
ż ż
“ A ∇uε ∇uε dx ´
ε
Aε ∇uε ∇uε dx (5.24)
Ω˚ Λ˚
ż ε ε
ď Aε ∇uε ∇uε dx.

Ω˚
ε
206
Going back to (5.2), this gives successively

ż
1 ` ˘ ` ˘
lim sup Tε˚ pAε q Tε˚ ∇uε Tε˚ ∇uε dxdy
εÑ0 |Y | ΩˆY ˚
ż
ď lim sup Aε ∇uε ∇uε dx
εÑ0 Ω˚
´ż ż
ε
¯
“ lim sup f uε dx ` gε uε dσε .
εÑ0 Ω˚
ε BS ε XΩ
But, by the three convergences of (5.7) together with formula (4.58) of Propo-
sition 4.57, it follows that
ż ż
|Y ˚ |
f uε dx Ñ f u0 dx,
Ω˚ |Y | Ω
ż ε
ż ż
|BS| |BS|
gε uε dσε Ñ MBS pyM gq ¨ ∇u0 dx ` G u0 dx
BS ε XΩ |Y | Ω |Y | Ω
ż
1
` p0 g dxdσpyq.
u
|Y | ΩˆBS
Confronting this with (5.8) where Ψ “ u0 and Φ` “ up˘0 , proves (5.21). Ap-
plying Lemma 3.11 with Dε “ Tε˚ pAε q, ζε “ Tε˚ ∇uε , yields convergences
(5.21) and (5.22). Now, using (5.24) again, gives
ż
lim Aε ∇uε ∇uε dx “ 0,
εÑ0 Λ˚
ε
hence (5.23) by ellipticity.

`
We can now address the question of correctors. When Aε pxq “ A x{εq,
by using extension operators and under the hypothesis that the holes do not
intersect BΩ, the following corrector result was proved in [99] (Corollary 2.2):
› ÿN
Bu0 ´ ¨ ¯›
› ›
›∇uε ´ ∇u0 ´ p˚i
∇y χ › 1 ˚ Ñ 0. (5.25)
i“1
Bx i ε L pΩε q
Using the unfolding method, we now give a general corrector result, of

which convergence (5.25) is a simple corollary. As in the case of fixed domains
(see Theorem 3.27), this corrector result is a direct consequence of the strong
convergence (5.22).
Theorem 5.10. Under the hypotheses of Proposition 5.9, the following strong
convergence holds:
› ÿN ´ Bu ¯ ›
› ›
Uε˚ p∇y χ
p˚i q ´ Uε˚ p∇y χ
p˚0 q›
0
›∇uε ´ ∇u0 ´ Mε Ñ 0. (5.26)
i“1
Bx i L2 pΩ˚
εq
207
Proof. By construction, the function χ p˚i belongs to L8 pΩ; Hper,0

1
pY ˚ qq, for
i “ 1, . . . , N . Due to convergences (5.22) and (5.23), Proposition 4.20 (iv)
gives
}∇uε ´ Uε˚ p∇u0 ` ∇y up0 q}L2 pΩ˚ε q Ñ 0.
By Proposition 4.19 and (5.16) this implies
› ÿN ´ Bu ¯ ›
› ›
Uε˚ p˚i ´ Uε˚ p∇y χ
p˚0 q›
0
›∇uε ´ ∇u0 ´ ∇y χ Ñ 0. (5.27)
i“1
Bx i L2 pΩ˚
εq
p˚i is extended
From formula (4.10) and Proposition 1.34 (in the latter, ∇y χ
by 0 in Ω ˆ S), it follows that
› ´ Bu ¯ ´ Bu ¯ ›
› ˚ ›
p˚i ´ Uε Uε˚ p∇y χ
p˚i q›
0 0
›Uε ∇y χ
Bxi Bxi L2 pΩ˚εq
› ´ Bu ¯ ´ Bu ¯ ›
› ˚ ›
p˚i ´ Mε Uε˚ p∇y χp˚i q›
0 0
“ ›Uε ∇y χ Ñ 0,
Bxi Bxi L2 pΩ˚
εq
which used in (5.27), concludes the proof.

Theorem 5.11. We assume the hypotheses of Proposition 5.9. Suppose
furthermore, that the matrix field B given by (5.5) does not depend on x,
and that the limit function g defined by (5.20) is of the form
.
gpx, yq “ g1 pxqg0 pyq with g1 P L2 pΩq and g0 P L2 pBSq.
Then the following corrector result holds:

› ÿN ´ Bu ¯ ´ ¨ ¯ ´ ¨ ¯›
› ›
p˚i χ˚0
0
›uε ´ u0 ´ ε Qε χ ´ εQε pg1 qr › Ñ 0, (5.28)
i“1
Bxi ε ε H 1 pΩ˚ε q
where χ r˚0 P Hper,0

1
pY ˚ q is the solution of Problem (5.18) with g replaced by
g0 , i.e.,
$ż ż
’
’ ÿ
N
Bχr˚ Bϕ
& bik pyq 0 pyq pyq dy “ g0 pyqϕpyq dσpyq,
Y ˚ i,k“1 Byk Byi BS (5.29)
’
’
%
@ϕ P Hper,0
1
pY ˚ q.
p˚i ’s are in L8 pY ˚ q(5) and if g1 belongs to H 1 pΩq the

Moreover, if the χ
following convergence also holds for every open ω Ť Ω:
› ÿN
Bu0 ˚ ´ ¨ ¯ ´ ¨ ¯›
› ›
›uε ´ u 0 ´ ε pi
χ χ˚0
´ εQε pg1 qr › 1 Ñ 0. (5.30)
i“1
Bx i ε ε H pωXΩ˚
εq
(5) This condition is satisfied for example when the b ’s belong to W 1,8 pY ˚ q and the
ij per
boundary of the hole S is C 1,1 (cf. e.g. [114] Chapter 9, adapted to the periodic case).
208
If u0 is in H 2 pΩq (e.g. if BΩ is smooth), then
› ÿN
Bu0 ˚ ´ ¨ ¯ ´ ¨ ¯›
› ›
›uε ´ u0 ´ ε pi
χ χ˚0
´ εQε pg1 qr › 1 ˚ Ñ 0. (5.31)
i“1
Bx i ε ε H pΩε q
p˚j for j “ 1, . . . , N are independent

Proof. Since B does not depend upon x, χ
˚
p0 , it is given by
of x. As for χ
p˚0 px, yq “ g1 pxqr

χ χ˚0 pyq. (5.32)
p˚i and χ
By (5.7)(i) and Proposition 1.71 (extending the χ r˚0 by 0 in S), it
follows that
› ÿN ´ Bu ¯ ´ ¨ ¯ ´ ¨ ¯›
› ›
p˚i χ˚0
0
›uε ´ u0 ´ ε Qε χ ´ εQε pg1 qr › 2 ˚ Ñ 0. (5.33)
i“1
Bx i ε ε L pΩε q
To go further, we shall use convergence (5.26). To do so, notice that,

p˚j for j “ 1, . . . , N are independent of x, by (4.11)
since χ
´¨¯
Uε˚ p∇y χ
p˚i q “ ∇y χ
p˚i p ˚.
in Ω ε
ε
On the other hand, recalling (5.32), we get
´¨¯
Uε˚ p∇y χ
p˚0 q “ ∇y χ
r˚0 Mε pg1 q.
ε
These last relations, replaced in (5.26), give the convergence
› ÿN ´ Bu ¯ ´¨¯
›
p˚i q
0
›∇uε ´ ∇u0 ´ Mε ∇y χ
Bxi ε
i“1
´ ¨ ¯› (5.34)
›
´ r˚0
Mε pg1 q∇y χ › Ñ 0.
ε L2 pΩ˚ε q
Now, apply Lemma 5.12 below twice for the choices
Bu0
α“ , p˚i
β “ ∇y χ and α “ g1 , r˚0 .
β “ ∇y χ
Bxi
After extending both gradients by 0 in S, this gives the estimates

›” ´ Bu ¯ ´ Bu ¯ı ´ ¨ ¯›
› ›
p˚i
0 0
› Qε ´ Mε ∇y χ ›
Bxi Bxi ε L2 pΩq
´› ´ Bu ¯ ´ Bu ¯› › Bu › ¯
› 0 › › 0›
r˚i }L2 pY q ,
0
ď C ›Qε ´ Mε › 2 `› › 2 }∇y χ
Bxi Bxi L pΩq Bxi L pΛε q
209
and
›“ ‰ ´ ¨ ¯›
› ›
r˚0
› Qε pg1 q´Mε pg1 q ∇y χ ›
ε L2 pΩq
´› › ¯
ď C ›Qε pg1 q ´ Mε pg1 q›L2 pΩq ` }g1 }L2 pΛε q }∇y χ
r˚0 }L2 pY q .
Observe that the right-hand side in these estimates go to 0 (see Proposi-

tion 1.64(iv)). Therefore, from (5.34) we deduce
› ÿN ˆ ˙ ´¨¯ ´ ¨ ¯›
› Bu0 ›
›∇uε ´ ∇u 0 ´ Q ε p˚i
∇y χ r˚0
´ Qε pg1 q∇y χ › 2 ˚ Ñ 0.
i“1
ˆ ˙
Bu0
By (1.72)(ii), ε∇Qε and ε∇Qε pg1 q converge to 0 strongly in L2 pΩq.
Bxi
Consequently,
› ´ ÿN ´ Bu ¯ ´ ¨ ¯ ´ ¨ ¯¯›
› ›
p˚i χ˚0
0
›∇ uε ´ u0 ´ ε Qε χ ´ εQε pg1 qr › 2 ˚ Ñ 0.
i“1
This, together with convergence (5.33), proves convergence (5.28).

Assuming further that g1 is in H 1 pΩq implies that u0 belongs to Hloc2
pΩq,
since ∇u0 belongs to Hloc pΩq.
1
In view of (5.17), the extension by 0 to Y of the field Bpyq∇pp χ˚j pyq ` yj q

is divergence-free. Reasoning as in Corollary 3.31, yields convergence (5.30).
Similarly, in case u0 belongs to H 2 pΩq, convergence (5.31) holds.
In the above proof we used the following lemma:
Lemma 5.12. There is a constant C such that, for α P L2 pΩq and β P L2 pY q,
›` ˘ ´ ¨ ¯››
›
› Qε pαq ´ Mε pαq β ›
ε L2 pΩq
`› › ˘ (5.35)
ď C ›Qε pαq ´ Mε pαq›L2 pΩq ` }α}L2 pΛε q }β}L2 pY q ,
and moreover,
› ´ ¯ ´ ¯›
›Mε pαqβ ¨ ´ Qε pαqβ ¨ › 2 Ñ 0. (5.36)
ε ε L pΩq
Proof. Extending α by 0 to the whole of RN , it is enough to give the proof
of inequality (5.35) in the case of Ω “ RN , noting that
Ăε pαq}L2 pRN q ď }Mε pαq}L2 pΩq ` }α}L2 pΛ q .

}M ε
For RN , estimate (5.35) is a consequence of Proposition 1.71. Then, conver-

gence (5.36) follows from the strong convergence of Qε pαq and Mε pαq to α
in L2 pΩq (see Proposition 1.25 and (1.81)(i)).
210
5.2 The Neumann problem

As in the previous section, let f be in L2 pΩq and Aε “ paεij q1ďi,jďN be a
matrix field in the set M pα, β, Ωq.
The Neumann problem is
$ ˚
’
’´div pA ∇uε q ` bε uε “ f in Ωε ,
ε
&
Aε ∇uε ¨ nε “ 0 on BΩ˚ε zB Spε , (5.37)
’
’
% Aε ∇u ¨ n “ g on B Sp ,
ε ε ε ε
where the function bε is measurable in Ω and gε is given in L2 pB Spε q (see

Notation (4.3)).
The variational formulation of (5.37) is
$
’
’ Find uε P H 1 pΩ˚ε q such that
’
&ż ż ż ż
Aε ∇uε ∇v dx ` bε uε v dx “ f v dx ` gε v dσε , (5.38)
’
’ Ω˚ Ω˚ Ω˚ pε
BS
’
%
ε ε ε
@v P H 1 pΩ˚ε q.
Remark 5.13. As far as we know, there is no homogenization result for
Problem 5.37 if gε is defined on the whole of BSε and does not vanish outside
of B Spε . This is mainly due to the lack of uniform bounds for solutions. In
several papers, the holes in the zone BSε zB Spε (or in a similar boundary layer)
are completely suppressed, in which case the unfolding approach works as
easily (since all unfolded functions always vanish in this layer).
To homogenize the Neumann problem, the method of the preceding section
applies. We state the results without detailing the proofs. The condition on
bε is the following:
$ 8 ˚
&There are two positive constants c0 and C0 and b P L pΩ ˆ Y q
’
˚
such that, c0 ď bε pxq ď C0 for a.e. x P Ωε (5.39)
’
%
and Tε˚ pbε q Ñ b a.e. in Ω ˆ Y ˚(6).
Theorem 5.14. Let uε be the solution of the Problem (5.38). Assume
that (5.5), (5.6) and (5.39) hold and that gε vanishes outside of B Spε . Then,
there exist u in H 1 pΩq and u
p in L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY ˚ qq, such that
piq Tε˚ puε q á u weakly in L2 pΩ; H 1 pY ˚ qq and strongly in L2loc pΩ; H 1 pY ˚ qq
#
Eε puε q Ñ u0 strongly in L2loc pΩq,
piiq
@ω Ť Ω, }uε ´ u0 }L2 pΩ˚ε Xωq Ñ 0,
piiiq Tε˚ p∇uε q á ∇u ` ∇y u
p weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y ˚ qN ,
211
5.2. The Neumann problem
and the pair (u, upq is the unique solution of the problem
$
’
’ u P H 1 pΩq, u
p P L2 pΩ; Hper,01
pY ˚ q,
’
’ ż
’
’ 1 “ ‰“ ‰
’
’ Bpx, yq ∇upxq ` ∇y u ppx, yq ∇Ψpxq ` ∇y Φpx, yq dxdy
’
’ |Y |
’
’ ΩˆY ˚
ż
’
’
’
’ |Y ˚ |
’
& ` MY ˚ pbqpxq upxq Ψpxq dx
|Y | Ω
ż ż
’
’ |Y ˚ | |BS|
’
’ “ f pxq Ψpxq dx ` MBS pyM gqpxq ¨ ∇Ψpxq dx
’
’ |Y | Ω |Y | Ω
’
’ ż ż
’
’ |BS|
’
’ ` Gpxq Ψpxq dx `
1
’
’ gpx, yqΦpx, yq dx dσpyq,
’
’ |Y | |Y | ΩˆBS
’
%
Ω
@Ψ P H 1 pΩq, @Φ P L2 pΩ; Hper 1
pY ˚ qq.
Proof. The a priori estimate
}uε }H 1 pΩ˚ε q ď C,
follows directly from the variational formulation (5.38) and Proposition 4.50.
The remainder of the proof is the exact analog of the proof of Theorem 5.1,
making use of Theorem 4.43 instead of Theorem 4.44.
The next results are the equivalent of Proposition 5.5 and Theorem 5.6
(with obvious modifications in the proofs).
p in Theorem 5.14 is given in terms of u
Proposition 5.15. The function u
by the expression,
ÿN
Bu
ppx, yq “
u χ˚i px, yq ` χ
pxqp p˚0 px, yq,
i“1
Bx i
p˚j , pj “ 0, . . . , N q are given, as before, by

where the corrector functions χ
(5.17) and (5.18).
Theorem 5.16. (Standard homogenization for Neumann problem).
Let uε be the solution of Problem (5.38) and suppose that the hypotheses of
Theorem 5.14 are satisfied. Then u is the solution in H 1 pΩq of the homoge-
nized problem
#
´div pAhom ∇uq ` MY ˚ pbq u “ f ´ div G in Ω,
Ahom ∇u ¨ n “ G ¨ n on BΩ,
where
. |BS| ` ˘ ` ˘
p˚0 px, ¨q
Gpxq “ ˚ Gpxq ` MBS pyM gqpxq ´ MY ˚ Bpx, ¨q ∇y χ in Ω.
|Y |
The matrix field Ahom is the same as that defined in Theorem 5.6.
212
Remark 5.17. A strange phenomenon appears in this result: the nonhomo-

geneous Neumann conditions on the boundary of the holes inside Ω (actually
p ε ) contribute to a nonhomogeneous Neumann condition
supported inside Ω
on the outer boundary BΩ in the limit problem through the term G. This
phenomenon was also observed in the context of Γ-convergence in [55].
When gε is derived from g in L2 pBSq, the two cases of Remark 4.58 give
different results.
p˚0 “ 0 so G=0),
In case 3, the limit problem is (since g “ 0, χ
$
&´div Ahom ∇uq ` MY ˚ pbq u “ f ` |BS| MBS pgq in Ω,
’
|Y ˚ |
’
% Ahom ∇u ¨ n “ 0 on BΩ.
In case 4 of Remark 4.58, the limit problem is

#
´div pAhom ∇uq ` MY ˚ pbq u “ f ´ div G in Ω,
A hom
∇u ¨ n “ G ¨ n on BΩ,
. |BS| ` ˘
with Gpxq “ ˚ MBS pyM gqpxq ´ MY ˚ Bpx, ¨q∇y χ p˚0 px, ¨q in Ω.
|Y |
In this last case, the holes induce a nonhomogeneous Neumann condition
at the limit.
5.2.2 Convergence of the energy and correctors

The next result is the equivalent of Proposition 5.9.
Proposition 5.18 (Convergence of the energy for Problem (5.38)). Assume
also that
Tεb pgε q Ñ g strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ BSq,
1 b
M pgε q Ñ G strongly in L2 pΩq.
ε ε
Then
ż ´ ¯
lim Aε ∇uε ∇uε ` bε u2ε dx
εÑ0 Ω˚
ε
ż ż (5.40)
1 “ ‰“ ‰ |Y ˚ |
“ p ∇u ` ∇y u
B ∇u ` ∇y u p dxdy ` MY ˚ pbq u2 dx,
|Y | ΩˆY ˚ |Y | Ω
and ´ż ż ¯
lim |∇uε | dx `
2
u2ε dx “ 0. (5.41)
εÑ0 Λ˚
ε Λ˚
ε
Moreover, one has the following convergences:

Tε˚ puε q Ñ u strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q,
(5.42)
Tε˚ p∇uε q Ñ ∇u ` ∇y u
p strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y ˚ qN .
213
5.3. The case of frame-periodic distribution of holes
Proof. The proof of (5.40) is similar to that of Proposition 5.9. In order to

prove (5.41) and (5.42), Lemma 3.11 is applied to the pN ` 1q ˆ pN ` 1q
matrix Dε and the N ` 1 vector ξε
¨ ´ ¯˛
˚ Buε
¨ ˛ T
˚ ε Bx1 ‹
0 ˚ ‹
˚ .. ‹ ˚ .. ‹
˚ T pA q
˚ ‹ ˚ . ‹
Dε “ ˚
ε
. ‹ , ξε “ ˚˚ ´ ¯ ‹.
˝
ε Bu ‹
0 ‚ ˚ ε
˚T ε ‹
˚ ˚ Bx ‹
0 ... 0 Tε pbε q ˝ N
‚
˚
Tε puε q
As a consequence of this proposition, we have

Theorem 5.19. As ε Ñ 0,
#
Eε puε q Ñ u strongly in L2 pΩq,
piq
}uε ´ u}L2 pΩ˚ε q Ñ 0,
› ÿN ´ Bu ¯ ›
piiq ›∇uε ´ ∇u ´ Mε Uε˚ p∇y χ χ˚0 q›L2 pΩ˚ q Ñ 0.
p˚i q ´ Uε˚ p∇p
i“1
Bx i ε
In the case where the matrix field B does not depend on x, and where
.
gpx, yq “ g1 pxqg0 pyq with g1 P L2 pΩq and g0 P L2 pBSq, the following corrector
result holds:
› ÿN ´ Bu ¯ ´ ¨ ¯ ´ ¨ ¯›
› ›
›uε ´ u ´ ε Qε p˚i
χ χ˚0
´ εQε pg1 qr › 1 ˚ Ñ 0,
i“1
Bx i ε ε H pΩε q
r˚0 P Hper
where χ 1
pY ˚ q is the solution of Problem (5.29).
Proof. Convergences (i) follow from Proposition 4.27, and from convergen-
ces (5.41)-(5.42) of Proposition 5.40. The proof of the other convergences is
the same as in that of Theorem 5.10.
5.3 The case of frame-periodic distribution of

holes
The aim of this section, is to answer the question how to apply the method
of Subsection 3.1.3 to the case of perforated domains.
We refer to that section for the definition of ε frame-periodic deformations
(Definition 3.14) and of the set DiffLip pY q and its subset DiffLip pY ; BY q.
As noted there, an ε frame-periodic deformation defined with elements of
DiffLip pY ; BY q is actually a global bi-Lipschitz diffeomorphism of Ω.
We consider the situation of a perforated domain as presented at the
beginning of Chapter 4, the definitions of the sets Ω, Y, Y ˚ and Ω˚ε being
given in Section 4.1.
214
Following the method of Section 3.14, we introduce the subset M˚ε of Mε

consisting of the elements of the latter with values in DiffLip pY ; BY q, and we
denote by S˚ the subset of S with elements in M˚ε for each ε.
For Θε in M˚ε , denote by Ω˚˚ ˚
ε the image of Ωε under the map apdpΘε q.
This set is perforated by holes which are distributed in an approximately
periodic fashion.
Given an element Aε of M pα, β, Ω˚˚ ε q (extended by αI to Ω), denote by
A its inverse image in M pα, β, Ω˚ε q (which is extended similarly to Ω). By
ε˚
Proposition 3.15, the convergence in measure of the unfolding of Tε pAε˚ q (or

equivalently of Tε˚ pAε˚ q) is equivalent to that of Tε pAε q.
Making use of the same changes of variable as in Subsection 3.1.3 to
rewrite the problem on Ω˚ε , one can now easily prove homogenization results
concerning problems in Ω˚˚ ε .
Under unfolding, Ω˚˚ε is transformed into the open set
.
Σε “ tpx, yq P Ω ˆ Y | y P Y ε˚ pxqu Ă Ω ˆ Y,
where Y ε˚ pxq “ Θε px, Y ˚ q.

We state the result for the problem with homogenous Neumann conditions
on the boundaries of approximately periodic holes (more general problems
can be treated in the same way),
$
’
’ Find uε P H 1 pΩ˚˚
ε q such that
’ż
& ż ż
Aε ∇uε ∇v dx ` bε uε v dx “ f v dx, (5.43)
’
’ Ω˚ Ω˚ Ω˚
’
%
ε ε ε
@v P H 1 pΩ˚˚
ε q.
Theorem 5.20. Suppose there exists a map Θ0 from Ω to DiffLip pY ; BY q

such that the sequence tΘε P S˚ u satisfies the hypotheses of Proposition 3.15
(see Remark 3.16 for an example of such situation).
For every x P Ω, let Y ˚ pxq denote Θ0 px, Y ˚ q, and Σ be the set defined by
Σ “ tpx, yq P Ω ˆ Y | y P Y ˚ pxqu.
Set also
.
X pΣq “ tw P L2 pΣq | ∇y w P L2 pΣqu,
.
Xper pΣq “ tw P X pΣq | wpx, ¨q is Y -periodic for a.e. x P Ωu.
Let uε be the solution of problem (5.43). Suppose that

. ` ˘
B ε “ Tε Aε˚ Ñ B in measure. in Ω ˆ Y.
Then, there exist u0 P H01 pΩq and u

p0 P Xper pΣq satisfying
}uε ´ u0 }L2 pΩ˚˚

ε q
Ñ 0,
215
5.4. A Fredholm alternative
and such that the following convergences hold:

$
’
& Tε puε q1Σε Ñ u0 1Σ strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y q,
piq
’
% ∇y Tε puε q1Σ Ñ 0 strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y q,
ε
piiq p0 q1Σ
Tε p∇uε q1Σε á p∇u0 ` ∇y u weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y ˚ qN ,
p0 q in H01 pΩq ˆ X pΣq is the unique solution of the problem

where (u0 , u
$ 1 ż “ ‰“ ‰
’
’ Bpx, yq ∇u0 pxq ` ∇y u p0 px, yq ∇Ψpxq ` ∇y Φpx, yq dxdy
’
’ |Y | Σ
’
’ ż
’
& 1
“ |Y ˚ pxq| f pxq Ψpxq dx,
’ |Y | Ω
’
’
’
’
’MY ˚ pxq pp
’
u0 px, ¨q “ 0 for a.e. x P Ω,
%
@Ψ P H0 pΩq, @Φ P X pΣq.
1
The proof of this theorem is obtained by applying the bi-Lipschitz trans-

formation apdpΘε q´1 to the original problem, now posed on Ω˚ε , applying af-
terwards the unfolding result for periodically perforated domains and finally,
translating the result on Ω ˆ Y ˚ back to Σ via apdpΘq. The homogenization
result is then easily obtained.
The same method applies to many other boundary conditions. Similar
results can be found in [177].
5.4 A Fredholm alternative

In this section, we follow the general notations of Chapter 4, in particular for
Hypothesis (Hp ), the sets P, Ω p ε , Ω˚ , Ω
p ˚ and the operators T ˚ , U ˚ .
ε ε ε ε
Consider a Neumann problem with the notations of Subsection 3.1.2 but
set in the perforated domain Ω˚ε defined in (4.2). However, there are at
least two reasons why this problem is not well-posed. First, it is not true in
general that Ω˚ε is connected. More important, even if Ω˚ε were connected, its
boundary could be so irregular that the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality would
not hold, making the definition of the space V pΩ˚ε q invalid (see (3.31) for the
definition of the latter space). Thus the original variational formulation does
not make sense.
To avoid these difficulties, we consider a subset Cε˚ of Ω˚ε which is con-
nected and a Hilbert space W pCε˚ q (see (5.49)) on which the approximate
problem is well-posed. The sets obtained by “filling the holes” of every Cε˚
converge to Ω in an appropriate sense (see Theorem 5.25 and Remark 5.27).
Furthermore, all the spaces W pCε˚ q satisfy a Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality
with a uniform constant, the key to obtaining the uniform estimates given
in Theorem 5.25.
216
5.4.1 A uniform cone property for approximating do-

mains
In this definition, a cone is the convex envelope of the union of the origin and
a closed ball which does not contain the origin.
Definition 5.21. A bounded open set O in RN has the uniform (interior)
cone property whenever there exist a finite open cover tUj u1ďjďm of BO, and
a corresponding family tCj u of cones isometric to a fixed cone C, such that
(i) for some strictly positive constant δ1 ,
( Ť
m
x P O | distpx, BOq ă δ1 Ă Uj ,
j“1
Ť ` ˘
(ii) for every j, x ` Cj Ă O.
xPΩXUj
It is well-known (see [54]) that this property is equivalent to the fact that
BO is Lipschitz.
. (
Recall the notation (1.48), Oδint “ x P O | distpx, BOq ą δ .
Lemma 5.22. Assume that the bounded open set Ω has a Lipschitz boundary.
Then, there exists δ0 ą 0 such that the sets BΩint
δ for δ P p0, δ0 s, are uniformly
Lipschitz.
Proof. We prove that the sets Ωint
δ satisfy a common uniform cone condition
for δ small enough. Since Ω has the uniform cone property, there exist δ1 and
a finite open cover tUj u1ďjďm of BΩ satisfying (i) and (ii) of Definition 5.21.
Set
. . 1 (
δ2 “ dpCq, δ3 “ min max distpx, BUj q, δ0 “ min δ1 , δ2 , δ3 .
xPBΩ j 3
Since BΩ is compact, δ3 is strictly positive. In the following, we use the
notations of Figure 5.1.
Figure 5.1: Uniform cone property
217
1 1 1
Let now C “ 13 C and Cj “ 13 Cj (which is isometric to C ) and consider,
for j P t1, . . . , mu, the following open sets:
1 (
Uj “ x P Uj | distpx, BUj q ą δ0 .
1
By the definition of δ3 , the family tUj u1ďjďm still covers BΩ. Clearly,
( Ť
m 1
x P Ωint
δ | distpx, BΩδ q ă δ0 Ă
int
Uj for δ P p0, δ0 s.
j“1
This is condition (i) of Definition 5.21.

1
δ X Uj , one has
To prove condition (ii), for j in t1, . . . , mu and x in Ωint
. 1 Ť ` ˘
Vj “ tz P RN | distpz, x ` Cj q ă δ u Ă y ` Cj .
yPBpx;δq
Furthermore, due to the uniform cone property the latter is included in Ω.

1
Thus the set x ` Cj is included in Ωint
δ . This proves the inclusion
Ť ` 1˘
x ` Cj Ă Ωint
δ ,
1
δ XUj
xPΩint
and this concludes the proof of Lemma 5.22.
Corollary 5.23. Suppose that p is in r1, `8s. For every δ P p0, δ0 s, there
exists a continuous extension operator Pδ from W 1,p pΩint
δ q into W
1,p
pΩq, i.e.,
such that for all φ P W 1,p pΩint
δ q,
Pδ pφq P W 1,p pΩq, Pδ pφq|Ωint

δ
“ φ.
There exists a constant C independent of δ and p such that
}Pδ pφq}Lp pΩq ď C}φ}Lp pΩint

δ q
, }∇pPδ pφqq}Lp pΩq ď C}∇φ}Lp pΩint
δ q
.
Proof. By Lemma 5.22, the boundaries BΩint δ have a common Lipschitz con-
stant. Therefore, the usual procedure of localization, bi-Lipschitz diffeomor-
phism and extension to construct Pδ , can be carried out with a uniform
bound.
Proposition 5.24 (Uniform Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality for Ωint δ ).

Suppose that p is in r1, `8s. Assume that Ω is a bounded connected domain
with Lipschitz boundary in RN . Then there exist δ0 ą 0 and a common
Poincaré-Wirtinger constant C for all the sets Ωint
δ with δ P p0, δ0 s, i.e.,
@φ P W 1,p pΩint
δ q, }φ ´ MΩint
δ
pφq}Lp pΩint
δ q
ď C}∇φ}Lp pΩint
δ q
,
δ ’s are connected for δ P p0, δ0 s.

where C is independent of δ and p. All the Ωint
218
Proof. Since Ω is bounded and connected with Lipschitz boundary, it has

a Poincaré-Wirtinger constant C0 . Let φ be in W 1,p pΩint
δ q. We apply the
Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality to the extension Pδ pφq of φ to get
` ˘
}Pδ pφq ´ MΩ Pδ pφq }Lp pΩq ď C0 }∇Pδ pφq}Lp pΩq ď CC0 }∇φ}Lp pΩint
δ q
.
` ˘
Here MΩ Pδ pφq is the mean value of Pδ pφq over Ω. Then,
` ˘ ` ˘
}φ ´ MΩ Pδ pφq }Lp pΩint
δ q
ď }Pδ pφq ´ MΩ Pδ pφq }Lp pΩq
ď CC0 }∇φ}Lp pΩint
δ q
.
` ˘
Taking the mean value of φ ´ MΩ Pδ pφq over Ωint
δ gives
ˇ ` ˘ˇ
ˇMΩint pφq ´ MΩ Pδ pφq ˇ ď CC0 }∇φ}Lp pΩint q ,
δ δ
which used in the previous inequality concludes the proof.
5.4.2 A uniform Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality for per-

forated domains
In this section, Hypothesis (Hp ) is assumed.
We use the notations (1.46), those of Section 4.6 and also the following ones
(see Figure 5.2) to insure that for every ϕ in W 1,p pΩ˚ε q, Q˚ε pϕq is defined on
r ε (in fact in its superset Ω
the set Ω r Y which is a union of cells):
ε
.
rε “
(
Ω x P Ω | ρpxq ą 2ε dpY 1 q ,
.
rε “ rε ‰ ∅ .
(
Ξ ξ P G | εpξ ` Y q X Ω
r ˚ (in dark blue)

Figure 5.2: The set Ω ε
219
Now define the sets

1 . ` Ť ˘ . ` Ť ˘
rY
Ω ε “ interior εpξ ` Y 1 q , rY “
Ωε interior εpξ ` Y q ,
rε
ξPΞ rε
ξPΞ
and also
. ˚ r
r˚ “ . ˚ r Y1
r ˚˚ “
Ωε Ω ε X Ωε , Ω ε Ω ε X Ωε .
The following inclusions hold:
r ε Ă ΞY
Ξ
1
Y
ε Ă Ξε ,
rε Ă Ω
Ω rY Ă Ω
ε
r Y 1 Ă Ω,
ε
r˚ Ă Ω
Ω ε
r ˚˚ Ă Ω˚ .
ε ε (5.44)
Theorem 5.25. Suppose 2ε diameterpY 1 q P p0, δ0 q. For every function ϕ in

r ˚˚ q, there exist ϕ1 in W 1,p pΩ
W 1,p pΩ r ε q and ϕ2 in W 1,p pΩ
r ˚ q, such that
ε ε
piq ϕ “ ϕ1 ` ϕ2 , r ˚,
a.e. in Ω ε
piiq }ϕ1 ´ MΩr ˚ε pϕq}W 1,p pΩr ε q ď Cp }∇ϕ}Lp pΩr ˚˚

ε q
,
(5.45)
piiiq }∇ϕ2 }Lp pΩr ˚ε q ď Cp }∇ϕ}Lp pΩr ˚˚
ε q
,
pivq }ϕ ´ MΩr ˚ε pϕq}Lp pΩr ˚ε q ď Cp }∇ϕ}Lp pΩr ˚˚
ε q
,
with a constant Cp independent of ε.

Proof. This corresponds to the decomposition w “ Q˚ε pwq ` R˚ε pwq for the
r Y 1 . Inequality (5.45)(iii) corresponds to the estimates
case of Ω replaced by Ω ε
of Proposition 4.37 for the case Y a parallelotope, and Proposition 4.65 for
the general case, taking into account the inclusions from (5.44). Similarly,
Proposition 4.35 or Proposition 4.37 imply
}∇ϕ1 }Lp pΩr ε q ď Cp }∇ϕ}Lp pΩr ˚˚

ε q
.
r ε satisfies the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality with

By Proposition 5.24, Ω
a constant independent of ε so that
}ϕ1 ´ MΩr ε pϕ1 q}Lp pΩr ε q ď Cp }∇ϕ1 }Lp pΩr ε q ď Cp }∇ϕ}Lp pΩr ˚˚
ε q
.
r ˚ε gives
Taking the average over Ω
}MΩr ˚ε pϕ1 q ´ MΩr ε pϕ1 q}Lp pΩr ε q ď Cp }∇ϕ}Lp pΩr ˚˚

ε q
,
hence,
}ϕ1 ´ MΩr ˚ε pϕ1 q}Lp pΩr ε q ď Cp }∇ϕ}Lp pΩr ˚˚
ε q
.
Also by (5.45)(iii),
|MΩr ˚ε pϕ2 q| ď εCp }∇ϕ}Lp pΩr ˚˚

ε q
,
from which (5.45)(ii) follows. Finally, (5.45)(iv) is an immediate consequence

of estimates (5.45)(ii)-(iii).
220
r ˚˚ is
Definition 5.26. The connected component of the set Ω˚ε containing Ω ε
˚
denoted Cε .
Remark 5.27. Since Ω r ˚˚ contains Ω r ˚ , all the other connected components of
ε ε
Ωε , lie near the boundary of Ω. Therefore, in some sense, Cε˚ is the “main”
˚
connected component of Ω˚ε . Furthermore, for w in Wloc 1,p ˚

pCε q with ∇w in
Lp pCε˚ q, its restriction w 1Ωr ˚ε belongs to Lp pΩ r ˚ q (and not only to Lp pΩ r ˚ q).
ε loc ε
As a consequence, we obtain the convergence for unfoldings which is

adapted to the case of the Fredholm alternative.
Theorem 5.28. Suppose 2ε diameterpY 1 q P p0, δ0 q. Let p be in p1, `8s and
1,p
twε uε a sequence in Wloc pΩ˚ε q satisfying
}∇wε }Lp pCε˚ q ď C,
and such that MΩr ˚ε pwε q “ 0. Then, up to a subsequence, there are two
functions w in W 1,p pΩq and w 1,p
p in Lp pΩ; Wper,0 pY ˚ qq, such that
Tε˚ pwε 1Ωr ˚ε q Ñ w strongly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY ˚ qq,

(5.46)
Tε˚ p∇wε 1Cε˚ q á ∇w ` ∇y w
Proof. Note first that according to Theorem 5.25, wε 1Ωr ˚ε belongs to Lp pΩ r ˚q

ε
so that the condition MΩr ˚ε pwε q “ 0 makes sense. Then, using Theorem 5.25,
we deduce that }wε } 1,p r ˚ is bounded (since Ω r ˚˚ is included in C ˚ ). It
W pΩε q ε ε
follows that, up to a subsequence, there exist W in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q and F in
Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ qN such that
Tε˚ pwε 1Ωr ˚ε q á W weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q,

Tε˚ p∇wε 1Cε˚ q á F weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y ˚ qN .
But, Theorem 4.43 applied in every relatively compact open subset ω of Ω

1,p
implies that, again up to a subsequence, there exist w in Wloc pΩq and w
p in
Lploc pΩ; Wper,0
1,p
pY ˚ qq, with
Tε˚ pwε 1Ωr ˚ε q á w weakly in Lp pω; W 1,p pY ˚ qq,

Tε˚ p∇wε 1Cε˚ q á ∇w ` ∇y w
p weakly in Lp pω; Lp pY ˚ qqN ,
for all ω. These convergences give
wpxq “ W px, ¨ q and ∇w “ MY ˚ pF q in Lp pΩq.
Consequently, w belongs to W 1,p pΩq and w 1,p

p to Lp pΩ; Wper,0 pY ˚ qq.
To obtain the strong convergence in the first line of (5.46), use the de-
composition of wε from Theorem 5.25
wε “ wε1 ` wε2 .
221
The same theorem implies first that }wε2 }Lp pΩr ˚ε q Ñ 0, and then the estimate
}wε1 }W 1,p pΩr ε q ď Cp }∇wε }Lp pΩr ˚˚

ε q
,
where Cp is independent of ε.
Using now the extension operator Pδ with δ “ 2ε diameterpY 1 q P p0, δ0 q,
as in the proof of Proposition 5.24, one concludes that wε1 1Ωr ε is in a compact
subset of Lp pΩq. Therefore Tε pwε1 1Ωr ε q is in a compact subset of Lp pΩ ˆ Y q,
so that Tε˚ pwε1 1Ωr ˚ε q is in a compact subset of Lp pΩˆY ˚ q. The proof of (5.46)
follows since Tε pwε2 1Ωr ε q converges strongly to 0 in the same space.
5.4.3 A Neumann problem with Fredholm alternative

In this section, we would like to consider the homogenization of the Neumann
problem whose variational formulation is
$ ˚
& Find uε in V pΩε q such that
ż ż
(5.47)
% Aε ∇uε ∇v dx “ fε v dx, @v P V pΩ˚ε q,
Ω˚
ε Ω˚
ε
where fε is given in L2 pΩ˚ε q and the matrix field Aε “ paεij q1ďi,jďN belongs
to M pα, β, Ω˚ε q (see Definition 3.1).
As explained in the introduction of Section 5.4, this problem is not well-
posed in general. Following Remark 5.27, the “natural” candidate for a
domain on which to consider the approximate problem for (5.47) is the Cε˚ .
Assuming that the right-hand side fε belongs to L2 pCε˚ q and satisfies the
extra hypothesis
fε vanishes outside Ω r ˚, (5.48)
ε
there is a unique solution to the approximate problem in the space

. (
W pCε˚ q “ ϕ P Hloc
1
pCε˚ q | ∇ϕ P L2 pCε˚ q and MΩr ˚ε pϕq “ 0 . (5.49)
Indeed, due to (iv) of Theorem 5.25, there exists a constant C (indepen-

dent of ε) such that for all ϕ in W pCε˚ q,
}ϕ}L2 pΩr ˚ε q ď C}∇ϕ}L2 pCε˚ q , (5.50)
so that W pCε˚ q is a Hilbert space when endowed with the norm

.
}ϕ}W pCε˚ q “ }∇ϕ}L2 pCε˚ q .
By Theorem 5.28, uniform estimates can now be obtained.
Theorem 5.29 (Existence and priori estimates for a proper approximation).

Suppose that Hypotheses H2 and (5.48) are satisfied.
222
Then, there is a unique function uε in W pCε˚ q, solution of

ż ż
A pxq∇uε pxq∇ϕpxq dx, “
ε
fε pxqϕpxq dx, @ϕ P W pCε˚ q. (5.51)
Cε˚ Cε˚
It satisfies the following estimates with a constant C independent of ε:

}∇uε }L2 pCε˚ q ď C}fε }L2 pΩ˚ε q ,
(5.52)
}uε }L2 pΩr ˚ε q ď C}fε }L2 pΩ˚ε q .
Proof. Existence and uniqueness of the solution uε follow immediately from
the Lax-Milgram theorem but this does not give a uniform estimate, unless
Cε in (5.50) is bounded.
To obtain a uniform estimate, use condition (5.48) to obtain the inequality
α}∇uε }2L2 pCε˚ q ď }fε }L2 pΩr ˚ε q }uε }L2 pΩr ˚ε q .
Since MΩr ˚ε puε q “ 0, by Theorem 5.25,
}uε }L2 pΩr ˚ε q ď C}∇uε }L2 pCε˚ q ,
from which (5.52) are derived.
Theorem 5.30. Suppose that Hypotheses H2 and (5.48) hold. Assume that
the sequence tfε uε satisfies
|Y ˚ |
Eε0 pfε qp“ frε q á f weakly in L2 pΩq(7).
|Y |
Assume furthermore, that for some matrix B,
` ˘
Tε˚ Aε Ñ B a.e. in Ω ˆ Y ˚(8).
Let uε be the solution of Problem (5.51). Then, there exist u in V pΩq and u
p
in L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY ˚ qq, satisfying
piq Tε˚ puε 1Ωr ˚ε q Ñ u strongly in L2 pΩ ; H 1 pY ˚ qq,
(5.53)
piiq Tε˚ p∇uε 1Cε˚ q á ∇u ` ∇y u
p weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y ˚ qN ,
pq is the unique solution in of the problem
and the pair (u, u
$ ż
’ 1 “ ‰“ ‰
’
’ Bpx, yq ∇upxq ` ∇y u ppx, yq ∇Ψpxq ` ∇y Φpx, yq dxdy
’
’ |Y | ΩˆY ˚
’
’ ż
’
& |Y ˚ |
“ f pxq Ψpxq dx, (5.54)
’ |Y | Ω
’
’
’
’ MΩ puq “ 0,
’
’
’
% 1
@Ψ P V pΩq, @Φ P L2 pΩ; Hper pY ˚ qq.
(7) See Proposition 4.25 for an equivalent statement involving Eε pfε q.
223
Proof. First, in view of Lemma 5.4 and the ellipticity of the matrix field B
(arising from Aε in M pα, β, Ωq), problem (5.54) has a solution which is unique
by application of the Lax-Milgram theorem in V pΩq ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper,0 1
pY ˚ qq.
Using estimates (5.52), convergences (5.53) follow from Theorem 5.28. This
is up to a subsequence, but as usual, the uniqueness of the solution of the
limit problem implies that the whole sequence converges.
At this point, the proof is somewhat standard when using unfolding.
First, unfold the left-hand side of (5.47) using as test function
´x¯
.
vε pxq “ Ψpxq ` ε ϕpxq ψ ,
ε
1
where Ψ is in H 1 pΩq, ϕ in DpΩq and ψ “ ψpyq in Hper pY ˚ q. Then, by
Proposition 4.8(i) that
Tε˚ pvε q Ñ Ψ strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q,

´ ´ ¨ ¯¯
Tε˚ ϕψ Ñ Φ strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q with Φpx, yq “ ϕpxq ψpyq.
ε
Since ´x¯ ´x¯
∇vε pxq “ ∇Ψpxq ` ϕpxqp∇y ψq ` ε∇ϕpxqψ ,
ε ε
by Proposition 4.8 (i),
Tε˚ p∇vε q Ñ ∇Ψ ` ∇y Φ strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y ˚ qN .
Consequently,
ż ż
1
A ∇uε ∇vε dx “
ε
T ˚ pAε qTε˚ p∇uε 1Cε˚ q Tε˚ p∇vε q dxdy
Cε˚ |Y | ΩˆY ˚ ε
ż
1 “ ‰“ ‰
Ñ p0 px, yq ∇Ψpxq ` φpxq∇ψpyq dx dy.
|Y | ΩˆY ˚
Concerning the right-hand side of (5.47), as vε strongly converges to Ψ

in L2 pΩq, ż ż
|Y ˚ |
lim fε vε dx “ f Ψ dx.
εÑ0 C ˚
ε
|Y | Ω
Equation (5.54) is then obtained in view of the density of the tensor product
1
DpΩq b Hper pY ˚ q in L2 pΩ; Hper
1
pY ˚ qq.
Finally, by convergence (5.53)(i),
MΩ puq “ MΩˆY ˚ puq “ lim MΩˆY ˚ pTε˚ puε 1Ωr ˚ε qq

εÑ0
r ˚|
|Ω
“ lim ε
MΩr ˚ε puε q “ 0,
εÑ0 |Ω|
from which the uniqueness for the solution of (5.54) is straightforward.
224
The homogenized limit problem can now be made explicit.
Theorem 5.31. Under the hypotheses of Theorem 5.30, the homogenized

formulation associated with Theorem 5.30 is
$ ˚
&´div pAhom ∇uq “ |Y | f in Ω,
|Y |
%
MΩ puq “ 0.
The homogenized matrix Ahom “ pahom

ij q1ďi,jďN is the same as the one given
in Theorem 5.6.
Proof. Taking Ψ “ 0 in Problem (5.54), yields
ÿN
Bu
ppx, yq “
u χ˚i px, yq,
pxqp
i“1
Bx i
p˚i ’s are the solutions of problems (5.17). Inserting into (5.54) with
where the χ
Φ “ 0 gives the result.
Under no additional hypothesis, one has the strong convergence of the

energy.
Proposition 5.32. Under the hypotheses of Theorem 5.30, the following

convergence holds:
ż ż
1 “ ‰“ ‰
lim Aε ∇uε ∇uε dx “ p ∇u ` ∇y u
B ∇u ` ∇y u p dxdy, (5.55)
εÑ0 C ˚
ε
|Y | ΩˆY ˚
so that,
Tε˚ p∇uε 1Cε˚ q Ñ ∇u ` ∇y u

p strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y ˚ qN . (5.56)
Proof. Then, by (5.46)(i) applied to uε , Tε˚ puε 1Ωr ˚ε q converges strongly to u

in L2 pΩ ˆ Y ˚ q. Due to Remark 4.9, for every weak limit point F of Tε˚ pfε q,
|Y ˚ |
MY ˚ pF q “ f.
|Y |
By Proposition 4.4 (i), as Λε X Ωr ˚ “ ∅, it follows that

ε
ż ż
1
fε uε dx “ T ˚ pfε qTε˚ puε 1Ωr ˚ε q dxdy.
rε
Ω ˚ |Y | ΩˆY ˚ ε
Consequently,
ż ż ż
1 |Y ˚ |
lim fε uε dx “ F px, yqupxq dxdy “ f u dx.
εÑ0 Ω r˚
ε
|Y | ΩˆY ˚ |Y | Ω
225
5.5. How to treat perforated solid structures
The proof of (5.55) is now complete, since by (5.51),

ż ż
Aε ∇uε ∇uε dx “ fε uε dx,
Cε˚ r˚
Ω ε
and by (5.54),
ż ż
1 “ ‰“ ‰ |Y ˚ |
p ∇u ` ∇y u
B ∇u ` ∇y u p dxdy “ f u dx.
|Y | ΩˆY ˚ |Y | Ω
Convergence (5.56) is now obtained as in the proof of Proposition 3.9.
Corollary 5.33 (Corrector results). As ε Ñ 0,
› ÿN ´ Bu ¯ ›
› ›
›∇uε ´ ∇u ´ Mε Uε˚ p∇y χ
p˚i q› Ñ 0.
i“1
Bx i r˚
L2 pΩ εq
In the case where the matrix field A does not depend on x, the following
corrector result holds:
› ÿN ´ Bu ¯ ´ ¨ ¯›
› ›
›uε ´ u ´ ε Qε p˚i
χ › 1 r ˚ Ñ 0.
i“1
Bx i ε H pΩε q
The proof is similar to those of Theorems 5.10 and 5.11.
5.5 How to treat perforated solid structures

In this section, for simplicity one assumes Y “ p0, 1qN . Recall also that
tb1 , . . . , bN u is the usual orthonormal basis of RN .
In many physical problems with holes, one cannot consider perforated open
sets containing only parts of perforated cells near the boundary (e.g. in
elasticity if we consider periodic truss-like structures made of thin beams or
plates). In these situations, one is required to consider domains containing
only whole perforated cells up to its boundary.
When one starts with a bounded domain Ω, the approximate problems
have to be posed in a union of perforated cells and a first choice is given
by Ωp ˚ . But it may very well happen that this open set is not connected for
ε
every values of ε even when Ω is (see Figure 5.3). The way this difficulty
is handled in the previous section (see Definition 5.26) does not necessarily
yield an exact union of perforated cells. If connectedness of the approximate
domain and the fact that these are unions of ε-cells are both essential, an
alternative is to use the set Ω p ˚ext defined as follows (see Figure 5.4):
ε
(
Ξε “ ξ P G | εpξ ` Y q X Ω ‰ ∅ ,
ext
` ˘
p ext “ interior Ť εpξ ` Y q ,
Ω
ε
ξPΞext
ε
` Ť ˚ ˘
p ˚ext
Ω ε “ interior εpξ ` Y q .
ξPΞext
ε
226
p ε (in grey) is not an open connected set

Figure 5.3: Ω
Ť p ext “ Ť Ť
ε “
Ωint Ω“ Ω ε
Figure 5.4: The open sets Ωint p ext

ε , Ω and Ωε .
p
The set Ωε˚ext
is obtained from the latter by perforating every ε-cell.
It is easy to see that Ωp ˚ext is connected whenever Ω is. Furthermore,

ε
Poincaré-Wirtinger and Korn inequalities hold with constants independent
of ε (for ε small) as is shown in the next proposition.
Proposition 5.34 (Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality). Assume Ω is a bounded

connected domain with Lipschitz boundary. Then the open set Ω p ˚ext satisfies
ε
a uniform Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality for every p P r1, `8q, i.e., there
exists a constant C independent of ε (it only depends on p and BΩ) such that
}ϕ ´ MΩp ˚ext pϕq}Lp pΩp ˚ext p ˚ext q. (5.57)

ε ε q ď C}∇ϕ}Lp pΩ
p ˚ext
ε q, @ϕ P W 1,p pΩ ε
227
For its proof, we need Lemma 5.35 stated below. To use it, set (i “
1, . . . , N )
. (
ε,i “ ξ P Ξε
Ξext | ξ ` bi P Ξext
ext
ε ,
. (
ε “ ξ P G | εpξ ` Y q Ă Ω2ε N ,
Ξint int?
. ` Ť ˘
p int “
Ω interior εpξ ` Y q ,
ε
ξPΞint
ε
Ť
N
and observe that Ξext
ε “ Ξext
ε,i .
i“1
Lemma 5.35. Suppose p P r1, `8q. There exists a constant C which only
depends on p and BΩ such that for every function defined on Ξextε ,
ÿ ´ ÿ ÿ
N ÿ ¯
|pξq|p ď C |pξq|p ` |pξ ` bi q ´ pξq|p . (5.58)
ξPΞext
ε ξPΞint
ε
i“1 ξPΞext
ε,i
Proof. First, since BΩ is Lipschitz, the domain Ω has the uniform

? cone pro-
perty (see Definition 5.21). Note that every ball of radius 4ε N contains a
p int (for example, the ε-cell containing the center
cell εpξ ` Y q included in Ω ε
of this ball).
Figure 5.5: The chain from ξ to ξ 1
ε . There exists a cone of the family tCj u (e.g., C1 see

Let ξ be in Ξext
Definition 5.21) and a point xξ P εpξ ` Y q X Ω such that xξ ` C1 Ă Ω.
228
Consider the cone C ξ obtained from the cone txξ ` C1 u ? (see Figure 5.5) by
truncation so that it contains a tangent?ball of radius 4ε N .
The domain tz P RN | distpz, C ξ q ă 2ε N u is covered by a finite number of
ε-cells included in Ω p ext and their number is bounded by some fixed integer κ
ε
independent of ε (depending only upon the geometry of the cone C1 ).
From such a covering, for every ξ P Ξext ε one constructs a finite chain
tη ξ i uiPt1,...ku of elements in Ξext
ε connecting ξ to some ξ 1 P Ξint
ε as follows:
ξ 1 “ η1ξ , ξ “ ηkξ , and ξ

ηi`1 ´ ηiξ P t˘b1 , . . . , ˘bN u, i “ 1, . . . , k ´ 1.
Each cell εpηiξ ` Y q intersects the cone C ξ . Since the cone C ξ is covered by
? the distance (in Z )
N
at most κ ε-cells, k is bounded by κ. Also observe that
between ξ and an element of the chain is less than κ N .
By finite induction, one has
` ÿ
k´1
˘
|pξq|p ď 2κpp´1q |pξ 1 q|p ` ξ
|pηi`1 q ´ pηiξ q|p . (5.59)
i“1
ř 2
Now consider the sum |pξq|p . Every ξ in Ξext
ε appears in the
ε zΞε
ξPΞext int
right-hand
? side of a sum like (5.59) a finite number of times which is bounded
2
by p2κ N q?N
(since the distance between ξ and the beginning of a chain ξis
less than κ N ).
As a consequence, one obtains
ÿ ´ ÿ ÿ
N ÿ ¯
|pξq|p ď C |pξq|p ` |pξ ` bi q ´ pξq|p .
ε zΞε
ξPΞext int ξPΞint
ε
i“1 ξPΞext
ε,i
where C does not depend on ε. This proves (5.58).
p ˚ext .
Proof of Proposition 5.34. For simplicity, one extends ϕ by 0 in RN zΩ ε
Set
Ăε pϕqpεξq ´ MΩint? ˝ Q˚ pϕq,
pξq “ M ε
2ε N
and note that pξq is defined for every ξ P Ξext

ε .
From Proposition 5.24, one
1,p p ˚ext
has, for every ϕ in W pΩε q and for a constant depending on p and BΩ,
}Q˚ε pϕq ´ MΩint? ˝ Q˚ε pϕq}Lp pΩint? q ď C}∇Q˚ε pϕq}Lp pΩint? q

2ε N 2ε N 2ε N
ď C}∇ϕ}Lp pΩp ˚ext

ε q.
This implies
ÿ
|pξq|p εN ď C}Q˚ε pϕq ´MΩint? ˝ Q˚ε pϕq}pLp pΩint? q
ď C}∇ϕ}pLp pΩp ˚ext q .
2ε N 2ε N ε
ξPΞint
ε
229
Moreover, by (4.34)), one has
ÿN ÿ ˇˇ pξ ` bi q ´ pξq ˇˇp p

ˇ ˇ εN ď C}∇ϕ}Lp pΩp ˚ext q .
i“1 ext
ε ε
ξPΞε,i
By Lemma 5.35 one concludes that there is a constant C independent of ε

such that ÿ
|pξq|p εN ď C}∇ϕ}pLp pΩp ˚ext q .
ε
ξPΞext
ε
Recall that
ÿ
Ăε pϕqpεξq}p p
}ϕ ´ M p
L pεpξ`Y ˚ qq ď C}∇ϕ}Lp pΩ
p ˚ext q .
ε
ξPΞext
ε
From the last two inequalities one obtains
}ϕ ´ MΩint? ˝ Q˚ε pϕq}Lp pΩp ˚ext

ε q ď C}∇ϕ}Lp pΩ
p ˚ext
ε q. (5.60)
2ε N
By the Hölder inequality, this implies

› ›
›M p ˚ext pϕq ´ MΩint? ˝ Q˚ε pϕq› p p ˚ext ď }ϕ ´ MΩint? ˝ Q˚ε pϕq} p p ˚ext .
Ωε 2ε N L pΩ q ε 2ε
L pΩε
N
q
This estimate together with (5.60) imply (5.57).

In the case of functions vanishing (at the limit as ε Ñ 0) on a part Γ0 of
BΩ, as in Subsection 4.3.2, assume that there exists an open set Ω1 with a
Lipschitz boundary such that Ω1 X BΩ “ Γ0 . Set
ˇ
WΓ1,p p ˚ext q “ ψ P W 1,p pΩ
pΩ p 1˚ext q, ψ “ ψ 1 ˚ext ,
p ˚ext q ˇ Dψ 1 PW 1,p pΩ
0 ε ε ε pε
|Ω
˚ext ( (5.61)
ψ 1 “ 0 in Ω p1 p *ext .
zΩ
ε ε
For these spaces, there is a uniform Poincaré inequality.

Proposition 5.36 (Poincaré inequality). For every p P r1, `8q, there exists
a constant C independent of ε (it only depends on p and BΩ) such that
}ϕ}Lp pΩp ˚ext @ϕ P WΓ1,p p ˚ext q.

ε q ď C}∇ϕ}Lp pΩ
p ˚ext
ε q, 0
pΩ ε
p 1˚ext , then we estimate M p 1˚ext pϕq

Proof. First we use Proposition 5.34 in Ω ε Ω ε
p 1˚ext z Ω
in Ω p *ext .
ε ε
The same proof can be carried out for the case of a uniform Korn inequa-
p ˚ext qN . Here, one uses the Korn inequalities (2.13)
lity for the space W 1,p pΩ
˚ ˚
`ε ˘
for Y and Yj “ interior Y ˚ Y pbj ` Y ˚ q , j “ 1, . . . , N . One also takes into
account the uniform Korn inequality for the domains Ωint ?
2ε N
(due to their
uniform Lipschitz boundary, see Lemma 5.22).
230
Proposition 5.37 (Korn inequality). For every displacement u belonging to

p ˚ext qN there exists a rigid displacement R such that
W 1,p pΩ ε
}u ´ R}W 1,p pΩp ˚ext

ε q ď C}epuq}Lp pΩε q .
˚
Furthermore, if u P WΓ1,p p ˚ext qN (see (5.61)), then one has

pΩ
0 ε
}u}W 1,p pΩp ˚ext

ε q ď C}epuq}Lp pΩε q .
˚
The constants do not depend on ε.
5.6 Cracks: from a linear operator to a Leray-

Lions operator.
In the case of fissured domains, there is a type of boundary condition which is
specific to cracks and makes the problem non-linear. The non-linearity arises
from a constraint on the jumps of the solution across the cracks (the most
common is that the jump be with a given sign, but this can be extended to
an inhomogeneous one-sided or two sided inequality satisfied by the jump).
We briefly present this model problem in the scalar case (where the crack
has to be orientable). The jump condition is more natural in elasticity as it
represents a non-penetration condition on the displacement near the crack
and is independent of the choice of direction of the unit normal. We refer to
[68] for the homogenization of a linearized elastic body with cracks and to
[126] for the homogenization of a diffusion-deformation problem in a fissured
domain. A first version of the scalar problem was presented in [87].
In the following theorem, the general hypotheses are the same as in the
preceding sections. For simplicity, we consider the case of a single crack S
and no holes in the unit cell Y (see Figure 4.9), but one can easily consider
more general situations as well). See Section 4.5 for the notations.
The ε-problem is posed in the fissured domain Ω˚ε where the small cracks
are denoted S ε . Since, S is a null set, there is no need to distinguish between
Tε and Tε˚ , except when applied to elements in H 1 pΩ˚ε q.
Let g be given in L1 pSq and set gε pxq “ ε gptx{εuY q. Introduce the closed
convex subset W ε of H 1 pΩ˚ε q defined by
. (
W ε “ w P H 1 pΩ˚ε q | w ” 0 a.e. on BΩ and rwsS ε ď gε a.e. on S ε ,
where r ¨ sSε is the jump along the defined normal across the crack S ε . The
function g is assumed to be non-negative so that W ε is not empty (it then
contains H01 pΩq).
Finally, let Aε belong to M pα, β, Ωq and f ε in L2 pΩq. Then the problem
is: to find uε in W ε such that
ż ż
A ∇uε ∇pw ´ uε q dx ě
ε
f pw ´ uε q dx, @w in W ε . (5.62)
Ω˚
ε Ω
231
5.6. Cracks: from a linear operator to a Leray-Lions operator.
This variational inequality has a unique solution from standard results (see
for example, [141]).
Note that here the operator is linear, the non-linearity arises solely from
the constraint (W ε is not a subspace).
In the case where Aε is a symmetric matrix field, the problem can be
reformulated as the minimization over W ε of the functional
ż ż
. 1
Eε pwq “ Aε ∇w ∇w dx ´ f w dx,
2 Ω˚ε Ω
which is continuous, uniformly convex and coercive.

The homogenization result is stated in the next theorems.
Theorem 5.38 (Unfolded limit). Let tAε uε be in M pα, β, Ωq. Assume that
Tε pAε q Ñ B a.e. (or in measure) in Ω ˆ Y
and that f ε converges to f weakly in L2 pΩq. Then there exists u in H01 pΩq,
such that
uε Ñ u strongly in L2 pΩq,
(5.63)
Tε˚ puε q Ñ u strongly in L2 pΩ; H 1 pY ˚ qq.
p in L2 pΩ; Hper
There exists also u 1
pY ˚ qq, such that
Tε˚ p∇uε q á ∇u ` ∇y u
p weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN .
pq in H01 pΩqˆL2 pΩ; Wq is the unique solution of the unfolded

The pair pu, u
limit problem,
$ ż
’ 1
’
’ Bp∇u ` ∇y u pq p∇w ` ∇y wp ´ ∇u ´ ∇y upq dxdy
’
& |Y | ΩˆY ˚ż
’
(5.64)
’
’ ě f pw ´ uq dx,
’
’
’
%
Ω
@pw, wq
p P H01 pΩq ˆ L2 pΩ; Wq,
where W is the closed convex set defined as

. ˇ (
W “ w P Hper 1
pY ˚ q ˇ rwsS ď g a.e. on S, and MY pwq “ 0 ,
and
. ˇ (
L2 pΩ; Wq “ v P L2 pΩ; Hper
1
pY ˚ qq ˇ vpx, ¨q P W for a.e. x in Ω .
Brief idea of the proof. The zero function is in L2 pΩ; Wq. Selecting it as
test function in (5.62) implies that }uε }H 1 pΩ˚ε q is bounded with respect to
0
ε so that, up to a subsequence, convergence (5.63)1 holds. Also, Tε˚ puε q is
bounded in L2 pΩ; H 1 pY ˚ qq and Tε p∇uε q is bounded in L2 pΩ ˆ Y ˚ qN . Up
to a subsequence, Tε˚ puε q converges weakly to some u in L2 pΩ; H 1 pY ˚ qq,
232
and by (5.63)1 and the fact that }uε }H 1 pΩ˚ε q is bounded with respect to ε,
0
the convergence is strong, which is (5.63)2 . Similarly, Tε˚ p∇uε q converges to
∇u ` ∇y u p for some u p in L2 pΩ; Hper
1
pY ˚ qq satisfying MY pp
uq ” 0 a.e. in Ω.
Since by Definition 4.11, M˚ε pφq “ MY ˚ ˝ Tε˚ pφq for φ in Lp pΩ˚ε q, Propo-
sition 4.45(ii) gives the convergence
1´ ˚ ¯
Tε puε q ´ MY ˚ ˝ Tε˚ puε q ´ y c ˚ ¨ ∇u á u p weakly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY ˚ qq.
ε
By the definition of W ε , the jump across S of the left-hand side is bounded
above by g, and therefore, so is the jump of u p across S. Hence u p belongs to
L2 pΩ; Wq.
Let w P H01 pΩq and wp P DpΩ; Hper 1
pY ˚ qq X L2 pΩ; Wq (the latter makes
sense since g ě 0). Take the function wε defined by
´ !x) ¯
.
wε pxq “ wpxq ` w p x,
ε Y
as test function in (5.62). Unfolding and passing to the limit gives (5.64).
Here, one can use Lemma 3.11 to pass to the limit in the quadratic term in
Tε˚ p∇uε q. Finally, the density of DpΩ; Hper
1
pY ˚ qq X L2 pΩ; Wq in L2 pΩ; Wq
(the standard procedure of truncation and regularization in Ω works in this
case because sW Ă W for sP r0, 1s) completes the proof of (5.64).
Uniqueness of the solution of (5.64) implies the convergence of the full
sequence. While existence of a solution for the unfolded problem is a con-
sequence of the above convergence, it also follows from standard results for
variational inequalities on the product space H01 pΩq ˆ Hper1
pY ˚ q.
In order to describe the homogenized problem satisfied by u, we intro-
duce the cell-problem and the associated corrector corresponding to (5.64).
Since the problem is nonlinear, one has to define the corrector for every vec-
tor ζ in RN .
But first, we write an equivalent formulation for (5.64) by replacing the
test function w by u ` w:
$
’ pq P H01 pΩq ˆ L2 pΩ; Wq such that
Find pu, u
’
’ ż ż
& 1
Bp∇u ` ∇y u pq p∇w ` ∇y wp ´ ∇y u
pq dxdy ě f w dx,
’
’ |Y | ΩˆY ˚ Ω
’
%
@pw, wq
p P H01 pΩq ˆ L2 pΩ; Wq.
p“u
Choosing w p and then replacing w by ´w, implies
ż ż
1
Bp∇u ` ∇y upq ∇w dxdy “ f w dx, @w P H01 pΩq. (5.65)
|Y | ΩˆY ˚ Ω
Clearly, now, (5.64) is equivalent to (5.65) together with

ż
1
Bp∇u ` ∇y u pq p∇y w
p ´ ∇y u
pq dxdy ě 0, @w p P L2 pΩ; Wq. (5.66)
|Y | ΩˆY ˚
233
5.6. Cracks: from a linear operator to a Leray-Lions operator.
Definition 5.39 (The cell problems and the homogenized operator). For ζ
in RN and a.e. x P Ω, let χζ be the solution of the following problem:
$
&Find χζ px, ¨q in W such that
ż
1
% Bpζ ` ∇y χζ q p∇y z ´ ∇y χζ q dy ě 0, @z P W.
|Y | Y ˚
1
This is a standard variational inequality on Hper pY ˚ q. Its unique solution
8 ˚
for each ζ, actually belongs to L pΩ; Hper pY qq because
1
β
}∇y χζ }L2 pY ˚ q ď |ζ||Y |1{2 .
α
p can now be expressed from (5.66) as
The solution u
ppx, yq ” χ∇upxq px, yq.
u
Going back to (5.65) one is lead to set

ż
. 1 ` ˘
A hom
px, ζq “ Bpx, yq ζ ` ∇y χζ px, yq dy.
|Y | Y ˚
Then the homogenized problem satisfied by u can be written in the form
ż ż
A hom
px, ∇upxqq ∇wpxq dx “ f w dx, @w P H01 pΩq, (5.67)
Ω Ω
or equivalently, as
´div Ahom px, ∇upxqq “ f in Ω.
Proposition 5.40. The map Ahom is of Caratheodory type and strongly

monotone. Hence problem (5.67) is of Leray-Lions type.
Proof. It is easy to prove that the map ζ ÞÑ χζ pxq is continuous from RN to
W for a.e. x P Ω. Furthermore, using Lusin’s criterion, one shows that the
map Ahom is of Caratheodory type.
One also has
´ β¯
|Ahom px, ζq| ď α ` |ζ| for a.e. x P Ω,
α
and moreover, for ζ and η in RN ,
` hom ˘
A p¨, ζq ´ Ahom p¨, ηq ¨ pζ ´ ηq
ż ´ ¯
1
“ Bpζ ` ∇y χζ q ´ Bpη ` ∇y χη q ¨ pζ ´ ηq dy
|Y | Y ˚
ż ´ ¯
1
“ Bpζ ` ∇y χζ q ´ Bpη ` ∇y χη q ¨ pζ ` ∇y χζ ´ η ´ ∇y χη q dy
|Y | Y ˚
ż ´ ¯
1
` Bpζ ` ∇y χζ q ´ Bpη ` ∇y χη q ¨ p∇y χη ´ ∇y χζ q dy.
|Y | Y ˚
234
The last integral above is non negative due to Definition 5.39. The next to
last integral is bounded below due to the coercivity of B, by
ż
α
|ζ ´ η ` ∇y χζ ´ ∇y χη |2 dy.
|Y | Y ˚
Expanding and using the fact that the gradient of a Y-periodic function is of
zero average, one gets
` hom ˘
A p¨, ζq ´ Ahom p¨, ηq ¨ pζ ´ ηq ě α|ζ ´ η|2 ,
which concludes the proof.
Remark 5.41.
1. One can obtain a convergence of the energy and a corrector result as in
the linear case.
2. In the case where Aε is a symmetric field, one can prove that the limit prob-
lem is the minimization of a limit convex continuous energy whose derivative
is Ahom .
3. One can also consider the more general jump condition involving a gε of
the form ´ !x) ¯
gε pxq “ εg x, .
ε Y
The same proof applies provided g is assumed to be in CpΩ ˆ Sq` .
For the first two points, we refer to [68] for a detailed presentation in the
case of linear elasticity with holes and cracks.
235
Chapter 6
A Stokes problem in a
partially porous medium
The scope of this chapter is the homogenization of the Stokes problem in

a partially porous medium via the unfolding method. As in the preceding
sections, Ω is a bounded open set in RN with a Lipschitz boundary. Assume
that it is composed by two parts, one of which is a porous medium with
ε-periodically distributed pores of the size of order ε. We consider the flow
of a newtonian fluid in Ω which adheres to the boundary of the pores. In
mathematical terms, this signifies that the pores behave as holes with an
homogeneous Dirichlet condition on their boundary. The problem is therefore
a partial differential equation with unknown velocity and pressure of the fluid,
stated in a partially perforated domain.
Darcy’s law, proposed by H. Darcy in 1856 (originally to describe the
flow of water through sand) is widely used for porous media computations.
Consisting of an explicit relationship between the velocity of the fluid and
the gradient of the pressure, it was at the time purely empirical.
In the framework of a completely perforated media, a remarkable mathe-
matical result is [107], where Darcy’s law was established in the homogenized
limit by applying the multiple-scale asymptotic method combined with sharp
evaluations of the physical quantities in the problem. To our knowledge, it
is the first mathematical justification of Darcy’s law.
More recently, similar mathematical results were obtained in [179] and in
[185] by the method of oscillating test functions of Tartar. Using the same
method, the problems associated with a family of nonhomogeneous Neumann
boundary conditions on the boundary of the pores (depending on a parame-
ter γ P p´8, `8q) were considered in [71]. Following the values of γ, various
limit problems were obtained beyond Darcy’s law, such as Brinkmann’s equa-
tion (also originally introduced empirically). Later, the same problems were
studied in [190] using the unfolding method.
On the other hand, in [149] it was shown (still applying the multiple-scale

6.1. Setting of the problem
asymptotic method) that two distinct pressures appear in the limit problem
(from which Darcy’s law is extracted). Contrary to that, there appeared
only a single pressure in the references indicated above. In this chapter
concerning a fluid flow in a partially perforated domain, the unfolding method
will clarify the role of the two pressures appearing in [149], and make precise
their contribution in the limit problem.
The case of partially porous media was studied in [134] and [136], where
the condition on the interface was investigated. In the particular case when
the latter is a hyper-plane, this paper establishes the “Beavers-Joseph-Saff-
mann” interface condition (originally obtained empirically).
In [61], the case of a vanishing viscosity (of order ε2 ) in the porous part of
the domain was considered. But this is not really natural, since it means that
there are distinct fluids in the two parts of the domain. Here, we consider
the more physical situation of a single fluid in both domains and a scaled
external force in the perforated part. As a consequence, the limit problems
in the two subdomains are decoupled since they occur at the scale 1 in the
regular part and at the scale ε in the porous part (see Theorems 6.5 and 6.7
below). A corrector result is also obtained.
6.1 Setting of the problem

We first recall the definition of the Stokes problem. Since one is dealing with
vector functions, introduce
Notation 6.1. As a rule, any vector function is written in bold characters,

as for example, w which means that
w “ pw1 , . . . , wN q.
Let Ω and Ω1 be two bounded open connected sets with Lipschitz bound-
aries and such that Ω1 Ă Ω Ă RN (N ě 2). Set
Ω2 “ ΩzΩ1 , Γ “ BΩ1 X BΩ2 .
Γ is the interface between the two subdomains Ω1 and Ω2 . For simplicity, we

assume Ω2 connected also and with Lipschitz boundary.
We use the notations introduced in Chapters 1 and 4 for the group G,
p ε , .., the operators associated with
the unit parallelotope Y , the sets Ξε , Ω
unfolding (Tε , Mε , Qε , ...).
The porous medium Ω1,ε is restricted to Ω1 and is modeled with a closed
hole S Ă Y , such that all the hypotheses and definitions of Section 4.1 are
.
satisfied (in particular, Y ˚ “ Y zS is connected and Hypothesis pH2 q holds).
We introduce the new notations for the cells in Ω1
ˇ ( ( (
pΞ1 q1ε “ ξ P G ˇ ε ξ ` Y X Ω1 ‰ ∅, ε ξ ` Y X Γ “ ∅ .
238
Chapter 6. A Stokes problem in a partially porous medium
In Ω1 , Ť (
.
Sε “ ε ξ`S , Ω˚1,ε “ Ω1 zSε ,
ξP pΞ1 q1ε
are the pores and the part occupied by the fluid, respectively. By the choice
of pΞ1 q1ε , Sε does not intersect Γ.
The problem is posed in the open domain
.
Ωε “ Ω˚1,ε Y Γ Y Ω2 .
Figure 6.1 below depicts three possible configurations (observe that the last
one corresponds to Ω2 “ ∅, the whole of Ω being a perforated domain). In
the three configurations, the holes can intersect the exterior boundary BΩ
(but, as mentioned above, not the interface Γ which is present in the first
two pictures).
Figure 6.1: Three possible configurations of the set Ωε
In the sequel we shall also use the notations from Chapter 4 for the sets
associated with Ω1 , namely
ˇ ( (
pΞ1 qε “ ξ P G ˇ ε ξ ` Y Ă Ω1 ,
` Ť (˘
p 1,ε “ interior
Ω ε ξ ` Y , Λ1,ε “ Ω1 zΩp 1,ε
ξPpΞ1 qε
` Ť ˚ (˘
p ˚ “ interior
Ω ε ξ`Y .
1,ε
ξPpΞ1 qε
One can see in Figure 6.2 a general physical domain Ωε and the sets
introduced so far. The hypothesis that the holes do not intersect the interface
Γ does not in this case, exclude the holes intersecting the exterior boundary
of Ω˚1,ε .
239
6.1. Setting of the problem
Figure 6.2: The physical domain Ωε and its components
The Stokes equations are derived from the general balance laws of continu-
ous media (here the balance of the momentum) and from the fluid constitutive
law given by Stokes.
Denoting by u the velocity field of the fluid, the equation of motion of a
newtonian incompressible fluid in a domain O in the general evolution case
(t being the time variable) is written as follows:
$
’ ÿ
N ÿN
& Bui `
’
uj
Bui
“
Bτij
` fi in O,
Bt Bx j Bxj (6.1)
’
’
j“1 j“1
%
div u “ 0 in O,
for i “ 1, . . . , N , where f is an exterior body force and τ “ pτij q1ďi,jďN is

the stress tensor.
The Stokes constitutive law for a fluid is given by
τ “ ´p I ` 2μD, (6.2)
where p is the (scalar) pressure (a Lagrange multiplier for the divergence-

free condition), I is the identity tensor, μ ą 0 is the viscosity constant, and
240
D “ pDij q1ďi,jďN (known as the rate of deformation tensor) is the symmetric

part of the velocity gradient, with components
1 ´ Bui Buj ¯
Dij “ ` .
2 Bxj Bxi
Taking into account this definition and the fact that div u “ 0, replacing τij
by its value from (6.2) in the right-hand side of (6.1), we get
$
’ ÿN
& Bui `
’
uj
Bui
“´
Bp
` μ Δui ` fi in O,
Bt Bxj Bxi (6.3)
’
’
j“1
%
div u “ 0 in O.
Here, we shall only consider the steady state (no dependence in time).
Moreover, for reasonably slow motions (for high viscosity for example), one
can neglect the non linear terms in the left-hand side of (6.3), to end up with
what is known as the Stokes equations in O for incompressible fluids,
#
´μ Δu ` ∇p “ f in O,
(6.4)
div u “ 0 in O,
to which, to be consistent, one adds a boundary conditions on BO. We

consider in this section the adhesion condition, i.e., u “ 0 on BO.
Now, considering the flow of an incompressible fluid in Ωε , introduce the
space ˇ (
Vε “ w P H01 pΩε qN ˇ div w “ 0 .
The variational formulation of the Stokes problem (6.4) in the domain Ωε
is formulated as follows: find uε in Vε such that
$ ż ż
&μ ∇uε ∇v dx “ fε v dx,
Ωε Ωε (6.5)
%
@v P Vε ,
where fε is given in L2 pΩqN . It has a unique solution uε by the Lax-Milgram

theorem applied in Vε . The pressure pε is recovered (up to constants) by the
Stokes formula in L2 pΩε q via its gradient.
We shall also use the following formulation which is equivalent and has a
unique solution puε , ∇pε q in Vε ˆ H ´1 pΩε qN (the pressure is normalized by
the second equation to guarantee its uniqueness in the connected component
of Ω2 in Ωε , see for instance [187]):
$ ż ż ż
’
’ μ ∇uε ∇v dx ´ pε div v dx “ fε v dx,
’
’
’
& ż Ωε Ωε Ωε
pε dx “ 0, (6.6)
’
’
’
’
’
%
Ω2
@v P H01 pΩε qN .
241
6.2. A priori estimates
Our aim is to study the asymptotic behavior of uε , pε as ε Ñ 0. To do so,

the first task is to obtain uniform (with respect to ε) estimates of puε , pε q.
The estimates given in the next subsection will involve the right-hand side
of system (6.6) through the following quantity:
.
Nε “ pε2 }fε }2L2 pΩ1 q ` }fε }2L2 pΩ2 q q1{2 . (6.7)
6.2 A priori estimates

Set `Ť ˇ (˘
Y “ interior ξ ` Y ˇ ξ P G, Y X tξ ` Y u ‰ ∅ ,
which is the union of Y and the 3N ´ 1 cells surrounding it.
The basic ingredients to establish a priori estimates are the following
inequalities:
1. The Poincaré inequality in Y. For every w P H 1 pYq with v|S “ 0,
}w}L2 pYq ď C}∇w}L2 pYq . (6.8)
2. The Nečas inequality. For every bounded domain O with Lipschitz
boundary, there is a constant C depending on O such that, for every Φ in
L2 pOqN ,
}Φ ´ MO pΦq}L2 pOq ď C}∇Φ}H ´1 pOq
"ż ˇ )
ˇ (6.9)
“ C sup Φpyq div Ψpyq dy ˇ }Ψ}H01 pOq ď 1 .
O
Lemma 6.2. For all ε satisfying ε dpY q ă 1 and for every v P H 1 pΩ1 q which
vanishes in Sε one has
}v}L2 pΩ1 q ď εC}∇v}L2 pΩ1 q . (6.10)
The constant is independent of ε.
Proof. Using Proposition 1.74, we extend v in a function belonging to the
space H 1 pRN ), still denoted v, and satisfying estimate (1.79)3 .
Now, observe that (see Notation 1.63 for VεdpY q pΩ1 q),
Ť
Ω1 Ă εpξ ` Yq Ă VεdpY q pΩ1 q.
ξPpΞ1 qε
By a standard ε-scaling argument, inequality (6.8) implies for every cell

εpξ ` Yq such that ξ P pΞ1 qε (in this case v “ 0 on εpξ ` Sq),
}v}2L2 pεpξ`Yqq ď ε2 C }∇v}2L2 pεpξ`Yqq .
Summing this inequality over ξ in pΞ1 qε , it follows that for all v in H 1 pΩ1 q
with v|Sε “ 0,
}v}L2 pΩ1 q ď ε C}∇v}L2 pVεdpY q pΩ1 qq ď ε C}∇v}L2 pΩ1 q .
242
To estimate the pressure pε , one uses the “extension by average” opera-

tor Eε introduced in Definition 4.22. In the same context, this operator was
used in [152, 185].
Proposition 6.3. Let puε , pε q be the solution of the Stokes problem (6.6)
with fε given in L2 pΩqN . Then the following estimates hold true:
piq }uε }H01 pΩq ` }ε´1 uε }L2 pΩ1 q ď C Nε ,
piiq }pε }L2 pΩ2 q ď C Nε ,
piiiq }pε ´ M˚ε ppε q}L2 pΩp ˚ q ď C Nε ,
1,ε
› › (6.11)
pivq ›Eε ppε q ´ Q˚ε ppε q› 2 int ď C Nε ,
L pΩ3εdpY q q
› ˚
pvq ›εQε ppε q}H 1 pΩint q ď C Nε ,
3εdpY q
› ›
pviq ›ε Eε ppε q1Ωint › 2 ď C Nε ,
3εdpY q L pΩq
with Nε defined by (6.7). The constants C are independent of ε.

Proof. (i)-(ii) First, observe that the following inequalities are straightfor-
ward, the first by Lemma 6.2 and the second by the Poincaré inequality in
H01 pΩq: ż
fε uε dx ď ε C }fε }L2 pΩ1 q }∇uε }L2 pΩ1 q ,
Ω1
ż (6.12)
fε uε dx ď C }fε }L2 pΩ2 q }∇uε }L2 pΩq .
Ω2
Now, take uε as test function in the Stokes problem (6.5) to get
ż
μ }∇uε }L2 pΩq ď
2
fε uε dx.
Ω
Using (6.12), we obtain

}∇uε }L2 pΩq ď C Nε ,
from which, by the Poincaré inequality and taking into account (6.10), esti-
mate (6.11)(i) follows.
.
Furthermore, (6.11)(i) combined with estimate (6.9) written for O “ Ω2 ,
give (6.11)(ii) by taking
ż an arbitrary test function v of H01 pΩ2 qN in (6.6) and
using the fact that pε pxqdx “ 0.
Ω2
(iii) Let ψ be in H01 pY ‹ qN and ξ in Ξ1ε . Choosing as test function in (6.6)
´! x ) ¯
vξε pxq “ εψ 1εtξ`Y ˚ u ,
ε Y
which is an element of H01 pΩε qN , gives
ż ż ż
pε div vξ dx “
ε
fε vξ dx ` 2μ
ε
∇uε ∇vξε dx.
εtξ`Y ‹u εtξ`Y ‹u εtξ`Y ‹u
243
6.2. A priori estimates
Since › ε› N › ›
›∇vξ › 2 “ ε 2 ›∇y pψq›L2 pY ‹ q ,
L pΩε q
› ε› N › › N › ›
›v ξ › 2 “ ε1` 2 ›ψ ›L2 pY ‹ q ď Cε1` 2 ›∇y ψ ›L2 pY ‹ q ,
L pΩ qε
it follows that
ż
› ›
pε div vξε dx ď Cε 2 Mε pξq ›∇y ψ ›L2 pY ‹ q .
N
(6.13)
εtξ`Y ‹ u
where
Mε pξq2 “ ε2 }fε }2L2 pεtξ`Y ‹ uq ` }∇uε }2L2 pεtξ`Y ‹ uq .
On the other hand, as pdiv vξε qpεyq “ divy ψpyq,

ż ż
εN pε pεpξ ` yqq divy ψpyq dy “ pε div vξε dx.
Y‹ εtξ`Y ‹ u
.
Consequently, by estimate (6.9) with O “ Y ˚ , from inequality (6.13) we get
› ›2
εN ›pε pεpξ ` ¨ qq ´ M˚ε ppε qpεξq›L2 pY ‹ q ď C Mε pξq2 ,
or equivalently,
› ›2
εN ›Eε ppε qpεpξ ` ¨ qq ´ M˚ε ppε qpεξq›L2 pY q ď C Mε pξq2 .
Summing over ξ P Ξ1ε and going back to the variable x, yields

› › ÿ
›Eε ppε q ´ M˚ε ppε q›2 2 p ďC Mε pξq2 ď C N2ε .
L pΩ1,ε q (6.14)
ξPΞ1ε
One concludes since

#
p˚ ,
pε ´ M˚ε ppε q a.e. in Ω
M˚ε ppε q
1,ε
Eε ppε q ´ “
0 p 1,ε X Sε .
a.e. in Ω
(iv)-(v) We use here the notations of Paragraph 4.3.1, more precisely those
of (4.3.1), (4.17)-(4.20). Observe that when ξ belongs to ΞY ε , one can perform
the same computation as in the previous step on the set εpξ ` Y ˚ q, to get
› ›2
εN ›pε pεpξ ` ¨qq ´ MY ˚ ppε qpεξq›L2 pY ˚ q
` › ›2 › ›2 ˘
ď C ε2 ›fε ›L2 pεpξ`Yqq ` ›∇uε ›L2 pεpξ`Yqq .
Note that there are 2N cells εpη ` Y ˚ q in εpξ ` Y ˚ q.

Taking averages on the contiguous cells εpξ ` bk ` Y ˚ q and εpξ ` Y ˚ q and
subtracting the results, yields
εN |M˚ε ppε qpεpξ ` bk qq ´ M˚ε ppε qpεξq|2
` › ›2 › ›2 ˘
ď C ε2 ›fε ›L2 pεtξ`Yuq ` ›∇uε ›L2 pεtξ`Yuq .
244
In view of (4.31), by summation, this inequality and (6.11)(i), imply

}ε∇Q˚ε ppε q}L2 pΩp Y q ď C Nε . (6.15)
ε
Recall that Q˚ε ppε qpεξq is the value of M˚ε ppε q over εpξ ` Y q (for all cells
εpξ `Y q included in Ωp Y ). By the estimate of Remark 1.65, since Q˚ “ Qε ˝Eε
ε ε
p Y
in Ωε (using the inclusion (4.19)), one obtains
› ˚ ›
›Qε ppε q ´ M˚ε ppε q› 2 int ď ε C } ∇Q˚ε ppε q} 2 p Y .
L pΩ3εdpY q q L pΩε q
Together with (6.14), this gives (6.11)(iv).

Now, in view of (6.11)(ii), we get
}εQ˚ε ppε q}L2 pΩint
3εdpY q
X Ω2 q ď C N ε ,
which, together with (6.15), imply (6.11)(v) (here we also used Lemma 5.22
for the domains Ωint3εdpY q ).
(vi) It is a direct consequence of (6.11)(iv)-(v).
6.3 Homogenization
Introduce now the following spaces:
. . (
H “ H01 pΩ1 ; Γq “ φ P H 1 pΩ1 q | φ ” 0 on Γ ,
. (
V “ v P H01 pΩqN | v|Ω1 ” 0, div v ” 0 ,
. (
HpY q “ v P Hper 1
pY qN | v ” 0 in S ,
. (
VpY q “ v P HpY q | divy v ” 0 .
Note that the space V can equivalently be viewed as
(
v P H01 pΩ2 qN | div v ” 0 .
Similarly, the space H can be defined as
! )
.
H01 pΩ; Ω2 q “ φ P H 1 pΩq | φ ” 0 on Ω2 .
Theorem 6.4. Let puε , pε q be the solution of the Stokes problem (6.6) with
fε given in L2 pΩqN . Then, up to a subsequence, there are
u P V,
u P L2 pΩ; VpY qq with u ” 0 in Ω2 ˆ Y,
such that the following convergences hold:
uε á u weakly in H01 pΩqN ,
Tε p∇uε q á ∇u ` ∇y u weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN ˆN ,
Tε pε´1 uε 1Ω1 q á u weakly in L2 pΩ; H 1 pY qqN , (6.16)
´1
ε uε|Ω1 á MY puq weakly in L pΩ1 q ,
2 N
Tε p∇uε q1Ω1 á ∇y u weakly in L2 pΩ1 ˆ Y qN ˆN .
245
6.3. Homogenization
There are also
pp P L2 pΩ1 ˆ Y ˚ q, p1 P H, p2 P L2 pΩ2 q,
satisfying
ż
piq p2 pxq dx “ 0,
Ω2 (6.17)
piiq pp ” 0 in Ω1 ˆ S with MY pp
pq ” 0 in Ω1 ,
and such that the following convergences hold:
pε |Ω2 á p2 weakly in L2 pΩ2 q,

ε Eε ppε q 1Ωint
3εdpY q
Ñ p1 strongly in L2 pΩq, (6.18)
` ˘
Tε˚ pε ´ M˚ε ppε q 1Ω1 ˆY ˚ á pp weakly in L2 pΩ1 ˆ Y ˚ q.
Proof. By estimate (6.11)(i) and Theorem 1.41, up to a subsequence, there

p q in the space V ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper,0
exist pu, u 1
pY qqN and u in L2 pΩ1 ; Hper
1
pY qN q
such that convergences (6.16)1,3,4,5 hold as well as
p
Tε p∇uε q á ∇u ` ∇y u weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN ˆN .
Since div uε “ 0 in Ω, Proposition 2.8 implies divy u p “ 0 in Ω ˆ Y .

It is easy to see that for every open subset ω Ť Ω1 , the restriction to ω
of ∇y Tε pε´1 uε 1Ω1 q coincides with that of Tε p∇uε q. Therefore at the limit,
p
∇y u “ ∇y u
p “ 0 in Ω1 ˆ Y. Recalling
which implies (6.16)2 . It also implies divy u “ divy u
that uε vanishes in Sε , it follows that u vanishes on Ω1 ˆ S. Hence u belongs
to L2 pΩ1 ; VpY qq.(1)
Except for the strong convergence (6.18)2 with p1 in H, all the conver-
gences (6.18), for an appropriate subsequence, are all direct consequences of
estimates (6.11).
The function p2 is the weak limit of a sequence of functions with zero
mean value on Ω2 , while function pp is the weak limit of a sequence of functions
with zero mean value on Y ˚ and vanishing on Ω1 ˆ S. These properties are
preserved by passing to the limit, so that (6.17)(i) and (6.17)(ii) hold true.
As for p1 , by (6.11)(iv) it is the weak limit in L2 pΩq of the sequence
tεQ˚ε ppε q1Ωint
3εdpY q
uε .
At this point, since the sets Ωint
3εdpY q are uniformly Lipschitz, one can use
the extension operators P3εdpY
` ˚q defined in Corollary 5.23. It is immediate
that the sequence tP3εdpY q εQε ppε q1Ω3εdpY q quε is bounded in H 1 pΩq. Hence,
int
up to a subsequence, it converges weakly in that space and strongly in L2 pΩq

(1) p is therefore: u
The relationship between u and u p ” u ´ MY puq in Ω1 ˆ Y .
246
to the same p1 which therefore is in H 1 pΩq. Consequently, tεQ˚ε ppε q1Ωint

3εdpY q
uε
converges strongly to p1 in L2 pΩq. This, by (6.11)(iv) again, implies conver-
gence (6.18)2 . Since pε 1Ω2 converges weakly in L2 pΩ2 q, p1 “ 0 in Ω2 , and
this ends the proof of Theorem 6.4.
We are now in position to state the limit unfolded problem satisfied by
u, p1 , p2 , u, pp.
Theorem 6.5. Let puε , pε q be the solution of the Stokes problem (6.6) with
fε in L2 pΩqN . Assume that there exist f in L2 pΩ2 qN and fp in L2 pΩ1 ˆ Y qN ,
such that
Tε pεfε 1Ω1 q á fp weakly in L2 pΩ1 ˆ Y qN (2),
(6.19)
fε 1Ω2 á f weakly in L2 pΩ2 qN .
Then the convergences in Proposition 6.4 hold for the full sequence and
the limit functions u, p1 , p2 , u, pp satisfying conditions (6.17), are the unique
solution in the space
V ˆ H ˆ L2 pΩ2 q ˆ L2 pΩ1 ; VpY qq ˆ L2 pΩ1 ˆ Y q
of the two following decoupled problems (recall that y c is defined in (1.40)):

$ ż ż
’
’ ∇ u ∇ ´ pp
p ´ y c ¨ ∇p1 q divy Ψ dxdy
’
’ μ y y Ψ dxdy
’
’ Ω1 ˆY Ω1 ˆY
’
’ ż
’
’
& “ pfp ´ ∇p1 qΨ dxdy,
Ω1 ˆY (6.20)
’
’ ż
’
’
’
’ MY puq ∇ϕ dx “ 0,
’
’
’
’
Ω1
%
@Ψ P L2 pΩ1 ; HpY qq, @ϕ P H,
and $ ż ż ż
’
&μ ∇u ∇v ´ p2 div v dx “ f v dx,
Ω2 Ω2 Ω2 (6.21)
’
%@v P H 1 pΩ qN .
0 2
Remark 6.6. In the limit problem, the two pressures p1 and pp which appear
in Ω1 were conjectured in [149] using the multiple scale expansion method.
Proof of Theorem 6.5. Formulation (6.6) can be rewritten as
$ ż ż ż
&μ ∇uε ∇v dx ´ Eε ppε q div v dx “ fε v dx,
Ω Ω Ω (6.22)
%
@v P H01 pΩqN , v ” 0 on Sε .
Step 1. Proof of (6.21). The proof of the theorem uses the convergences
established in Proposition 6.4.
(2) Note that by its definition, fp vanishes on Ω2 ˆ Y .
247
6.3. Homogenization
Testing in (6.6) with a function v of H01 pΩ2 qN , one easily obtains (6.21)
since fε 1Ω2 converges to f .
Step 2. Proof of (6.20)2 . The solution uε of (6.6), satisfies by definition,
div uε “ 0 in Ω and vanishes on BΩ. Consequently, for φ in H (which by
definition vanishes on Γ ), it follows that
ż ż
0“´ div uε φ dx “ uε ∇φ dx.
Ω1 Ω1
Multiplying with ε´1 and passing to the limit, which is allowed due to con-
vergences (6.16)4 , implies (6.20)2 .
Step 3. Proof of (6.20)1 . Formulation (6.22) with test function
´! x ) ¯
.
vε pxq “ εφpxqψ ,
ε Y
where ψ P HpY q and φ P DpΩ1 q, becomes under unfolding for ε small enough,
ż ż
μ Tε p∇uε q Tε p∇vε q dxdy ´ Tε ˝ Eε ppε qTε pdiv vε q dxdy
Ω1 ˆY Ω1 ˆY
ż (6.23)
“ Tε pεfε q Tε pε´1 vε q dxdy.
Ω1 ˆY
The second term in the last equality writes successively,

ż
Tε ˝ Eε ppε qTε pdiv vε q dxdy
Ω1 ˆY
ż
“ Tε ˝ Eε ppε qpεTε p∇φq ψpyq ` Tε pφq divy ψpyqq dxdy
Ω1 ˆY
ż
“ ` ˘ ‰
“ εTε ˝ Eε ppε qTε p∇φq ψpyq`Tε Eε ppε q´M˚ε ppε q Tε pφq divy ψpyq dxdy
Ω1 ˆY
ż
Tε pφq ´ Mε pφq
` εM˚ε ppε q divy ψ dxdy
Ω1 ˆY ε
ż
` M˚ε ppε q Mε pφq divy ψ dxdy.
Ω1 ˆY
Now, we can pass to the limit in the the right-hand side of this equality,
due to convergences (6.18) and Proposition 1.39(ii). The last term vanishes
because, by the periodicity of ψ,
ż
divy ψpyq dy “ 0.
Y
Therefore, passing to the limit, one obtains

ż
Tε ˝ Eε ppε qTε pdiv vε q dxdy
Ω1 ˆY
ż ” ı
` ˘
Ñ p1 pxq∇φpxq ψpyq ` y c divy ψpyq ` pppx, yq φpxq divy ψpyq dxdy.
Ω1 ˆY
248
This last convergence allows to pass to the limit in (6.23) (using (6.16) in the
first term and hypothesis (6.19) for the right-hand side), which gives
ż ż
` ˘
μ ∇y u ∇y ψ φ dxdy ´ p1 pxq ∇φpxq ψpyq ` y c divy ψpyq dxdy
Ω1 ˆY Ω1 ˆY
ż ż
´ pppx, yq φpxq divy ψpyq dxdy “ fppx, yqφpxq ψpyq dxdy.
Ω1 ˆY Ω1 ˆY
This holds for every φ in DpΩ1 q. Therefore, since p1 belongs to H 1 pΩ1 q,

ż
μ ∇y u ∇y ψ φ dxdy
Ω1 ˆY
ż
` ˘
` ∇p1 pxqφpxq ψpyq ` y c divy ψpyq dxdy
żΩ1 ˆY (6.24)
´ pppx, yq φpxq divy ψpyq dxdy
żΩ1 ˆY
“ fppx, yq φpxq ψpyq dxdy.
Ω1 ˆY
Then, the density of DpΩ1 q b HpY q in L2 pΩ1 ; HpY qq proves (6.20)1 .

Step 4. The uniqueness of the solution of (6.21) is known, as it is the usual
Stokes problem in Ω2 . The uniqueness of the solution of (6.20) holds since it
is a periodic Stokes problem in Y with parameter in Ω.
6.4 Standard homogenized problem and cor-

rectors
In order to state the (strong) homogenization result, we first introduce for
k P t1, . . . , N u , the unique solution
pθ k , q k q in VpY q ˆ L2 pY ‹ q,
of the following periodic Stokes cell problem:

$ż ż ż
’
’ ∇ θ k
∇ ζ ´ k
ζ “
’
’ y y dy q divy dy ζk dy,
’
& żY ‹ Y‹ Y‹
(6.25)
’
’ q k dy “ 0,
’
’ ‹
’
%
Y
@ζ P HpY q.
Let K “ pkij q1ďi,jďN be the matrix with constant coefficients given by

ż
kij “ θji pyq dy. (6.26)
Y‹
249
6.4. Standard homogenized problem and correctors
For a.e. x P Ω1 , let also pu 0 , pp0 q P L2 pΩ1 ; VpY qq ˆ L2 pΩ1 ˆ Y ˚ q be the

unique solution of the problem (with fp defined by (6.19)),
$ż ż
’
’ ∇ u 0
px, yq ∇ ψpyq dy ´ pp0 px, yq divy ψpyq dy
’
’ y y
’
’ Y
ż Y
’
’ ` ˘
’
& “ fppx, yq ´ MY pfpqpxq ψpyq dy,
ż Y (6.27)
’
’
’
’
’
’ pp px, yq dy “ 0,
0
’
’ Y˚
’
%
@ψ P HpY q.
This is a standard periodic Stokes problem where x P Ω1 is a parameter.

Note that by the uniqueness of the solution of (6.27), u 0 and pp0 both vanish
if and only if fp is independent of y.
Theorem 6.7. Under the assumptions of Theorem 6.5, the function p1 be-
longing to H is the unique solution of the following elliptic problem in Ω1 :
#
´div K ∇p1 “ ´div MY pu 0 q ´ div KMY pfpq in Ω1
` ˘ (6.28)
K p∇p1 ´ MY pfpqq ´ MY pu 0 q ¨ n “ 0 on BΩ1 zΓ,
where n is the unit outward normal to BΩ.

Furthermore, u and pp are determined uniquely as
1´ 0 ÿ ` ˘ ¯
N
Bp1
upx, yq “ u px, yq ` MY pfpk qpxq ´ pxq θ k pyq ,
μ k“1
Bxk
(6.29)
N ´
ÿ ¯
Bp1
pppx, yq “ y ¨ ∇p pxq ` pp px, yq `
c 1 0
MY pfpk qpxq ´ pxq q k pyq.
k“1
Bxk
The pair of functions pu, p2 q belonging to V ˆ L2 pΩ2 q, is the unique so-

lution of the Stokes problem in Ω2 ,
$ ż ż ż
’
&μ ∇u ∇v dx ´ p div v dx “
2
f v dx,
Ω2 Ω2 Ω2 (6.30)
’
%@v P H 1 pΩ qN .
0 2
The problems in Ω1 and in Ω2 are uncoupled.

Proof. The limit problem in Ω2 is clear; indeed, (6.30) is the same as (6.21).
Equation (6.24) implies that for a.e. x P Ω1
ż ż ´ ¯
μ ∇y upx, yq ∇y ψpyq dy ` ∇p1 pxq ψpyq ` y c divy ψpyq dy
Y
żY ż
´ pppx, yq divy ψpyq dy “ fppx, yq ψpyq dy,
Y Y
250
which in turn, gives for a.e. x P Ω1 ,

ż ż ´ ¯
μ ∇y upx, yq ∇y ψpyq dy ´ pppx, yq ´ y c ∇p1 pxq divy ψpyq dy
Y
żY
` ˘
“ fppx, yq ´ ∇p1 pxq ψpyq dy.
Y
Using here the solutions of the cell-problems (6.25) and (6.27), implies (6.29).
In particular,
` ˘
μ MY puq “ MY pu 0 q ´ K ∇p1 ´ MY pfpq , (6.31)
which, replaced in the last equation of (6.20), gives the variational formula-
tion of (6.28).
Remark 6.8. The third convergence of Proposition 6.4 implies that
ε´1 uε á MY puq weakly in L2div pΩ1 q.
Consequently, the following limit holds in H ´1{2 pBΩ1 q:
lim ε´1 uε ¨n “ MY puq ¨ n

εÑ0
1` ˘
“´ K p∇p1 ´ MY pfpqq ´ MY pu 0 q ¨ n on BΩ1 ,
μ
giving the limit of the renormalized normal velocity on the interface Γ.
The macroscopic velocity in Ω1 , MY puq, is given by (6.31) which is
Darcy’s law in this context. If fp does not depend of y, it implies that u 0 “ 0
and formula (6.31) is the classical Darcy’s law,
1
MY puq “ ´ Kp∇p1 ´ fpq,
μ
where K (see (6.26)) is known as the permeability matrix of the limit material.
For a fully perforated domain pΩ2 “ ∅q, this was proved in [107] and [185].
Finally, as in preceding applications, one can investigate the convergence
of the energy and obtain strong convergences.
Proposition 6.9 (Convergence of the energy). Assume that the hypotheses
of Theorem 6.5 are fulfilled and that
Tε pεfε 1Ω1 q Ñ fp strongly in L2 pΩqN ,

εfε 1Ω1 XΛε Ñ 0 strongly in L2 pΩqN .
Then, the following strong convergences hold:
∇y Tε pε´1 uε q|Ω1 Ñ ∇y u strongly in L2 pΩ1 ˆ Y qN ˆN ,
∇uε|Ω2 Ñ ∇u strongly in L2 pΩ2 qN ˆN , (6.32)
pε |Ω2 Ñ p2
strongly in L pΩ2 q.
2
251
6.4. Standard homogenized problem and correctors
Proof. The proof is based on the convergence of the energy as in Proposi-

tion 3.9. One easily checks the following successive computations, recalling
that u “ 0 in Ω1 and u “ 0 in Ω2 :
ż ż
μ
Tε p∇uε q Tε p∇uε q dxdy ` μ ∇uε ∇uε dx
|Y | ΩˆY Λε
ż ż ż
“ μ ∇uε ∇uε dx “ fε uε dx ` fε uε dx
Ω Ω Λε
ż
1
“ Tε pεfε 1Ω1 q Tε pε´1 uε 1Ω1 q dxdy
|Y | ΩˆY
ż ż
1
` Tε pfε 1Ω2 q Tε puε 1Ω2 q dxdy ` fε uε dx.
|Y | ΩˆY Λε
By the hypotheses
ż ż
1 1
´1
Tε pεfε 1Ω1 q Tε pε uε 1Ω1 q dxdy Ñ fp u dxdy,
|Y | ΩˆY |Y | Ω1 ˆY
ż ż
1
Tε pfε 1Ω2 q Tε puε 1Ω2 q dxdy Ñ f u dx.
|Y | ΩˆY Ω2
Similarly, ż
fε uε dx Ñ 0.
Λε
Taking Ψ “ u in (6.20) gives for value of the first integral above, namely
ż ż
fp u dxdy “ μ ∇y u ∇y u dxdy,
Ω1 ˆY Ω1 ˆY
since, according to the second condition of (6.20),

ż ż
u ∇p1 dxdy “ |Y | MY puq ∇p1 dx ” 0.
Ω1 ˆY Ω1
Taking v “ u in (6.21) gives

ż ż
f u dx “ μ ∇u ∇u dx.
Ω2 Ω2
From these equalities and by Lemma 3.11, it follows that

ż
1
Tε p∇uε q Tε p∇uε q dxdy
|Y | ΩˆY
ż
1 ` ˘` ˘
Ñ ∇u ` ∇y u ∇u ` ∇y u dxdy, (6.33)
|Y | ΩˆY
ż
lim ∇uε ∇uε dx “ 0.
εÑ0 Λ
ε
252
These convergences, using Lemma3.11, give the strong convergence,
Tε p∇uε q Ñ ∇u ` ∇y u strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN ˆN . (6.34)
Since u vanishes in Ω1 , (6.32)(i) follows.

In Ω2 where u vanishes, (6.34), (6.33) and Proposition 1.29(iii), also im-
plies (6.32)(ii) (the strong limit of Tε p∇uε 1Ω2 q is independent of y).
Finally, going back to the Stokes problem, we get the strong convergence
of ∇pε to ∇p2 in H ´1 pΩ2 q, that is the strong convergence (6.32)(iii).
As usual with unfolding, the convergences from this proposition give cor-
rectors results. There is actually no need of a corrector in Ω2 where tuε uε
converges strongly to u in H 1 pΩ2 qN (by (6.32)(ii)). in Ω1 , one has
Proposition 6.10. Under the previous hypotheses, both
1 1 ´ Bp1 ¯ ´! ¨ ) ¯
∇uε ´ Uε p∇y u 0 q ` Mε ∇ y θ k
1Ωp 1,ε ,
μ μ Bxk ε Y
and ´ Bp1 ¯ ´! ¨ ) ¯
1 1
∇uε ´ Uε p∇y u 0 q ` Qε ∇ y θ k
1Ωp 1,ε ,
μ μ Bxk ε Y
converge strongly to 0 in L2 pΩ1 qN ˆN .
Proof. In Ω1 , by (6.33) and (6.34), Proposition 1.29(ii) gives
∇uε ´ Uε p∇y uq Ñ 0 strongly in L2 pΩ1 qN ˆN .
As in Theorem 3.27, using the representations (6.29)(i), one can restate this
convergence in the two forms
1 1 ´ Bp1 ¯
∇uε ´ Uε p∇y u 0 q ` Mε Uε p∇y θ k q Ñ 0 strongly in L2 pΩ1 qN ˆN ,
μ μ Bxk
and
1 1 ´ Bp1 ¯
∇uε ´ Uε p∇y u 0 q ` Qε Uε p∇y θ k q Ñ 0 strongly in L2 pΩ1 qN ˆN .
μ μ Bxk
However, the functions θ k do not depend upon x, so

´! ¨ ) ¯
Uε p∇y θ k q “ ∇y θ k 1Ωp 1,ε ,
ε Y
and this ends the proof.
253
Part III
Partial Unfolding
Part III Partial Unfolding
In this short Part III, we explain how to use the unfolding method in
presence of parameters or when oscillations occur only with a subset of the
variables. This generalizes the results of Section 1.5.
There are two equivalent strategies, unfolding with parameters and using
artificial periods, both discussed in Chapter 7.
Chapter 8 is dedicated to the particular case of oscillating boundaries,
where a particular case of partial unfolding is used.
257
Chapter 7
Partial unfolding: a brief

primer
In this short chapter, we give a brief description of the case of partial un-
folding and unfolding with parameters. The theory is presented insofar as it
differs from the cases of Parts I and II. Some applications are also presented.
The situation corresponds to the case where oscillations occur (in the
coefficients, the domain,...) only in some directions.
We present an example to explain the ideas.
Let Ω be a domain in RN , and N1 ` N2 “ N (both positive). Consider
a problem such as (3.3) posed in Ω where the coefficient matrix Aε is of
the form
´ x1 ¯
A , x2 where x ” px1 , x2 q P Ω with x1 P RN1 , x2 P RN2 .
ε
The map Apy 1 , x2 q is defined for x2 in the projection of Ω on RN2 , for y 1 in
RN1 . It is periodic with respect to the y 1 with a group of periods generated
by a basis of RN1 and a corresponding parallelotope Y 1 .
Two distinct strategies can be applied with the unfolding method.

They will of course, give the same end result.
1. Perform a partial unfolding with respect to the first N1 variables
alone; this is unfolding with parameters, also known as partial unfolding.
2. Introduce N2 artificial periods to obtain a basis of periods in RN
and apply the results of Part I. Then express the results in a way which is
independent of the choice of these artificial periods.
7.1 Unfolding with parameters

This is well adapted to the situation where the domain is a product and
the periods bear only on one of the factors. One has to prove the results of

7.2. Unfolding with artificial periods
Chapter 1 in this specific situation.

Section 1.5 deals with an example where the parameters do not appear
in partial derivatives.
A slightly different case has derivatives with respect to all variables but
oscillation with respect to some only.
Considering weak convergences, this program is almost straightforward
due to the basic relation between integrals (the equivalent of (i) of Propo-
sition 1.8). This allows to obtain bounds in the appropriate Lp or W 1,p
spaces. To establish strong convergences, as in the standard case, one proves
convergence for the Lp norms.
We refer to Subsection 3.1.4 where this technique is applied. See also
Chapter 8 below where it is applied to the case of oscillating boundaries in a
slightly more general framework (the unfolded domains depend upon ε but
converge in an appropriate sense).
7.2 Unfolding with artificial periods

The second strategy of adding artificial periods is straightforward to apply,
but it requires to express the final result independently of the added artificial
periods. Below, we give a simple example of such a situation where this is
achieved simply by averaging over the artificial periods.
7.2.1 A diffusion problem

We use the preceding notations (N1 ` N2 “ N , x ” px1 , x2 q, x1 P RN1 ,
x2 P RN2 ). Let a basis of the given macroscopic periods be tb1 , . . . , bN1 u.
Complete the basis with arbitrary (linearly independent) tbN1 `1 , . . . , bN u.
This allows to define Y “ Y 1 ˆ Y 2 .
What information can be obtained via unfolding which is independent of
the choice of the tbN1 `1 , . . . , bN u?
The answer is quite straightforward, but one needs to introduce a new
notation for the partial unfolding:
.
Tpε “ MY 2 ˝ Tε where MY 2 is the averaging operator over Y 2 .
Applying the operator MY 2 to all the results of Chapter 1, one obtains

the statements corresponding to the new unfolding operator Tpε .
For example, Theorem 1.41 can be restated as follows (compare with
Theorem 1.50 (vi):
Theorem 7.1. Suppose p P p1, `8q. Let twε uε be a sequence in W 1,p pΩq
such that
260
Chapter 7. Oscillating boundaries
1,p
Then, up a subsequence, there exists some w in Lp pΩ; Wper,0 pY 1 qq such that
1´ p ¯
Tε pwε q ´ Mε pwε q á y 1 ¨ ∇w ` w weakly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY 1 qq,
c
piq
ε
piiq Tpε p∇wε q á ∇w ` ∇y1 w weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y 1 qN .
.
Here w “ MY 2 pwq,
p where w
p is given by Theorem 1.41.
As an application, consider the simple situation of Subsection 3.1.1, and
more precisely, Theorem 3.5. Assume that the matrix field Aε does not
.
depend upon the x2 and that, moreover, its unfolding B ε “ Tε pAε q is inde-
p ε ˆ Y (and so is its limit B). More generally, we can
pendent of y 2 P Y 2 in Ω
make this assumption only at the limit, that is
` ˘
B ε “ Tε Aε Ñ B a.e. in Ω ˆ Y with B independent of y 2 . (7.1)
This happens certainly in the case where Aε is a product of two factors, one
oscillating in x1 and the other one non oscillating in x2 . The same holds true
if Aε is of the form ´ x1 ¯
Aε pxq “ A , x2 in Ω.
ε
What can be concluded for the limit problem (3.13)? The answer is given in
the following variant of Theorem 3.5:
Proposition 7.2. Under the assumptions of Theorem 3.5 as well as assump-
tion (7.1), there exist u0 P H01 pΩq and u P L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY 1 qq such that
uε á u0 weakly in H01 pΩq,
Tpε puε q Ñ u0 strongly in L2 pΩ; H 1 pY 1 qq, (7.2)
Tpε p∇uε q á ∇u0 ` ∇y1 u 1 N
weakly in L pΩ ˆ Y q ,
2
and the pair pu0 , uq is the unique solution of problem

$ ż
’ 1 “ ‰“ ‰
’
’ Bpx, y 1 q ∇u0 pxq`∇y1 upx, y 1 q ∇Ψpxq`∇y1 Φpx, y 1 q dxdy 1
& |Y |1 1
ΩˆY
’
’ “ xf, ΨyH ´1 pΩq,H01 pΩq ,
’
%
@Ψ P H01 pΩq, @Φ P L pΩ; Hper
2 1
pY 1 qq.
Proof. Indeed, convergences (7.2) follow from Theorem 7.1. Then the homog-
enized problem above is easily obtained because for test functions ϕ indepen-
.
dent of y 2 (ϕpx, yq “ Φpx, y 1 q), all the functions in (3.13) are independent of
2 .
y except for u p, so setting u “ MY 2 pp uq gives the result.
All the statements of Subsection 3.1.1 can now be rephrased with formulas
using only Y 1 . For example, only the first N1 correctors χpj are used (they
only depend upon x and y 1 ) and the remaining N2 correctors are not used
(they simply vanish !). The formula for the homogenized matrix field is also
written as an average over Y 1 . The convergence of the energy holds and the
corrector is expressed in terms of the averaging operator defined for Y 1 , etc.
261
Chapter 8
Oscillating boundaries
The point of the unfolding method is to reduce rapid oscillations (of size ε)
to smooth variations. In the case of problems with small holes, the unfolding
method essentially reduced the problem to a fixed domain. In this chapter,
we consider a situation with rapidly oscillating boundaries. The very first
results for oscillating boundaries were obtained in [39] making use of an
adapted extension operator. The treatment using partial unfolding, which
indeed reduced it to a fixed domain, appeared in ([93]). We shall consider
much more general situations, where, after unfolding, the domains still have
changing boundaries, albeit without high oscillations. Consequently, one
first has to understand the situation of “converging” boundaries, which is
not completely standard. This is the purpose of the first section below. The
corresponding results are then applied in the next section which considers
the application of the unfolding method to oscillating boundaries.
In the Propositions, Corollaries and Remarks of Section 8.1, the Lebesgue
exponent p is restricted to p1, `8q.
8.1 Mosco convergences for varying domains

In this section, we consider as usual a sequence tεu of strictly positive numbers
going to 0` and for each element of the sequence an open bounded domain
Oε in RN .
For p P p1, `8q we consider the spaces Lp pOε q (respectively, W 1,p pOε q
or W01,p pOε q) and give simple conditions for the notion of convergence to
make sense for sequences of functions vε which, for each ε takes a value in
Lp pOε q(resp. in W 1,p pOε q, W01,p pOε q).
How can one give a notion of convergence for the sequence tvε uε ?
Applications to variational problems require two properties, which have
been well-known since the work of Mosco. In [162], the notion of Mosco-
convergence is defined for sequences of closed convex sets (and in particular
of closed subspaces) tCε uε . They “converge” in the Mosco sense to a closed

8.1. Convergences for “varying domains”
convex subset C in a given reflexive Banach space X, if the following two

conditions are satisfied:
1. Strong convergence. For each element v in C there is a sequence tvε uε
converging strongly to v in X and such that for each ε, vε belongs to Cε .
2. Weak convergence (for subsequences). For any subsequence tε1 u of tεu,
any sequence tvε1 uε1 with vε1 P Cε1 and converging weakly to some v in X, it
is true that v belongs to C.
Definition 8.1. When the two above conditions of weak and strong conver-
gence are satisfied, we say that the sequence tCε uε Mosco-converges to C.
We introduce two notions of convergence for sequences of bounded open
domains. The first is measure-theoretical, the second is metric-based.
The purpose is to establish results which mimic the basic tools of weak
and strong convergence in the case of fixed domains for spaces of Lebesgue
or Sobolev type (see Corollaries 8.5, 8.8 and 8.11).
For simplicity, we will assume that all the Oε ’s are included in a fixed
bounded set in RN .
Definition 8.2 (Convergence in measure). The sequence of (uniformly) boun-
ded domains tOε uε converges in the measure sense to a non empty domain
O if the sequence of characteristic functions t1Oε uε converges to 1O almost
everywhere.
Since the sets are bounded it is equivalent that the Lebesgue measure of the
symmetric difference of Oε and Ωε goes to zero(1) .
Definition 8.3 (Hausdorff convergence). The Hausdorff excess of a set B
to a set A in a metric space is
.
EH pA , Bq “ sup distpx, Aq.
xPB
The Hausdorff distance between the sets A and B is

.
dH pA , Bq “ maxpEH pA , Bq, EH pB , Aqq.
The sequence of (uniformly) bounded domains tOε uε converges in the Haus-

dorff sense to the domain O whenever the sequence tdH pOε , Oquε goes to
zero.
Obviously, the second convergence implies the first one. It is also known
that if the Oε ’s are with uniformly Lipschitz boundaries, the first convergence
implies the second one (a consequence of Ascoli’s theorem).
We shall now discuss the notion of Mosco convergence for Lebesgue and
Sobolev spaces.
(1) Recall the definition of the symmetric difference:
. ` ˘ ` ˘
Oε ΔO “ Oε X pRN zOq Y O X pRN zOε q .
264
Chapter 8. Oscillating Boundaries
8.1.1 Mosco convergence for the sequence tLp pOε quε .

The space Lp pOε q is isometric to the closed subspace of Lp pRN q of its elements
which vanish a.e. outside of Oε . Without loss of generality, we can identify
these spaces and consider their Mosco convergence in the space Lp pRN q (or
in the Lp space of a bounded set containing all the Oε ’s).
The following is straightforward.
Proposition 8.4. If the sequence of tOε uε converges in measure to O, then
the sequence tLp pOε quε Mosco-converges to Lp pOq.
Corollary 8.5 (Weak compactness for a sequence of Lp spaces). Under the
hypothesis of the preceding proposition, if the sequence tvε uε is such that
t}vε }Lp pOε q uε is bounded, then, up to a subsequence, it converges weakly to
some v in Lp pOq in the sense of the second condition of Mosco convergence.
Furthermore,
}v}Lp pOq ď lim inf }vε }Lp pOε q .
εÑ0
Remark 8.6. Under the same hypotheses, if the full sequence tvε uε converges
weakly and if the converse inequality holds, namely,
lim sup }vε }Lp pOε q ď }v}Lp pOq ,

εÑ0
then vε converges strongly to v (in the sense of Lp pRN q).
8.1.2 Mosco convergence for the sequence tW 1,p pOε quε

For spaces W 1,p pOε q, the situation is more complex. In order to use the
Mosco-convergence framework, we can identify the space W 1,p pOε q to its
image by the map v ÞÑ pv, ∇vq to a closed subspace of Lp pRN qN `1 .
Proposition 8.7. Suppose that the domains Oε converge in the Hausdorff
sense to O and that either all the sets Oε are included in O, or the latter
admits an extension operator from W 1,p pOq to W 1,p pRN q. Then the sequence
tW 1,p pOε quε Mosco-converges to W 1,p pOq in Lp pRN qN `1 .
Proof. Step 1. Proof of the weak convergence condition.
It is enough to reason with the whole sequence tεu. The result of the
previous subsection can be applied to the two weakly convergent sequences
tvε uε and t∇vε uε in Lp pRN q (resp. Lp pRN qN ). It remains to show that the
weak limit W of t∇vε uε in the previous sense is indeed ∇v in O.
To this aim, let ϕ be an element of DpOq and j be in t1, . . . , N u. The
hypothesis of the Hausdorff convergence of Oε to O implies in particular, that
the excess EH pO , Oε q goes to 0. Therefore, for ε small enough, ϕ belongs to
DpOε q and it is easy to pass to the limit in the duality
A ż
Bϕ E A Bv
ε
E Bvε
´ vε , “ ,ϕ “ pxqϕpxq dx
Bxj D1 pOε q,DpOε q Bxj D 1 pOε q,DpOε q supppϕq Bx j
265
8.1. Convergences for “varying domains”
to obtain A Bϕ E ż
´ v, “ Wj pxqϕpxq dx
Bxj D1 pOε q,DpOε q supppϕq
Bv
This shows that Wj “ .
Bxj
Step 2. Proof of the strong convergence condition.
For the strong convergence condition, one needs to approximate, in the
sense of Lp pRN qN `1 , a given element v of W 1,p pOq by a sequence each ele-
ment of which is in W 1,p pOε q . One obvious case is when each Oε is included
in O (using the sequence tpv1Oε , ∇v 1Oε quε ).
Otherwise, assume that there is an extension operator from W 1,p pOq to
W pRN q (which holds true as soon as O has a Lipschitz boundary). For
1,p
v in W 1,p pOq, let vp P W 1,p pRN q be its extension. Then, tpp

v |Oε , ∇p
v |Oε quε
converges to pv, ∇vq strongly in the sense of Lp pRN qN `1 .
The following corollary (similar to Corollary 8.5) is easily proved.
Corollary 8.8 (weak compactness for a sequence of W 1,p spaces). Under
the hypothesis of the preceding proposition, if the sequence tvε uε is such that
t}vε }W 1,p pOε q uε is uniformly bounded, then, up to a subsequence, it converges
weakly to some v P W 1,p pOq in the sense of the Mosco convergence of W 1,p
spaces (2).
Remark 8.9. A similar result (for weak convergences) holds when only some
partial derivatives Bvε {Bxj are bounded in the sense of Lp .
8.1.3 Mosco convergence for the sequence tW01,p pOε quε

The space W01,p pOε q can be seen as a closed subspace of W 1,p pOε q so that the
previous results can be applied. However, extending its elements by zero, one
can also consider W01,p pOε q as a closed subspace of W 1,p pRN q and one can
consider Mosco convergence in the latter. It turns out that the two settings
give the same notion of convergence.
Proposition 8.10. Suppose that the domains Oε converge in the Hausdorff
sense to O and that either all the domains Oε are included in O, or the latter
has a Lipschitz boundary. Then the sequence tW01,p pOε quε Mosco-converges
to W01,p pOq.
Proof. Step 1. Proof of the weak convergence condition.
This condition requires that the “weak limit” v of a sequence tvε uε (with
vε P W01,p pOε q for every ε) belong to the subspace W01,p pOq of W 1,p pOq. This
is true if all the Oε ’s are included in O (so that the spaces W01,p pOε q are all
included in W01,p pOq).
(2) Assuming the Hausdorff convergence of the O to O holds and O is with Lipschitz
ε
boundary one can show, making use of (12.3), that the same subsequence, extended by
zero to RN , converges strongly to v in Lp pRN q.
266
It is also true if O is with Lipschitz boundary. Indeed, the hypothesis of

the Hausdorff convergence of Oε to O implies in particular that the excess
EH pOε , Oq goes to 0. Therefore each vε vanishes outside of the open neigh-
borhoods Vε1 pOq (for ε ď ε1 ), so that v vanishes outside of O (which is the
intersection of there neighborhoods). But the fact that O is with Lipschitz
boundary implies that this property is equivalent to belonging to W01,p pOq.
Step 2. Proof of the strong convergence condition. It is enough to appro-
ximate a given v in W01,p pOq by a sequence tvε uε in DpOq and such that
supppvε q Ă O X Oε . By the hypothesis, it follows that vε belongs to DpOε q
(the case of a decreasing sequence of open domains Oε is actually trivial,
since it is enough to extend v by zero).
The following result (similar to that stated in Corollary 8.8) is straight-

forward:
Corollary 8.11 (Weak compactness for a sequence of W01,p spaces). Under

the hypotheses of the preceding proposition, if the sequence tvε uε is such that
for each ε, t}vε }W 1,p pOε q uε is bounded, then, up to a subsequence, it con-
0
verges weakly to some v P W01,p pOq in the sense of the Mosco convergence for
W 1,p spaces. In particular, the same subsequence converges strongly to v in
Lp pRN q.
Remark 8.12. Here are two examples where the results of this Subsec-
tion 8.1.2 apply. In Parts I and II, the domains Ωp ε ˆ Y converge to Ω ˆ Y in
p
the Hausdorff sense (likewise Ωε ˆ Y converge to Ω ˆ Y ˚ ). In Section 5.3,
˚
the domains Σε also converge to Σ in the Hausdorff sense.

In these two parts, making use of the results of Subsection 8.1.2, one can
consider situations with varying domains ins the place of a fixed Ω.
8.2 An example of oscillating boundaries

In this section, we give a model example of the use of partial unfolding to
treat the case of oscillating boundaries in two dimensions. Problems in higher
dimensions can be treated in the same way (but the figures are in dimension
4 at least !). Three dimensional models are presented at the end of this
chapter. Problems of this type with tooth-like periodic oscillating boundaries
were studied originally in [39], see also [81] for nonlinear operators and more
recently [109] for the case of generalized solutions in a non-periodic setting
(and the list of references therein).
8.2.1 Setting of the problem

Consider a sequence of two-dimensional domains tΩε uε which are all included
in the rectangle Ω (see Figure 8.1),
.
Ω “ p0, 1q ˆ p´1, 1q, ΩA “ p0, 1q ˆ p0, 1q and ΩB “ p0, 1q ˆ p´1, 0q.
267
8.2. An example
Figure 8.1: An example of a set Yk
For a positive integer N , set ε “ 1{N. For each k “ 0, . . . , N ´ 1, let Yk

be an open Lipschitz Ş subdomain of ΩA (with variable y “ py1 , y2 q) such that
the interior of BYk ty2 “ 0u is not empty in p0, 1q. Set also
! ˇ ´ x1 ´ k ¯ )
.
Ykε “ px1 , x2 q P p0, 1q2 ˇ , x2 P Y k .
ε
ε
The definitions of the domains ΩA and Ωε are given, respectively, by
´ ¯
. ď ε
N ´1
ΩεA “ Yk , Ωε “ interior ΩA
ε
Y ΩB .
k“0
Note that part ΩεA contained in ΩA , exhibits an oscillating boundary. Fig-
ure 8.2 gives two examples of such domains. The second one corresponds to
the case studied in [93] where the Yk ’s are all the same rectangle.
Figure 8.2: Examples of sets Ωε

Notation 8.13. We set ` ˘
Ť
I “ p0, 1q ˆ t0u (a line segment in Ωq, J ε “ interior BΩεa BΩεb .
which is a subset of I.
268
In this geometrical framework, we are in a position to introduce the prob-

.
lem in Ωε . For Aε “ paεij q1ďi,jď2 in M pα, β, Ωq, c ą 0 a constant, and fε
given in L pΩq, consider the following Neumann problem:
2
$ ÿ B ´ Buε ¯
’
’ ´ aε ` c uε “ fε in Ωε ,
’
& i,j“1,2 Bxj ij Bxi
’ ÿ Buε
’
’ aεij nj “ 0 on BΩε ,
% Bx
i,j“1,2 i
the żweak formulation of which is ż

´ ÿ Bu Bϕ ¯
aεij ` c uε dx “ fε ϕ dx, @ϕ P H 1 pΩε q. (8.1)
Ωε i,j“1,2 Bxi Bxj Ωε
Note that fε cannot be chosen as an element of H ´1 pΩq since, in that case,

fε |Ωε does not make sense.
With the above assumptions on the data, the Lax-Milgram theorem pro-
vides a unique solution uε in H 1 pΩε q of (8.1) such that
}uε }H 1 pΩε q ď C, (8.2)
where C is independent of ε. Our aim is to study what happens when ε Ñ 0.
8.2.2 The partial unfolding operator

On ΩB we use the standard unfolding operator Tε (see Chapter 1) corre-
sponding to the reference cell Y “ p0, 1q2 . On ΩεA , we introduce a partial
unfolding operator which unfolds only on the first variable x1 . To do so, let
Σε denote the open domain defined as follows (see Figure 8.3):
´ Nď
´1 ¯
.
Σε “ interior rkε, pk ` 1qεq ˆ Yk Ă p0, 1q3 .
k“0
Figure 8.3: An example of a set Σε
269
8.2. An example
Definition 8.14 (The partial unfolding operator TεA ).

For a function u : ΩεA Ñ R, its unfolding by the partial operator TεA is the
function TεA puq : Σε Ñ R, defined (almost everywhere) as
´ ”x ı ¯
. 1
TεA puqpx1 , yq “ u ε ` εy1 , y2 .
ε
Proposition 8.15 (Properties of Tε ). The properties of this partial unfold-
A
ing operator are similar to those of previous partial unfolding operators (but
with the variable domain Σε ).
(i) The operator TεA is linear.
(ii) For two functions u, v ΩεA Ñ R, TεA puvq “ TεA puqTεA pvq.
(iii) Let u P L1 pΩεA q. Then TεA puq belongs to L1 pΣε q and
ż ż
TεA puqdx1 dy “ u dx. (8.3)
Σε ΩεA
So, TεA is an isometry from Lp pΩεA q to Lp pΣε q for every p P r1, `8s.
(iv) Let u P H 1 pΩεA q. Then
B A ´ Bu ¯ B A ´ Bu ¯
Tε puq “ TεA , Tε puq “ εTεA .
By2 Bx2 By1 Bx1
tx u
(v) For every x1 P p0, 1q, let Σε 1 denote the section of Σε defined by x1 ,
that is, (
1u .
Σtx
ε “ py1 , y2 q | px1 , y1 , y2 q P Σε .
Then, ` ˘
TεA puqpx1 , ¨, ¨q P H 1 Σtx
ε
1u
,
and
x1 ÞÑ }upx1 , ¨, ¨q} ` tx1 u
˘ is in L2 p0, 1q,
H 1 Σε
and is bounded above by }u}H 1 pΩεA q .

Proof. The proof of (8.3) goes as follows:
ż ´1 ż pk`1qε
Nÿ ż ´ ”x ı ¯
1
Tε puqdx1 dy “
A
dx1 u ε ` εy1 , y2 dy
Σε k“0 kε Yk ε
Nÿ
´1 ż
´ ”x ı ¯
1
“ εu ε ` εy1 , y2 dy
k“0 Yk ε
´1 ż
Nÿ ż
“ u pz, y2 q dzdy2 “ u dx,
k“0 pz,y2 qPYkε ΩεA
”x ı
1
where we used the change of variable z “ ε ` εy1 .
ε
All the other properties are straightforward.
In ΩB the standard homogenization operator Tε (of Part I is used with
the standard period Y “ p0, 1q2 ).
270
8.2.3.1 Geometric assumption
We make the following assumption on the sequence of domains tΣε uε : there
exists some Σ with a Lipschitz boundary such that,
Σε Ñ Σ in the Hausdorff sense, (8.4)
see Definition 8.3. Observe that Σε is with Lipschitz boundary by construc-

tion.
Figure 8.4: An example of a set Σ and an associated Σε
Let BΣ0ε denote the intersection of BΣε with the plane ty2 “ 0u (it is
the geometric unfolding of Jε ). By construction, it has a non empty interior
(in the plane). We assume that it converges in the Hausdorff sense to the
intersection of BΣ with the same plane ty2 “ 0u, this intersection being
denoted BΣ0 (by this hypothesis, BΣ0 is not empty).
For simplicity we write dσ for dx1 dy, the volume element of Σ.
Remark 8.16 (Examples). In the model problem studied in [93], the previous
assumption on tΣε uε is satisfied trivially since the sets Σε do not depend upon
ε and all coincide with Σ.
A more general example is constructed in the following way. Let Σ be
Ş subset of subset of p0, 1q with Lipschitz boundary and such that
3
a given
BΣ tpx1 , yq | x1 “ , y2 “ 0u contains a non empty interval for P r0, 1s.
For ε ą 0, let ξε,k be any point in rkε, pk ` 1qεq (k “ 0, . . . , N ´ 1) and set
.
Yk “ Σ X tx1 “ ξε,k u. Then, the corresponding sequence tΣε uε converges in
the Hausdorff sense to Σ (see Figure 8.4).
271
8.2. An example
Notation 8.17.
1. In the sequel, V denotes the following Hilbert space:
! ˇ BV BV )
.
V “ V P L2 pΣq ˇ ” 0, P L2 pΣq ,
By1 By2
endowed with the obvious (graph) norm. By definition, the elements of V

have traces on the set BΣ0 , belonging to L2 pBΣ0 q.
2. Also, W denotes the Hilbert space of pairs of functions,
! ˇ )
.
W “ pV, vq P VˆH 1 pΩB q ˇ V|BΣ0 px1 , y1 q “ v|I px1 q for a.e. px1 , y1 q P BΣ0 ˆΩB .
` ˘
3. For a function w defined on Ωε “ interior ΩεA Y ΩB , wa and wb , denote
the restrictions of w to ΩεA and ΩB , respectively.
8.2.3.2 The limit of the unfolded problem

Making use of the estimates and the convergence properties defined in Sec-
tion 8.1, one easily proves the next results (for simplicity, we express them
with the homogenized formulation in ΩB ). Recalling Notation 8.17, we have
Proposition 8.18. Assume that hypothesis (8.4) holds true. Assume also
that there exists a matrix field A satisfying
TεA pAε q 1Σε Ñ A 1Σ a.e. in ΩA ,

Tε pAε q Ñ A a.e. in ΩB ˆ Y,
fε Ñ f strongly in L2 pΩq, so that
TεA pfε q 1Σε Ñ fp1Σ strongly in L2 pΩA ˆ p0, 1qq and
Tε pf q Ñ f strongly in L2 pΩB q.
Then there exists a unique element pU, ub q in W such that

(i) TεA puaε q converges to U in the generalized weak L2 sense (see Section 8.1),
BU
(ii) ∇y TεA puaε q converges to ∇y U in the same sense (recall that “ 0),
By1
(iii) ubε á ub weakly in H 1 pΩB q,
(iv) the pair pU, ub q is the unique solution in W of the following problem:
$ż ´
’ a12 px1 , yqa21 px1 , yq ¯ BU BΨ
’
’ a px , yq ´ px1 , yq px1 , yq dσ
’
’
22 1
a11 px1 , yq By2 By2
’
’
Σ
ż ż
’
’ ÿ Bub Bϕ
’
& ` c U px1 , yqΨpx1 , yq dσ ` ahom pxq pxq pxq dx
Σ ΩB i,j“1,2
ij
Bxi Bxj (8.5)
’
’ ż ż ż
’
’
’
’ ` c ub pxqϕpxq dx “ fppx1 , y2 q Ψpx1 , yq dσ ` f pxq ϕpxq dx,
’
’
’
’ Ω Σ ΩB
% B
@pΨ, ϕq P W.
272
Proof. Step 1. Problem (8.5) is well-posed.

Note that since the matrix field A belongs to M pα, β, Ωq, it follows that
the function
a12 a21 detA
a22 ´ “ ,
a11 a11
takes its values in the interval rα2 {β, β 2 {αs. Therefore, the bilinear form in
(8.5) is coercive and bounded on the space W.
Step 2. Existence of the pair pU, ub q in W.
Under the hypotheses of the statement, the sequences t}uεa }H 1 pΩεA q uε and
tuεb uε are bounded in R and in H 1 pΩB q, respectively. Therefore, the se-
quences t}TεA puε q}L2 pΣε q uε and t}TεA p∇y uε q}L2 pΣε q uε are also bounded.
The existence of a pair pU, ub q in L2 pΣq ˆ H 1 pΩB q such that convergences
(i)-(iii) hold, is obvious in view of hypothesis (8.4).
From the properties of the unfolding operator, it easily also follows that,
at the limit,
BU BU
” 0, and P L2 pΣq.
By1 By2
Step 3. pU, ub q belongs to W.
The subsequence tubε uε converges weakly to ub in H 1 pΩB q so that by the
trace theorem, the traces ubε p¨, 0q converge strongly to ub p¨, 0q in L2 p0, 1q.
Therefore, by the properties of the one dimensional unfolding operator,
the unfolding of this trace defined as
´ ”x ı ¯
. 1
Tε pubε q|px2 “0q px1 , y1 q “ ubε ε ` εy1 , 0 ,
ε
converges strongly to ub in L2 pp0, 1q ˆ p0, 1qq.
On the other hand, by definition, the traces of uaε from above and ubε from
below on J ε (see Notation 8.13) coincide. Therefore, on BΣ0ε , the following
equality holds:
TεA puaε qpx1 , y1 q 1BΣ0ε “ Tε pubε q|px2 “0q px1 , y1 q 1BΣ0ε .
Then, the hypotheses on Σε and BΣ0ε allow to pass to the limit as ε Ñ 0
(along the subsequence), and one concludes that
U px1 , y1 , 0q “ ub px1 q a.e. on BΣ0 .
Step 4. pU, ub q is a solution of (8.5).
By (8.2) ˇˇ ˇˇ
ˇˇ Buε ˇˇ
ˇˇ ˇˇ
ˇˇ Bx1 ˇˇ 2 ε ď C,
L pΩ q A
so that, up to a subsequence, its unfolding converges weakly (in the gener-

alized sense) to some W1 which belongs to L2 pΣq. To determine this limit,
consider in (8.1) a test functions ϕε of the form
´! x )¯
1
ϕε pxq “ ε ϕpxq ψ , (8.6)
ε
273
8.2. An example
where ϕ P C 8 pr0, 1s2 q and vanishes near tx2 “ 0u, and ψ P C 8 pr0, 1sq.
The function ϕε is piecewise continuous in x1 but smooth in ΩεA (the jump
possibilities are only at x1 “ kε for k “ 1, . . . , n, outside of ΩεA ).
For the integral in the left hand side, we shall use the unfolding operator
TεA . From its definition
´ ”x ı ¯
. 1
TεA pϕε q “ ε ϕ ε ` εy1 , y2 ψpy1 q,
ε
it follows that
ˆ ε˙
Bϕ 1 B Bϕ ´ ” x1 ı ¯
TεA “ pTεA ϕε q “ ε ε ` εy1 , y2 ψpy1 q
Bx1 ε By1 Bx1 ε
´ ”x ı ¯
` εy1 , y2 ψ 1 py1 q,
1
`ϕ ε
ˆ ε˙ ε
Bϕ B Bϕ ´ ”x ı ¯
1
TεA “ pTεA ϕε q “ ε ε ` εy1 , y2 ψpy1 q.
By2 By2 Bx2 ε
Consequently,
› ˆ ˙›
› A Bϕε ›
}TεA pϕε q}L2 pΣε q Ñ 0 and ›Tε › 2 Ñ 0,
Bx2 L pΣε q
while ´ Bϕε ¯
TεA Ñ ϕpx1 , y2 qψ 1 py1 q|BΣ0 .
Bx1 |Σε
Therefore,
ż ´ ÿ ¯
Buaε Bϕε
aεij pxq pxq pxq ` c uaε pxq ϕε pxq dx
Ωε i,j“1,2
Bxi Bxj
ż ´ ÿ ¯
Buaε Bϕε
“ aεij pxq
pxq pxq ` c uaε pxq ϕε pxq dx
ΩεA i,j“1,2 Bxi Bxj
ż ´ ÿ ´ Bua ¯ ´ Bϕε ¯ ¯
“ TεA paεij q TεA ε
TεA ` c TεA puaε q TεA pϕε q dσ
Σε i,j“1,2 Bxi Bxj
ż ´ ¯
BU
Ñ a11 px1 , y2 q W1 px1 , yq ` a21 px1 , y2 q px1 , yq ϕpx1 , y2 q ψ 1 py1 q dσ.
Σ By2
For the right-hand side,

ż ż
fε ϕ dx “
ε
fε ϕε dx Ñ 0.
Ωε ΩεA
Therefore the limit of (8.1) with the choice (8.6) as test function is
ż ´ ¯
BU
a11 px1 , y2 q W1 px1 , yq ` a21 px1 , y2 q px1 , yq ϕpx1 , y2 qψ 1 py1 q dσ “ 0.
Σ By2
274
Observe that ϕ is an arbitrary function in C 8 pr0, 1s2 q as is ψ 1 in C 8 pr0, 1sq.

Thus, the set of test functions ϕpx1 , y2 qψ 1 py1 q is dense in L2 pΣq, from which
BU
a11 px1 , y2 q W1 px1 , yq ` a21 px1 , y2 q px1 , yq ” 0 a.e. in Σ. (8.7)
By2
Hence
a21 BU
W1 px1 , yq “ ´ px1 , y2 q px1 , yq a.e. in Σ.
a11 By2
Now take Ψ P C 8 pΩq as test function in (8.1). The left-hand side of (8.1)
thus obtained is
ż ” ÿ ı
Buε BΨ
aεij pxq pxq pxq ` c uε pxq Ψpxq dx
ΩεA i,j“1,2 Bxi Bxj
ż ” ÿ ı
Buε BΨ
` aεij pxq pxq pxq ` c uε pxq Ψpxq dx.
ΩB i,j“1,2 Bxi Bxj
The first integral is unfolded as

ż ” ÿ ´ Bu ¯ ´ BΨ ¯ ı
ε
TεA paεij q TεA TεA ` c TεA puε qTεA pΨq dσ
Σε i,j“1,2 Bxi Bxj
and converges to
ż ”´
BU ¯ BΨ ´ BU ¯ BΨ ı
a11 W1 ` a21 ` a12 W1 ` a22 ` c U Ψ dσ,
Σ By2 Bx1 By2 Bx2
which, by (8.7), reduces to
ż ”´
a21 a12 ¯ BU BΨ ı
a22 ´ ` c U Ψ dσ. (8.8)
Σ a11 By2 Bx2
For the second integral, using the standard unfolding Tε in ΩB , we get
ż ” ÿ ı
Buε BΨ
aεij ` c uε Ψ dx
ΩB i,j“1,2 Bxi Bxj
ż ” ÿ ı (8.9)
Bub BΨ
Ñ ahom ` c ub
Ψ dx,
ΩB i,j“1,2
ij
Bxi Bxj
where Ahom is the homogenized matrix field obtained by homogenization in

the domain ΩB (see formulas (3.19)).
For the right-hand side of (8.1), we have
ż ż ż ż ż
fε Ψ dx “ fε Ψ dx ` fε Ψ dx “ TεA pfε Ψq dσ ` fε Ψ dx
Ωε ΩεA ΩB Σε ΩB
ż ż
Ñ fppx1 , y2 qΨpx1 , yq dσ ` f Ψ dx.
Σ ΩB
This, together with (8.8) and (8.9), used in (8.1) gives problem (8.5) and
concludes the proof in view of the density of C 8 pΩq in W.
275
8.2. An example
8.2.3.3 Unfolded homogenization result

Although U is a better choice, traditionally, the weak limit in L2 pΩA q of u raε ,
a
the extension by 0 of uε , is considered as representing the limit solution. The
following lemma allows to obtain it from the convergence of TεA puaε q.
Lemma 8.19. Let p be in p1, `8q and assume that the hypothesis (8.4)
holds. Let wε belong to Lp pΣε q and be such that the sequence tTεA pwε quε
converges weakly to some W P Lp pΣq in the generalized sense. Then, w
rε , the
extension by 0 of wε , satisfies
ż1
rε á
w Ă p ¨ , y1 , ¨ q dy1
W weakly in Lp pp0, 1q2 q,
0
Ă is the extension by 0 of W to the set p0, 1q3 .

where W
Proof. Similar to TεA associated with ΩεA , one can define an unfolding opera-
A
tor Trε for the set p0, 1q2 which contains ΩεA . The properties of this operator
are the same as those of TεA but the domains are fixed. By testing against
1
fixed functions in Lp pp0, 1q2 q, it is easily shown that if for a sequence tϕε uε
in Lp pp0, 1q2 q,
A
Trε pϕε q á Φ weakly in Lp pp0, 1q3 q,
then,
ż1
ϕε á r ¨ , y1 , ¨ q dy1
Φp weakly in Lp pp0, 1q2 q.
0
A
One concludes, since Trε pw
rε q is simply the extension by 0 of TεA pwε q.
Given λ ” pλ1 , λ2 q in p0, 1q2 , denote by spλq the section of Σ by the line
tpx1 , y2 q “ λu. Lemma 8.19 implies the weak convergence in L2 pp0, 1q2 q
raε á ua
u weakly in L2 pp0, 1q2 q,
where ż
u px1 , x2 q “
a
U px1 , y1 , x2 q dy1 . (8.10)
spx1 ,x2 q
On y2 “ 0, the trace of U is independent of y1 so that the transmission

condition is expressed as
ua px1 , 0q “ |spx1 , 0q| ub px1 , 0q.
However, in order to express the limit problem in terms of pua , ub q one

requires to invert (8.10), in order to express U in terms of ua . In general,
this is impossible. Below we present the only case where this seems possible.
Assume the section spλq is connected (i.e. a possibly empty interval)
for every λ P ΩA , and denote by pλq its length. For simplicity, assume also
276
that pλq is uniformly bounded away from zero near tλ2 “ 0u. Recall that
BU
“ 0, so that U does not depend upon y1 and (8.10) becomes simply
By1
ua px1 , y2 q “ px1 , y2 q U px1 , y2 q,
and by a change of variables (to go back to the original variables px1 , x2 q),
ua pxq
U pxq “ for every x P ΩA such that pxq ą 0.
pxq
The effective upper part of the domain for the problem satisfied by pua , ub q
is then
.
ΩrA “ tx P ΩA | pxq ą 0u,
which is the projection of Σ on the plane of coordinates px1 , y2 q. Finally, the
reduced domain is ď
.
Ωr “ interior p ΩAr
ΩB q,
which is connected.
For convenience, extend to be just 1 on ΩB and define the measure μ as
μpxq “ pxq dx on Ωr .
Let x
W be the space
! ˇφ B ´φ¯
x . ˇ
W “ φ ˇ P L2 pΩr ; μq, P L2 pΩr ; μq,
Bx2
)
φpx1 , 0` q ” p0q φpx1 , 0´ q for x1 P BΩra X Ωb .
Then the proper variational space for the homogenized problem is
V “ t φ | φ P x
Wu.
The pair pua , ub q defines one element u in V, which can be seen as the
homogenized solution. This generalizes the result of [93], where the Yk are
all equal to fixed rectangle (second example of Figure 8.2).
Theorem 8.20. Under the above hypotheses, there exists a unique element
u P V such that,
rε á u weakly in V.
u
The function u is the unique solution of the following variational problem
(where y2 is replaced by x2 to revert to the original variables): To find u P V
such that
ż ÿ ú¯ B ´ϕ¯ ż
hom B
rij
a dμ “ f ϕ dμ, @ϕ P V,
Ωr i,j“1,2 Bxi Bxj Ωr
277
8.2. An example
where
$
’
’ 0 for pi, jq ‰ p2, 2q and x in ΩrA ,
’
’
’
’ ż ´
’
’
& 1 a12 px1 , y1 , x2 qa21 px1 , y1 , x2 q ¯
. a 22 px 1 , y1 , x 2 q ´ dy1
rhom
aij pxq “
pxq spxq a11 px1 , y1 , x2 q
’
’
’
’ for i “ j “ 2 and x in ΩrA ,
’
’
’
’
% hom
aij pxq for i, j “ 1, 2 and x in ΩB .
Furthermore, recalling that is a non negative element of L8 pΩA q which
can take the value 0, one also has the convergences,
Č
uε|ΩεA á u|ΩA weakly in L2 pΩA q,
Ąε
Bu Bu
ε á weakly in L2 pΩA q,
Bx2 |ΩA Bx2 |ΩA
uε|ΩB á u|ΩB weakly in H 1 pΩB q.
In ΩrA , this is a degenerate problem with the bounded weight pxq which
is not necessarily bounded below away from zero.
Remark 8.21. The case of variable thickness of the narrow bands (defined
above as uniformly distributed as kε) can be easily reduced to the previous case
by a bi-Lipschitz change of variable affecting only x1 , and the results from
this section can then be applied, provided the sequence of change of variables
converges uniformly. Another possibility is to modulate the unfolding operator
itself (see [15] for an example of such a treatment).
Convergence of the energy and corrector In this situation one can

prove the convergence of the energy, from which as usual, corrector result
follows. The corrector is the standard one in ΩB . In ΩA the corrector is of
different type: it is the extension of the solution uε by its local average on
the lines x2 constant. This extension then converges strongly to the limit
u|ΩA in L2 pΩA q (see [93] for details).
Coefficients oscillating at a different scale In case the coefficients os-

cillate at a different scale than the upper boundary, one can use the same
method as in Subsection 3.1.4. Whether the scale for the coefficients is smaller
or larger than that of the boundary, the double unfolded problem is posed in
a domain which is supposed to converge in the Hausdorff sense.
Remark 8.22 (Transformation via a bi-Lipschitz diffeomorphism). As noted
in the introduction of Chapter 3, the previous problems can be transformed
via a global bi-Lipschitz diffeomorphism, in which case the periodicity becomes
a local periodicity varying in a bi-Lipschitz way with each point.
The next figure presents several “nasty” devices (Brushes or radiators ?)
for which the homogenization method presented in this section applies.
278
Figure 8.5: Examples of 3D geometries where the method can be applied
279
Part IV
Unfolding for small

obstacles and strange
terms
Part IV Unfolding for small obstacles and strange terms
In Part IV of this book, the unfolding method is presented for domains in

RN , N ě 2, with “small holes” and obstacles which, at the critical size, give
rise to the so-called “strange terms”. It turns out that the unfolding method
is very well adapted for these situations.
Chapter 9 presents the notations, tools and main convergence results in
the case of volume-distributed small holes and in the case of a single layer
along a hyperplane which is well-suited for sieve-type problems (boundary
layer unfolding). They depend on two small parameters, the first, ε, is the
scale of periodicity, and the second, δ, defines the size εδ of the holes. This
approach never assumes the existence of an extension operator in the cells but
is based on the Sobolev-Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality. The latter requires
that the dimension N of the domain Ω be larger than the Lebesgue exponent
p for functions in W 1,p pΩq.
In Chapter 10 several linear applications are presented in various settings,
exemplifying the flexibility and effectiveness of the method.
It is worth noticing that the same method applies, mutatis mutandis, in
the case combining small holes with ε-size holes ε-periodically distributed as
in Part I, provided the two type of holes stay away from each other (in the
macroscopic period Y ).
283
Chapter 9
Unfolding operators: the

case of “small holes”
This chapter presents the unfolding method adapted to perforated domains

by holes of size εδ, distributed periodically with period ε (on whose boundary
a Dirichlet condition is imposed). We consider here the case where δ “ δpεq
is such that δ Ñ 0 as ε Ñ 0. Such kind of holes are known in literature as
“small holes” (see e.g. [74], [156]), or “tiny holes” ([3], [142]). For this new
geometrical framework, we define specific unfolding operators.
The related estimates are based on the Sobolev-Poincaré-Wirtinger in-
equality, presented in Section 9.1 with some of its consequences.
In Section 9.2, the unfolding operator Tε,δ is introduced for domains in
RN , N P Nzt0, 1u when the small holes are distributed in volume.
Section 9.3 presents the case where the “holes” are concentrated in a
layer along a section of the domain in RN by a hyperplane, which can be
near the boundary of the domain or internal (e.g. the Dirichlet screen). The
boundary-layer unfolding operator Tε,δ bl
and the corresponding local average
operator Mε are defined.
bl
For sieve problems, one has to distinguish between the two sides of the
hyperplane, so that there are two local average operators Mbl` ε and Mbl´ε .
The case of a layer along a Lipschitz orientable hypersurface can be reduced
to a hyperplane via a bi-Lipschitz diffeomorphism as in previous chapters.
Other type of transmission conditions on the boundary of ε-periodically
distributed subdomains of size εδ can be treated with the unfolding method.
9.1 Sobolev - Poincaré - Wirtinger inequality

The Sobolev-Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality combines the Sobolev embedding
and the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality for a domain D where the latter holds.

9.1. Sobolev - Poincaré - Wirtinger inequality
Definition 9.1. Let p be in r1, N q and let
. pN
p˚ “ ,
N ´p
be the associated Sobolev exponent. A bounded domain D in RN satisfies the

Sobolev-Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality if there exists a constant C “ CpDq
such that,
}ϕ ´ MD pϕq}Lp∗pDq ď C }∇ϕ}Lp pDq , @ϕ P W 1,p pDq.
This is the case for D bounded with Lipschitz boundary. The constant
C is the same for all scaled domains δD for δ ą 0 (as can be checked by
rescaling), and also for their translates.
.
We recall the definition of the “homogeneous” space W 1,p pRN q: it is the
completion of DpRN q for the norm
}φ} .
W 1,p pRN q
“ }∇φ}Lp pRN q .
The Sobolev imbedding theorem implies that for p ă N ,

. ˇ (
W 1,p pRN q “ φ P Lp pRN q ˇ ∇φ P Lp pRN qN .
∗
Therefore, all its elements admit 0 as limit at 8 of RN in the weak sense of

∗
Lp pRN q, see [2].
The next proposition generalizes this result to functions having a gradient
in Lp pRN qN . It shows that they have a constant generalized limit at infinity
of RN .
Proposition 9.2. Let p be in r1, N q. Consider the space of functions

. 1,p N ˇˇ (
W 1,p pRN q “ Wloc pR q ∇Φ P Lp pRN qN .
.
It is isomorphic to the space W 1,p pRN q ‘ R.
More precisely, for every Φ in W 1,p pRN q there exists a real number Φp8q
(which is the weak limit of Φ at infinity) such that
.
Φ ´ Φp8q P W 1,p pRN q.
Moreover,
}Φ ´ Φp8q}Lp∗pRN q ď C}∇Φ}Lp pRN q , @ Φ P W 1,p pRN q, (9.1)

.
where C is the constant for the Sobolev embedding of W 1,p pRN q into Lp pRN q
∗
(it is actually the Sobolev-Poincaré-Wirtinger constant of the balls of RN ).
286
Chapter 9. Unfolding for “small holes”
Remark 9.3. Assume that T is a distribution on RN such that ∇T is in

Lp pRN qN . Making use of the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality for balls in RN
.
applied to the distributions Tε “ T ˚ ρε (ρε here is a mollifying sequence),
1,p
one can show that Tε and then T itself actually belong to Wloc pRN q. So
Proposition 9.2 holds under the apparently more general hypothesis that Φ is
in D1 pRN q with gradient in Lp pRN qN .
Proof of Proposition 9.2. Let B be the unit ball in RN and C be the Sobolev-
Poincaré-Wirtinger constant for B. By the scaling invariance of this constant,
it is the constant for all balls nB with n P N˚ .
Consequently, for Φ in W 1,p pRN q,
}Φ ´ MnB pΦq}Lp∗pnBq ď C}∇Φ}Lp pnBq ď C}∇Φ}Lp pRN q . (9.2)

. ∗
Thus, Ψn “ pΦ ´ MnB pΦqq1nB is bounded in Lp pRN q and admits weak
limit points in that space. Let Ψ be such a limit point. Clearly, ∇Ψ “ ∇Φ
in every nB, so also in RN . This implies the uniqueness of the weak limit
.
point for the sequence tΨn un which therefore converges. It also implies that
Ψ belongs to W 1,p pRN q. As for Φ ´ Ψ, it is constant (since its gradient is
0 on RN !) and it is also the limit of the sequence of averages tMnB pΦqun .
Denoting it Φp8q and going to the limit in inequality (9.2) gives (9.1).
With these notations, a norm on W 1,p pRN q can be taken as
` ˘1{p
}Φ} “ }∇Φ}pLp pRN q ` |Φp8q|p ,
for which it is a Banach space. Then the linear form Φ ÞÑ Φp8q is continuous.
A similar result holds for half-spaces.
We use the notations
. N ´1 . N ´1
RN` “R ˆ p0, `8q and RN ´ “R ˆ p´8, 0q.
The equivalent of Proposition 9.2 for RN

.
` is stated below without proof.
The corresponding spaces are in this case W 1,p pRN ` q, the completion of
8
` N˘
the space of functions in C R` with bounded support for the norm
φ ÞÑ }∇φ}Lp pRN
`q
, and
! ˇ )
. N ˇ
W 1,p pRN
` q “ W 1,p
loc pR` q ∇Φ P L p
pR ` q
N N
.
.
Proposition 9.4. Let p be in r1, N q. The space W 1,p pRN
the space W 1,p pRN
` q is isomorphic to
1,p
` q ‘ R. More precisely, for every Φ in W pRN
` q there is
a real number Φp`8q such that
.
Φ ´ Φp`8q P W 1,p pRN
` q,
and satisfying
}Φ ´ Φp`8q}Lp∗pRN
`q
ď C}∇Φ}Lp pRN
`q
,
287
9.2. Unfolding for volume-distributed holes
.
where C is the constant for the Sobolev embedding of W 1,p pRN
∗
` q into L pR` q
p N
(it is actually the Sobolev-Poincaré-Wirtinger of every half-ball in R ).

N
The norm on W 1,p pRN

` q is given by
` ˘1{p
}Φ} “ }∇Φ}pLp pRN q ` |Φp`8q|p ,
`
and the linear form Φ ÞÑ Φp`8qq is continuous.

Ť N
Of course, for functions defined on RN
` R´ , the two versions of Propo-
sition 9.4 can be combined. Therefore,
1,p
Corollary 9.5. On the space of functions Φ belonging to Wloc pRN
` Y R´ q
N
with ∇Φ belonging to L pR` Y R´ q , there exist two continuous linear forms

p N N N
Φ ÞÑ Φp`8q and Φ ÞÑ Φp´8q, such that

.
Φ` ´ Φp`8q P W 1,p pRN ´
.
` q and Φ ´ Φp´8q P W pRN
´ q.
1,p
9.2 Unfolding for volume-distributed holes

Recall that G is the subgroup of RN generated by the basis B “ pb1 , . . . , bN q
of periods, see Section 1.1. In the remainder of this chapter, Ω is a bounded
domain in RN and the reference cell is the open parallelotope Y with coor-
dinates relative to the basis B in p´1{2, 1{2qN .
Below, we will consider domains with εY -periodically distributed holes of
size εδ (1 ą δ “ δpεq Ñ 0 as ε Ñ 0), see Figure 9.1.
Figure 9.1: The sets B and Yδ˚ and the corresponding Ω˚ε,δ
288
More precisely, for a given open B Ť Y , set

.
Yδ˚ “ Y zδB,
and define the perforated domain Ω˚ε,δ as

! ˇ !x) )
ˇ
Ω˚ε,δ “ x P Ω ˇ P Yδ˚ . (9.3)
ε Y
Functions belonging to the space W01,p pΩ˚ε,δ q, p P r1, `8s vanish on the
whole boundary of the perforated domain Ω˚ε,δ and their natural extensions by
zero to the whole of Ω belong to W01,p pΩq. Consequently, in this chapter
and in the next one, we will not distinguish elements of W01,p pΩ˚ε,δ q
and their extensions by 0 in W01,p pΩq.
This geometry of domains with small holes requires another unfolding
operator Tε,δ depending on both parameters ε and δ. It will be defined for
functions on the whole of Ω.
Definition 9.6 (The unfolding operator in domains with small holes). For
φ in Lp pΩq, p P r1, `8s, the unfolding operator
Tε,δ : Lp pΩq ÝÑ Lp pΩ ˆ RN q,
is defined by
$
&T pφqpx, δzq
ε
p ε ˆ 1 Y,
for a.e. px, zq P Ω
Tε,δ pφqpx, zq “ δ
%
0 otherwise.
The next results follow from Proposition 1.8 by using the change of vari-
able z “ p1{δqy.
Theorem 9.7. (Properties of the operator Tε,δ ).
Suppose p P r1, `8s. The operator Tε,δ is linear and continuous from Lp pΩq
to Lp pΩ ˆ RN q.
(i) For every v, w P Lp pΩq, Tε,δ pvwq “ Tε,δ pvqTε,δ pwq.
(ii) For every u P L1 pΩq,
ż ż ż
δN 1
Tε,δ puqpx, zq dxdz “ Tε puqpx, yq dx dy “ u dx.
|Y | ΩˆRN |Y | ΩˆY pε
Ω
(iii) For every u P Lp pΩq,

´ |Y | ¯1{p
}Tε,δ puq}Lp pΩˆRN q ď }u}Lp pΩq .
δN
(iv) For every u P L1 pΩq,
ˇż N ż
ˇ ż
ˇ ˇ
ˇ u dx ´ δ Tε,δ puq dxdz ˇˇ ď |u| dx.
ˇ |Y | N
Ω ΩˆR Λε
289
9.2. Volume distributed “small holes”
(v) Let u P W 1,p pΩq. Then

1 ` ˘ 1
Tε,δ p∇x uq “ ∇z Tε,δ puq in Ω ˆ Y,
εδ δ
1 (9.4)
` ˘ ε |Y | p
}∇z Tε,δ puq }Lp pΩˆ δ1 Y q ď N }∇u}Lp pΩq .
δ p ´1
(vi) Suppose p P r1, N q and let ω be a bounded open set in RN . For every u
in W 1,p pΩq the following estimates hold:
` ˘ ` ˘
}Tε,δ u ´ Mε puq }Lp pΩ;Lp∗pRN qq ď C}∇z Tε,δ puq }Lp pΩˆ δ1 Y q
1
ε |Y | p (9.5)
ďC }∇u}Lp pΩq ,
N
´1
δ p
and
`
}Tε,δ uq}Lp pΩˆωq
` ˘
ď |ω|1{N }Tε,δ u ´ Mε puq }Lp pΩ;Lp∗pRN qq ` |ω|1{p ||u||Lp pΩq
(9.6)
1
ε |Y | p
ďC |ω|
1{N
}∇u}Lp pΩq ` |ω| 1{p
}u}Lp pΩq ,
δ p ´1
N
where C denotes the Sobolev-Poincaré-Wirtinger constant for W 1,p pY q.

(vii) Suppose p P p1, N q. Let twε,δ upε,δq be a sequence in W 1,p pΩq which is
.
uniformly bounded when both ε and δ go to zero. Then, up to a subsequence,
there is W in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pRN qq such that
δ p ´1 ` ˘
N
∗
Tε,δ wε,δ ´ Mε pwε,δ q á W weakly in Lp pΩ; Lp pRN qq,
ε
δ p ´1 ` ˘
N
∇z Tε,δ pwε,δ q 1 δ1 Y á ∇z W weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ RN qN .

ε
Assuming furthermore, that
δ p ´1
N
lim sup ă `8,

ε
.
pε,δqÑp0,0q
we choose the subsequence above and some U in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pRN q ‘ Rq with
δ p ´1
N
Tε,δ pwε,δ q á U weakly in Lp pΩ; Lploc pRN qq.

ε
Remark 9.8. Estimates (9.5)-(9.6) are derived from (9.4) by using the
Sobolev-Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality (because of its scale-invariance). The
standard Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality would give (see Proposition 1.38),
` ˘ Cε
}Tε,δ u ´ Mε puq }Lp pΩˆRN q ď N {p }∇u}Lp pΩq ,
δ
where C is the Poincaré-Wirtinger constant of Y . This estimate is not as
sharp as (9.5).
290
Remark 9.9. One can also define a corresponding averaging operator Uε,δ ,
adjoint of Tε,δ . It can be expressed in terms of Uε together with the change of
variable z “ p1{δqy. The properties of Uε,δ follow directly from those of Uε .
9.3 Boundary-layer unfolding operator

The sieve-type problems (Sections 10.2 and 10.3 in the next chapter), consider
the case of holes periodically distributed in a layer Σε of thickness of order
ε, parallel to a hyperplane (e.g. xN “ constant) in the domain Ω of RN .
.
Denote G1 the subgroup generated by the vectors B1 “ pb1 , . . . , bN ´1 q.
Notation 9.10.
.
1. x1 “ px1 , ¨ ¨ ¨ , xN ´1 , 0q.
.
2. Π “ txN “ 0u and Σ “ Π X Ω.
.
3. Y 1 “ Y X tyN “ 0u the pN ´ 1q-dimensional parallelotope associated with
this system.
The layer Σε is defined as follows:

! ˇ ε)
ˇ
Σε “ Ω X x P RN ˇ |xN | ă . (9.7)
2
By analogy with (1.3), introduce the corresponding sets
(
Ξε1 “ ξ P G1 , εpξ ` Y 1 q Ă Σ ,
` ˘( ´ ¯
p ε1 “ interior Ť ε ξ ` Y 1 , Σ
Σ p 1 ˆ ´ ε, ε ,
pε “ Σ
ε
ξPΞε1 2 2
´ ε ε¯
Λε1 “ ΣzΣ p 1 , Λε “ Λ 1 ˆ ´ , .
ε ε
2 2
p 1 is the largest union of εY 1 cells contained in Σ (see Figure 9.2).
The set Σε
p ε and Λε
Figure 9.2: The sets Σε , Σ
291
9.3. Boundary-layer unfolding operator
As we did for perforated domains in Section 4.4 (see Definition 4.46), we

now define a specific boundary layer operator for this particular geometry.
Definition 9.11 (The boundary layer unfolding operator).
For φ P Lp pΣε q, p P r1, `8s, the boundary unfolding operator
Tε,δ
bl
: Lp pΣε q ÝÑ Lp pΣ ˆ RN q,
is defined by
$ ´ ” x1 ı ¯
& p 1 ˆ 1 Y,
Tε,δ
bl
pφqpx1 , zq “ φ ε ` εδz for a.e. px1 , zq P Σ ε
% 0 ε Y1 δ
otherwise.
This operator, designed to capture the contribution of the barriers in the

limit process, was originally used in [169].
We also introduce the local average operator related to the hyperplane Σ.
Definition 9.12. The local average
ε : L pΣε q ÝÑ L pΣq,
Mbl p p
is defined for every φ in Lp pΣε q, p P r1, `8s, by

$ ż
’ 1 p 1,
& N φpζq dζ for a.e. x1 P Σ
Mbl pφqpx 1
q “ ε |Y | εr xε1 sY 1 `εY ε
ε
’
%0 for a.e. x1 P Λ 1 ,
ε
N ż
δ
“ T bl pφqpx1 , zq dz.
|Y | δ1 Y ε,δ
Remark 9.13. Since elements in Lp pΣq can be considered as functions in

Lp pΣε q, Mbl
ε can be applied to them. With this convention,
Tε,δ
bl
˝ Mbl
ε pφq “ Mε pφq
bl
on the set Σ ˆ RN .
An equivalent of Proposition 1.25 holds in this framework.

Proposition 9.14. Suppose p P r1, `8q. Let twε uε be a sequence such that
wε á w weakly in W 1,p pΩq. Then
ε pwε q Ñ w|Σ
Mbl strongly in Lp pΣq.
It is easy to check that most of the results stated in the previous subsection
extend to Tε,δ
bl
, they are listed in the next theorem.
Theorem 9.15. (Properties of the operator Tε,δ

bl
) Suppose p P r1, `8s.
(i) For every v, w P L pΣε q,
p
Tε,δ
bl
pvwq “ Tε,δ
bl
pvqTε,δ
bl
pwq.
292
(ii) For every u P L1 pΣε q,

ż ż
εδ N
Tε,δ
bl
puq dx1 dz “ u dx.
|Y | ΣˆRN pε
Σ
(iii) For every u P Lp pΣε q,

› bl › ´ |Y | ¯1{p
›Tε,δ puq› ď }u}Lp pΣε q .
Lp pΣˆRN q εδ N
(iv) For every u P L1 pΣε q,
ˇż ż ˇ ż
ˇ εδ N ˇ
ˇ u dx ´ Tε,δ
bl
puq dx1 dz ˇˇ ď |u| dx.
ˇ |Y |
Σε ΣˆRN Λε
(v) Let u be in W 1,p pΣε q. Then

1 ` bl ˘ 1
Tε,δ
bl
p∇x uq “ ∇z Tε,δ puq in Σ ˆ Y,
εδ δ
and 1
› ` bl ˘› 1{p ε
1´ p
›∇z Tε,δ puq › p ď |Y | }∇u}Lp pΣε q .
L pΣˆ δ1 Y q
δ p ´1
N
(vi) Suppose p P r1, N q and let ω be a bounded open set in RN . Then, for
every u in W 1,p pΣε q, the following estimates hold:
1
› bl ` ˘› 1{p ε
1´ p
›Tε,δ u ´ Mbl ›
ε puq Lp pΣ;Lp∗ pRN qq ď C|Y | }∇u}Lp pΣε q ,
δ p ´1
N
and
1
› bl ` › ε1´ p
›Tε,δ uq› ď C|Y |1{p |ω|1{N }∇u}Lp pΣε q ` | ω |1{p }u}Lp pΣε q ,
Lp pΣˆωq N
´1
δ p

(vii) Suppose p P p1, N q. Let twε,δ upε,δq be a sequence in W 1,p pΣε q such
.
that }∇wε,δ }Lp pΣε q is bounded. Then, up to a subsequence, there exists W in
Lp pΣ; W 1,p pRN qq satisfying,
δ p ´1 ` ˘
N
∗
1
1´ p
Tε,δ
bl
wε,δ ´ Mbl
ε pwε,δ q á W weakly in Lp pΣ; Lp pRN qq,
ε
δ p ´1 ` bl ˘
N
N
1
1´ p
∇z Tε,δ pwε,δ q 1 δ1 Y 1 á ∇z W weakly in Lp pΣ ˆ RN q .
ε
Furthermore, assuming
δ p ´1
N
lim sup 1 ă `8,

ε1´ p
.
pε,δqÑp0,0q
one can choose the subsequence above and U in Lp pΣ; W 1,p pRN q ‘ Rq with
δ p ´1
N
1 Tε,δ
bl
pwε,δ q á U weakly in Lp pΣ; Lploc pRN qq.
ε1´ p
293
9.3. Boundary-layer unfolding operator
For sieve problems, there is a need to distinguish between the subdomains

above (index +) and below (index -) Σ. Set
Ω` “ RN
` X Ω, Σ`
ε “ R ` X Σε ,
N
Y` “ R N
` X Y,
(9.8)
Ω´ “ R N
´ X Ω, Σ´
ε “ R ´ X Σε ,
N
Y´ “ R N
´ X Y.
Both domains Ω` and Ω´ are assumed to have a Lipschitz boundary.

For every function u defined in Ω, u` denotes its restriction to the domain
Ω` , i.e., u` ” u|Ω` ; analogously, u´ ” u|Ω´ . The restrictions of the operator
Tε,δ
bl
to the spaces Lp pΣ` ´
ε q and L pΣε q (p P r1, `8s), are still denoted Tε,δ .
p bl
In this framework, two local averages (defined below) are used.

Definition 9.16. Let p be in r1, `8s. The local average operators,
Mbl`
ε : Lp pΣ`
ε q Ñ L pΣq,
p
Mbl´
ε : Lp pΣ´
ε q Ñ L pΣq,
p
are defined by
N ż
1 . δ
ε pφqpx q “
Mbl` Tε,δ
bl
pφqpx1 , zq dz, @φ P Lp pΣ`
ε q,
|Y` | 1
δ Y`
ż
1 . δN
ε pφqpx q
Mbl´ “ Tε,δ
bl
pφqpx1 , zq dz, @φ P Lp pΣ´
ε q.
|Y´ | 1
δ Y´
The next results are obtained in the same way as at the beginning of
this section and are stated without proof. Unless specified otherwise, all the
results stated for Ω` hold with obvious modifications for Ω´ .
Proposition 9.17. Suppose p P r1, `8q. Let twε uε be a sequence such that
wε á w` weakly in W 1,p pΩ` q. Then
`
ε pwε q Ñ w |Σ
Mbl` strongly in Lp pΣq.
Theorem 9.18.
(i) Suppose p P r1, `8s. For every u P Lp pΣ`
ε q and v P W
1,p
pΣ`
ε q,
› bl › ´ |Y | ¯1{p
›Tε,δ puq› ď
`
}u}Lp pΣ` ,
Lp pΣˆRN
`q ε q
εδ N
1
› ` bl ˘› ε1´ p
›∇z Tε,δ pvq › ď C|Y` |1{p }∇v}Lp pΣε` q .
Lp pΣˆ δ1 Y` q
δ p ´1
N
(ii) Suppose p P r1, N q and let ω be bounded open set in RN

` . Then, for
every u in W 1,p pΣ`
ε q, the following estimates hold:
1
› bl ` ˘› ε1´ p
›Tε,δ u ´ Mbl`
ε puq
› ď C|Y` | 1{p
}∇u}Lp pΣ` ,
Lp pΣ;Lp∗ pRN
` qq ε q
δ p ´1
N
294
and
1
› bl ` › ε1´ p
›Tε,δ uq› ď C|Y` |1{p |ω|1{N }∇u}Lp pΣ` ` | ω |1{p }u}Lp pΣ` ,
Lp pΣˆωq ε q ε q
δ p ´1
N

(iii) Suppose p P p1, N q. Let twε,δ upε,δq be a sequence in W 1,p pΣ`
ε q such that
.
}∇wε,δ }Lp pΣε` q is bounded. Then, up to a subsequence, there exists W ` in
Lp pΣ; W p,1 pRN
` qq satisfying,
δ p ´1 ` ˘
N
` ∗
1
1´ p
Tε,δ
bl
wε,δ ´ Mbl`
ε pwε,δ q á W weakly in Lp pΣ; Lp pRN
` qq,
ε
δ p ´1 ` bl ˘
N
1
1´ p
∇z Tε,δ pwε,δ q 1 δ1 Y` á ∇z W ` weakly in Lp pΣ ˆ RN
`q .
N
ε
Assuming furthermore, that
δ p ´1
N
lim sup 1 ă `8,

pε,δqÑp0,0q ε1´ p
one can choose the subsequence above and U ` in Lp pΣ; W p,1 pRN
.
` q ‘ Rq with
δ p ´1
N
1 Tε,δ
bl
pwε,δ q á U ` weakly in Lp pΣ; Lploc pRN
` qq.
ε1´ p
Remark 9.19. As in Remark 9.9, the adjoint of operator Tε,δ
bl
can be defined
as an averaging operator in this setting.
295
Chapter 10
Homogenization in
domains with “small
holes”
This chapter is devoted to examples of the use of the unfolding method for
various linear problems in domains perforated with small holes and with oscil-
lating coefficients. For simplicity, in most cases, we prescribe a homogeneous
Dirichlet boundary condition on the outer boundary of the domain, but more
general boundary conditions can be handled provided the outer boundary is
Lipschitz and the perforations do not intersect it. In each case, we obtain
both the unfolded and the classical (standard) form for the limit problem.
The operator Tε allows to homogenize the coefficients of the differential op-
erators, whereas the operator Tεδ or Tε,δ bl
, generate the “strange terms” in
the limit. In each example, the convergence of the energy is investigated and
used to obtain corrector results. It should be noted that for technical reasons,
the method fails to apply in dimension N “ 2 for linear problems. See [13]
for the nonlinear case.
For each class of problems (e.g., problems in domains with “small holes”
distributed in volume or in a layer such as sieves), specific unfolding operators
are designed on the model of the unfolding operators introduced in Chapters
1 and 3. This emphasizes that unfolding is a general and powerful method.
Moreover, since by definition, the unfolding separates the scales, it allows to
have very general problems, combining at the same time highly oscillating
coefficients, various holes of size ε and small holes of size εδ with varying
conditions on their boundaries.
Section 10.1 concerns the homogenization of elliptic problems with oscil-
lating coefficients and ε-periodically volume-distributed small holes of size εδ
having an homogeneous Dirichlet condition on their boundary. These results
are well known for the Laplace operator, with the appearance of the “strange

10.1. Volume-distributed “small holes”
term” (see [74], [75] and references therein). For the case of oscillating co-
efficients, we also refer to [83] where H-convergence is used. The similar
problem in the nonlinear case (associated with Leray-Lions type operators)
can be treated in the same way, with the complications due to non-linearity.
We refer to [90] for a detailed presentation.
The same kind of small holes of size εδ are considered in Section 10.2, now
distributed ε-periodically in a layer of thickness ε on which the solution has
to vanish (the electrostatic screen). The homogenization results are obtained
by using the boundary unfolding operator Tε,δ bl
. They generalize the results
of [166, 180] and [75] to the case of oscillating coefficients.
Section 10.3 deals with the Neumann sieve problem with zero thickness
and oscillating coefficients. For the case of constant coefficients, we refer the
reader to [11, 17, 85, 163, 170] and [176]. We also refer to [12] for a different
approach.
In Section 10.4, the problem of a thick sieve is treated (see [98] for the
case of constant coefficients).
The unfolding method was applied for the first time for sieve problems
in [169], also in the case of constant coefficients.
In Section 10.5, some variational inequalities with periodically oscillating
obstacles are studied.
The last section presents some applications to the case of periodically
distributed singular homogeneities near the boundary. Here again, the use of
the boundary unfolding operator allows to give precise statements concerning
the behavior in the boundary layer, and the limit results.
The methods presented here can be applied to evolution problems (see [42]
for the heat and wave equations).
In this chapter the domains are in RN for N ě 3.
10.1 Volume distributed small holes

We use the notations of Section 9.2. In particular, B is a compact set in RN .
The perforated domain Ω˚ε,δ is defined by (9.3). Assume that the matrix field
Aε “ paεij q1ďi,jďN belongs to M pα, β, Ωq (see Definition 3.1). For f in L2 pΩq,
consider the problem
$
’
’ Find uε,δ P H01 pΩ˚ε,δ q satisfying
’
&ż
’ ż
Aε ∇uε,δ ∇φ dx “ f φ dx, (10.1)
’
’ Ω˚ Ω˚
’
’
ε,δ ε,δ
%@φ P H 1 pΩ˚ q.
0 ε,δ
. .
In order to state the homogenization result, one introduces some func-
tional spaces. The first are the spaces H 1 pRN q and H 1 pRN q ‘ R. They
correspond to the statement of Proposition 9.2 for the case p “ 2.
Here, the important space for the applications is the subspace KB of
298
Chapter 10. Applications for “small holes”
.
H 1 pRN q ‘ R defined as follows (recall that B is a given open set):
. .
KB “ Φ P H 1 pRN q ‘ R | Φ “ 0 on B
(
( (10.2)
“ Φ P Hloc
1
pRN q | ∇Φ P L2 pRN qN and Φ “ 0 on B
.
with the norm }Φ}KB “ }∇Φ}L2 pRN q . Since the elements of H 1 pRN q vanish
.
at infinity of R , the component in R of an element Φ of KB is actually its
N
.
limit at infinity, denoted Φp8q. Thus, KB is a Hilbert space isometric to the
closed subspace of H 1 pRN q consisting of functions which are constant on B
(the isometry is Φ ÞÑ Φ ´ Φp8q).
Finally, consider the space
(
LB “ V P L2 pΩ; KB q | V p¨, 8q P H01 pΩq
.
“ V P L2 pΩ; H 1 pRN qq ‘ H01 pΩq | V “ 0 a.e. in Ω ˆ B ,
( (10.3)
with the norm

` ˘1{2
}V }LB “ }∇V p8q}2L2 pΩq ` }∇y V }2L2 pΩˆRN q .
We now derive the unfolded formulation of the limit of problem (10.1). The
result will show the contribution of the periodic oscillations of Aε , as well as
the contribution of the perforations.
Proposition 10.1. Suppose that δ “ δpεq is such that
δ 2 ´1
N
.
k1 “ lim exists in R` . (10.4)
εÑ0 ε
Suppose also that there exist a matrix A such that,
` ˘
Tε Aε px, yq Ñ Apx, yq for a.e. px, yq in Ω ˆ Y, (10.5)
and a matrix A0 such that,

` ˘
Tε,δ Aε px, zq Ñ A0 px, zq for a.e. px, zq in Ω ˆ pRN zBq(1). (10.6)
(1) It is easy to see that there is no particular connection between A and A . Actually,
0
every pair pA, A0 q in M pα.β, Ω ˆ Y q ˆ M pα, β, Ω ˆ RN zBq can be obtained as the limit of
the pTε pAε q, Tε,δ pAε qq for the sequence tAε,δ u in Mpα, β, Ωq) defined by
.
Aε,δ “ Uε pAq1Ω˚ ? ` Uε,δ pA0 q1 ,
ε, δ ΩzΩ˚ ?
ε, δ
where Uε,δ is the adjoint of Tε,δ (see Remark 9.9).
299
10.1. Volume-distributed small holes
Let uε,δ be the solution of problem (10.1). There exist u0 in H01 pΩq and
U in LB such that
uε,δ á u0 weakly in H01 pΩq,

Tε,δ puε,δ q á U weakly in L2 pΩ; L2loc pRN qq with U p¨, 8q “ u0 , (10.7)
` ˘
∇z Tε,δ puε,δ q 1 δ1 Y á ∇z U weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ RN qN .
p in L2 pΩ; Hper,0
Moreover, there exists u 1
pY qq such that
Tε p∇uε,δ q á ∇u0 ` ∇y u
The pair pU, upq P LB ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper,0 1

pY qq satisfies the unfolded limit problem
$ 1 ż
` ˘` ˘
’
’ A ∇U p¨, 8q ` ∇y u p ∇V p¨, 8q ` ∇y vp dxdy
’ |Y |
’
’
& ΩˆY
ż ż
k12 (10.8)
’
’ ` A 0 ∇ z U ∇ z V dxdz “ f V p¨, 8q dx,
’
’ |Y | N zBq
’
%
ΩˆpR Ω
@ V P LB , @ vp P L2 pΩ; Hper 1
pY qq.
Problem (10.8) has a unique solution by the Lax-Milgram theorem applied

in the space LB ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq due to the ellipticity of the matrix fields
A and A0 (arising from A in M pα, β, Ωq) and identity (3.14).
ε
The proof of Proposition 10.1 makes use of the next two elementary re-
sults. Since B is compact in RN , take R ą 1 so that B is included in the
ball BpO; Rq (the ball centered at the origin and of radius R). There exists
δ0 ą 0 such that
BpO; 2δ0 Rq Ă Y .
Lemma 10.2. Ť (
(i) For p P r1, `8q, the set ϕ P W 1,p pY q | ϕ const. on δB is dense
δPp0δ0 s
in W 1,p pY q. Ť (
(ii) For p P r1, N q, the set φ P W 1,p pY q | φ “ 0 on δB is dense
δPp0δ0 s
in W 1,p pY q(2).
Proof. It is enough to show the result in the case where B is the ball BpO; Rq,
in which situation the sets are subspaces of W 1,p pY q. Denote by θ the func-
tion in W 1,8 pR` q defined by
$
’
&0 if t P r0, 1s,
θptq “ t ´ 1 if t P p1, 2q,
’
%
1 if t ě 2,
(2) This density does not hold for p ą N since, under that hypothesis, W 1,p pY q is included
in CpY q by the Sobolev embedding theorem.
300
and set
´ |y| ¯
Θδ pyq “ θ , @y P Y.
δ
The function Θδ is with values in r0, 1s. It vanishes on BpO; δRq and equals
1 outside of BpO; 2δRq. Thus the sequence tΘδ uδ converges to 1 for every
y P Y zt0u and its gradient is bounded by 1{δ. It is used as a cut-off.
Let ϕ be in W 1,p pY q, for simplicity set
ż
1
mδ “ MBpO;2δRq pϕq “ ϕpyq dy.
|BpO; 2δRq| BpO;2δRq
piq From the (rescaled) Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality, there exists a constant

C which does not depend on δ such that
}ϕ ´ mδ }Lp pBpO;2δRqq ď Cδ}∇ϕ}Lp pBpO;2δRq .
For δ P p0, δ0 s, set

` ˘
ϕδ “ m δ ` Θ δ ϕ ´ m δ .
It belongs to W 1,p pY q by construction, and is constant on BpO; δRq. We
claim that
ϕδ Ñ ϕ strongly in W 1,p pY q. (10.9)
Indeed,
` ˘
ϕ ´ ϕδ “ p1 ´ Θδ q ϕ ´ mδ ,
and from the properties of Θδ ,
}ϕ ´ ϕδ }Lp pY q ď }ϕ ´ mδ }Lp pBpO;2δRqq ď Cδ}∇ϕ}Lp pBpO;2δRqq ,

` ˘
}∇pϕ ´ ϕδ q}Lp pY q ď }∇Θδ ϕ ´ mδ }Lp pBpO;2δRqq
` ˘
` }p1 ´ Θδ q∇ ϕ ´ mδ }Lp pY q
ď C}∇ϕ}Lp pBpO;2δRqq ,
where the constants do not depend on δ.

By dominated convergence, limδÑ0 }∇ϕ}Lp pBpO;2δRqq Ñ 0, the claim (10.9)
follows.
piiq Assume 1 ď p ă N . We claim that Θδ ϕ, which vanishes on BpO; δRq,
converges to ϕ in W 1,p pY q. The Sobolev embedding theorem applies since
∗
p ă N . Therefore, ϕ belongs to Lp pY q where p˚ is the Sobolev conjugate of
1 1 1
p, defined by ˚ “ ´ .
p p N
By the properties of Θδ ,
}p1 ´ Θδ qϕ}Lp pY q Ñ 0 by dominated convergence,
301
so that Θδ ϕ converges to ϕ in Lp pY q. Similarly,
}∇pp1 ´ Θδ qϕq}Lp pY q
C (10.10)
ď }p1 ´ Θδ q∇ϕ}Lp pBpO;2δRqq ` }ϕ}Lp pBpO;2δRqq .
δ
By dominated convergence, the first term in the right-hand side goes to 0.
By Hölder’s inequality, }ϕ}Lp pBpO;2δRqq is bounded above by
1 1
|BpO; 2δRq|p p ´ p∗ q }ϕ}Lp∗pBpO;2δRqq “ Cδ}ϕ}Lp∗pBpO;2δRqq .
Consequently, the last term in (10.10) is bounded above by C}ϕ}Lp∗pBpO;2δRqq .

The claim is proved since the last norm goes to 0 (by dominated convergence
∗
again since ϕ belongs to Lp pY q).
1,p
Remark 10.3. Lemma 10.2 holds also true in the space Wper pY q (in place
of W pY q).
1,p
1,p
Lemma 10.4. Let p P r1, `8q and v be in Wloc pRN q, such that ∇z v is in
L pR q and has a compact support. Set
p N N
´ 1!x) ¯
vε,δ pxq “ v for a.e. x P Ω. (10.11)
δ ε Y
By Proposition 9.2, it has a limit at infinity denoted vp8q. If δ is small
enough, the function vε,δ belongs to W 1,p pΩq and
vε,δ Ñ vp8q strongly in Lp pΩq. (10.12)
Moreover, if
δ p ´1
N
is uniformly bounded, (10.13)

ε
the following convergence hold:
vε,δ á vp8q weakly in W 1,p pΩq. (10.14)

1,p
Proof. Let v be in Wloc pRN q satisfying the hypotheses. By construction,
ŞŤ ` ˘
supppvε,δ ´ vp8qq Ă Ω ε ξ ` δ suppp∇z vq .
ξPG
Consequently, for δ small enough, vε,δ ´ vp8q belongs to W 1,p pΩq since it
vanishes on the boundary of the ε-cells (so that there is no jump discontinuity
going from a cell to a neighboring one). Moreover, the measure of its support
is of order δ N . Applying the Poincaré inequality, we have(3)
}v ´ vp8q}Lp pRN q ď Cv }∇z v}Lp pRN q .

(3) Here, the constant Cv depends only upon the support of ∇z v.
302
Rescaling with (10.11), yields
}vε,δ ´ vp8q}Lp pΩq ď Cv δ N {p }v ´ vp8q}Lp pRN q

(10.15)
ď Cv δ N {p }∇z v}Lp pRN q ,
which implies convergence (10.12).

Similarly rescaling for the gradient gives
δ p ´1
N
}∇vε,δ }Lp pΩq ďC }∇z v}Lp pRN q ,

ε
with a constant C depending only upon Ω (related to |Ω|). In turn, due
to (10.13), this implies the boundedness of the sequence tvε,δ upε,δq in W 1,p pΩq.
This boundedness together with convergence (10.12) gives (10.14).
Proof of Proposition 10.1 for the case k1 ą 0(4) .
Step 1. Observe first that by the Lax-Milgram theorem, there exists a unique
solution uε,δ of (10.1) satisfying
}uε,δ }H 1 pΩ˚ ď C}f }L2 pΩq ,

0 ε,δ q
which implies the first convergence in (10.7), up to a subsequence. Next, by

p in L2 pΩ; Hper,0
Theorem 1.41, there exists u 1
pY qq, such that
Tε p∇uε,δ q á ∇u0 ` ∇y u (10.16)
For ψ in DpΩq and φ in Hper

1
pY q vanishing in a neighborhood of the origin,
set ´x¯
Φε pxq “ εψpxqφ .
ε
By construction, Φε is an admissible test function in (10.1), and this gives
ż ´x¯ ż ´x¯
ε Aε ∇uε,δ ∇ψ φ dx ` Aε ∇uε,δ ψ ∇φ dx
Ω˚ ε Ω˚ ε
ε,δ
żε,δ
´x¯
“ε f ψφ dx.
Ω˚ε,δ
ε
It is easy to see that the first integral, as well as the right-hand side of
the above equality, converge to zero. Unfolding the second integral with Tε ,
and taking into account the fact that
´ ´ x ¯¯
Tε ∇φ px, yq “ ∇y φpyq,
ε
(4) See Remark 10.36 for the cases k1 “ 0 and k1 “ `8.
303
we get,
ż ´x¯
Aε ∇uε,δ ψ ∇φ dx
Ω˚ ε
ε,δ
ż
1
“ Tε pAε qpx, yq Tε p∇uε,δ qpx, yq ∇y φpyq Tε pψqpx, yq dxdy.
|Y | ΩˆY
Passing to the limit in this identity using convergences (10.5) and (10.16),
yields
ż ´¨¯ ż
` ˘
lim A ∇uε,δ ψ ∇φ
ε
dx “ p ∇y φ ψ dxdy “ 0.
A ∇u0 ` ∇y u
εÑ0 Ω˚
ε,δ
ε ΩˆY
Then, by Lemma 10.2(ii),

ż
` ˘
p ∇y vp dxdy “ 0,
A ∇u0 ` ∇y u @p
v P L2 pΩ; Hper
1
pY qq. (10.17)
ΩˆY
This equation describes the effect of the periodic oscillations of the coefficients
in problem (10.1).
Step 2. By Theorem 9.7(vii), there exists U in L2 pΩ; L2loc pRN qq such that,
up to a subsequence,
Tε,δ puε,δ q á U weakly in L2 pΩ; L2loc pRN qq. (10.18)
By Proposition 1.25, one has
Mε puε,δ q Ñ u0 strongly in L2 pΩq,
so that,
Mε puε,δ q1 δ1 Y Ñ u0 strongly in L2 pΩ; L2loc pRN qq. (10.19)

∗
Again by Theorem 9.7(vii), there exists W in L2 pΩ; L2 pRN qq with ∇z W
in L2 pΩ ˆ RN q, such that
` ˘ ∗
Tε,δ uε,δ ´ Mε puε,δ q á W weakly in L2 pΩ; L2 pRN qq. (10.20)
From (10.18), (10.19) and (10.20), one draws the conclusion
U “ W ` u0 and ∇z U “ ∇z W, (10.21)
and, by Theorem 9.7(vii) once more,

` ˘ N
∇z Tε,δ puε,δ q 1 δ1 Y á ∇z U weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ RN q . (10.22)
From Definition 9.6, Tε,δ puε,δ q “ 0 in Ω ˆ B, and thanks to (10.18),
U “ 0 on Ω ˆ B. (10.23)
304
Due to (10.20)-(10.23), U belongs to LB and U p¨, 8q “ u0 .

Step 3. Let ψ be in DpΩq and v P KB such that ∇z v has a compact sup-
port. We take vε,δ ψ as test function in problem (10.1) where vε,δ is defined
by (10.11). The result is
ż ż
A ∇uε,δ ∇vε,δ ψ dx `
ε
Aε ∇uε,δ ∇ψ vε,δ dx
Ω˚ Ω˚
ε,δ ε,δ
ż (10.24)
“ f vε,δ ψ dx.
Ω˚
ε,δ
The first term in this equation is unfolded with Tε,δ . From the obvious
inequality
}Tε,δ pψq ´ ψ}L8 pΩp ε ˆ 1 Y q ď C ε}∇ψ}L8 pΩq , (10.25)
δ
it follows that
Tε,δ pψq∇z v Ñ ψ∇z v strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ RN qN . (10.26)
Convergences (10.22), (10.26) together with the strong convergence in

L2 pΩq of vε,δ (given by (10.12)), as well as hypothesis (10.6), allow to pass to
1
the limit in the first integral in (10.24). Recalling that Tε,δ p∇vε,δ q “ ∇z v,
εδ
one has successively,
ż
lim Aε ∇uε,δ ∇vε,δ ψ dx
εÑ0 Ω˚
ε,δ
ż
δ N ´2
“ lim Tε,δ pAε q ∇z Tε,δ puε,δ q ∇z vpzq Tε,δ pψq dxdz (10.27)
εÑ0 ε2 |Y | Ωˆ 1 Y
ż
δ
k12
“ A0 px, zq ∇z U px, zq ∇z vpzq ψpxq dxdz,
|Y | ΩˆpRN zBq
which by density, is true for every v P KB .

The second term in (10.24) is unfolded with Tε . Due to Proposition 1.9
and to convergence (10.16), using again the strong convergence of vε,δ as well
as hypothesis (10.5), we pass to the limit, to get
ż
lim Aε ∇uε,δ vε,δ ∇ψ dx
εÑ0 Ω˚
ε,δ
ż
1
“ lim Tε pAε q Tε p∇uε,δ qTε pvε,δ q Tε p∇ψq dxdy (10.28)
εÑ0 |Y | ΩˆY
ż
vp8q ` ˘
“ A ∇u0 ` ∇y u p ∇ψ dxdy.
|Y | ΩˆY
305
Passing to the limit in (10.24) and using (10.27)-(10.28), give

ż
vp8q ` ˘
A ∇u0 ` ∇y u p ∇ψ dxdy
|Y | ΩˆY
ż ż (10.29)
k2
` 1 A0 ∇z U ∇z v ψ dxdz “ vp8q f ψ dx,
|Y | ΩˆpRN zBq Ω
from which, by density,

ż
1 ` ˘
A ∇u0 ` ∇y u p ∇V p¨, 8q dxdy
|Y | ΩˆY
ż ż
k12
` A0 ∇z U ∇z V dxdz “ f V p¨, 8q dx
|Y | ΩˆpRN zBq Ω
for every V P LB . Then, taking into account (10.17), the unfolded prob-
lem (10.8) satisfied by the pair pU, u pq follows. The Lax-Milgram theorem
gives the existence of a unique solution for (10.8).
10.1.2 Standard form of the limit problem

Here we show that the unfolded problem is well-posed and give the formula-
tion in terms of the macroscopic solution u0 alone.
p in terms of the correctors χ
First express u pj , j “ 1, . . . , N defined by the
cell problems (3.10). That gives
ÿN
Bu0 ÿN
BU
ppx, yq “
u pxq χ
pj px, yq “ px, 8q χ
pj px, yq,
j“1
Bx j j“1
Bx j
for a.e. px, yq P Ω ˆ Y . Using it in equation (10.8) from Proposition 10.1,

yields
ż ż
k2
Ahom ∇U p¨, 8q ∇V p¨, 8q dxdy ` 1 A0 ∇z U ∇z V dxdz
Ω |Y | ΩˆRN
ż (10.30)
“ f V p¨, 8q dx, @V P LB ,
Ω
where (cf. (3.22)), for a.e. x P Ω,

ż
. 1 “ ‰
Ahom pxq∇U px, 8q “ ppx, yq dy.
Apx, yq ∇U px, 8q ` ∇y u (10.31)
|Y | Y
Let θ P L8 pΩ ; KB q, θpx, 8q ” 1, be the solution of the “cell problem”(5)
$ż
’
& A0 px, zq ∇z θpx, zq ∇z Ψpzq dz “ 0 for a.e. x P Ω,
’
%
RN zB
.
@Ψ P H pR q with Ψ “ 0 on B.
1 N
(10.32)
(5) The cell problem has a unique solution by the Lax-Milgram theorem applied in the
affine subspace of KB consisting of functions which are constant equal to 1 at infinity.
306
In view of (10.30) and since U p¨, 8q “ u0 , it follows that for a.e. x P Ω, the
two functions U px, ¨q and u0 pxqθpx, ¨q coincide since they both belong to KB
and are solutions of the same problem, (10.32) multiplied by u0 pxq, which
has a unique solution.
Going back to equation (10.30) with V px, zq “ ψpxqθpzq for a.e. px, zq in
Ω ˆ RN , where ψ is arbitrary in H01 pΩq, gives
ż ż ż
Ahom ∇u0 ∇ψ dxdy ` k12 Θ u0 ψ dxdz “ f ψ dx,
Ω Ω Ω
where, for a.e. x P Ω,

ż
1
Θpxq “ A0 px, zq ∇z θpx, zq ∇z θpx, zq dz. (10.33)
|Y | RN zB
This integral is non-negative, so that Θ can be interpreted as the local ca-

pacity of the set B.
In summary, we have proved the following result:
Theorem 10.5. Under the assumptions of Proposition 10.1 with k1 ą 0, the

limit function u0 P H01 pΩ is the unique solution of the homogenized equation,
$ż ż ż
’
& Ahom ∇u0 ∇ψ dx ` k12 Θ u0 ψ dx “ f ψ dx,
Ω Ω Ω (10.34)
’
%
@ψ P H0 pΩq.
1
Remark 10.6. The contribution of the oscillations of the matrix Aε in

the homogenized problem is reflected by the first term of the left-hand side
in (10.34), that is the presence of the operator Ahom . The contribution of the
perforations is the appearance in the limit equation of the zero order “strange
term” k12 Θ u0 .
Remark 10.7.
1. The proof for the case k1 “ 0 (k1 defined by (10.4)) is actually simpler, but
requires a slight modification, namely setting in place of (10.7)2 , the following
convergence:
δ 2 ´1
N
Tε,δ puε,δ q á U weakly in L2 pΩ; L2loc pRN qq with U p¨, 8q “ u0 ,

ε
Then the corresponding statement is Theorem 10.5 with k1 “ 0; the holes are
too small to have any influence at the limit.
2. The case of k1 “ `8 is easy to analyze with the help of Theorem 9.7(vi).
Indeed, by (9.5),
Tε,δ puε,δ q á u0 weakly in L2 pΩ; L2loc pRN qq.
307
On the other hand, since
Tε,δ puε,δ q “ 0 in Ω ˆ B,
this implies that

u0 “ 0.
This means that in this case, the holes are too big and force the limit to vanish
on the whole of Ω.
3. In [75], the small holes in the perforated domain which led to a “strange
term” were balls of the critical radius
rεc “ CεN {N ´2 for N ą 2 and C a constant.
Like in the items 1 and 2 above, for a radius rε λrεc the holes do not contribute
at the limit, whereas for rεc λrε , the limit solution is 0. It is easily seen that
looking for δ of the form Cεα with α ą 0, and satisfying (10.4), one finds the
critical size rεc above.
10.1.3 Convergence of the energy

Theorem 10.5, one has
ż ż ż
piq lim A ∇uε,δ ∇uε,δ dx “
ε
A hom
∇u0 ∇u0 dx ` k12 Θ u20 dx
εÑ0 Ω˚ Ω Ω
ε,δ
ż
1 ` ˘` ˘
“ p ∇U p¨, 8q ` ∇y u
A ∇U p¨, 8q ` ∇y u p dxdy
|Y | ΩˆY
ż
k12
` A0 ∇z U ∇z U dxdz,
|Y | ΩˆpRN zBq
ż
piiq lim |∇uε,δ |2 dx “ 0.
εÑ0 Λ
ε
Proof. Taking uε,δ as test-function in (10.1) and unfolding with Tε gives

ż ż ż
1
Tε pAε qTε p∇uε,δ qTε p∇uε,δ qdxdy ` Aε ∇uε,δ ∇uε,δ dx “ f uε,δ dx.
|Y | ΩˆY Λε Ω˚
ε,δ
Set
?
Yrδ “ Y z δ B.
Transforming the first integral on the left-hand side by using the change of
308
variable y “ δz in Y zYrδ , we get

ż
1
Tε pAε q Tε p∇uε,δ q Tε p∇uε,δ q dxdy
|Y | ΩˆYrδ
ż
δ N ´2
` 2 Tε,δ pAε qTε,δ p∇uε,δ q Tε,δ p∇uε,δ q dxdz
ε |Y | Ωˆ ?1 B
ż δ
ż
` A ∇uε,δ ∇uε,δ dx “
ε
f uε,δ dx.
Λε Ω˚
ε,δ
For simplicity, set

ż
1
Aε “ Tε pAε qTε p∇uε,δ q Tε p∇uε,δ q dx,
|Y | ΩˆYrδ
ż
δ N ´2
Bε “ 2 Tε,δ pAε qTε,δ p∇uε,δ q Tε,δ p∇uε,δ q dxdz, (10.35)
ε |Y | Ωˆ ?1 B
ż δ
Cε “ Aε ∇uε,δ ∇uε,δ dx.

Λε
From (10.16) and (10.22) we have the convergences

Tε p∇uε,δ q1ΩˆYrδ á ∇u0 ` ∇y u
p “ ∇U p¨, 8q ` ∇y u
p weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
` ˘
∇z Tε,δ puε,δ q 1 ?1 B á ∇z U weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ RN qN .
δ
Consequently,
ż
1 ` ˘` ˘
A ∇U p¨, 8q ` ∇y up ∇U p¨, 8q ` ∇y u p dxdy
|Y | ΩˆY
ż
k2
` 1 A0 ∇z U ∇z U dxdz
|Y | ΩˆpRN zBq
´ż ¯
ď lim inf Aε ` lim inf Bε ď lim inf Aε ∇uε,δ ∇uε,δ dx ´ Cε
εÑ0 εÑ0 εÑ0 Ω˚
´ż ż
ε,δ
¯
ď lim sup Aε ∇uε,δ ∇uε,δ dx ´ Cε ď lim sup Aε ∇uε,δ ∇uε,δ dx
εÑ0 Ω˚ εÑ0 Ω˚
ż ε,δ
ż ε,δ
“ lim f uε,δ dx “ f U p¨, 8q dx.

εÑ0 Ω˚ Ω
ε,δ
Then, from (10.8), all inequalities above are actually equalities and this im-
plies convergences (i) and (ii) from the statement of the proposition.
The standard method applies then to obtain a corrector result.
Corollary 10.9. Under the hypotheses of Theorem 10.5, the following strong
convergences hold:
Tε p∇uε,δ q1ΩˆYrδ Ñ ∇u0 ` ∇y up strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
` ˘ (10.36)
∇z Tε,δ puε,δ q 1 ?1 B Ñ ∇z U strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ RN qN .
δ
309
The first convergence implies the corrector result

∇uε,δ 1Ω˚ ? ´ ∇u0 ´ Uε p∇y u
pq Ñ 0 strongly in L2 pΩqN ,
ε, δ
while the second convergence implies that

}∇uε,δ }L2 pΩ˚ ˚ Ñ k1 }∇z U }L2 pΩˆRN q .
ε,δ zΩε, δ q
?
Furthermore,
Tε,δ puε,δ q Ñ U strongly in L2 pΩ; L2loc pRN qq. (10.37)
Proof. Using again notations (10.35), the previous proposition proved that
` ˘
lim inf Aε ` lim inf Bε “ lim Aε ` Bε .
εÑ0 εÑ0 εÑ0
On the other hand, it is always true that

` ˘
lim Aε ` Bε ě lim sup Aε ` lim inf Bε
εÑ0 εÑ0 εÑ0
` ˘
lim Aε ` Bε ě lim inf Aε ` lim sup Bε .
εÑ0 εÑ0 εÑ0
Hence,
lim inf Aε “ lim sup Aε , lim inf Bε “ lim sup Bε ,
εÑ0 εÑ0 εÑ0 εÑ0
which concludes the proof of (10.36).
To prove (10.37), let ω be an open bounded set and R ą 0 such that
ω Y B Ă BpO; Rq (where BpO; Rq is the ball of radius R and center O in
RN ). Since Tε,δ puε,δ qpx, ¨q and U px, ¨q vanishes on B for a.e. x P Ω, one has
}Tε,δ puε,δ qpx, ¨q ´ U px, ¨q}2L2 pBpO;Rqq
` ˘
ď C}∇z Tε,δ puε,δ qpx, ¨q ´ U px, ¨q }2L2 pBpO;Rqq ,
for a.e. x in Ω p ε . The constant depends on R and B. Then, integrating over

p
Ωε , gives
` ` ˘
}Tε,δ puε,δ q ´ U }2L2 pΩp ˆBpO;Rqq ď C }∇z Tε,δ puε,δ q ´ U }2L2 pΩp ˆBpO;Rqq .
ε ε
As a consequence,
`
}Tε,δ puε,δ q ´ U }2L2 pΩˆBpO;Rqq ď C }∇zpTε,δ puε,δ q ´ U q}2L2 pΩˆBpO;Rqq
˘
`}∇z U }2L2 pΛε ˆBpO;Rqq ` }U }2L2 pΛε ˆBpO;Rqq .
1
For δ small enough the ball BpO; Rq is included in ? B. Then (10.36) and
δ
1
the fact that ω Ă BpO; Rq Ă ? B, imply
δ
Tε,δ puε,δ q Ñ U strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ ωq,
which ends the proof of (10.37).
310
10.2 Electrostatic screens

This section considers the homogenization of an electrostatic screen in a
domain, namely when small sets on which the solution is to vanish, are pe-
riodically distributed in a layer. The notations of Sections 9.3 and 10.1 are
used. In particular, Yδ˚ “ Y zδB.
Here, the perforated layer Σε,δ is given by (recall Notations (9.7) and 9.10)
! !x) ) ! ε !x) )
Σε,δ “ x P Σε | P Yδ˚ “ Ω X x P RN | |xN | ă and P Yδ˚ ,
ε Y 2 ε Y
and the perforated domain is now (see Figure 10.1 for an example)
! !x) )
Ωε,δ “ Ωz x P Σε | P δB .
ε Y
Figure 10.1: An example of set Ωε,δ : an electrostatic screen
Consider the sequence of problems

$
’
’Find uε,δ P H01 pΩε,δ q satisfying
&ż
’ ż
Aε ∇uε,δ ∇φ dx “ f φ dx, (10.38)
’
’
’
%
Ωε,δ Ωε,δ
@φ P H01 pΩε,δ q,
where f is given in L2 pΩq.

The following space will play an important role (KB was defined in (10.2)):
(
L1B “ V P L2 pΣ; KB q | V p¨, 8q P H 1{2 pΣq ,
` ˘1{2
with the norm }V }LB “ }V p8q}2H 1{2 pΣq ` }∇y V }2L2 pΣˆRN q .
311
10.2. Electrostatic screens
Set
.
W “ tpv, V, vpq P H01 pΩq ˆ L1B ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper
1
pY qq | V px1 , 8q “ vpx1 q
for a.e. x1 P Σu.
δ 2 ´1 .
N
lim ? “ k2 ě 0. (10.39)
εÑ0 ε
Let Aε belong to M pα, β, Ωq. Suppose that, as ε Ñ 0, there exist a matrix

A such that (10.5) is satisfied and a matrix A10 such that
` ε˘ 1
Tε,δ
bl
A px , zq Ñ A10 px1 , zq for a.e. px1 , zq in Σ ˆ pRN zBq. (10.40)
Let uε,δ be the solution of problem (10.38). There exists a unique pu0 , U, u
pq
in W such that,

Tε,δ
bl
puε,δ q á U weakly in L2 pΣ; L2loc pRN qq,
` bl ˘ (10.41)
∇z Tε,δ puε,δ q 1 δ1 Y á ∇z U weakly in L2 pΣ ˆ RN qN ,
p
Tε p∇uε,δ q á ∇u0 ` ∇y u weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN .
The triple pu0 , U, u

pqsatisfies the unfolded problem
$ ż
1 ` ˘` ˘
’
’ A ∇u0 ` ∇y u p ∇v ` ∇y vp dxdy
’
’ |Y | ΩˆY
’
& ż ż
k22 1 1 (10.42)
’
’ ` A ∇ z U ∇ z V dx dz “ f v dx,
’
’ |Y | ΣˆpRN zBq 0
’
%
Ω
@pv, V, vpq P W.
Problem (10.42) has a unique solution by the Lax-Milgram theorem ap-

plied in the space W due to the ellipticity of the matrix fields A and A10
(arising from Aε in M pα, β, Ωq) and identity (3.14).
Proof of Proposition 10.10. We assume k2 ą 0 and denote uε,δ the extension

by zero to the whole of Ω of the solution of (10.38). The reasoning is similar
to that of the previous section.
Step 1. Choosing uε,δ itself as test function in (10.38), gives the a priori
estimate
}uε,δ }H01 pΩq ď C}f }L2 pΩq ,
312
so, up to a subsequence, there exist u0 in H01 pΩq and u

p in L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq
such that

(10.43)
As in Step 1 of the proof of Proposition 10.1, we obtain

ż
` ˘
A ∇u0 ` ∇y u p ∇y vp dxdy “ 0, @p v P L2 pΩ; Hper
1
pY qq. (10.44)
ΩˆY
Step 2. By Theorem 9.15(vii), there exists U in L2 pΣ; L2loc pRN qq such that,
Tε,δ
bl
puε,δ q á U weakly in L2 pΣ; L2loc pRN qq. (10.45)
Thanks to Proposition 9.14,
Mbl
ε puε,δ q Ñ u0 strongly in L2 pΣq,
so that
Mbl
ε puε,δ q1 δ1 Y Ñ u0 strongly in L2 pΣ; L2loc pRN qq. (10.46)
On the other hand, again by Theorem 9.15(vii), there exists W in the

∗
space L2 pΣ; L2 pRN qq with ∇z W P L2 pΣ ˆ RN q, and such that
` ˘ ∗
Tε,δ
bl
uε,δ ´ Mbl
ε puε,δ q á W weakly in L2 pΣ; L2 pRN qq. (10.47)
From (10.45), (10.46) and (10.47), one concludes
U “ W ` u0 and ∇z U “ ∇z W, (10.48)
and, by Theorem 9.15(vii) once more

` bl ˘
∇z Tε,δ puε,δ q 1 δ1 Y á ∇z U weakly in L2 pΣ ˆ RN qN . (10.49)
Since Tε,δ
bl
puε,δ q “ 0 on Σ ˆ B by Definition 9.6, and thanks to (10.45),
U “0 on Σ ˆ B. (10.50)
Due to (10.47)-(10.50), U belongs to LB and moreover, U p¨, 8q “ u0 on Σ.

Step 3. Now, let ψ be in DpΩq and v P KB such that ∇z v has a compact
bl
support. Take vε,δ ψ as test function in problem (10.38), where
´ 1!x) ¯
bl
vε,δ pxq “ v .
δ ε Y
313
bl
Note that for δ small enough, the gradient of vε,δ vanishes outside of Σε,δ .
Therefore,
ż ż ż
Aε ∇uε,δ ∇vε,δ
bl
ψ dx ` Aε ∇uε,δ ∇ψ vε,δ
bl
dx “ bl
f vε,δ ψ dx. (10.51)
Σε,δ Ωε,δ Ωε,δ
We will pass to limit in this identity. To do so, we will treat separately

each of its terms.
bl
For the first one, observe that since vε,δ vanishes in the holes,
ż ż
A ε
∇uε,δ ∇vε,δ
bl
ψ dx “ Aε ∇uε,δ ∇vε,δ
bl
ψ dx,
Σε,δ Σε
which unfolded with Tε,δ

bl
gives (for ε small enough),
ż
bl
ψ dx
Σε
ż
εδ N
“ Tε,δ
bl
pAε qTε,δ
bl
p∇uε,δ q Tε,δ
bl
p∇vε,δ
bl
qTε,δ
bl
pψq dx1 dz.
|Y | ΣˆRN
Since from Theorem 9.15(v),
1
Tε,δ
bl
p∇vε,δ
bl
q“ ∇z v,
εδ
the former identity writes
ż
bl
ψ dx
Σε,δ
´ δ N2 ´1 ¯2 1 ż ` bl ˘
(10.52)
“ ? Tε,δ
bl
pAε q ∇z Tε,δ puε,δ q ∇z v Tε,δ
bl
pψq dx1 dz.
ε |Y | ΣˆRN
On the other hand, thanks to (10.25) one has the convergence,
Tε,δ
bl
pψq∇z v Ñ ψ∇z v strongly in L2 pΣ ˆ RN qN .
This, together with convergences (10.39) and (10.49), as well as hypothe-

sis (10.40), allow to pass to the limit in (10.52) to get,
ż
lim Aε ∇uε,δ ∇vε,δ
bl
ψ dx
εÑ0 Σ
ε,δ
ż
k2
“ 2 A10 px1 , zq ∇z U px1 , zq ∇z vpzq ψpx1 , 0q dx1 dz. (10.53)
|Y | ΣˆRN
By a density argument, this is true for every v in KB .
314
The second term in (10.51) is unfolded with Tε . By convergence (10.43)2 ,

ż ż
vp8q ` ˘
lim A ε
∇uε,δ vε,δ
bl
∇ψ dx “ p ∇ψ dxdy,
A ∇u0 ` ∇y u
εÑ0 Ω
ε,δ
|Y | ΩˆY
which with (10.53), gives

ż ż
vp8q ` ˘ k2
p ∇ψ dxdy ` 2
A ∇u0 ` ∇y u A10 ∇z U ∇z v ψ|Σ dx1 dz
|Y | ΩˆY |Y | ΣˆRN
ż
“ vp8q f ψ dx.
Ω
By density, we deduce
ż ż ż
1 ` ˘ k2
p ∇v dxdy ` 2
A ∇u0 ` ∇y u A10 ∇z U ∇z V dx dz “ 1
f v dx,
|Y | ΩˆY |Y | ΣˆRN Ω
for every v P H01 pΩq and V P L1B such that V p¨, 8q “ v on Σ.

Taking into account (10.44) and (10.41), we obtain the unfolded prob-
pq. The uniqueness of the solution
lem (10.42) satisfied by the triple pu0 , U, u
for (10.42) implies the convergence of the whole sequence.

Like in Subsection 10.1.2, one can rewrite system (10.42) in the standard
form. The result is stated in the next theorem, the proof of which follows
along the lines that of Theorem 10.5.
p in terms of the correctors χ
First, express u pj , j “ 1, . . . , N defined by the
cell problems (3.10),
ÿN
Bu0
ppx, yq “
u pxq χ
pj px, yq for a.e. px, yq P Ω ˆ Y.
j“1
Bxj
This, used in equation (10.42), gives

$ż
2 ż ż
’
& Ahom ∇u0 ∇v dxdy ` k2 A10 ∇z U ∇z V dx1 dz “ f v dx,
Ω |Y | ΣˆRN Ω (10.54)
’
% 1
@v P H0 pΩq, @V P LB such that V p¨, 8q “ v a.e. on Σ.
1
Here, as before, for a.e. x P Ω,

ż
. 1 “ ‰
Ahom pxq∇u0 pxq “ ppx, yq dy.
Apx, yq ∇u0 pxq ` ∇y u
|Y | Y
315
Let θ1 be the solution of the corresponding “cell problem”(6)

$ 1
’
’ θ P L8 pΣ ; KB q, θ1 px1 , 8q ” 1,
’
&ż
’
A10 px1 , zq ∇z θpx1 , zq ∇z Ψpzq dz “ 0 for a.e. x1 P Σ,
’ R
.
N zB
’
’
’
%
@Ψ P H 1 pRN q with Ψ “ 0 on B.
For a.e. x1 P Σ, set

ż
1
Θ1 px1 q “ A10 px1 , zq ∇z θ1 px1 , zq ∇z θ1 px1 , zq dz, (10.55)
|Y | RN zB
which is non-negative and can be interpreted as the local capacity of the set
B. In view of (10.42),
U px1 , zq “ u0 px1 q θ1 px1 , zq for a.e. px1 , zq P Σ ˆ RN .
To summarize, one has the following statement:

Theorem 10.11. Under the assumptions of Proposition 10.10 with k2 ą 0,
the limit function u0 in H01 pΩq is the solution of the homogenized problem
$ż ż ż
& Ahom ∇u0 ∇ψ dx ` k 2 Θ 1
u 0 ψ dx 1
“ f ψ dx
2
Ω Σ Ω (10.56)
%
@ψ P H0 pΩq,
1
where Θ1 is defined by (10.55).

Proof. Let ψ be in H01 pΩq, we choose v and V px1 , zq “ ψpx1 qθ1 pzq for a.e.
px1 , zq P Σ ˆ RN as a test function in (10.54); that gives (10.56).
Remark 10.12. The strong formulation for (10.56) is the following:
$
’
’ ´div Ahom ∇u0 “ f in ΩzΣ,
& “ ‰
´ Ahom ∇u0 Σ “ k22 Θ1 u0 on Σ,
’
’
%
u0 “ 0 on BΩ,
“ ‰
where Ahom ∇u0 Σ denotes the jump across Σ, that is
“ ‰ .
Ahom ∇u0 Σ
“ Ahom ∇u´ ´
0 n À
hom
∇u`
0 n
`
on Σ,
and n` and n´ are the respective (opposite) exterior unit normal to Ω` and
Ω´ on Σ.
(6) The cell problem has a unique solution by the Lax-Milgram theorem applied in the
affine subspace of KB consisting of functions which are constant equal to 1 at infinity.
316
Remark 10.13.
1. The proof for the case k2 “ 0 (k2 defined by (10.39)), is actually simpler
but requires a slight modification, namely setting in (10.7)2 ,
δ 2 ´1
N
? Tε,δ puε,δ q á U.
ε
The corresponding statement is that of Theorem 10.11 for `k2 “ 0. The
˘ small
holes have no influence at the limit, i.e. the equation div Ahom ∇u0 “ f is
satisfied in the whole of Ω.
2. As in Remark 10.7, for the case of k2 “ `8, Theorem 9.15(vi) implies
the convergence
Tε,δ
bl
puε,δ q á u0|Σ weakly in L2 pΣ; L2loc pRN qq.
On the other hand, Tε,δbl

puε,δ q “ 0 in Σ ˆ B implies that u0|Σ “ 0. Thus
the limit problem splits into two separate homogeneous Dirichlet problems in
Ω` and Ω´ . In Ω` , the problem is
# ` ˘
´div Ahom ∇u0 “ f in Ω` ,
u0 “ 0 on BΩ` ,
and a similar one in Ω´ .

The proofs of the next propositions follow the same lines as that of Proposi-
tion 10.8 and its corollary.
ż ż ż
lim Aε ∇uε,δ ∇uε,δ dx “ Ahom ∇u0 ∇u0 dx ` k22 Θ1 u20 dx1
εÑ0 Ω˚ Ω Σ
ε,δ
ż
1 ` ˘` ˘
“ p ∇u0 ` ∇y u
A ∇u0 ` ∇y u p dxdy
|Y | ΩˆY
ż
k2
` 2 A10 ∇z U ∇z U dx1 dz,
|Y | ΣˆpRN zBq
ż
lim |∇uε,δ |2 dx “ 0.
εÑ0 Λ
ε
Corollary 10.15. Under the hypotheses of Theorem 10.11, the following

convergences hold:
Tε p∇uε,δ q1pΩzΣε qˆY Ñ ∇u0 ` ∇y u
` bl ˘
∇z Tε,δ puε,δ q 1 δ1 Y Ñ ∇z U strongly in L2 pΣ ˆ RN qN .
317
10.3. The thin Neumann sieve
pq Ñ 0
∇uε,δ 1pΩzΣε q ´ ∇u0 ´ Uε p∇y u strongly in L2 pΩqN .
The second one implies that
}∇uε,δ }L2 pΣε q Ñ k2 }∇z U }L2 pΣˆRN q .
This shows how a non negligible part of the energy concentrates near Σ, in
general.
10.3 The thin Neumann sieve

We use the framework of Sections 9.3 and 10.2, in particular Notation 9.10
and (9.7)-(9.8). For an open subset S of Y X Π such that S Ă Y X Π, set
Yδ “ Y` Y Y´ Y δS,
and ! ˇ ! x1 ) )
ˇ
Sε,δ “ x1 P Σ ˇ P δS .
ε Y1
For Ω bounded domain in RN , define
.
εδ “ Ω` Y Ω´ Y Sε,δ
Ωbl ε,δ “ Σε X Ωεδ .
Σbl bl
and
The connection between Ω` and Ω´ occurs through the “sieve” consisting of

the set Sε,δ (see Figure 10.2).
Consider the space
V “ tv P H 1 pΩ` Y Ω´ q | v “ 0 on BΩu,
which is a Hilbert space for the scalar product

ż
xu, vy V “ ∇u ∇v dx for all pu, vq P V2 .
Ω` YΩ´
For simplicity, when v belongs to V, we denote ∇v the L2 pΩq-function which

equals the gradient of v in Ω` Y Ω´ (this is not the distributional gradient of
v in Ω but its restriction to Ω` Y Ω´ ). Every element v of V has two traces in
` ´
H 1{2 pΣq, one from above, v|Σ and one from below v|Σ . The jump of v across
Σ is given by
. ` ´
rvsΣ “ v|Σ ´ v|Σ P H 1{2 pΣq(7).
Finally set
Vε,δ “ tv P V | rvsΣ “ 0 on Sε,δ u.
(7) With these notations, the distributional gradient of v in whole of Ω is ∇v ` rvsΣ eN dσ.
318
Figure 10.2: The set Yδ and the thin sieve Ωbl

εδ
The thin Neumann sieve model is

$
’ Find uε,δ P Vε,δ satisfying
’
’ż ż
&
A ∇uε,δ ∇φ dx “
ε
f φ dx, f P L2 pΩq, (10.57)
’
’ Ωbl Ωbl
’
%
ε,δ ε,δ
@φ P Vε,δ .
N ´1 . N ´1
Let RN` be the set R ´ “R
ˆ p0, `8q and similarly RN ˆ p´8, 0q.
In this problem, the equivalent of the space KB (see (10.2)), is
! ˇ )
Kp S “ Φ P H 1 pRN Y RN q ˇˇ ∇Φ P L2 pRN Y RN q, rΦs “ 0 on S . (10.58)
loc ` ´ ` ´ Σ
p S , we denote
For Φ P K
Φ|RN
`
“ Φ` , Φ|RN
´
“ Φ´ .
The following proposition is an easy consequence of Corollary 9.5.
319
Proposition 10.16. On K p S there exist two linear forms Φ ÞÑ Φp`8q (resp.

Φ ÞÑ Φp´8q) such that the function Φ` ´ Φp`8q (resp. Φ´ ´ Φp´8q)
∗ 2∗
belongs to L2 pRN` q (resp. L pR´ q).
N
The space Kp S is a Hilbert space for the norm

.
x “ }∇Φ}L2 pRN YRN q ` Φp`8q ` Φp´8q .
}Φ}2K 2 2 2
(10.59)
S ` ´
Furthermore, the two linear forms are continuous and

ˇ
p8 “. p S ˇˇ Φ` P C 8 pRN q, suppp∇Φ` q bounded in RN ,
K S Φ P K ` `
(
Φ´ P C 8 pRN ´
´ q, suppp∇Φ q bounded in R´ ,
N
p S for this norm.

is dense in K
In this framework, the space of test functions for the unfolded limit problem
is more complicated. It is given by
. (
p S q | V p¨, ˘8q “ v ˘ a.e. on Σ .
W “ pv, vp, V q P VˆL2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qqˆL2 pΣ; K |Σ
Proposition 10.17. Suppose that (10.39) is satisfied with k2 ą 0.

Let Aε belong to M pα, β, Ωq. Suppose also that, as ε goes to 0, there exist
a matrix A such that (10.5) holds, and a matrix A10 such that
` ε˘ 1
Tε,δ
bl
A px , zq Ñ A10 px1 , zq for a.e. px1 , zq in Σ ˆ RN . (10.60)
Let uε,δ be the solution of problem (10.57). Then, there exists pu0 , u
p, U q
in W such that
uε,δ á u0 weakly in V,
Tε,δ
bl
pu˘
ε,δ q á U
˘
weakly in L2 pΣ; L2loc pRN
˘ qq,
` bl ˘ ˘ ˘ (10.61)
∇z Tε,δ puε,δ q 1 δ1 Y˘ á ∇z U weakly in L2 pΣ ˆ RN
˘q ,
N
Tε p∇u˘ ˘
p
ε,δ q á ∇u0 ` ∇y u weakly in L2 pΩ˘ ˆ Y qN .
The triple pu0 , up, U q P W satisfies the following unfolded limit problem:
$ ż
’ 1 ` ˘` ˘
’
’ A ∇u` 0 ` ∇y u p ∇v ` ` ∇y vp dxdy
’
’ |Y |
’
’ Ω` ˆY
ż
’
’ ` ˘` ˘
’
’ 1
’
’ ` A ∇u´ 0 ` ∇y u p ∇v ´ ` ∇y vp dxdy
’
’ |Y | Ω´ ˆY
’
& ż
k22 (10.62)
’ ` A10 ∇z U ` ∇z V ` dx1 dz
’
’ |Y |
’
N
ΣˆR`
’
’
’
’ 2 ż ż
’
’ `
k 2 1
∇ ´
∇ ´ 1
“
’
’ A z U z V dx dz f v dx,
’
’ |Y | ΣˆRN 0
’
’
´ Ω
%
@pv, vp, V q P W.
320
Problem (10.62) has a unique solution by the Lax-Milgram theorem ap-

plied in the space W due to the ellipticity of the matrix fields A and A10
(arising from Aε in M pα, β, Ωq) and identity (3.14).
Proof of Proposition 10.17. Use uε,δ as test function in (10.57). The cor-
responding equality, together with the Poincaré inequality on Ω` and Ω´ ,
imply that there is a constant C (independent of pε, δq) such that,
||uε,δ ||V ď C||f ||L2 pΩq .
Step 1. Making use of Theorem 1.41(ii), separately in Ω` and Ω´ , there exist

(up to a subsequence) u0 P V and u
p P L2 pΩ; Hper
1
pY qq such that,
Tε p∇u`
ε,δ q á ∇u` p weakly in L2 pΩ` ˆ Y qN ,
0 ` ∇y u
Tε p∇u´
ε,δ q á ∇u´ p weakly in L2 pΩ´ ˆ Y qN .
0 ` ∇y u
1
Now, let φ be in Hper pY q and ψ in DpΩq such that supppψq Ă Ω` Y Ω´ .
Using ´x¯
Φpxq “ εψpxqφ ,
ε
as a test function in (10.57), yields
ż ż
` ` ˘ ` ˘
A ∇u0 ` ∇y u p ψ ∇y φ dxdy ` A ∇u´ p ψ ∇y φ dxdy “ 0.
0 ` ∇y u
Ω` ˆY Ω´ ˆY
By density it follows that for every vp P L2 pΩ; Hper

1
pY qq,
ż
` ˘
A ∇u` p ∇y vp dxdy
0 ` ∇y u
Ω` ˆY
ż (10.63)
` ˘
` A ∇u´ p ∇y vp dxdy “ 0.
0 ` ∇y u
Ω´ ˆY
Step 2. By Theorem 9.18(iii), there exist U ` and U ´ in L2 pΣ; L2loc pRN

` qq and
L2 pΣ; L2loc pRN
´ qq respectively, such that (up to a subsequence),
Tε,δ
bl
pu˘
ε,δ q á U
˘
weakly in L2 pΣ; L2loc pRN
˘ qq. (10.64)
By construction
` bl` ` ˘ `
Tε,δ
bl
Mε puε,δ q “ Mbl`
ε puε,δ q1 δ1 Y` ,
and by Proposition 9.17,

` `
ε puε,δ q1 δ1 Y` Ñ u0 |Σ
Mbl` strongly in L2 pΣ; L2loc pRN
` qq. (10.65)
321
∗
By Theorem 9.18(iii) there exists W ` in L2 pΣ; L2 pRN
` qq with ∇z W
`
in
L pΣ ˆ R` q, such that
2 N
` ` `
˘ ` ∗
Tε,δ
bl
uε,δ ´ Mbl`
ε puε,δ q á W weakly in L2 pΣ; L2 pRN` qq. (10.66)
From (10.64), (10.65) and (10.66), one concludes
U ` “ W ` ` u`
0|Σ , and ∇ z U ` “ ∇z W ` . (10.67)
∗
Similarly, there exists W ´ P L2 pΣ; L2 pRN
´ qq with ∇z W
´
P L2 pΣ ˆ RN
´ q and
U ´ “ W ´ ` u´
0|Σ , and ∇ z U ´ “ ∇z W ´ . (10.68)
Again by Theorem 9.18(iii), one has the convergences

` bl ˘ ˘
∇z Tε,δ puε,δ q á ∇z U ˘ weakly in L2 pΣ ˆ RN ˘q .
N
(10.69)
From Definition 9.11, Tε,δ

bl
pu` ´
ε,δ q “ Tε,δ puε,δ q on Σ ˆ S, so that by conver-
bl
gences (10.64) and (10.69),
rU px1 , ¨qsΣ “ 0 on S for a.e. x1 P Σ.
p S q, and (10.67)-(10.68) provide the compatibility con-

Therefore, U P L2 pΣ; K
p, U q belongs to W.
dition guaranteeing that pu0 , u
Now, choose a function v in K p 8 and set
S
´ 1 ! x1 ) xN ¯
vε,δ px1 , xN q “ v , for a.e. x “ px1 , xN q P RN .
δ ε Y εδ
` ´
Clearly, rvε,δ s “ 0 on Sε,δ and ∇vε,δ , ∇vε,δ vanish outside Σbl
ε,δ for δ small
enough. As in Step 2 of the proof of Proposition 10.1, we get
˘
Tε pvε,δ q á vp˘8q strongly in L2 pΩ˘ ˆ Y q,
(10.70)
˘
vε,δ á vp˘8q weakly in H 1 pΩ˘ q.
For ψ P DpΩq, using ψ vε,δ as a test function in problem (10.57), gives the
following formula:
ż ż
A ∇uε,δ ∇ψ vε,δ dx `
ε
Aε ∇uε,δ ∇vε,δ ψ dx
Ωbl Σε,δ
ε,δ
ż (10.71)
“ f vε,δ ψ dx,
Ωbl
ε,δ
The first term in (10.71) is unfolded with Tε as usual. This yields

ż ż
1
Aε ∇uε,δ ∇ψ vε,δ dx “ Tε pAε qTε p∇uε,δ q Tε p∇ψqTε pwε,δ q dxdy.
Ωbl
ε,δ
|Y | ΩˆY
322
Applying (10.70) and passing to the limit gives

ż ż
vp`8q ` ˘
lim Aε ∇uε,δ ∇ψ vε,δ dx “ A ∇u` p ∇ψ dxdy
0 ` ∇y u
εÑ0 Ωbl |Y | Ω` ˆY
ż
ε,δ
vp´8q ` ˘
` A ∇u´ p ∇ψ dxdy.
0 ` ∇y u
|Y | Ω´ ˆY
The second term in (10.71) is unfolded with Tε,δ

bl
. To do so, first recall that
1
Tε,δ
bl
p∇vε,δ q “ ∇z v.
εδ
As a consequence,
ż
Aε ∇uε,δ ∇vε,δ ψ dx
Σε,δ
´ δ N2 ´1 ¯2 1 ż
“ ? T bl pAε q ∇z Tε,δ
bl
puε,δ q ∇z v Tε,δ
bl
pψq dx1 dz.
ε |Y | ΣˆRN ε,δ
Convergences (10.60) and (10.69) allow to pass to the limit in this equality
to obtain
ż ż
k22
lim Aε ∇uε,δ ∇vε,δ ψ dx “ A10 ∇z U ` px1 , zq ∇z v ` ψ dx1 dz
εÑ0 Σ
ε,δ
|Y | ΣˆRN
`
ż
k22
` A10 ∇z U ´ px1 , zq ∇z v ´ ψ dx1 dz.
|Y | ΣˆRN
´
Then, gathering the above convergences in the limit of (10.71), yields

ż
vp`8q ` ˘
A ∇u` p ∇ψ dxdy
0 ` ∇y u
|Y | Ω` ˆY
ż
vp´8q ` ˘
` A ∇u´ 0 ` ∇y up ∇ψ dxdy
|Y | Ω´ ˆY
ż
k2
` A10 ∇z U ` ∇z v ` ψ dx1 dz
|Y | ΣˆRN `
ż
k2
` A10 ∇z U ´ ∇z v ´ ψ dx1 dz
|Y | ΣˆRN
ż ´ ż
“ vp`8q f ψ dx ` vp´8q f ψ dx.
Ω` Ω´
323
Then by density, we get

ż
1 ` ˘
A ∇u` p ∇v ` dxdy
0 ` ∇y u
|Y | Ω` ˆY
ż
1 ` ˘
` A ∇u´ 0 ` ∇y up ∇v ´ dxdy
|Y | Ω´ ˆY
ż
k2
` 2 A10 ∇z U ` ∇z V ` dx1 dz
|Y | ΣˆRN`
ż ż
k22 1 ´ ´ 1
` A0 ∇z U ∇z V dx dz “ f v dx,
|Y | ΣˆRN´ Ω
p S q with V p¨, ˘8q “ v ˘ a.e. on Σ. Together

for every pv, V q P V ˆ L2 pΣ; K |Σ
with (10.63), this gives (10.62).

As in Subsections 10.1.2 - 10.2.2, one can write system (10.62) in a standard
form, with only u` ´
0 and u0 as unknowns.
pj pj “ 1, . . . , N q defined by the cell problems (3.10),
Using the correctors χ
p in terms of these correctors to get the formulas,
we can express u
ÿN
Bu`
ppx, yq “
u 0
pxq χ
pj px, yq for a.e. px, yq P Ω` ˆ Y,
j“1
Bx j
ÿN
Bu´
ppx, yq “
u 0
pxq χ
pj px, yq for a.e. px, yq P Ω´ ˆ Y,
j“1
Bx j
which used in equation (10.42), yields

ż ż
Ahom ∇u` 0 ∇v `
dx ` Ahom ∇u´ ´
0 ∇v dx
Ω` Ω´
ż
k22
` A10 ∇z U ` ∇z V ` dx1 dz (10.72)
|Y | ΣˆRN
`
ż ż
k22
` A10 ∇z U ´ ∇z V ´ dx1 dz “ f v dx,
|Y | ΣˆRN
´ Ω
for every v P V and for every V P L2 pΣ; K p S q, such that V p¨, `8q “ v ` ,
|Σ
´
V p¨, ´8q “ v|Σ a.e. on Σ, and where for a.e. x P Ω,
ż
. 1 “ ‰
Ahom pxq∇u` pxq “ Apx, yq ∇u` ppx, yq dy
0 pxq ` ∇y u in Ω` ,
0
|Y | Y
ż
. 1 “ ‰
Ahom pxq∇u´ pxq “ Apx, yq ∇u´ ppx, yq dy
0 pxq ` ∇y u in Ω´ .
0
|Y | Y
324
Let θ P L8 pΣ; K p S q be the solution of the following cell problem:

$ż
’
’
’
’ A10 px1 , zq ∇z θ` px1 , zq ∇z Ψ` pzq dz
’
’ RN
’
’ `
ż
’
&
` A10 px1 , zq ∇z θ´ px1 , zq ∇z Ψ´ pzq dz “ 0 for a.e. x1 P Σ,
’
’ R´
N
’
’
’
’ θpx 1
, `8q ” 1, θpx1 , ´8q ” 0,
’
’
’
% @Ψ P K p S with Ψp`8q “ Ψp´8q “ 0.
From (10.62) it follows that

` ˘ ´
U ` p¨, zq “ θ` p¨, zqu` `
0|Σ ` 1 ´ θ p¨, zq u0|Σ in Σ ˆ RN
`,
` ˘ ´
U ´ p¨, zq “ θ´ p¨, zqu` ´
0|Σ ` 1 ´ θ p¨, zq u0|Σ in Σ ˆ RN
´.
Let v be in V and V in L2 pΣ; K p S q, such that

`
` ˘ ´
V ` p¨, zq “ θ` p¨, zqv|Σ ` 1 ´ θ` p¨, zq v|Σ in Σ ˆ RN
`,
`
` ˘ ´
V ´ p¨, zq “ θ´ p¨, zqv|Σ ` 1 ´ θ´ p¨, zq v|Σ in Σ ˆ RN
´.
Going back to (10.72) with this test function gives

ż ż
Ahom ∇u` 0 ∇v `
dx ` Ahom ∇u´ ´
0 ∇v dx
Ω` Ω´
ż
k22
` A10 ∇z θ` ∇z θ` pu` ´ ` ´ 1
0|Σ ´ u0|Σ q pv|Σ ´ v|Σ qdx dz
|Y | ΣˆRN
`
ż
k22
` A10 ∇z θ´ ∇z θ´ pu` ´ ` ´ 1
0|Σ ´ u0|Σ q pv|Σ ´ v|Σ q dx dz
|Y | ΣˆRN
´
ż
“ f v dx.
Ω
Set
ż
2 1
Θ px1 q “ A10 ∇z θ` ∇z θ` dz
|Y | RN
`
ż
1
` A10 ∇z θ´ ∇z θ´ dz for a.e. x1 P Σ.
|Y | RN
´
We proved the following theorem:

Theorem 10.18. Suppose that (10.39) is satisfied with k2 ą 0. The limit
function u0 P V given by Proposition 10.17, is the solution of the variational
homogenized equation
$ż ż ż
’
’ A hom ` `
∇u0 ∇v dx ` A hom ´ ´
∇u0 ∇v dx ` k2 2 2
Θ ru0 sΣ rvsΣ dx1
&
Ω` Ω Σ
ż ´
’
’
% “ f v dx, @v P V.
Ω
325
Remark 10.19. The strong formulation of the limit problem is,

$
’
’ ´div Ahom ∇u0 “ f in ΩzΣ,
’
& 2
Ahom ∇u0 n´|Σ “ Áhom ∇u0 n`|Σ “ k22 Θ ru0 sΣ ,
’
’
’
%
u0 “ 0 on BΩ.
Remark 10.20. In the case where A10 is even with respect to zN , θ vanishes
2
on S. Then, Θ can be interpreted as the local capacity of the set S.
Remark 10.21.
1. The proof for the case k2 “ 0 (k2 defined by (10.39)) is actually sim-
pler but, as in the preceding examples, requires a slight modification, namely
setting in (10.7)2 ,
δ 2 ´1
N
? Tε,δ puε,δ q á U.
ε
The corresponding statement is that of Theorem 10.18 with k2 “ 0. The
holes are too small to keep any connection between Ω` and Ω´ . The limit
problem is split into two independent problems in each of these sets, with
mixed homogeneous boundary conditions,
$
’
’ ´div Ahom ∇u0 “ f in Ω˘,
&
Ahom ∇u0 ¨ n˘
|Σ “ 0 on Σ,
’
’
% u “ 0 on BΩ.
0
2. For the case of k2 “ `8, Theorem 9.18(ii) implies
Tε,δ
bl
pu` `
ε,δ q á u0|Σ weakly in L2 pΣ; L2loc pRN
` qq,
Tε,δ
bl
pu´ ´
ε,δ q á u0|Σ weakly in L2 pΣ; L2loc pRN
´ qq.
On the other hand, rTε,δ

bl
puε,δ qsΣˆS “ 0 on Σ ˆ S implies that ru0 sΣ “ 0.
Hence, u0 is in H01 pΩq and the limit problem is satisfied in the whole of Ω.

The proofs of the next proposition and corollary follow the same lines as that
of Proposition 10.8 and its corollary.
ż ż ż
2
lim Aε ∇uε,δ ∇uε,δ dx “ Ahom ∇u0 ∇u0 dx ` k22 Θ ru0 s2 dx1 ,
εÑ0 Ωbl ΩzΣ Σ Σ
ż
ε,δ
lim |∇uε,δ |2 dx “ 0.
εÑ0 Λ
ε
326
Corollary 10.23. Under the hypotheses of Theorem 10.18, one has
Tε p∇uε,δ q1pΩzΣε qˆY Ñ ∇u0 ` ∇y u p strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN ,

` bl ˘
∇z Tε,δ puε,δ q 1 δ1 Y Ñ ∇z U strongly in L2 pΣ ˆ RN qN .
pq Ñ 0
∇uε,δ 1pΩzΣε q ´ ∇u0 ´ Uε p∇y u strongly in L2 pΩqN ,
while the second convergence implies that
}∇uε,δ }L2 pΣ˘

ε q
Ñ k2 }∇z U }L2 pΣˆRN
˘q
.
10.4 The thick Neumann sieve

In this section we extend the results of Section 10.3 to the case of a thick
Neumann sieve of thickness of order of ε ą 0. We will use the same nota-
tions, unless specified otherwise, and we only sketch the main modifications
of setting and of the proofs.
Recall Notation 9.10, as in particular, Π “ txN “ 0u. Then, for an open
subset S such that
S Ă Y X Π satisfying S Ă Y X Π,
we introduce the class FS of admissible sets, that we will use in order to

describe a thick sieve with holes shaped according to S.
Definition 10.24. The subset set F of RN is in FS , if
i) F is closed with connected complement in RN ,
ii) F is symmetric with respect to all the hyperplanes of equations zj “ 0,
j P t1, . . . , N ´ 1u, and F “ F` Y F´ Y pΠzSq,
iii) F is such that for every 0 ă δ ăă 1,
1 ! 1)
F X Y Ă |zN | ď ,
δ 2δ
iv) F` and F´ are unbounded with Lipschitz boundary,
v) there exists some positive R such that the boundaries BF` and BF´ outside
the ball of radius R, are Lipschitz graphs over RN ´1 .
For F P FS , set
! ˇ !x) )
ˇ
Fδ “ δF X Y and Fε,δ “ x P Σbl
ε ˇ P Fδ .
ε Y
Due to the hypotheses ii) and iii), the pieces of Fε,δ from neighboring ε-cells
match.
Figure 10.3 presents an example of admissible set F in dimension 3.
327
10.4. The thick Neumann sieve
Figure 10.3: An example of set F: the hole in the sieve
Below, Figure 10.4 is a sieve corresponding to the geometry of Figure 10.3,

while Figure 10.5 is its two dimensional cross-section.
Figure 10.4: The 3D geometry of the thick Neumann sieve
Figure 10.5: A 2D cross-section of F and of the domain Ωns

ε,δ
328
Define
εδ “ ΩzFεδ
Ωns and Sε,δ “ Ωns
εδ X Π.
We use the same space V as in Section 10.3, while the Vε,δ is now
! ˇ )
Vε,δ “ v P H 1 pΩns ˇ
εδ ` Y Ωεδ ´ q v|BpΩns zSε,δ q “ 0, rvsS
ns
“0 .
εδ ε,δ
Every function v belonging to Vε,δ is extended by 0 in

` ˘ ` ˘
Ω` zΩns
εδ ` Y Ω´ zΩεδ ´ ,
ns
and this extension, belonging to V, is still denoted v.

The equivalent of the space Kp S (see (10.58)) is the following:
! )
p G “ Φ P H 1 pGq | ∇Φ P L2 pGq ,
K loc
where G denotes the complement of F (not to be confused with the group

G).
Proposition 10.25. There exist two linear forms Φ ÞÑ Φp`8q (respectively
Φ ÞÑ Φp´8q) on K p G , the function Φ` ´Φp`8q
p G such that, for every Φ in K
´ 2∗ ∗
(resp. Φ ´ Φp´8q) belongs to L pR` zF` q (resp. to L2 pRN
N
´ zF´ q).
p G is a Hilbert space for the norm
The space K
.
x “ }∇Φ}L2 ppRN YRN qzF q ` Φp`8q ` Φp´8q .
}Φ}2K 2 2 2
G ` ´
Furthermore, for this norm, the two linear forms are continuous and
! )
p8 “ . p G | Φ P C 8 pGq, suppp∇Φq bounded in G ,
K G Φ P K
p G.
is dense in K
Proof. The proof is the same as that of Proposition 10.16. The only modifica-
tion concerns the sequence of sets on which the Sobolev-Poincaré-Wirtinger
inequality (with a uniform constant) is applied. In view of Definition 10.24
(iv), this can be achieved on the set
1 1
Y` X tzN ą Ru X G (respectively, Y´ X tzN ă ´Ru X G),
δ δ
making use of results from [184].
The thick Neumann sieve problem can be stated as follows:
$
’
’
’
’
&ż ż
’ A ε
∇u ∇φ dx “ f φ dx, f P L2 pΩq,
’
’
ε,δ
’ Ω ns Ω ns
’
%
ε,δ εδ
@φ P Vε,δ .
329
10.4. The thick Neumann sieve
The unfolded limit problem and the standard homogenized equation are
given in the next two theorems. Up to the modifications of notations indi-
cated above, theirs proofs are the same as those in Section 10.3.
Proposition 10.26. Suppose that (10.39) is satisfied with k2 ą 0. Let Aε

belong to M pα, β, Ωq. Suppose also that, as ε Ñ 0, there exist a matrix A
such that (10.5) is satisfied and a matrix A10 such that
` ε˘ 1
Tε,δ
bl
A px , zq Ñ A10 px1 , zq a.e. in Σ ˆ pRN zF q.
Let uε,δ be the solution of the problem (10.57). Then there exists pu0 , u
p, U q
in V ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1 p G q with U p¨, ˘8q “ u˘ such that,
pY qq ˆ L2 pΣ; K 0|Σ
˘
Tε,δ
bl
á U ˘ weakly in L2 pΣ; L2loc ppRN zF q˘ qq,
puε,δ q
` bl ˘ ˘
∇z Tε,δ puε,δ q 1 δ1 Y˘ á ∇z U ˘ weakly in L2 pΣ ˆ pRN zF q˘ qN ,
˘
Tε p∇uε,δ q á ∇u˘ p
0 ` ∇y u weakly in L2 pΩ˘ ˆ Y qN .
p, U q belongs to V ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper,0

The triple pu0 , u 1 p G q with
pY qq ˆ L2 pΣ; K
˘
U p¨, ˘8q “ u0|Σ , and satisfies the unfolded problem
$ ż
’ 1 ` ˘` ˘
’
’
’ A ∇u`0 ` ∇y u p ∇v ` ` ∇y vp dxdy
’
’ |Y | Ω` ˆY
’
’ ż
’
’ 1 ` ˘` ˘
’
’ ` A ∇u´ ` ∇y u p ∇v ´ ` ∇y vp dxdy
’
’ |Y | Ω´ ˆY
’
’
& ż
k22
’ ` A10 ∇z U ` ∇z V ` dx1 dz
’
’ |Y | ΣˆpR zF q`
’
N
’
’ 2 ż ż
’
’ k
’
’ ` 2 1 ´ ´
A ∇z U ∇z V dx dz “ 1
f v dx,
’
’ |Y | ΣˆpRN zF q´ 0
’
’ Ω
’
’
%@pv, vp, V q in V ˆ L2 pΩ; H 1 pY qq ˆ L2 pΣ; K p q with V p¨, ˘8q “ v ˘ .
per G |Σ
Let θ P L8 pΣ; K p G q be the solution of the following cell problem, defined

1
for a.e. x P Σ as follows:
$ż
’
’
’
’ A10 px1 , zq ∇z θ` px1 , zq ∇z Ψ` pzq dz
’
’ R` zF`
N
’
’ ż
’
&
` A10 px1 , zq ∇z θ´ px1 , zq ∇z Ψ´ pzq dz “ 0,
’
’ RN zF ´
’
’
´
’
’ θ ` 1
px , `8q ” 1, θ ´ 1
px , ´8q ” 0,
’
’
’
%
@Ψ P K p G with Ψ p`8q “ Ψ´ p´8q “ 0.
`
330
With this definition, it follows that
U px1 , zq “ θpx1 , zq u` 1 1 ´ 1
0|Σ px q ` p1 ´ θpx , zqq u0|Σ px q.
Set
ż
1
ΘG “ A10 ∇z θ` ∇z θ` dz
|Y | RN
` zF`
ż
1
` A10 ∇z θ´ ∇z θ´ dz a.e. in Σ.
|Y | RN
´ zF´
Theorem 10.27. Suppose that (10.39) is satisfied with k2 ą 0. The limit

function u0 P V given by Proposition 10.26, is the solution of the homogenized
equation
$ż ż
’
’ ∇u `
∇v `
` Ahom ∇u´ ´
0 ∇v dx
hom
’
’
A 0 dx
’
& Ω` Ω´
ż ż
1
’
’ ` k22
ΘG ru0 sΣ rvsΣ dx “ f v dx,
’
’
’
%
Σ Ω
@v P V.
Remark 10.28. The function ΘG px1 q can be interpreted as the local relative
.
capacity (in G) of the set Cpx1 q “ tx1 P G | θpx1 , ¨ q “ 1{2u, the capacitary
potential being p2θpx1 , ¨ q ´ 1q “above Cpx1 q” and p1 ´ 2θpx1 , ¨ qq “below Cpx1 q”.

Here also, the proofs of the next proposition and corollary follow the same
lines as that of Proposition 10.8 and its corollary.

ż ż
lim Aε ∇uε,δ ∇φ dx “ Ahom ∇u` `
0 ∇u0 dx
εÑ0 Ωbl Ω`
ε,δ
ż ż
` A hom
∇u´
0 ∇u´
0 dx ` k22 ΘG ru0 s2 dx1 ,
Ω´ Σ Σ
ż
lim |∇uε,δ |2 dx “ 0.
εÑ0 Λ
ε
Corollary 10.30. Under the hypotheses of Theorem 10.27, one has
Tε p∇uε,δ q1pΩzΣε qˆY Ñ ∇u0 ` ∇y u

` bl ˘
∇z Tε,δ puε,δ q Ñ ∇z U strongly in L2 pΣ ˆ GqN .
331
10.5. Inequalities with obstacles: fakir’s carpet

pq Ñ 0
∇uε,δ 1pΩzΣε q ´ ∇u0 ´ Uε p∇y u strongly in L2 pΩqN .
The second convergence implies that
}∇uε,δ }L2 pΣ˘
ε q
Ñ k2 }∇z U }L2 pΣˆGq˘ q .
10.5 Inequalities with obstacles: fakir’s carpet
The problem considered here is a variational inequality with small obstacles.

The terminology “fakir’s carpet” was introduced in [74] where the problem
was originally studied. The unfolding method gives an alternate proof in the
general case of oscillating coefficients.
Since the small obstacles are distributed in volume, this section is related
to Section 10.1 the notations of which will be used, in particular for the sets
KB and LB (see (10.2)-(10.3)).
.
The set Bε,δ “ ΩzΩ˚ε,δ is where the unilateral constraint is imposed.
Assume that the matrix field Aε “ paεij q1ďi,jďN belongs to M pα, β, Ωq.
Introduce the closed convex cone in H01 pΩq,
! )
`
Vε,δ “ v P H01 pΩq | v ě 0 a.e. in Bε,δ .
For f P L2 pΩq consider the variational inequality,

$ `
’
’
& ż ż
A ∇uε,δ ∇pv ´ uε,δ q dx ě
ε
f pv ´ uε,δ q dx, (10.73)
’
’
’
%
Ω
`
Ω
@v P Vε,δ .
It is well-known (see e.g. [141, Theorem 2.1, Chapter II]) that problem 10.73
admits a unique solution, which furthermore satisfies the estimate,
}uε,δ }H 1 pΩq ď C}f }L2 pΩq . (10.74)
The constant does not depend on ε and δ.
Remark 10.31. If the matrix field Aε is symmetric, problem (10.73) is
equivalent to the following one:
$ `
&Find a minimizer over Vε,δ of the functional
ż ż
1
%Eε,δ pvq “ Aε ∇v ∇v dx ´ f v dx.
2 Ω Ω
Since Eε,δ is bounded from below, strictly convex and strongly continuous
(hence weakly lower semi-continuous) and coercive, there exists a minimizer
`
uε,δ P Vε,δ of Eε,δ which is unique.
332
We now derive the unfolded limit formulation for problem (10.73) as ε and
δ tend to 0. To this end, we introduce the associated variational setting and
.
use the notations of Proposition 9.2.
For V in L2 pΩ; H 1 pRN q ‘ Rq, it is clear that V p¨, 8q belongs to L2 pΩq.
Introduce the following space:
. . ˇ
W “ V P L2 pΩ; H 1 pRN q ‘ Rq ˇ V p¨, 8q P H01 pΩq ,
(
which is a Hilbert space for the norm,
}V }2W “ }∇z V }2L2 pΩˆRN q ` }∇V p¨, 8q}2L2 pΩq .
Finally, introduce the closed convex cone

(
L`
B “ V P W | V ě 0 a.e. on Ω ˆ B .
δ 2 ´1
N
.
k1 “ lim exists in R` .
εÑ0 ε
Suppose also that, as ε goes to 0, there exist a matrix A such that (10.5)
is satisfied and a matrix A0 such that (10.6) is satisfied.
Let uε,δ be the solution of problem (10.73). Then there exists pu0 , u
p, U q
in H01 pΩq ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq ˆ L`
B such that,

Tε,δ puε,δ q á U weakly in L2 pΩ; L2loc pRN qq,
` ˘
∇z Tε,δ puε,δ q 1 δ1 Y á ∇z U weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ RN qN , (10.75)
U px, 8q “ u0 pxq for a.e. x P Ω,
p
Tε p∇uε,δ q á ∇u0 ` ∇y u weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN .
The pair pp u, U q P L2 pΩ; Hper,0

1
pY qq ˆ L`
B satisfies the unfolded variational
inequality,
$ ż
’ 1 ` ˘` ˘
’
’ A ∇U p¨, 8q ` ∇y u p ∇pV ´ U qp¨, 8q ` ∇y pp vú pq dxdy
’
’ |Y | ΩˆY
’
’
& ż ż
k12 (10.76)
’
’ ` A ∇ U ∇ pV ´ U q dxdz ě f pV ´ U qp¨, 8qdx,
’
’ |Y |
0 z z
’
’
ΩˆR N Ω
’
%@pp `
v , V q P L pΩ; H pY qq ˆ L .
2
per
1
B
The weak limit u0 of the sequence of solutions of (10.73) is then recovered as

u0 “ U p¨, 8q.
333
Problem (10.76) has a unique solution as a standard variational inequality

in the closed convex set L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq ˆ L`
B due to the ellipticity of the
matrix fields A and A0 (arising from Aε in M pα, β, Ωq) and identity (3.14).
Proof of Proposition 10.32 for the case k1 ą 0(8) .
Step 1. Due to estimate (10.74), up to a subsequence, we get the first con-
vergence of (10.75). Then, as in the proof of the Proposition 10.1,
Mε puε,δ q1 δ1 Y Ñ u0 strongly in L2 pΩ; L2loc pRN qq. (10.77)
p P L2 pΩ; Hper,0
By Theorem 1.41, there exists u 1
pY qq such that, up to a sub-
sequence,
By Theorem 9.7(vii), there exists U in L2 pΩ; L2loc pRN qq such that, up to a

subsequence
Tε,δ puε,δ q á U weakly in L2 pΩ; L2loc pRN qq. (10.78)

∗
Again by Theorem 9.7(vii) there exists W in L2 pΩ; L2 pRN qq with ∇z W in
L2 pΩ ˆ RN q such that
` ˘ ∗
Tε,δ uε,δ ´ Mε puε,δ q á W weakly in L2 pΩ; L2 pRN qq. (10.79)
By (10.77)-(10.79), one concludes
U “ W ` u0 and ∇z U “ ∇z W. (10.80)
From Definition 9.6, Tε,δ puε,δ q ě 0 in Ω ˆ B, so that by (10.78),
U ě 0 in Ω ˆ B. (10.81)
Due to (10.80) and (10.81), U p¨, 8q “ u0 and U belongs to L` B.

Step 2. From (10.73) and for every test-function v P Vε,δ , we can write
ż ż ż
Aε ∇uε,δ ∇uε,δ dx ď Aε ∇uε,δ ∇v dx ´ f pv ´ uε,δ q dx. (10.82)
Ω Ω Ω
Then using both unfoldings, and proceeding as in the proof of Proposi-

tion 10.8, we obtain for the left hand side of the above inequality
ż ¯
1 ` ˘`
|Y | ΩˆY
ż ż (10.83)
k2
` 1 A0 ∇z U ∇z U dxdz ď lim inf Aε ∇uε,δ ∇uε,δ dx.
|Y | ΩˆRN εÑ0 Ω
(8) See Remark 10.36 for the cases k1 “ 0 and k1 “ `8.
334
Let pψ1 , ψ2 q P DpΩq ˆ DpΩq, φ P Hper

1
pY q vanishing in a neighborhood of
the origin, v P KB such that ∇z v has a compact support (we recall that v
vanishes on B) and Ψ P DpΩ ˆ RN q X L` B.
Consider in (10.73), the test function Φε,δ “ Ψ0ε,δ ` Ψε,δ where
´x¯
Ψ0ε,δ pxq “ εψ1 pxq φ ` ψ2 pxq vε,δ pxq,
ε
and
´ 1!x) ¯ ´ 1!x) ¯
vε,δ pxq “ v , Ψε,δ pxq “ Ψ x, ,
δ ε Y δ ε Y
for a.e. x in Ω.
First, observe that if ε is small enough, the support of Ψ0ε,δ is included in
˚ `
Ωε,δ . Hence Ψ0ε,δ belongs to Vε,δ .
Second, since Ψε,δ vanishes on the boundary of the ε-cells, it also belongs
` `
to Vε,δ . Therefore Φε,δ itself is in Vε,δ .
Clearly, εψ1 φp¨{εq converges to 0 and vε,δ to vp8q strongly in L2 pΩq (see
Lemma 10.4). Moreover, Ψε,δ also converges to 0 strongly in L2 pΩq since the
support of the function Ψε,δ is included in a set whose measure is at most of
order δ N . Hence we get
ż ż
` ˘
f pv ´ uε,δ q dx Ñ f pxq ψ2 pxqvp8q ´ U px, 8q dx.
Ω Ω
Now,
ż ż ´¨¯ ż ´¨¯
A ∇uε,δ ∇Φε,δ dx “ A ∇uε,δ ψ1 ∇φ
ε ε
dx` ε Aε ∇uε,δ ∇ψ1 φ dx
ε ε
Ω Ω
ż żΩ
` Aε ∇uε,δ ∇ψ2 vε,δ dx ` Aε ∇uε,δ ∇vε,δ ψ2 dx
żΩ żΩ
1
` A ∇uε,δ ∇Ψε,δ dx `
ε
Aε ∇uε,δ ∇z Ψε,δ dx.
Ω εδ Ω
Following the same arguments as in steps 2 and 3 of the proof of the Propo-
sition 10.1 gives
ż ż
` ˘
lim A ∇uε,δ ∇Φε,δ dx “
ε
p ∇y φ ψ1 dxdy
A ∇u0 ` ∇y u
εÑ0 Ω ΩˆY
ż
vp8q ` ˘
` A ∇u0 ` ∇y u p ∇ψ2 dxdy (10.84)
|Y | ΩˆY
ż
k12 ` ˘
` A0 ∇z U ∇z v ψ2 ` ∇z Ψ dxdz.
|Y | ΩˆRN
335
Taking into account (10.83), (10.82) and (10.84), we get

ż
1 ` ˘` ˘
|Y | ΩˆY
ż ż
k2 ` ˘
` 1 A0 ∇z U ∇z U dxdz ď A ∇u0 ` ∇y up ∇y φ ψ1 dxdy
|Y | ΩˆRN ΩˆY
ż
vp8q ` ˘
` A ∇u0 ` ∇y up ∇ψ2 dxdy (10.85)
|Y | ΩˆY
ż
k2 `
` 1 A0 ∇z U ∇z v ψ2 ` ∇z Ψqdxdz
|Y | N
ż ΩˆR
` ˘
´ f pxq vp8qψ2 pxq ´ U px, 8q dx.
Ω
Then, by Lemma 10.2 and due to the density of the product DpΩq b
1
Hper pY q in L2 pΩ; Hper
1
pY qq, one can replace in (10.85), ∇y φ ψ1 by ∇y vp for
arbitrary vp in L pΩ; Hper
2 1
pY qq. By density again, inequality (10.85) holds true
for every Ψ in L` B such that Ψp¨, 8q “ 0 and ψ2 in H01 pΩq. As a consequence,
setting
.
V px, zq “ vpzqψ2 pxq ` Ψpx, zq,
inequality (10.76) holds true for every V in L` B.
Uniqueness of the solution of (10.76) is easily verified by cross-testing.

Here we first give the variational inequality satisfied by U and then the one
satisfied by the macroscopic term u0 alone.
In (10.76), we take V “ U and vp “ w pù p (resp. vp “ ´w pù p), where
p P L2 pΩ; Hper
w 1
pY qq. This gives
ż
` ˘
A ∇u0 ` ∇y u p ∇y wp dxdy “ 0, @w p P L2 pΩ; Hper
1
pY qq.
ΩˆY
pj (j “ 1, . . . , N ) defined by the cell problems (3.10),

Using the correctors χ
p as
we express u
ÿN
Bu0 ÿN
BU
ppx, yq “
u pxq χ
pj px, yq “ px, 8q χ
pj px, yq,
j“1
Bx j j“1
Bx j
for a.e. px, yq P Ω ˆ Y . This used in (10.76) implies

ż
Ahom ∇U p¨, 8q ∇pV ´ U qp¨, 8q dx
Ω
ż
k2
` 1 A0 ∇z U ∇z pV ´ U q dxdz (10.86)
|Y | ΩˆRN
ż
ě f pV ´ U qp¨, 8q dx, @V P L` B,
Ω
336
where the matrix Ahom is given by (10.31).

Now, if we choose V P L`B such that V p¨, 8q “ U p¨, 8qp“ u0 q, we get
ż
A0 ∇z U ∇z pV ´ U q dxdz ě 0. (10.87)
ΩˆRN
In order to solve this variational inequality, introduce the convex set
C`
! . )
B “ Ψ P H pR q ‘ R | Ψ ě 0 a.e. on B, Ψp8q “ ´1 ,
1 N
and let θI P L8 pΩ ; C`
B q be the solution of the variational inequality,
$ż
’ ` ˘
& A0 px, zq ∇z θI px, zq ∇z Ψpzq ´ θI px, zq dz ě 0 for a.e. x P Ω,
RN (10.88)
’
%
@Ψ P C`
B.
Existence and uniqueness of the solution to this problem follows from

standard results (see [141, Theorem 2.1, Chapter II]).
The unique solution of (10.87) can be now determined: multiplying the
equation in (10.88) by pu´
0 q , one can see that the solution U is given by
2
U px, zq “ u` ´
0 pxq ` u0 pxqθI px, zq for a.e. px, zq P Ω ˆ RN ,
where u`0 is added to satisfy the condition at 8, and the test function V is
written as u` ´
0 pxq ` u0 pxqΨpx, zq.
Now, for ψ arbitrary in H01 pΩq, choose as test-function in (10.86)
V px, zq “ U px, zq ´ ψpxqϑpzq for a.e. px, zq P Ω ˆ RN ,
where ϑ belongs to KB X C`
B . This gives
ż ż ´ż ¯
k2
A hom
∇u0 ∇ψ dx ´ 1 u´
0ψ A0 ∇z θI ∇z ϑ dz dx
|Y | RN
Ω Ω
ż (10.89)
ě f ψ dx.
Ω
Choose successively Ψ “ ϑ and 2θI ´ ϑ as test functions in inequal-

ity (10.88), to obtain
ż ż
A0 ∇z θI ∇z θI dz “ A0 ∇z θI ∇z ϑ dz a.e. in Ω.
RN RN
Therefore, setting for a.e. x in Ω,

ż
1
ΘI pxq “ A0 px, zq ∇z θI px, zq ∇z θI px, zq dz, (10.90)
|Y | RN
337
inequality (10.89) becomes

ż ż ż
Ahom ∇u0 ∇ψ dx ´ k12 ΘI u´
0 ψ dx ě f ψ dx.
Ω Ω Ω
Since ψ is arbitrary in H01 pΩq, the latter inequality is actually an equality

which is the limit homogenized problem,
$ż ż ż
& Ahom ∇u0 ∇ψ dx ´ k 2 Θ I u ´
ψ dx “ f ψ dx,
1 0
Ω Ω Ω (10.91)
%
@ψ P H01 pΩq
Theorem 10.33. Under the assumptions of Proposition 10.32 with k1 ą 0,

the limit function u0 in H01 pΩq is the unique solution of the homogenized
problem (10.91) which is the variational formulation of the equation
# ` ˘
´div Ahom ∇u0 ´ k12 ΘI u´ 0 “ f,
(10.92)
u0 “ 0 on BΩ.
This equation is well-posed since the function ΘI given by (10.90) is non

negative a.e. in Ω.
Remark 10.34. The contribution of the oscillations of the matrix Aε in

the homogenized problem is reflected by the first term in the left-hand side
of (10.92). The contribution of the perforations is represented by the second
term of the left-hand side.
Remark 10.35. If the matrix field Ahom is symmetric, problem (10.92) is

equivalent to the following one:
$
’
&Find a minimizer over H0 pΩq of the functional
1
ż ż ż
’ 1 k12 ´ 2
% Epvq “ A hom
∇v ∇v dx ` Θ I pv q dx ´ f v dx.
2 Ω 2 Ω Ω
Remark 10.36.
1. The proof for the case k1 “ 0 (k1 defined by (10.4)), is actually simpler
but requires a slight modification, setting in (10.75)2
δ 2 ´1
N
Tε,δ puε,δ q á U.
ε
The corresponding statement is that of Theorem 10.5 with k1 “ 0; in this
case, the holes are too small to have any influence at the limit.
2. The case of k1 “ `8 is easy to analyze with the help of Theorem 9.7(vi).
By (9.5),
Tε,δ puε,δ q á u0 weakly in L2 pΩ; L2loc pRN qq.
338
Thus, U is independent of z and is equal to u0 . Since Tε,δ puε,δ q ě 0 in ΩˆB,

`
it follows that u0 belongs to H01 pΩq . Then, is enough to test with functions
`
which are also in H01 pΩq .
The limit problem is obtained from (10.86) with test functions independent
of z also. It reduces to the following standard variational inequality with
`
solution u0 in H01 pΩq :
$ż ż
’
& Ahom ∇u0 ∇pv ´ u0 q dx ě f pv ´ u0 qdx,
Ω Ω
’
%@v P H 1 pΩq` .
0

Theorem 10.32,
ż ż ż
lim A ∇uε,δ ∇uε,δ dx “
ε
Ahom
∇u0 ∇u0 dx ` k1
2
ΘI pu´
0 q dx,
2
εÑ0 Ω
ż Ω Ω
lim |∇uε,δ |2 dx “ 0,
εÑ0 Λ
ε
where
ż
Ahom ∇u0 ∇u0 dx
Ω
ż
1 ` ˘` ˘
“ p ∇U p¨, 8q ` ∇y u
A ∇U p¨, 8q ` ∇y u p dxdy, (10.93)
|Y | ΩˆY
ż ż
´ 2 k12
2
k1 ΘI pu0 q dx “ A0 ∇z U ∇z U dxdz.
Ω |Y | ΩˆRN
Proof. First, taking into account (10.83) and (10.93), we get

ż ż
Ahom ∇u0 ∇u0 dx ` k12 ΘI u´ ´
0 u0 dx
Ω Ω
ż
ď lim inf Aε ∇uε,δ ∇uε,δ dx.
εÑ0 Ω
pηq
We now prove the converse inequality. To do so, let tθI uη be a sequence
pηq
in L8 pΩ ; C`
B q X C pΩ ˆ R q with ∇z θI
1 N
having a compact support, and
such that
pηq
θ I ´ θI Ñ 0 strongly in L2 pΩ; HpRN qq.
.
Choosing
´ 1!x) ¯
pηq pηq
vε,δ pxq “ 2u` ´
0 pxq ` 2u0 pxqθI x, for a.e. x P Ω,
δ ε Y
339
10.6. Singular inhomogeneity near the boundary
as test function in (10.82), and proceeding as in the proof of the Proposi-

tion 10.32, we obtain
ż ż
pηq 2 ` ˘
lim Aε ∇uε,δ ∇vε,δ dx “ A ∇u0 ` ∇y up ∇u0 dxdy
εÑ0 Ω |Y | ΩˆY
ż
k2 ` pηq ˘
`2 1 A0 ∇ z U ∇ z θ I u ´0 dxdz,
|Y | ΩˆRN
ż ż ż
pηq ` ˘
lim f pvε,δ ´ uε,δ q dx “ f pxq 2u0 pxqÚ px, 8q dx “ f pxq u0 pxq dx.
εÑ0 Ω Ω Ω
Summarizing the above convergences gives

ż ż
A hom
∇u0 ∇u0 dx ` k1 2
ΘI u´ ´
0 u0 dx
Ω
ż Ω
ż
ď lim inf Aε ∇uε,δ ∇uε,δ dx ď lim sup Aε ∇uε,δ ∇uε,δ dx
εÑ0
ż Ω żεÑ0 Ω
pηq pηq
ď lim Aε ∇uε,δ ∇vε,δ dx ´ lim f pvε,δ ´ uε,δ q dx
εÑ0 Ω εÑ0 Ω
ż ż ż
k2 ` pηq ˘
“ Ahom ∇u0 ∇p2u0 qdx ` 2 1 A0 ∇ z U ∇ z θ I u ´ dxdz ´ f u0 dx.
Ω |Y | ΩˆRN 0
Ω
Passing to the limit with respect to η and using (10.91) gives

ż ż ż
ΘI u´
2
lim Aε ∇uε,δ ∇uε,δ dx “ Ahom ∇u0 ∇u0 dx ` k12 0 dx.
εÑ0 Ω Ω Ω
This gives the convergence

ż of the energy. As in the proof Proposition 10.8,
one also obtains lim |∇uε,δ |2 dx “ 0.
εÑ0 Λ
ε
Corollary 10.38. Under the hypotheses of Theorem 10.5, the following

strong convergences hold:
Tε p∇uε,δ q1ΩˆYrδ Ñ ∇u0 ` ∇y up “ ∇U p¨, 8q ` ∇y u

` ˘
∇z Tε,δ puε,δ q 1 ?1 B Ñ ∇z U strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ RN qN .
δ
pq Ñ 0
∇uε,δ 1Ω˚ ? ´ ∇u0 ´ Uε p∇y u strongly in L2 pΩqN .
ε, δ
The second convergence implies that
}∇uε,δ }L2 pΩzΩ˚ ? q Ñ k1 }∇z U }L2 pΩˆRN q .

ε, δ
340
10.6 Singular inhomogeneities near boundary

In this section we give a brief presentation of the use of the unfolding method
for the homogenization of a boundary value problem for the Poisson equation
with singular asymptotically high contrast zero order term and right-hand
side, the support of which is concentrated near a fixed subset of the domain
boundary and with a periodic microstructure. It involves two small parame-
ters (both intended to go to zero), the first one, ε, as usual characterizes the
boundary microstructure period, while the second, δ, characterizes the vol-
ume fraction of the set where the source term is large, as well as the portion
of the boundary where the Dirichlet condition is imposed. The boundary
condition alternates rapidly between Dirichlet and Neumann on this subset.
This gives rise to a boundary layer and the unfolding method is well
adapted to give actual proofs for formal results common in this theory. De-
pending on the ratio between ε and δ, one can obtain various boundary
conditions in the limit. We follow the method of [53] where the unfolding
approach was used for the first time in this kind of problems.
Problems in domains with singularly perturbed density (“concentrated
masses”) have been widely discussed in the literature. The behavior of solu-
tions of a wave equation with one concentrated mass and the vibration of a
body with a concentrated mass were studied in [181] and [182], respectively.
We refer to [53] for a detailed list of references concerning problems with
concentrated masses.
10.6.1 Setting the problem

For a given fixed h ě 0, consider a domain Ω in RN , N ě 3, which lies in the
upper half space, with a piecewise smooth boundary consisting of three parts
BΩ “ Γ1 Y Γ2 Y Γ3 (see Figure 10.6). The part Γ3 is the pN ´ 1q-dimensional
unit cube
! ˇ 1 1 )
.
Γ3 “ x ˇ ´ ă xi ă for i “ 1, . . . N ´ 1, xN “ 0 .
2 2
The part Γ2 is the union of Γi2 for i “ 1, . . . N ´ 1, where
! ˇ 1 1 1 )
.
Γi2 “ x ˇ xi “ ˘ , ´ ă xj ă for j ‰ i, 1 ď j ď N ´1, 0 ď xN ď h .
2 2 2
The remainder Γ1 is the part of BΩ located in the half-space xN ě h.

Moreover, Γ3 (see Figure 10.7) has a periodic micro-structure associated to
the small parameters δ ă 1 and ε “ p2N1`1q where N P N , N ě 1 and
δ “ δpεq Ñ 0 as ε Ñ 0.
341
Figure 10.6: Side view
xn
1
xn-1
2
x1
,
, ,
Figure 10.7: Perspective view
To describe the microstructure, let D be the hyperdisk

D “ tz P RN | |z| ă 1, zN “ 0u.
Then
Γ3 “ Γε,δ Y γε,δ ,
where
. Ş´Ť ¯
.
γε,δ “ Γ3 N ´1
εpξ ` δDq and Γε,δ “ Γ3 zγε,δ .
ξPZ
Let B be the half-ball

B “ tz | |z| ă 1, zN ą 0u.
Then Bε,δ is the set
Ş`Ť ˘
Bε,δ “ Ω εpξ ` δBq . (10.94)
ξPZN ´1
342
When the small parameters go to zero, we have a homogenization process

where the periodic cell Y is the cube Y “ p´1{2, 1{2qN , but the periodicity is
restricted to the boundary Γ3 . The notations of the boundary layer unfolding
from Section 9.3 will be used in the sequel.
Remark 10.39. The set B defined above as a half-ball, can be replaced by any
bounded connected open subset of the upper half-space with Lipschitz bound-
ary. All the results of this section remain valid for such a choice of B.
The problem is to study the asymptotic behavior as ε and δ go to 0, of
the solutions of the following boundary value problem:
$
’ ´Δuε,δ ` pεδq´κ gε,δ uε,δ “ fε,δ in Ω,
’
&
uε,δ “ 0 on γε,δ Y Γ1 , (10.95)
’
’
% Buε,δ “ 0 on Γ Y Γ ,
ε,δ 2
Bn
where n is the outward unit normal on BΩ, and pεδq´κ gε,δ with κ ě 0,
is a non-negative density supported in Bε,δ , such that gε,δ is bounded in
L8 pBε,δ q. The right-hand side fε,δ P L2 pΩq is of the form
#
f in ΩzB ε,δ ,
fε,δ pxq “
frε,δ in Bε,δ .
where fε,δ belongs to L2 pΩq, and, for simplicity, f is fixed in L2 pΩq. The
function frε,δ is not necessarily bounded with respect to ε and δ, the exact
scaling being specified in Proposition 10.42 below.
Let Vε,δ be the space
(
Vε,δ “ v P H 1 pΩq | v “ 0 on Γ1 Y γε,δ .
The variational formulation of problem (10.95) is now
$
’
’
&ż ż ż
´κ
∇uε,δ ∇φ dx ` pεδq gε,δ uε φ dx “ fε,δ φ dx, (10.96)
’
’
’ Ω
%
Ω Ω
@φ P Vε,δ .
Introduce the spaces
(
V0 “ w P H 1 pΩq | w “ 0 on Γ1 ,
( (10.97)
V0c “ w P C 8 pΩq | w “ 0 in some neighborhood of Γ1 .
Observe that the latter is a dense subspace of the former.
Remark 10.40. The spaces Vε,δ are all closed subspaces of H 1 pΩq and more
precisely, of V0 . The Poincaré inequality holds for V0 , hence uniformly for
the spaces Vε,δ .
Remark 10.41. The presence of the density pεδq´κ gε,δ means that equation
(10.95) is asymptotically singular near the boundary Γ3 within the set Bε,δ .
343
10.6.2 A priori estimates

The estimates are established assuming that ε and δ are independent small
parameters.
Proposition 10.42. There is a constant C independent of ε and δ such that
}uε,δ }H 1 pΩq ` pεδq´κ{2 }gε,δ uε,δ }L2 pBε,δ q

1{2
´› › › ´1{2 › › › (¯
ď C ›f ›L2 pΩq ` min pεδqκ{2 ›gε,δ frε,δ ›L2 pB q
, εδ ›frε,δ ›L2 pB .
ε,δ ε,δ q
Proof. Using uε,δ as a test function in (10.96), we obtain

ż ż
|∇uε,δ |2 dx ` pεδq´κ gε,δ u2ε,δ dx
Ω Ω
ż ż
“ frε,δ uε,δ dx ` f uε,δ dx.
Bε,δ ΩzBε,δ
By the Poincaré inequality for V0 and the standard Young inequality,

ż ż
1
2 Ω Ω
ż (10.98)
ď |frε,δ uε,δ | dx ` C}f }2L2 pΩq .
Bε,δ
The Cauchy-Schwarz and the Young inequalities, give

ż
ˇ ˇ › › › 1{2 ›
ˇfrε,δ ˇ |uε,δ | dx ď ›g ´1{2 frε,δ › 2 ›g uε,δ › 2 ,
ε,δ L pB q
ε,δ ε,δ L pB ε,δ q
Bε,δ
and
ż ż
Ω
´ Ω
› ´1{2 ›2 › ›2 ¯ (10.99)
ď C pεδqκ ›gε,δ frε,δ ›L2 pB q
` ›f › 2
L pΩq
.
ε,δ
On the other hand, by scaling the Poincaré inequality in the set B for
functions vanishing on D X B, it follows that
}uε,δ }L2 pBε,δ q ď Cεδ}∇uε,δ }L2 pBε,δ q .
Using this estimate and the Young inequality again in (10.98), we get
ż ż
1 ´κ
|∇uε,δ | dx ` pεδq
2
gε,δ u2ε,δ dx
4 Ω Ω
´ › ›2 › ›2 ¯ (10.100)
ď C εδ ›frε,δ ›L2 pB q ` ›f ›L2 pΩq .
ε,δ
The claim is then obtained by combining (10.99) and (10.100).
344
Corollary 10.43. If
› ´1{2 › › › (
min pεδqκ{2 ›gε,δ frε,δ ›L2 pB , εδ ›f˜ε,δ ›L2 pB ď C,
ε,δ q ε,δ q
then uε,δ is bounded in H 1 pΩq. Furthermore,

› 1{2 ›
›g uε,δ › 2 ď Cpεδqκ{2 .
ε,δ L pB q ε,δ
10.6.3 The boundary-layer unfolding operator

The setting is similar to that of Section 9.3, with the modification due to the
fact that the layer in on one side of the boundary only (and not an internal
boundary).
.
Recall the notation x1 “ px1 , . . . , xN ´1 q. We use the periodicity cells
. .
Y 1 “ p´1{2, 1{2qN ´1 , Y “ Y 1 ˆ p0, 1q(9),
and define the layer Σε as

(
Σε “ Ω X x | 0 ă xN ă ε .
For a.e. y 1 in RN ´1 , one writes
y 1 “ ry 1 sY 1 ` ty 1 uY 1 , ry 1 sY 1 P ZN ´1 , ty 1 uY 1 P Y 1 .
From now on, when referring to a point px1 , 0q in Γ3 , we often drop the last
coordinate and just write x1 .
For simplicity, we assume that Γ3 is the exact union of εY 1 -cells, so that,
with the notations of Section 9.3 (see also (1.3)),
Λε “ ∅ and p ε ” Σε .
Σ
The general case of Γ3 with Lipschitz boundary can actually be handled as

in Section 9.3.
In this situation, Definitions 9.11-9.12 become
Definition 10.44. For φ P Lp pΣε q, p P r1, `8q, the unfolding operator
Tε,δ
bl
: Lp pΣε q Ñ Lp pΓ3 ˆ RN ` q is defined by
$ ´ ” 1ı ¯
&φ ε x ` εδz
1
if px1 , zq P Γ3 ˆ Y,
1
Tε,δ pφqpx , zq “
bl
ε Y 1 δ
%
0 otherwise.
Definition 10.45. The local average Mbl ε : L pΣε q ÞÑ L pΓ3 q, is defined for
p p
every φ in L pΣε q, p P r1, `8q, by

p
ż ż
1 1 Ń
Mblε pφqpx q “ δ N
T bl
ε,δ pφqpx , zq dz “ ε 1
φpζq dζ, for x1 P Γ3 .
1
δY εr xε s`εY
(9) Since the measure |Y | of Y is 1, it will not appear explicitly in this section.
345
Remark 10.46. Since elements of Lp pΓ3 q can be considered as functions of

Lp pΣε q, Mbl
ε can be applied to them. With this convention,
Tε,δ
bl
˝ Mbl
ε pφq “ Mε pφq
bl
on Γ3 .
Proposition 9.14 and Theorem 9.15 hold in the present setting and they
read as follows:
Proposition 10.47. Let twε uε be a sequence such that wε á w weakly in
H 1 pΩq. Then the following convergence holds:
ε pwε q Ñ w|Γ3
Mbl strongly in L2 pΓ3 q.
Theorem 10.48. (Properties of the operator Tε,δ

bl
)
(i) For every v, w measurable on Σε ,
Tε,δ
bl
pvwq “ Tε,δ
bl
pvqTε,δ
bl
pwq.
(ii) For every u P L1 pΣε q,

ż ż
εδ N Tε,δ
bl
puq dx1 dz “ u dx,
Γ3 ˆRN
` Σε
and ż ż
εδ N |Tε,δ
bl
puq| dx1 dz “ |u| dx.
Γ3 ˆRN
` Σε
(iii) For every u P L2 pΣε q,

1
}Tε,δ
bl
puq}2L2 pΓ3 ˆRN q “ }u}2L2 pΣε q .
` εδ N
(iv) Let u be in H 1 pΣε q. Then,
1 ` bl ˘ 1
Tε,δ
bl
p∇uq “ ∇z Tε,δ puq in Γ3 ˆ Y.
εδ δ
(v) Let ω be an open bounded set in RN
` . Then the following estimates hold:
` bl ˘ ε
}∇z Tε,δ puq }2L2 pΓ3 ˆ 1 Y q ď N ´2 }∇u}2L2 pΣε q ,
` ˘ 2 δ δ
ε
}Tε,δ
bl
u ´ Mblε puq }L2 pΓ3 ;L2∗ pRN qq ď C N ´2 }∇u}L2 pΣε q ,
2
` δ
and
` 2 ε ˚
}Tε,δ
bl
uq}L2 pΓ3 ;L2∗pωqq ď C }∇u}2L2 pΣε q ` 2| ω |2{2 }u}2L2 pΣε q ,
δ N ´2
where 2˚ is the Sobolev exponent defined by
1 . 1 1
“ ´ .
2˚ 2 N
346
ε
(vi) Assume is bounded. Let wε,δ be in H 1 pΣε q such that
δ N ´2
}∇wε,δ }L2 pΣε q ď C.
∗
Then, up to a subsequence, there exist two functions W P L2 pΓ3 ; L2 pRN ` qq
1
and U in L2 pΓ3 ; Hloc pRN
` qq with ∇ z W and ∇ z U in L 2
pΓ3 ˆ R N
` q, such that
` ˘ ∗
Tε,δ
bl
wε,δ ´ Mbl
ε pwε,δ q á W weakly in L2 pΓ3 ; L2 pRN
` qq,
˚
Tε,δ
bl
pwε,δ q á U weakly in L2 pΓ3 ; L2loc pRN
` qq,
` bl ˘
∇z Tε,δ pwε,δ q 1 δ1 Y á ∇z U weakly in L2 pΓ3 ˆ RN
`q .
N
Furthermore, ∇z W “ ∇z U , U ´ W is independent of z and
wε,δ |Γ3 Ñ U ´ W strongly in L2 pΓ3 q.
10.6.4 The functional setting

In the study of the limit behavior of problem (10.95) as ε, δ Ñ 0, the func-
tional setting is similar to that of Section 10.2 with the modification for a half
space due to the geometry of the boundary layer. It can be also compared to
“half” of the situation of Section 10.3.
Introduce the following functional space:
. (
KD “ Φ P Hloc pRN` q | ∇Φ P L pR` q and Φ “ 0 on D
.
1 2 N N
( (10.101)
“ Φ P H 1 pRN ` q ‘ R | Φ “ 0 on D .
It is isomorphic to the subspace of the Hilbert space H 1 pRN

.
` q consisting of
.
functions constant on D(10) so that }Φ}KD “ }∇Φ}L2 pRN ` q is a Hilbert norm
on KD . Also, the space
.
KcD “ tΦ P KD X C 8 pRN
` q | support of ∇Φ is boundedu,
is dense in KD . Let K0D be the subspace KD X H 1 pRN

.
` q.
The effective (homogenized) boundary condition in problem (10.95) de-
pends crucially on the ratio between ε and δ N ´2 . We assume that δ is a
function of ε such that there exists k2 P r0, `8s satisfying hypothesis (10.39).
10.6.5.1 The unfolded limit for 0 ă k2 ă `8.
In this subsection, we only state the main results. They can be proved in a
similar way as in the previous subsections (one can also refer to [53]).
(10) The isomorphism is the map Φ ÞÑ Φ ´ Φp8q.
347
We make the assumption that (10.39) holds with 0 ă k2 ă `8. Note

that this implies the relation εδ N „ pk2 q2 pεδq2 .
Suppose that the following conditions on the functions gε,δ and frε,δ are
satisfied:
H1. The functions gε,δ satisfy the estimate }gε,δ }L8 pBε,δ q ď C uniformly in
ε, δ, and the sequence tTε,δ
bl
pgε,δ qupε,δq converges in measure (or almost
everywhere) in Γ3 ˆ B to a function g.
bl r
H2. The sequence tεδ N Tε,δ pfε,δ qupε,δq converges weakly in L2 pΓ3 ˆ Bq to
some fr.
Hypothesis H2 implies that εδ}fr}L2 pBε,δ q is uniformly bounded, so that

Corollary 10.43 applies.
Example 10.49. A typical example of gε,δ and f˜ε,δ satisfying Hypotheses

H1 and H2 is the case where
´ 1 ! x1 ) x ¯ 1 r´ 1 ! x1 ) xN ¯
frε,δ pxq “
N
gε,δ pxq “ g , , f , ,
δ ε εδ εδ N δ ε εδ
with g P L8 pBq and fr P L2 pBq. Observe that in these cases, one has
bl r
Tε,δ
bl
pgε,δ q “ g and εδ N Tε,δ pfε,δ q “ fr.
Consider first the case κ “ 2 and recall definition (10.97) of V0 . Then
Proposition 10.50. Let uε,δ be a solution of problem (10.95). Assume that

κ “ 2, and that conditions H1 and H2 are fulfilled. Then there exists pu0 , U q
in V0 ˆ L2 pΓ3 ; KD q with U p¨, 8q “ u0 a.e. on Γ3 , such that
uε,δ á u0 weakly in V0 ,
Tε,δ
bl
puε,δ q á U weakly in L2 pΓ3 ; L2loc pRN
` qq,
` bl ˘ (10.102)
εδTε,δ p∇uε,δ q “ ∇z Tε,δ puε,δ q 1 δ1 Y á ∇z U
bl
weakly in L2 pΓ3 ˆ RN
`q ,
N
and such that the pair pu0 , U q is the unique solution of the unfolded problem
$ż ż ż
’
’ ∇u ∇v dx ` pk q2
∇ U ∇ V dx 1
dz ` pk q 2
g U V dx1 dz
’
’ 0 2 z z 2
’
& Ω Γ 3 ˆR N
` Γ 3 ˆB
ż ż
(10.103)
’
’ “ f v dx ` fr V dx1 dz
’
’ Γ3 ˆB
’
%
Ω
@pv, V q P V0 ˆ L2 pΩ; KD q such that V p¨, 8q “ v a.e. on Γ3 .
Let θ11 P L8 pΓ3 ; KD q with θ11 px1 , 8q ” 1 be the solution of the cell
348
problem(11)
$ż
’
& ∇z θ11 px1 , zq ∇z Ψpzq dz “ 0 for a.e. x1 P Γ3 ,
RN
` (10.104)
’
%
@Ψ P K0D ,
and θ01 P L2 pΓ3 ; K0D q the solution of

$ż ż
’
’ ∇ θ 1
px 1
, zq ∇ Ψpzq dz ` gpx1 , zq θ01 px1 , zq Ψpzq dz
’ N
’ z 0 z
’
& ` R B
ż
’
’ “ frpx1 , zq Ψpzq dz for a.e. x1 P Γ3 ,
’
’
’
%
B
@Ψ P K0D .
(10.105)
According to (10.104)-(10.105), for a.e. px1 , zq P Γ3 ˆ RN
`
1 1 1
U px1 , zq “ u0 px1 qθ11 px1 , zq ` θ px , zq.
pk2 q2 0
Set,
ż
Θ11 px1 q “ ∇z θ11 px1 , zq ∇z θ11 px1 , zq dz for a.e. x1 P Γ3 (10.106)
RN
`
which is non-negative and can be interpreted as a local capacity. We can now

state the homogenization result concerning u0 .
Theorem 10.51. Let κ “ 2. Then, under the assumptions of Proposi-

tion 10.50, the limit function u0 P V0 is the solution of the homogenized
equation,
$ż ż ż ż
& ∇u0 ∇ψ dx ` pk2 q2 Θ11 u0 ψ dx1 “ f ψ dx ` F ψ dx1 ,
Ω Γ3 Ω Γ3 (10.107)
%
@ψ P V0 ,
where Θ11 is defined by (10.106) and F P L2 pΓ3 q is given by

ż
1
F px q “ frpx1 , zq θ11 px1 , zq dz for a.e. x1 P Γ3 .
B
The next statement treats the case κ ă 2.

κ ă 2, and that conditions H1 and H2 are fulfilled.
(11) These cell problems have a unique solution by the Lax-Milgram theorem.
349
Then there exists pu0 , U q in V0 ˆ L2 pΓ3 ; KD q with U p¨, 8q “ u0 a.e. on

Γ3 , such that (10.102) holds and the pair pu0 , U q is the unique solution of
$ż ż
’
’ ∇u ∇v dx ` pk q2
∇z U ∇z V dx1 dz
’
’ 0 2
’
& Ω Γ3 ˆR`
N
ż ż
’
’ “ f v dx ` fr V dx1 dz,
’
’ ˆB
’
%
Ω Γ 3
@pv, V q P V0 ˆ L2 pΓ3 ; KD q such that V p¨, 8q “ v a.e.on Γ3 .

Theorem 10.53. In this case, the homogenized equation is actually the same
as that of Theorem 10.11 with Ahom ” Id, but obviously, the function spaces
are not the same.
We now consider the case κ ą 2. For simplicity we assume,
H1’. There is a subset B 1 of B with Lipschitz boundary such that Tε,δ
bl
pgε,δ q
1
vanishes on Γ3 ˆ pBzB q, and
Tε,δ
bl
pgε,δ q ÝÑ g a.e. in Γ3 ˆ B 1 ,
where g ą 0 a.e. on Γ3 ˆ B 1 .
We introduce the notations
B 2 “ B 1 Y D, D2 “ pBB 1 Y DqzpBB 1 X Dq,
and define in the same way as KD (see (10.101)) the space

.
! .
KB 2 “ Φ P H 1 pRN
ˇ
ˇ 2
)
` q ‘ R Φ “ 0 on B .
The spaces KcB 2 and K0B 2 are defined similarly.

κ ą 2, and that conditions H1’ and H2 are satisfied.
Then there exists pu0 , U q P V0 ˆ L2 pΓ3 ; KB 2 q with U p¨, 8q “ u0 a.e. on
Γ3 , such that convergences (10.102) hold, and the pair pu0 , U q is the unique
solution of
$ż ż
’
’ ∇u ∇v dx ` pk q2
∇z U ∇z V dx1 dz
’
’ 0 2
’
& Ω Γ3 ˆR`N
ż ż
’
’ “ f v dx ` fr V dx1 dz,
’
’ ˆB
’
%
Ω Γ 3
@pv, V q P V0 ˆ L2 pΓ3 ; KB 2 q such that V p¨, 8q “ v a.e. on Γ3 .

Theorem 10.55. In this case, the homogenized formulation is actually the
same as that of Theorem 10.11 with Ahom ” Id.
Remark 10.56. In Proposition 10.54 assumption H1’ can be relaxed to the
case where the subset B 1 depends on x1 P Γ3 in a enough regular way, in
which case D2 depends on x1 too.
350
10.6.5.2 Unfolded limit for k2 “ 0.
In the case k2 “ 0, the contributions of inhomogeneities γε,δ and Bε,δ are

asymptotically negligible, and the limit problem includes the Neumann boun-
dary condition on Γ3 .
We make the following hypothesis:
H3. The number κ and the functions gε,δ and f˜ε,δ are such that, as ε and
(
δ tend to zero, min pεδqκ{2 }gε,δ frε,δ }L2 pBε,δ q , εδ}frε,δ }L2 pBε,δ q is bounded
´1{2
(so that Corollary 10.43 applies).
Theorem 10.57. Let uε,δ be a solution of problem (10.95). Assume that

hypothesis H3 is fulfilled and k2 “ 0. Then
and u0 is the solution of the variational problem

$ż ż
& ∇u0 ∇ψ dx “ f ψ dx,
Ω Ω (10.108)
%
@ψ P V0 .
Remark 10.58. Note that for k2 “ 0 the value of κ has no influence on

the structure of the limit problem. Its formulation (10.108) only involves the
function u0 and thus, represents the macroscopic limit problem.
10.6.5.3 Unfolded limit for k2 “ `8.
In this case, the ”spots” γε,δ are large enough to ensure the homogeneous
Dirichlet boundary condition on Γ3 in the limit problem.
Theorem 10.59. Let uε,δ be the solution of problem (10.95). Assume that
the hypothesis H3 is fulfilled, and k2 “ `8. Then
and u0 is the solution of the variational problem

$ż ż
’
’ ∇u0 ∇ψ dx “ f ψ dx,
’
& Ω Ω
’ u0 “ 0 on Γ3 ,
’
’
%
@ψ P V0 with ψ “ 0 on Γ3 .
Remark 10.60. The assertion of Remark 10.58 for k2 “ 0, is the same

for k2 “ `8, the value of κ has no influence on the structure of the limit
problem as it only involves the function u0 .
351

In preceding section, the sequence tuε,δ upε,δq was shown to converge weakly
to u0 in the space V0 . Following the same procedure as in Proposition 10.8,
one can prove the next theorem.
Theorem 10.61. Under the hypotheses of Theorem 10.10, the following
uε,δ Ñ u0 strongly in V0 ,
Tε,δ
bl
puε,δ q Ñ U strongly in L2 pΓ3 ; L2loc pRN
` qq,
p∇z Tε,δ
bl
puε,δ qq1 δ1 Y Ñ ∇z U strongly in L2 pΓ3 ˆ RN
`q .
N
The limit U of the boundary layer term is in L2 pΓ3 ; KD q. Due to the

discontinuity of the boundary layer term Tε,δ
bl
puε,δ q at the boundary of 1δ Y ,
one cannot expect a convergence in this space.
10.6.7 Complement
All the above results can be extended for the case of a second order elliptic
operator with a possibly oscillating matrix Aε,δ . The original problem is
changed to
$
’
’
&ż ż ż
Aε,δ ∇uε,δ ∇φdx ` pεδq´κ gε,δ uε,δ φ dx “ fε,δ φ dx,
’
’
’
%
Ω Ω Ω
@φ P Vε,δ .
The extra hypotheses for Aε,δ are
A1. Aε,δ is positive definite and bounded uniformly in ε and δ, a.e. in Ω.

A2. Aε,δ H-converges to some limit matrix Ahom (see [164] for the definition
of H-convergence)(12).
A3. Tε,δ
bl
pAε,δ q converges to some A0 a.e. on Γ3 ˆ RN
`.
Let us briefly describe the limit problem in the case 0 ă k2 ă `8 and

κ “ 2. Equation (10.103) becomes
$ż ż
’
’ A hom
∇u ∇v dx ` pk q2
A0 ∇z U ∇z V dx1 dz
’
’ 0 2
’
& Ω Γ3 ˆR`
N
ż ż ż
’
’ `k 2 1
g U V dx dz “ f v dx ` fr V dx1 dz
’
’ ˆB ˆB
’
%
Γ 3 Ω Γ 3
@pv, V q P V0 ˆ L2 pΩ; KD qq such that V p¨, 8q “ v a.e. on Γ3 ,

(12) In particular, this holds when (with the notations of Part I) T pA
ε ε,δ q converges to B
a.e. in Ω ˆ Y , in which case Ahom is given by formula (3.19).
352
which has a unique solution pu0 , U q P V0 ˆ L2 pΩ; KD q such that U p¨, 8q “ u0

a.e. on Γ3 .
The convergence of the energy still holds (with obvious modifications)
and implies the strong convergence for the boundary layer term. The strong
convergence of uε,δ Ñ u0 in V0 is replaced by the standard corrector result
associated with the H-convergence of the operators Aε,δ .
The other cases for k2 and κ are modified accordingly.
353
Part V
Linear Elasticity
Part V Linear Elasticity
In this part, we investigate the interaction of homogenization and do-

main reduction, involving two small parameters in a plate-like domain with
thickness δ and periodicity ε in its large dimensions (the case of a beam-like
domain is treated in [131]).
Such a study covers two aspects: the homogenization (ε Ñ 0) and the
reduction of dimension (δ Ñ 0). For such problems, usually one studies the
cases δ goes to 0 before ε, and vice-versa. In general the two limit problems
are different (see e.g. [44, 110]). The purpose of Chapter 11 is to explore the
general situation where both parameters go to 0 independently.
The reduction of dimension is done by the standard scaling to a fixed
thickness (see the pioneer papers [44, 94]). In this setting, an appropriate
tool was introduced in [117, 118] and developed in [121, 123, 124], decom-
posing a general displacement into the sum of an elementary displacement
which is affine in the transverse dimension(s), plus a residual part. Together
with the unfolding operator, one proceed to the reduction of dimension and
homogenization processes.
The decomposition of the displacements in thin structures has been also
used in [22–24, 127–130] in particular for the homogenization of the junction
of rods and 3D domains or plates.
In nonlinear elasticity for deformations of beams or shells and for struc-
tures made of beams, similar decompositions are considered in [25–27]. These
decompositions are applied to obtain the asymptotic behavior of structures
made of a plate and a beam [28, 29].
357
Chapter 11
Homogenization of an
elastic thin plate
This chapter concerns the modeling of a thin elastic plate Ωδ “ ωˆp´δ, δq. Its
thickness is 2δ, pδ P p0, 1qq, and its mid-surface ω is a bounded domain in R2
with Lipschitz boundary. The plate is made of mix of materials periodically
distributed in cells isometric to the domain p0, εq2 ˆp´δ, δq. Both parameters
ε and δ are assumed to go to zero.
Supposing that the limit
ε
θ“ lim P r0, `8s
pε,δqÑp0,0q δ
exists (which is always true, at least for a subsequence), a limit problem is
obtained. Varying θ, this gives rise to a continuum of limit problems. It
is also shown that the limit problem corresponding to θ “ 0 is the same as
the one obtained when homogenization is carried out first (ε Ñ 0) followed
by dimension reduction (δ Ñ 0), while the limit problem for θ “ `8 is
the same as the one obtained when dimension reduction is performed before
homogenization. These two limits are usually different.
Section 11.1 introduces the plate and recalls results concerning the de-
composition of plate displacements. A displacement u is decomposed into the
sum of an elementary displacement Ue , affine along the fibers tx1 u ˆ p´δ, δq
(x1 P ω) and a residual part u. The elementary displacement represents the
displacement of the mid-surface ω and the small rotations of the fibers (see
Definition 11.2). The residual part is the warping: it takes into account the
deformations of the fibers. A Korn inequality adapted to the decomposition
is established.
Section 11.2 presents the general hypotheses for the study of the linear
elasticity problem in this setting.
Section 11.3 introduces the classical unfolding operator Tε in ω (associated
.
with the unit cell Y 1 “ p0, 1q2 q, and a rescaling operator Tδ in the direction

11.1. Geometry and preliminary results
of the thickness of the plate, the latter in order to work in a fixed domain
of thickness 2. Rewriting the estimates obtained in the preceding section
highlights the role of the limit θ.
Section 11.4 is dedicated to an “abstract” unfolding result with two pa-
rameters which is used in the sequel.
In Section 11.5, Proposition 11.12 gives the asymptotic behavior of the
rescaled strain tensor in Ω “ ω ˆ p´1, 1q and Proposition 11.13 gives the
same for the rescaled and unfolded tensor in ω ˆ Y with respect to θ, where
Y “ Y 1 ˆ p´1, 1q.
Theorem 11.19 in Section 11.6 presents the unfolded and rescaled limit
elasticity problem.
Section 11.7 gives the homogenized limit via the mid-surface displacement
as the solution of a problem posed in ω and depending on θ.
Finally, Section 11.8 considers the two problems where dimension reduc-
tion is performed before homogenization and vice-versa, then proves the con-
tinuity of the limit mid-surface displacement with respect to θ in r0, `8s.
11.1 Geometry and preliminary results

11.1.1 The plate and notations
The set te1 , e2 , e3 u is the usual orthonormal basis for R3 . Let ω be a bounded
domain in R2 with Lipschitz boundary, and let γ0 be a subset of Bω with non
null measure. For δ P p0, 1q, the plate is the domain
.
Ωδ “ ω ˆ p´δ, δq.
It is clamped (i.e. with zero displacement) on the part Γ0,δ of its lateral
boundary
.
Γ0,δ “ γ0 ˆ p´δ, δq,
The displacement of the clamped plate belongs to the space IDδ defined below.
We will also use the space IDM :
. (
IDδ “ u P H 1 pΩδ q3 | u “ 0 on Γ0,δ ,
. (11.1)
IDM “ Hγ10 pωq ˆ Hγ10 pωq ˆ Hγ20 pωq.
Here, Hγ10 pωq is the same as the space H01 pω; γ0 q with the notations of Chap-
ter 4, and Hγ20 pωq is the subspace of H 2 pωq of functions which vanish on γ0
as well as their first derivatives (equivalently, their normal derivative).
Notation 11.1.
1. In this chapter the latin indices i, j, k, l belong to t1, 2, 3u while the greek
indices α, β, α1 , β 1 belong to t1, 2u. We also use the Einstein summation
convention on repeated indices (unless indicated otherwise).
2. The mid-surface component of every x “ px1 , x2 , x3 q in Ωδ is denoted
.
x1 “ px1 , x2 q P ω.
360
Chapter 11. Homogenization of an elastic thin plate
3. The calligraphic letters (e.g. U, R, . . .) are used for functions or fields

defined on ω.
4. Fields depending on the variable x3 (resp. y3 )(1) which satisfy the three
vanishing average conditions ( i “ 1, 2, 3)
żδ ż1
` ˘
u8 i p¨, x3 q dx3 “ 0 resp. 8 p¨, y3 q dy3 “ 0
ψ (11.2)
i
´δ ´1
8 ψ8 . . . ).
are indicated with the modifier 8 (e.g., u,
5. Similarly, fields satisfying (11.2) as well as the two extra vanishing mo-
ment conditions (α “ 1, 2)
żδ ż1
x3 uα p¨, x3 q dx3 “ 0 presp. y3 ψ α p¨, y3 q dy3 “ 0q, (11.3)
´δ ´1
are indicated with an overbar (e.g. u, ψ . . . ).

6. Recall the strain tensor peij q1ďi,jď3 , defined for every u in H 1 pΩδ q3 :
´ Bui ¯
. 1 Buj . 1` ˘
eij puq “ ` , epuq “ ∇u ` p∇uqT .
2 Bxi Bxj 2
Its kernel consists of the set of rigid displacements (in R3 ), defined as
tR : x ÞÑ a ` b ^ x | a, b P R3 u.
11.1.2 A decomposition for the plate displacements

Definition 11.2 (elementary and residual displacements). Elementary dis-
placement are elements ue of H 1 pΩδ q3 satisfying for a.e. x “ px1 , x3 q P Ωδ
(where x1 P ω)
ue,1 pxq “ U1 px1 q ` x3 R1 px1 q,
ue,2 pxq “ U2 px1 q ` x3 R2 px1 q,
ue,3 pxq “ U3 px1 q.
Here
U “ pU1 , U2 , U3 q P H 1 pωq3 and R “ R1 e1 ` R2 e2 P H 1 pωq2 .
Elementary displacements are a generalization of the notion of Kirchhoff-

Love displacement(2) . The first part Upx1 q of the elementary displacement is
(1) Simultaneous dependence upon both x3 and y3 never occurs.
(2) A Kirchhoff-Love displacement is a displacement of the form
´ BU3 1 ¯
ue pxq “ Uα px1 q ´ x3 px q eα ` U3 px1 qe3 , for a.e. x “ px1 , x3 q P Ωδ .
Bx1
361
the mid-surface displacement at the point x1 P ω, while x3 Rpx1 q represents

the small linearized rotation(3) of the fiber tx1 u ˆ p´δ, δq.
Residual displacements are elements u of H 1 pΩδ q3 which satisfy (see No-
tation 11.1-5) the five conditions
żδ żδ
ui px1 , x3 q dx3 “ x3 uα px1 , x3 q dx3 “ 0 for a.e. x1 P ω. (11.4)
´δ ´δ
Definition 11.3 (Decomposition of a displacement). Every displacement u

in H 1 pΩδ q3 is uniquely decomposed as the sum
u “ ue ` u (11.5)
of an elementary displacement ue and a residual displacement u P H 1 pΩδ q3 .

Due to the properties of the residual part, the components U and R of ue are
given for a.e. x1 P ω, by
ż
1 1 δ
U px q “ upx1 , x3 q dx3 ,
2δ ´δ
żδ (11.6)
1 3 ` 1 1
˘
Rpx q “ 3 x3 u1 px , x3 qe1 ` u2 px , x3 qe2 dx3 .
2δ ´δ
The sum
Um “ U1 e1 ` U2 e2 ,
is the membrane displacement, while U3 represents the bending of the mid-
surface. The residual part u is the warping; it stands for the deformation of
the fibers tx1 u ˆ p´δ, δq.
With the above notations, the explicit expressions of the components of
the strain tensor of u are
BU1 BR1 Bu1 BU2 BR2 Bu2
e11 puq “ ` x3 ` , e22 puq “ ` x3 ` ,
Bx1 Bx1 Bx1 Bx2 Bx2 Bx2
1 ´” BU1 BU2 ı ” BR
1 BR2 ı ” Bu1 Bu2 ı¯
e12 puq “ ` ` x3 ` ` ` ,
2 Bx2 Bx1 Bx2 Bx1 Bx2 Bx1
´”
1 BU3 ı ” Bu3 Bu1 ı¯
e13 puq “ ` R1 ` ` , (11.7)
2 Bx1 Bx1 Bx3
1 ´” BU3 ı ” Bu
3 Bu2 ı¯
e23 puq “ ` R2 ` ` ,
2 Bx2 Bx2 Bx3
Bu3
e33 puq “ .
Bx3
Theorem 11.4, stated below, was proved in [124].
(3) The axis of this small rotation is directed by the vector R px1 qe ´ R px1 qe and its
2 1 1 2
angle is approximately equal to the euclidean norm of this vector. Here, in the framework
of small displacements, the symmetric part of the rotation is neglected.
362
Theorem 11.4. Let u be a displacement in H 1 pΩδ q3 and pU, R, uq be its

decomposition given by Definition 11.3. Then,
› › › › C
δ ›eαβ pRq›L2 pωq ` ›eαβ pUq›L2 pωq ď 1{2 }epuq}L2 pΩδ q ,
δ
› BU › (11.8)
› 3 › C
› ` Rα › ď 1{2 }epuq}L2 pΩδ q ,
Bxα L2 pωq δ
}u}L2 pΩδ q ď C δ }epuq}L2 pΩδ q ,

(11.9)
}∇u}L2 pΩδ q ď C}epuq}L2 pΩδ q ,
with a constant C independent of δ.
11.1.3 Rescaling of the plate and Korn type inequalities

The reference plate is the domain
.
Ω1 “ ω ˆ p´1, 1q,
denoted Ω for simplicity.

We rescale Ωδ to Ω in the vertical direction.
Definition 11.5 (The rescaling operator Tδ ). For every measurable function

Ψ over Ωδ , we define the measurable function Tδ pΨq over Ω by
Tδ pΨqpx1 , y3 q “ Ψpx1 , δy3 q for a.e. px1 , y3 q P Ω.
For every Ψ P L2 pΩδ q, Tδ pΨq satisfies
1
} Tδ pΨq}L2 pΩq “ ? }Ψ}L2 pΩδ q .
δ
The next proposition gives a Korn-type inequality for displacements in the

space H 1 pΩδ q3 .
Proposition 11.6. For every u in H 1 pΩδ q3 , there exists a rigid displacement

R in R3 such that v “ u ´ R satisfies
}vα }L2 pΩδ q ` δ}v3 }L2 pΩδ q ď C}epuq}L2 pΩδ q ,

ÿ2 › Bv › › Bv ›
› α› › 3›
› › 2 `› › ď C}epuq}L2 pΩδ q ,
α,β“1
Bx β L pΩδ q Bx3 L2 pΩδ q (11.10)
ÿ
2 ´› Bv › › Bv › ¯ C
› α› › 3›
› › 2 `› › 2 ď }epuq}L2 pΩδ q .
α“1
Bx3 L pΩδ q Bxα L pΩδ q δ
The constant does not depend on δ.
363
Proof. The displacement u is decomposed as (11.5). Below we show that

there exists a rigid displacement R such that ve “ ue ´ R satisfies the esti-
mates (11.10). Combining with (11.9), this prove the proposition.
Consider the displacement Ue “ Tδ pue q on Ω. For a.e. px1 , y3 q P Ω,
Ue,1 px1 , y3 q “ U1 px1 q ` y3 δ R1 px1 q,

Ue,2 px1 , y3 q “ U2 px1 q ` y3 δ R2 px1 q,
Ue,3 px1 , y3 q “ U3 px1 q.
re “ .
The displacement U Ue,α eα ` δUe,3 e3 belongs to H 1 pΩq3 and its strain
re qp¨, y3 q is given a.e. in Ω by
tensor ex1 ,y3 pU
¨ ¯˛
δ ´ BU3
˚ e 11 pU q ` y 3 δe 11 pRq e 12 pUq ` y 3 δe 12 pRq ` R 1 ‹
˚ 2 ´ Bx1 ¯‹
˚ δ BU3 ‹
˚e12 pU q ` y3 δe12 pRq e22 pUq ` y3 δe11 pRq ` R2 ‹ .
˚ 2 Bx ‹
˝ δ ´ BU3 ¯ δ ´ BU3 ¯ 2
‚
` R1 ` R2 0
2 Bx1 2 Bx2
Estimates (11.8) give
re q}L2 pΩq ď C }epuq}L2 pΩ q .

}ex1 ,y3 pU δ
δ 1{2
Using the first Korn inequality (see (2.13) in Proposition 2.11), there exist a
rigid displacement R r and a constant C which only depends on Ω
¨ ˛
a1 ´ b3 x2 ` δb2 y3
˚ ‹
. ˚
r 1 , y3 q “ ‹
Rpx ˚ a2 ` b3 x1 ´ δb1 y3 ‹ for px1 , y3 q P Ω,
˝ ‚
δa3 ` δb1 x2 ´ δb2 x1
such that,
re ´ R}
}U re q}L2 pΩq ď C }epuq}L2 pΩ q .
r H 1 pΩq ď C}ex1 ,y pU
3 δ
δ 1{2
After a simple calculation, this reduces to
› › › › C
›U 1 ´ a 1 ` b 3 x 2 › ` δ ›R1 ´ b2 ›H 1 pωq ď 1{2 }epuq}L2 pΩδ q ,
H 1 pωq δ
› › › › C
›U2 ´ a2 ´ b3 x1 › 1 ` δ ›R2 ` b1 › 1 ď 1{2 }epuq}L2 pΩδ q ,
H pωq H pωq δ
› › C
δ ›U3 ´ a3 ´ b1 x2 ` b2 x1 ›H 1 pωq ď 1{2 }epuq}L2 pΩδ q .
δ
Set Rpxq “ a`b^x, for all x P Ωδ , where a “ ai ei and b “ bi ei . Then, as an
immediate consequence, the displacement ve “ ue ´ R satisfies (11.10).
364
For u in IDδ (i.e., vanishing on Γ0,δ ), the formulas for its components U,
R and u ((11.3)-(11.6)) show that
U “ 0, R “ 0 a.e. on γ0 and u“0 a.e. on Γ0,δ .
Proposition 11.7. For every u in IDδ decomposed as (11.5), one has

` ˘ C
}Uα }H 1 pωq ` δ }U3 }H 1 pωq ` }R}H 1 pωq ď 1{2 }epuq}L2 pΩδ q ,
δ
}uα }L2 pΩδ q ` δ}u3 }L2 pΩδ q ď C}epuq}L2 pΩδ q ,
ÿ2 › Bu › › Bu ›
› α› › 3› (11.11)
› › 2 `› › ď C}epuq}L2 pΩδ q ,
α,β“1
Bx β L pΩ δ q Bx3 L2 pΩδ q
ÿ2 ´› › › Bu › ¯ C
› Buα › › 3›
› › 2 `› › 2 ď }epuq}L2 pΩδ q .
α“1
Bx3 L pΩδ q Bxα L pΩδ q δ
The constant does not depend on δ.

re “ 0 on γ0 ˆ p´1, 1q, where
Proof. Since U “ 0, R “ 0 a.e. on γ0 , one has U
r
Ue has been introduced in the proof of Proposition 11.6. Then the second
Korn inequality (see (2.14) in Proposition 2.11) gives
re q}L2 pΩq ď C }epuq}L2 pΩ q .

re }H 1 pΩq ď C}ex1 ,y pU
}U 3 δ
δ 1{2
The constant only depends on Ω and Γ0 . Since
› ›2 2δ 2 ›› ››
re,α }2 1
}U › ›
H pΩq “ 2 Uα H 1 pωq ` Rα H 1 pωq ,
3
› ›
re,3 }2 1
}U 2› ›2
H pΩq “ 2δ U3 H 1 pωq ,
inequality (11.11)1 follows. Estimates (11.11)2,3,4 are a consequence, taking

into account (11.9).
11.2 The linear elasticity problem

11.2.1 Hypotheses on the Hook tensor field
Set
. .
Y 1 “ p0, 1q2 , Y “ Y 1 ˆ p´1, 1q.
For a.e. x1 P R2 , one has (cf. (1.1); for simplicity, we omit the subscripts Y 1 )
x1 “ rx1 s ` tx1 u, rx1 s P Z2 , tx1 u P Y 1 .
From now on, we assume that the plate Ωδ is made up of a mix of various
linear elastic materials.
365
11.2. The linear elasticity problem
For 1 ď i, j, k, l ď 3, let aijkl be in L8 pY q and satisfy the symmetry

conditions
aijkl pyq “ ajikl pyq “ aklij pyq for a.e. y P Y,
as well as the coercivity condition
aijkl pyqτij τkl ě c0 τij τij for a.e. y P Y (11.12)
for every symmetric matrix τ “ pτij q of order 3 (c0 is a given strictly positive
number).
The coefficients aε,δijkl of the Hooke tensor are then given by
´! x1 ) x ¯
3
aε,δ
ijkl pxq “ a ijkl , for a.e. x P Ωδ .
ε δ
The constitutive law of the materials is the classical relation between the
strain tensor and the stress tensor,
ε,δ
σij pvq “ aε,δ
ijkl ekl pvq, @v P IDδ . (11.13)
For given applied forces fδ (to simplify the presentation, we consider only
body forces), the displacement uε,δ P IDδ of the plate is the solution of the
following elasticity problem:
$ż ż
& ε,δ
σij puε,δ q eij pvq dx “ fδ pxq ¨ vpxq dx
Ωδ Ωδ (11.14)
%
@v P IDδ .
11.2.2 Assumptions on the forces and a priori estimate

We make the assumption that the applied body forces fδ are of the form
` ˘
fδ pxq “ δ fα px1 q ` x3 gα px1 q eα ` δ 2 f3 px1 qe3 for a.e. x P Ωδ ,
where f “ pf1 , f2 , f3 q is in L2 pωq3 and g “ pg1 , g2 q in L2 pωq2 .
This allows to obtain an a priori estimate as follows. Using the decompo-
sition (11.5) for a u P IDδ , one can write
ż ż ż ż
1 δ3
fδ ¨ u dx “ δ 2 fα Uα dx1 ` gα Rα dx1 ` δ 3 f3 U3 dx1 ,
2 Ωδ ω 3 ω ω
where the warping u does not appear (in view of the conditions (11.4) which
it satisfies).
From estimates (11.11)1,2 , one deduces an upper bound for this integral:
ˇż ˇ ` ˘
ˇ ˇ
ˇ fδ pxq ¨ upxq dxˇ ď Cδ 3{2 }f }L2 pωq ` }g}L2 pωq }epuq}L2 pΩδ q .
Ωδ
Applying this estimate for u “ uε,δ taken as test function in (11.14), gives
the estimate
` ˘
}epuε,δ q}L2 pΩδ q ď Cδ 3{2 }f }L2 pωq ` }g}L2 pωq .
366
Definition 11.8. To simplify the notations, for every u P H 1 pΩδ q3 , set

.
Npuq “ Nδ puq “ δ ´3{2 }epuq}L2 pΩδ q .
The last inequality now simply reads

` ˘
Npuε,δ q ď C }f }L2 pωq ` }g}L2 pωq . (11.15)
In the following sections we study the asymptotic behavior of the sequence

tuε,δ uε,δ when both parameters ε and δ go to 0.
11.3 Unfolding the rescaled plate

From now on, we will use the usual unfolding operator in ω, as well as in
Ω (where y3 is a parameter in the vertical direction).(4) The subset of ω
r ε.
included in the ε-cells intersecting its boundary Bω is denoted Λ
At some point we may identify Ω ˆ Y 1 with ω ˆ Y (5) .
Definition 11.9 (The unfolding operators). The unfolding Tε pψ 1 q (resp.

Tε pψq) of a measurable function ψ 1 defined on ω, (resp. ψ on Ω) is mea-
surable on ω ˆ Y 1 (resp. on Ω ˆ Y 1 ) and given by
´ ” x1 ı ¯
Tε pψ 1 qpx1 , y 1 q “ ψ 1 ε ` εy 1 for a.e. px1 , y 1 q P ω
pε ˆ Y 1 ,
ε
Tε pψ 1 qpx1 , y 1 q “ 0 for a.e. r ε ˆ Y 1,
px1 , y 1 q P Λ
respectively,
´ ” x1 ı ¯
Tε pψqpx1 , y 1 , y3 q “ ψ ε ` εy 1 , y3 for a.e. px1 , y 1 , y3 q P ω
pε ˆ Y,
ε
1
Tε pψqpx, y , y3 q “ 0 for a.e. r ε ˆ Y.q
px1 , y 1 q P Λ
We recall (see Section 1.1) that if ψ 1 is in L2 pωq then Tε pψ 1 q satisfies
}Tε pψ 1 q}L2 pωˆY 1 q ď }ψ 1 }L2 pωq .
A similar estimate holds for ψ in L2 pΩq.

Finally, to simplify the presentation, introduce the
Notation 11.10 (The rescaling-unfolding operator for thin plates).

.
Tε,δ “ Tε ˝ Tδ .
(4) See Section 1.5 for notations and details.
(5) The variables in the former are px1 , x3 , y1 , y2 q, while they are px1 , y1 , y2 , y3 q in the
latter, so the identification consists of replacing x3 by y3 .
367
11.4. An unfolding result with two parameters
Estimates (11.9) of u, transposed by Tδ in the rescaled domain Ω, are

now
} Tδ puq}L2 pΩq ď Cδ 2 Npuq
› B T puq ›
› δ ›
› › ď CδNpuq,
Bxα L2 pΩq (11.16)
› B T puq ›
› δ ›
› › ď Cδ 2 Npuq.
By3 L2 pΩq
The same estimates (11.9) of u, transposed by Tε,δ in ω ˆ Y , become
} Tε,δ puq}L2 pωˆY q ď Cδ 2 Npuq

› B T puq ›
› ε,δ › ε
› › 2 ď CεδNpuq “ C δ 2 Npuq,
Byα L pωˆY q δ (11.17)
› B T puq ›
› ε,δ ›
› › 2 ď Cδ 2 Npuq.
By3 L pωˆY q
From now on, assume that

ε
pε, δq Ñ p0, 0q and lim “ θ P r0, `8s. (11.18)
δ
In view of estimates (11.17), we are led to distinguish three cases, namely
θ “ 0, θ P p0, `8q, θ “ `8.
11.4 An unfolding result with two parameters

We give here a general unfolding result involving two parameters (ε and δ,
both supposed to go to 0). In this section (and only in this section), we go
back to the notations of Part I, namely Ω is assumed to be a bounded` domain˘
in RN , the basis of G (for simplicity) is the usual euclidean basis e1 , . . . , eN
and Y “ p0, 1qN .
Both ε and δ are positive and converge to 0.
Lemma 11.11. Suppose p P p1, `8q. Assume (11.18) holds (and defines θ).
Let tpuε,δ , vε,δ quε,δ be a sequence converging weakly to pu, vq in the space
W 1,p pΩqˆW 1,p pΩqN . Assume furthermore that there exist X in Lp pΩqN and
1,p
vp in Lp pΩ; Wper,0 pY qqN such that
1` ˘
∇uε,δ ` vε,δ á X weakly in Lp pΩqN ,
δ (11.19)
Tε p∇vε,δ q á ∇v ` ∇y vp weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN .
Then u belongs to W 2,p pΩq, and one of the following assertions, depending
on the values of θ, holds:
368
(i) if θ is finite, there exists p 1,p

u P Lp pΩ; Wper,0 pY qq such that, up to a subse-
quence,
1 ` ˘
Tε ∇uε,δ ` vε,δ á X ` ∇y p
u ` θ vp weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN . (11.20)
δ
(ii) if θ “ `8, there exists p 1,p

u in Lp pΩ; Wper,0 pY q X Wper
2,p
pY qq such that
vp “ ∇y p
u. (11.21)
Proof. Step 1. Proof of the assertion u P W 2,p pΩq.

Passing to the limit in assumption (11.19)1 implies that
∇u “ ´v. (11.22)
The latter belongs to W 1,p pΩqN , so u is in W 2,p pΩq and
∇v “ ´D2 puq (the Hessian of uq. (11.23)
By Theorem 1.41 , up to a subsequence, Tε pvε,δ q converges weakly to some

1,p
v in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q and there exists a function u
p in Lp pΩ; Wper,0 pY qq such that
Tε p∇uε,δ q á ∇u ` ∇y u
Consequently,
p`v “ 0
∇u ` ∇y u a.e. in Ω ˆ Y.
Together with (11.22), this implies ∇y u
p “ 0. Thus u
p “ 0 (since MY pp
uq “ 0
a.e. in Ω). By Theorem 1.41 and Corollary 1.43, it follows that
1` ˘
Tε puε,δ q ´ uε,δ 1Ωp ε á y c ¨ ∇u,
ε
1 ` ˘
Tε vε,δ q ´ vε,δ 1Ωp ε á ∇v ¨ y c ` vp “ ´D2 u ¨ y c ` vp, (11.24)
ε
1 ` ˘
Tε vε,δ ´ Mε pvε,δ q á ∇v ¨ y c ` vp “ ´D2 u ¨ y c ` vp,
ε
all weakly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qqN .

Step 2. Proof of convergence (11.20).
From (11.18) there exists a finite C (independent of ε and δ) such that
0 ă ε ď Cδ. (11.25)
Introduce the function Zε,δ belonging to Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq, defined as
1 ` ˘
Zε,δ “ Tε uε,δ ´ Mε puε,δ q ´ y c ¨ ∇uε,δ 1Ωp ε .
ε
369
11.4. An unfolding result with two parameters
Its gradient with respect to y is

` ˘
∇y Zε,δ “ Tε ∇uε,δ ´ ∇uε,δ 1Ωp ε
` ` ˘ ˘ ` ˘ (11.26)
“ Tε ∇uε,δ ` vε,δ ´ p∇uε,δ ` vε,δ q1Ωp ε ´ Tε pvε,δ q ´ vε,δ 1Ωp ε .
Convergence (11.19)2 on one side and estimate (1.38)2 (together with the
fact that }∇vε,δ }Lp pΩq is bounded), give
}∇y Zε,δ }Lp pΩˆY qN ď Cpδ ` εq ď Cδ.
The latter inequality used (11.25).

Since MY pZε,δ q “ 0 a.e. in Ω, the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality implies
}Zε,δ }Lp pΩ;W 1,p pY qq ď Cδ.
Consequently, up to a subsequence, there exists Zp in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq such

that,
1
Zε,δ á Zp weakly in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq. (11.27)
δ
By (11.26)
1 ` ˘ 1 ε Tε pvε,δ q ´ vε,δ 1Ωp ε 1

Tε ∇uε,δ ` vε,δ “ ∇y Zε,δ ` ` p∇uε,δ ` vε,δ q1Ωp ε ,
δ δ δ ε δ
and going to the limit, using (11.27), (11.24)2 and (11.19),
1 ` ˘
Tε ∇uε,δ ` vε,δ
δ
` ˘
á ∇y Zp ` θ ∇v ¨ y c ` vp ` X weakly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y qN . (11.28)
. Bvi c
Here, ∇v ¨ y c is given component-wise by p∇v ¨ y c qi “ ∇vi ¨ y c “ y
Bxj j
(i “ 1, . . . , N ), or in terms of u, by (11.23),
ˆ 2 ˙
B2 u 1 B B u
p∇v ¨ y c qi “ yjc “ yjc ykc .
Bxi Bxj 2 Byi Bxj Bxk
In other words,
ˆ ¯˙
1 B2 u ´ c c
∇v ¨ y “ D u ¨ y “ ∇y
c 2 c
y y ´ MY pyj yk q (6).
c c
2 Bxj Bxk j k
Going back to (11.28), one concludes by setting

ˆ 2 ¯˙
. p θ B u ´ c c
p
u“Z` y y ´ MY pyj yk q
c c
.
2 Bxj Bxk j k
(6) Note that for j ‰ k, MY pyjc ykc q “ MY pyjc qMY pykc q “ 0.
370
Step 3. Proof of the existence of p

u when θ “ `8.
We will show that the following necessary and sufficient condition is sat-
isfied for the existence of p
u in Lp pΩ; Wper
2,p
pY qq such that ∇y p
u “ vp, in view of
the fact that vp is in L pΩ; Wper pY qq:
p 1,p
ż ż
Bφ Bφ
vpi dxdy “ vpj dxdy, @φ P DpΩq b Cper
1
pY q, (11.29)
ΩˆY Byj ΩˆY Byi
for pi, jq P t1, . . . , N u2 with i ‰ j.

Indeed, if (11.29) is true, it implies that
Bp
vi Bp
vj
“ ,
Byj Byi
hence pu exists in Lp pΩ; W 2,p pY qq and an integration by parts proves that p

u
is Y -periodic.
We now prove (11.29). By convergence (11.19)1 , }∇uε,δ `vε,δ }Lp pΩq ď Cδ,
so the next two estimates successively hold:
}Mε p∇uε,δ q ` Mε pvε,δ q}Lp pΩq ď Cδ,

›` ˘ ` ˘› (11.30)
› ∇uε,δ ´ Mε p∇uε,δ q ` vε,δ ´ Mε pvε,δ q › p ď Cδ.
L pΩq
Therefore,
1 ››` ˘ ` ˘› δ
∇uε,δ ´ Mε p∇uε,δ q ` vε,δ ´ Mε pvε,δ q ›Lp pΩq ď C Ñ 0.
ε ε
This, together with (11.24)3 and (11.30), gives the weak convergence,
1 ` ˘
Tε ∇uε,δ ´ Mε p∇uε,δ q á D2 u ¨ y c ´ vp in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qqN . (11.31)
ε
For φ in DpΩq b Cper

1
pY q and pi, jq P t1, . . . , N u2 , perform the following
computation:
ż ż
1 ” ´ Buε,δ ¯ ´ Bu ¯ı Bφ
ε,δ 1 ´ Buε,δ ¯ Bφ
Tε ´ Mε dxdy “ Tε dxdy
ΩˆY ε Bxi Bxi Byj ΩˆY ε Bxi Byj
ż
1 BTε puε,δ q Bφ
“ dxdy
ΩˆY ε
2 Byi Byj
ż
1 BTε puε,δ q Bφ
“ dxdy
ε2 Byj Byi
żΩˆY
1 ´ Buε,δ ¯ Bφ
“ Tε dxdy
ε Bxj Byi
żΩˆY ” ´
1 Buε,δ ¯ ´ Bu ¯ı Bφ
ε,δ
“ Tε ´ Mε dxdy.
ΩˆY ε Bx j Bx j Byi
371
11.5. Asymptotic behavior of the strain tensor
Passing to the limit and using (11.31), one obtains (note that Einstein’s
convention is not used here),
ż ´ÿ
N ¯ Bφ ż ´ÿ
N ¯ Bφ
B2 u c B2 u c
yk ´ vpi dxdy “ yk ´ vpj dxdy.
ΩˆY k“1
Bxi Bxk Byj ΩˆY k“1
Bxj Bxk Byi
From the periodicity of φ,

ż1 ż
Bφ Bφ
dyj “ 0 so that for i ‰ j, yic dy “ 0.
0 Byj Y Byj
Therefore, the last equality reduces to (11.29).
11.5 Asymptotic behavior of the strain tensor

In this subsection we investigate the behavior of a sequence tuε,δ upε,δq in IDδ
for which (cf. estimate (11.15)),
Npuε,δ q ď C. (11.32)
We denote by Uε,δ , Rε,δ and uε,δ the terms of the decomposition of uε,δ
(see (11.5) in Subsection 11.1.2).
11.5.1 Limit of the rescaled strain tensor

We start by introducing the spaces
! ˇ
1
Hper pY 1 q “ φ P H 1 pY 1 q ˇ φp0, y2 q “ φp1, y2 q for a.e. y2 P p0, 1q
)
φpy1 , 0q “ φpy1 , 1q for a.e. y1 P p0, 1q ,
! ˇ )
.
H per
1
pY q “ ψ P H 1 pY q ˇ ψ|y1 “0 “ ψ|y1 “1 , ψ|y2 “0 “ ψ|y2 “1 ,
! ż ż1 )
. ˇ 1
3 ˇ
Dw “ φ P L pω; H p´1, 1qq
2 1
φi p¨, y3 q dy3 “ y3 φα p¨, y3 q dy3 “ 0 .
´1 ´1
Note that the space H per

1
pY q defined here (with periodicity with respect to
the first two dimensions only) is different from the space Hper1
pY q used in
previous chapters (where periodicity is in all dimensions).
Proposition 11.12. Under hypothesis (11.32) and assumption (11.18), there

exist
Um “ pU1 , U2 q P Hγ10 pωq2 , U3 P Hγ20 pωq, Z P L2 pωq2 , u P Dw ,
372
such that, up to a subsequence, the following convergences hold:

1
Uε,δ,m á Um weakly in Hγ10 pωq2 ,
δ
Uε,δ,3 ÝÑ U3 strongly in Hγ10 pωq,
Rε,δ á ´∇U3 weakly in Hγ10 pωq2 ,
1` ˘ (11.33)
∇Uε,δ,3 ` Rε,δ á Z weakly in L2 pωq2 ,
δ
1
Tδ puε,δ q á u weakly in Dw ,
δ2
1
Tδ puε,δ q á 0 weakly in H 1 pΩq3 ,
δ
as well as,
1 BU3
Tδ puε,δ,α q á Uα ´ y3 weakly in H 1 pΩq,
δ Bxα (11.34)
Tδ puε,δ,3 q á U3 weakly in H 1 pΩq.(7)
Set
u8 “ u ` y3 Zα eα .
Then
¨ ˛
1 B u8 1
E11 pUq E12 pUq
˚ 2 By3 ‹
˚ ‹
˚ ‹
1 ` ˘ ˚˚ 1 B u8 2 ‹
‹
Tδ epuε,δ q á ˚E12 pUq E22 pUq ‹ weakly in L2 pΩq9 , (11.35)
δ ˚ 2 By3 ‹
˚ ‹
˚ ‹
˝ 1 B u8 1 1 B u8 2 B u8 3 ‚
2 By3 2 By3 By3
where
B 2 U3
U “ pUm , U3 q, Eαβ pUq “ eαβ pUm q ´ y3 .
Bxα Bxβ
Furthermore, there exist
U pα P L2 pω; H 1 pY 1 qq
pα , R per,0 and Zpα P L2 pω ˆ Y 1 q,
with MY 1 pZpα q “ 0 a.e. in ω, such that

1 pα weakly in L2 pω ˆ Y 1 q2 ,
Tε p∇Uε,δ,α q á ∇Uα ` ∇y1 U
δ
Tε p∇Rε,δ q á ´D2 U3 ` ∇y1 R p weakly in L2 pω ˆ Y 1 q2ˆ2 , (11.36)
1 ` ˘
Tε ∇Uε,δ,3 ` Rε,δ á Z ` Zp weakly in L2 pω ˆ Y 1 q2 .
δ
(7) This mean that the original displacement in the domain Ω is asymptotically of
δ
Kirchhoff-Love type.
373
There are three cases according to the value of θ.

Case 1. If θ “ 0, there exist u p in L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1 p3 in L2 pω; H 1 pY 1 qq
pY 1 qq3 , U per,0
satisfying
ż1 ż1
p
u i p¨, y3 q dy3 “ p α p¨, y3 q dy3 “ 0 a.e. in ω ˆ Y 1 ,
y3 u (11.37)
´1 ´1
and such that

1 ` ˘
2
Tε,δ uε,δ á u weakly in L2 pω; H 1 pY qq3 ,
δ ` ˘
1 B Tε,δ uε,δ Bup (11.38)
á weakly in L2 pω ˆ Y q3 ,
εδ Byα Byα
Zp “ ∇y1 U p3 .
Case 2. If θ P p0, `8q, there exist up in L2 pω; H 1per pY qq3 satisfying (11.37)
p3 in L2 pω; H 1 pY 1 qq such that
and as before U per,0
1 ` ˘
p
Tε,δ uε,δ á u ` u weakly in L2 pω; H 1 pY qq3 ,
δ 2
(11.39)
Zp “ ∇y1 U p
p3 ` θR.
p in L2 pω ˆ Y 1 ; H 1 p´1, 1qq3 satisfying (11.37)

Case 3. If θ “ `8, there exist u
p 1
and U3 in L pω; Hper,0 pY qq such that
2 2
1 ` ˘
Tε,δ uε,δ á u ` u p weakly in L2 pω ˆ Y 1 ; H 1 p´1, 1qq3 ,
δ 2
1 B Tε,δ puε,δ q (11.40)

á 0 weakly in L2 pω ˆ Y q3 ,
εδ Byα
p “ ´∇y1 U
R p3 .
Proof. The sequence tuε,δ uε,δ satisfies Npuε,δ q ď C. Therefore, the inequali-
ties of (11.11)1 give the convergences (11.33)1,2 and
Rε,δ á R weakly in Hγ10 pωq2 ,
BU3
where R P Hγ10 pωq2 . Equality “ ´Rα and (11.33)4 are consequences
Bxα
of (11.8)2 . Estimates (11.16) and equalities (11.4) yield (11.33)5,6 .
Convergences (11.34) follow from (11.33), while convergence (11.35) is
also a consequence of (11.33) and of the expression (11.7) of the strain tensor.
Then (11.36) is obtained by applying Theorem 1.41.
For the residual displacement uε,δ , estimates (11.17) and (11.32) imply
›1 › › 1 B T pu q ›
› › › ε,δ ε,δ ›
› 2 Tε,δ puε,δ q› 2 `› 2 › 2 ď C,
δ L pωˆY q δ By3 L pωˆY q
374
and › 1 B T pu q › › 1 B T pu q ›
› ε,δ ε,δ › › ε,δ ε,δ › ε
› 2 › 2 `› 2 › 2 ď C.
δ By1 L pωˆY q δ By2 L pωˆY q δ
Then convergences (11.38)1 and (11.38)2 follow by using Lemma 1.44, and
convergences (11.39)1 by using Theorem 1.36 and (11.40). On the other hand,
convergences (11.33)1 , (11.33)3 , (11.33)5 and Lemma 11.11, give (11.38)3
and (11.39)2 .
In the case θ “ `8, observe that
›1 › › 1 B T pu q ›
› › › ε,δ ε,δ › ε
› Tε,δ puε,δ q› 2 `› › 2 ď C,
εδ L pωˆY q εδ By3 L pωˆY q δ
and › 1 B T pu q › › 1 B T pu q ›
› ε,δ ε,δ › › ε,δ ε,δ ›
› › 2 `› › 2 ď C.
εδ By1 L pωˆY q εδ By2 L pωˆY q
As a consequence,
1
Tε,δ puε,δ q á 0 weakly in L2 pω; H 1 pY qq3 ,
εδ
from which convergence (11.40)2 is straightforward. Finally, Lemma 11.11
p3 in L2 pω; H 2 pY 1 qq satisfying MY 1 pU
provides the existence of U p3 q “ 0 a.e.
per
in ω, and such that Rp “ ´∇y1 Up3 .
11.5.2 Limit of the unfolded scaled strain tensor

As a consequence of Proposition 11.12, we can give the different weak limits
of the unfolded and rescaled strain tensor in L2 pω ˆ Y q9 . Before doing so,
we introduce some spaces and notations which will be needed in the sequel.
‚ The plate mid-surface limit displacements
The mid-surface limit displacements are elements of IDM (see (11.1)). For
every V belonging to IDM , the associated membrane displacement is denoted
Vm “ pV1 , V2 q or V1 e1 ` V2 e2 , while the bending is denoted V3 . Thus,
V “ pVm , V3 q “ pV1 , V2 , V3 q.
For V in IDM , define the symmetric matrix EM pVq as
¨ ˛
E11 pVq E12 pVq 0
˚ ‹
˚ ‹
EM pVq “ ˚E12 pVq E22 pVq 0‹
˚
‹,
˝ ‚
0 0 0
where
B 2 V3
Eαβ pVq “ eαβ pVm q ´ y3 .
Bxα Bxβ
375
‚ The warping displacements

They are the relative displacements of the vertical fibers, and belong to the
space L2 pω; Wq where (see (11.2)),
! ˇ ż1 )
ˇ
W “ ψ8 P H 1 p´1, 1q3 ˇ 8 3 q dy3 “ 0 .
ψpy
´1
` ˘
For every v8 P L2 pω; Wq, define the symmetric matrix Ew v8 by
¨ ˛
1 B v81
0 0
˚ 2 By3 ‹
˚ ‹
˚ ‹
` ˘ ˚ ˚ 1 B v82 ‹
‹
Ew v8 “ ˚ 0 0 ‹.
˚ 2 By3 ‹
˚ ‹
˚ ‹
˝ 1 B v81 1 B v82 B v83 ‚
2 By3 2 By3 By3
‚ The microscopic displacements or the limit periodic cell displacements

They are defined separately in the three cases of θ.
Case 1. If θ “ 0, set
! ˇ ż )
ˇ
D0 “ ψp P L2 p´1, 1; Hper
1
pY 1 qq3 ˇ p 1 , y3 q dy 1 “ 0 for a.e. y3 P p´1, 1q
ψpy
Y1
p by
and define the symmetric tensor Ey0 pψq
¨ ˛
p p 1 B ψp3
˚e11,y1 pψq e12,y1 pψq
2 By1 ‹
˚ ‹
˚ ‹
˚ ‹
˚ 1 B ψ3 ‹
p
p “ ˚e 1 pψq ‹.
Ey0 pψq ˚ 12,y p p
e22,y1 pψq
2 By2 ‹
˚ ‹
˚ ‹
˚ ‹
˝ 1 B ψp 1 B ψp3 ‚
3
0
2 By1 2 By2
Case 2. If θ P p0, `8q, set

! ż )
ˇ
D “ ψp P H per
1
pY q ˇ p 1 , y3 q dy 1 “ 0 for a.e. y3 P p´1, 1q
ψpy
Y1
In order to simplify some notations in the statements below, we will write

Dθ instead of D for θ P p0, `8q, even though this space does not actually
depend on θ (only its norm does).
376
Introduce also the tensor

¨ ˛
p p 1 ´ B ψp3 B ψp1 ¯
˚ e11,y1 pψq e12,y1 pψq `θ
˚ 2 By1 By3 ‹ ‹
˚ ‹
˚ ´ ¯ ‹
˚ 1 B ψ3 p B ψ2 ‹
p
p “˚
Eyθ pψq p
e12,y1 pψq p
e22,y1 pψq `θ ‹.
˚ 2 By2 By3 ‹
˚ ‹
˚ ‹
˚ ‹
˝ 1 ´ B ψp B ψp1 ¯ 1 ´ B ψp3 B ψp2 ¯ p
B ψ3 ‚
3
`θ `θ θ
2 By1 By3 2 By2 By3 By3
This symmetric tensor Eyθ depends on θ and so does the associated semi-norm
(see (11.42) below) on Dθ in which it intervenes. In fact, one easily has
p L2 pY q ď p1 ` θq}ψ}
}Eyθ pψq} p H 1 pY q , @ψp P Dθ (11.41)
where C does not depend on θ.

Case 3. If θ “ `8, set
! ż
ˇ
D8 ” ψp P L2 pY 1 ;H 1 p´1, 1qq3 ˇ p 1 , y3 q dy 1 “ 0 for a.e. y3 P p´1, 1q,
ψpy
Y1
ż1 ż1 )
ψpα p¨, y3 q dy3 P Hper
1
pY 1 q, ψp3 p¨, y3 q dy3 P Hper
2
pY 1 q .
´1 ´1
Then, every ψp in D8 can be uniquely written as

” p ı ż1
ψp “ Ψp α ´ y3 B Ψ3 eα ` Ψ p
p 3 e3 ` ψ, p“
Ψ
. 1 p y3 q dy3 ,
ψp¨,
Byα 2 ´1
` ˘
where Ψ p 3 , ψp belongs to H 1 pY 1 q2 ˆ H 2 pY 1 q ˆ L2 pY 1 ; Dw q.
p m, Ψ
per per
The symmetric tensor E 8 pψqp is defined as
y
¨ ˛
p p 1 B ψp1
˚E11,y pψq E12,y pψq ‹
˚ 2 By3 ‹
˚ ‹
˚ ‹
˚ ‹
8 p ˚
p
Ey pψq “ ˚E12,y pψq p 1 B ψp2 ‹
‹,
˚ E22,y pψq
˚ 2 By3 ‹ ‹
˚ ‹
˚ ‹
˝ 1 B ψp 1 B ψp2 Bψ ‚
p
1 3
2 By3 2 By3 By3
where
2p
p m q ´ y3 B Ψ3 .
p “ eαβ,y pΨ
Eαβ,y pψq
Byα Byβ
377
Introduce the sets ID0 , IDθ (for θ P p0, `8q) and ID8 as follows:
. (
ID0 “ v “ pV, v8 , vpq P IDM ˆ L2 pω; Wq ˆ L2 pω; D0 q ,
. (
IDθ “ v “ pV, v8 , vpq P IDM ˆ L2 pω; Wq ˆ L2 pω; Dθ q (8) ,
. (
ID8 “ v “ pV, v8 , vpq P IDM ˆ L2 pω; Wq ˆ L2 pω; D8 q .
To every v in IDθ , θ P r0, `8s, we associate the symmetric tensor

` ˘
EM pVq ` Ew v8 ` Eyθ pp
v q,
and the semi-norm

` ˘
}v}θ “ }EM pVq ` Ew v8 ` Eyθ pp
v q}L2 pωˆY q . (11.42)
In Lemma 11.18 it will be shown that this semi-norm is actually a norm.

We are now in a position to give the limits of the rescaled and unfolded
strain tensor. Proposition 11.13 below completes the results of Proposi-
tion 11.12. We continue to distinguish the cases θ “ 0, θ P p0, `8q, θ “ `8.
Proposition 11.13. Under the hypotheses and with the notations of Propo-
sition 11.12,
1 ` ˘ ` ˘
Tε,δ epuε,δ q á EM pUq ` Ew u8 ` Eyθ pp
uq weakly in L2 pω ˆ Y q9 , (11.43)
δ
p is specified below in each of the three cases.
where the function u
Case 1. For θ “ 0,
u p p ¨ , y 1 q ` y3 Rp
pp ¨ , yq “ U p ¨ , y1 q ` u
pp¨, yq, p P L2 pω; D0 q.
u (11.44)
Case 2. For θ P p0, `8q
pp ¨ , yq “ U
u p ¨ , y 1 q ` 1 up
p p ¨ , y 1 q ` y3 Rp p ¨ , yq, p P L2 pω; Dθ q.
u (11.45)
θ
Case 3. For θ “ `8
” p ı
pp ¨ , yq “ U
u pα p ¨ , y 1 q ´ y3 B U3 p ¨ , y 1 q eα ` U
p3 p ¨ , y 1 qe3
Byα (11.46)
` ˘
` u pp ¨ , yq ` y3 Zpα p ¨ qeα , p P L2 pω; D8 q.
u
Observe that in the third case, since the field u p satisfies conditions (11.37),
p p
the function up ¨ , yq ` y3 Zα p ¨ qeα belongs to the space
! ż ż )
1
ˇ 1
3 ˇ
v P L pω ˆ Y ; H p´1, 1qq
2 1
vp¨, y3 q “ 0, vp¨, y 1 , y3 qdy 1 “ 0 .
´1 Y1
(8) For the same reason as for the space Dθ , the space IDθ does not depend on θ.
378
Proof of Proposition 11.13. In all three cases, it is enough to consider the

limits of the following two terms:
1 ` ˘ 1 ` ˘
Tε,δ e11 puε,δ q and Tε,δ e13 puε,δ q , (11.47)
δ δ
1 ` ˘
since the limit of all the terms of the form Tε,δ eαβ puε,δ q are obtained in
δ
1 ` ˘
the same way as the former, and the limit of Tε,δ e23 puε,δ q is obtained in
δ
1 ` ˘ 1 B Tε,δ puε,δ,3 q
the same way as the latter. The limit of Tε,δ e33 puε,δ q “ 2
δ δ By3
was already obtained in Proposition 11.12 ((11.38), (11.39) and (11.40)).
Case 1. θ “ 0. In this step, in order to treat the terms from (11.47), we

refer to Proposition 11.12, in particular to convergence (11.38), and use the
explicit expression (11.7) of the strain tensor. The result is
1 ` ˘ 1 ´ BUε,δ,1 ¯ ´ BR
ε,δ,1
¯ 1 B Tε,δ puε,δ,1 q
Tε,δ e11 puε,δ q “ Tε ` y3 T ε `
δ δ Bx1 Bx1 εδ By1
BU1 p1
BU ´ BR1 BRp1 ¯ Bup1
á ` ` y3 ` ` weakly in L2 pω ˆ Y q,
Bx1 By1 Bx1 By1 By1
and similarly,
1 ` ˘
Tε,δ e13 puε,δ q
δ
1 ” 1 ´ BUε,δ,3 ¯ 1 B Tε,δ puε,δ,1 q 1 B Tε,δ puε,δ,3 q ı
“ Tε ` Rε,δ,1 ` 2 `
2 δ Bx1 δ By3 εδ By1
1 ” Bu1 p
Bu 3 ı
á Z1 ` Zp1 ` ` weakly in L2 pω ˆ Y q.
2 By3 By1
Recalling that
BU3 p3
BU B u8 1 Bu1
Rα “ ´ , Zp1 “ , “ Z1 ` ,
Bxα By1 By3 By3
p (see (11.44)), convergence (11.43) is proved.

and introducing the field u
Case 2. θ P p0, `8q. Here again, consider the terms from (11.47). In view
of (11.39) one obtains
1 ` ˘ 1 ´ BUε,δ,1 ¯ ´ BR
ε,δ,1
BU1 p1
BU ´ BR1 BRp1 ¯ 1 Bu1
á ` ` y3 ` ` weakly in L2 pω ˆ Y q.
Bx1 By1 Bx1 By1 θ By1
379
Similarly,
1 ` ˘
Tε,δ pe13 uε,δ q
δ
“ Tε ` Rε,δ,1 ` 2 `
1 ” Bu1 p
Bu 1 p
1 Bu 3 ı
á Z1 ` Zp1 ` ` ` weakly in L2 pω ˆ Y q.
2 By3 By3 θ By1
In this case
p3
BU B u8 1 Bu1
Zp1 “ p1
` θR and “ Z1 ` .
By1 By3 By3
p (see (11.45)), we get conver-
As in the Case 1, with the help of the field u
gence (11.43).
Case 3. θ “ `8. The corresponding convergences for the terms in (11.47)
are now (see (11.40)),
1 ` ˘ 1 ´ BUε,δ,1 ¯ ´ BR
ε,δ,1
BU1 p1
BU ´ BR B 2p ¯
U
1 3
á ` ` y3 ´ weakly in L2 pω ˆ Y q,
Bx1 By1 Bx1 By12
and
1 ` ˘
Tε,δ pe13 uε,δ q
δ
“ Tε ` Rε,δ,1 ` 2 `
1 ” Bu1 p1
Bu ı
á Z1 ` ` Zp1 ` weakly in L2 pω ˆ Y q.
2 By3 By3
p (see (11.46)), convergence (11.43)

Due to (11.21), and using again the field u
follows.
As a first consequence of Proposition 11.13, we obtain the limit of the

unfolded stress tensor (11.13).
Corollary 11.14. For the rescaled and unfolded stress tensor, one has the
convergence
1
Tε,δ pσ ε,δ q á Σθ weakly in L2 pω ˆ Y q,
δ
i.e., for 1 ď i, j, k, l ď 3,
1 ε,δ ˘
Tε,δ pσij puε,δ q á Σθij “ aijkl Ekl,M pUq ` aijkl Ekl,w puq
8 ` aijkl Ekl,y
θ
pp
uq.
δ
380
Remark 11.15. As can be seen from (11.43), the tensor EM pUq ` Ew puq 8
is the limit strain tensor of the sequence tuε,δ uε,δ in the rescaled domain Ω.
The third tensor appearing in (11.43) captures the strong oscillations.
In the case θ “ 0, the cell p0, εq2 ˆ p´δ, δq looks like a thin beam. The
limit tensor Ey0 pp
uq represents the behavior of the symmetric gradient of a thin
periodic beam (the periods are in the directions of its smallest dimensions).
In the case θ “ `8, the tensor Ey8 pp uq corresponds to the limit tensor of
a periodic thin plate. That is why this tensor looks like EM pUq ` Ew puq.8
The lemma below gives a Korn inequality for fields in D0 (resp. D8 ).
Lemma 11.16. For every ψp in D0 the following estimate holds:
}ψ} p L2 pY q .
p L2 p´1,1;H 1 pY 1 qq ď C}E 0 pψq} (11.48)
y
For every ψp in D8 , decomposed as

” p ı
ψp “ Ψp α ´ y3 B Ψ3 eα ` Ψ p
p 3 e3 ` ψ, (11.49)
Byα
` ˘
where Ψ p 3 , ψp belongs to H 1 pY 1 q2 ˆ H 2 pY 1 q ˆ L2 pY 1 ; Dw q, the fol-
p m, Ψ
per per
lowing estimates hold:
ÿ
2
p α }H 1 pY 1 q ` }Ψ
}Ψ p L2 pY q ,
p 3 }H 2 pY 1 q ď C}E 8 pψq}
y
α“1 (11.50)
p L2 pY 1 ;H 1 p´1,1qq ď C}E 8 pψq}
}ψ} p L2 pY q .
y
Proof. Estimate (11.48) for ψpα , α “ 1, 2, is an immediate consequence of

the definitions of D0 , Ey0 and the 2-dimensional Korn inequality for periodic
functions (see (2.15) in Proposition 2.11), which writes
ÿ
2 ÿ
2
}ψpα }L2 p´1,1;H 1 pY 1 qq ď C p L2 pY q .
}eαβ pψq}
α“1 α,β“1
Recall that
ż
@φ P L2 p´1, 1; H 1 pY 1 qq such that φp¨, y3 qdy 1 “ 0,
Y1
the 2-dimensional Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality yields

´› Bφ › › Bφ › ¯
› › › ›
}φ}L2 p´1,1;H 1 pY 1 qq ď C › › 2 `› › 2 . (11.51)
By1 L pY q By2 L pY q
This, applied to ψp3 gives (11.48) (for ψp3 ).
To obtain estimates (11.50), with ψp decomposed as in (11.49), we apply
again the 2-dimensional Korn and Poincaré-Wirtinger inequalities. Taking
into account the periodicity give (11.50)1 .
Finally, the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality yields (11.50)2 .
381
In Dθ , θ P p0, `8q, the semi-norm }Eyθ p ¨ q}L2 pY q is clearly equivalent to

the usual norm of H 1 pY q3 , but with constants which depend upon θ. In the
next lemma, we make these constants explicit.
Lemma 11.17. For every ψ P Dθ , θ P p0, `8q, the following estimates hold:
(i) If θ ě 1, then
1
}ψα }L2 pY q ` }ψ3 }L2 pY q ď C}Eyθ pψq}L2 pY q ,
θ
ÿ2 › Bψ › › Bψ ›
› α› › 3›
› › 2 ` θ› › 2 ď C}Eyθ pψq}L2 pY q , (11.52)
α,β“1
By β L pY q By 3 L pY q
ÿ2 ´› › 1 ›› Bψ3 ›› ¯
› Bψα ›
› › ` › › 2 ď C}Eyθ pψq}L2 pY q .
α“1
By3 L2 pY q θ Byα L pY q
(ii) If θ ď 1, then
ÿ2 › › › Bψ ›
› Bψ › › ›
}ψ}L2 pY q ` › › 2 ` θ› › 2 ď C}Eyθ pψq}L2 pY q . (11.53)
α“1
By α L pY q By 3 L pY q
The constants do not depend on θ.
Proof. We show that, after a simple change of variables, the tensor Eyθ pψq for
ψ P Dθ , appears as the symmetric gradient of a displacement belonging to
H 1 pYθ q3 periodic in the directions eα (α “ 1, 2) where
´ 1, 1¯
Yθ “ Y 1 ˆ ´ ` .
θ θ
For ψ P Dθ , θ P p0, `8q, define the displacement Ψ as

` ˘
Ψpzq “ ψ z1 , z2 , θz3 for a.e. z P Yθ . (11.54)
For a.e. z P Yθ , one has

` ˘
eαβ,z pΨqpzq “ eαβ,y pψq z1 , z2 , θz3 ,
1 ´ Bψα Bψ3 ¯` ˘
eα3,z pΨqpzq “ θ ` z1 , z2 , θz3 ,
2 By3 Byα
Bψ3 ` ˘
e33,z pΨqpzq “ θ z1 , z2 , θz3 .
By3
By (11.54), a simple computation shows that
1
}ez pΨq}L2 pYθ q “ ? }Eyθ pψq}L2 pY q .
θ
382
Case θ ě 1. Observe that in this case, the set Yθ is actually, a plate of

thickness 2{θ and of mid-surface Y 1 . Hence, by applying Proposition 11.6
with δ “ 1{θ, there exists a rigid displacement R such that
1
}Ψα ´ Rα }L2 pYθ q ` }Ψ3 ´ R3 }L2 pYθ q ď C}ez pΨq}L2 pYθ q ,
θ
ÿ2 › BpΨ ´ Rq › › BΨ ›
› α› › ›
› › 2 `› › ď C}ez pΨq}L2 pYθ q ,
α,β“1
Bzβ L pYθ q Bz3 L2 pYθ q
ÿ2 ´› › › BpΨ ´ Rq › ¯
› BpΨ ´ Rqα › › 3›
› › 2 `› › 2 ď Cθ}ez pΨq}L2 pYθ q .
α“1
Bz3 L pYθ q Bzα L pYθ q
Using the periodicity of Ψ and the fact that

ż ´ 1 1¯
Ψpz1 , z2 , z3 q dz1 dz2 “ 0 for a.e. z3 P ´ , ` ,
Y1 θ θ
the rigid displacement can be eliminated in the above estimates, to get

1
}Ψα }L2 pYθ q ` }Ψ3 }L2 pYθ q ď C}ez pΨq}L2 pYθ q ,
θ
ÿ2 › BΨ › › BΨ ›
› α› › ›
› › 2 `› › 2 ď C}ez pΨq}L2 pYθ q ,
α,β“1
Bz β L pYθ q Bz 3 L pYθ q
ÿ2 ´› › › BΨ › ¯
› BΨα › › 3›
› › 2 `› › 2 ď Cθ}ez pΨq}L2 pYθ q .
α“1
Bz3 L pYθ q Bzα L pYθ q
Then, going back to the variable y3 , we obtain (11.52).

Case θ ď 1. In this case, we cannot assimilate the domain to a thin plate.
Set ”1ı
N “ ,
θ
for the integer part of 1{θ, and consider the domain
` ˘2 ´ 1 1¯
Yθ “ 0, pN ` 1q ˆ ´ , ` .
θ θ
Now, extend the function Ψ from (11.54) by periodicity to Yθ .
The domain Yθ is star-shaped with respect to a ball of radius 1{p2θq, since
´ 1 ¯2 ´ 1 1¯
0, ˆ ´ ,` Ă Yθ ,
θ θ θ
and its diameter is less than 4{θ. Thus, the three-dimensional Korn inequality
holds in Yθ with a constant independent of θ (cf. [124, Theorem 2.3]). Here,
this gives
}∇Ψ ´ A}L2 pYθ q ď C}ez pΨq}L2 pYθ q ,
383
for some antisymmetric matrix A and C independent of θ. By periodicity,

}∇Ψ ´ A}L2 pYθ q “ pN ` 1q}∇Ψ ´ A}L2 pYθ q ,
}ez pΨq}L2 pYθ q “ pN ` 1q}ez pΨq}L2 pYθ q .
Hence,
}∇Ψ ´ A}L2 pYθ q ď C}ez pΨq}L2 pYθ q .
This, with the periodicity of Ψ and the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, gives
ˇ ż ´ BΨ ¯ ˇ › BΨ ›
ˇ ˇ › ›
|Yθ | |Aeα | “ ˇ ´ Aeα dy ˇ ď |Yθ |1{2 › ´ Aeα › 2
Yθ Byα Byα L pYθ q
ď C|Yθ |1{2 }ez pΨq}L2 pYθ q .

Since the constant matrix A is antisymmetric,
|Yθ |1{2 |A| “ }A}L2 pYθ q ď C}ez pΨq}L2 pYθ q ,
so that
}∇Ψ}L2 pYθ q ď C}ez pΨq}L2 pYθ q .
Then estimate (11.51) yields
}Ψ}L2 pYθ q ď C}ez pΨq}L2 pYθ q .
Going back to Y , one gets (11.53).

Lemma 11.18. The semi-norm } ¨ }θ , θ P r0, `8s, is equivalent to the
product-norm of the space IDθ .
Proof. Step 1. Proof of the first inequality (ď).
By the definitions of the tensor Eyθ and of the space Dθ , θ P r0, `8s, for
every ψp P L2 pω; Dθ q,
ż
p 1 , y 1 , y3 qdy 1 “ 0 for a.e. px1 , y3 q P Ω.
Eyθ pψqpx
Y1
Then, for every v “ pV, v8 , vpq P IDθ (recall that the semi-norm } ¨ }θ is defined
by (11.42)), one has
}v}2θ “ }EM pVq}2L2 pΩq ` }Ew p8v q}2L2 pΩq ` }Eyθ pp

v q}L2 pωˆY q . (11.55)
Hence, for all v in IDθ , θ P r0, `8s,

` › › ˘
}v}0 ď C }Vm }H 1 pωq ` }V3 }H 2 pωq ` }p v }L2 pΩ;H 1 pY 1 qq ` ›v8 ›L2 pω;H 1 p´1,1qq ,
`
}v}θ ď C }Vm }H 1 pωq ` }V3 }H 2 pωq ` p1 ` θq}p v }L2 pω;H 1 pY qq
› › ˘
` ›v8 ›L2 pω;H 1 p´1,1qq ,
`
}v}8 ď C }Vm }H 1 pωq ` }V3 }H 2 pωq ` }Vpm }L2 pω;H 1 pY 1 qq ` }Vp3 }L2 pω;H 2 pY 1 qq
› › ˘
v }L2 pωˆY 1 ;H 1 p´1,1qq ` ›v8 › 2
` }p 1
L pω;H p´1,1qq
,
384
which proves that the semi-norm } ¨ }θ is bounded above by a multiple of the

norm of the corresponding product space. The constants do not depend on θ.
Step 2. Proof of the converse inequality (ě).
Let v “ pV, v8 , vpq be in IDθ , θ P r0, `8s. From (11.55), on the one hand,
one has
ÿ ´ 2 ›› B 2 V3 ››2 ¯
2
2}eαβ pVm q}2L2 pωq ` › › 2 “ }EM pVq}2L2 pΩq
α,β“1
3 Bx α Bx β L pωq
and on the other hand,
1 ÿ ›› B v8α ››2 › B v8 ›2
2
› 3›
› › 2 `› › “ }Ew p8v q}2L2 pΩq .
4 α“1 By3 L pΩq By3 L2 pΩq
The first equality, together with the 2-dimensional Korn and Poincaré in-
equalities in ω and the boundary conditions, implies
}Vm }H 1 pωq ` }V3 }H 2 pωq ď C}EM pVq}L2 pΩq ď C}v}θ ,
From the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality applied in the second equality,
one gets
› › › B v8 ›
›v8 › 2 › ›
1
L pω;H p´1,1qq
ď C › › ď C}Ew p8v q}L2 pΩq ď C}v}θ .
By3 L2 pΩq
The constants do not depend on θ.
To conclude the proof, the three cases are treated separately.
Case 1. θ “ 0. Lemma 11.16 and (11.55) give
v }L2 pΩ;H 1 pY 1 qq ď C}Ey0 pp
}p v q}L2 pωˆY q ď C}v}0 .
Case 2. θ P p0, `8q. Due to Lemma 11.17 and (11.55), there exists a constant
Cθ such that
v }L2 pω;H 1 pY qq ď Cθ }Eyθ pp
}p v q}L2 pωˆY q ď Cθ }v}θ .
Case 2. θ “ `8. Decompose vp as
” B Vp3 ı
vpp¨, yq “ Vpα p¨, y 1 q ´ y3 p¨, y 1 q eα ` Vp3 p¨, y 1 qe3 ` vpp¨, yq.
Byα
Then, again Lemma 11.16 and (11.55) give
ÿ
2
}Vpα }L2 pω ;H 1 pY 1 qq ` }Vp3 }L2 pω;H 2 pY 1 qq ď C}Ey8 pp
v q}L2 pωˆY q ď C}v}8 ,
α“1
and
v }L2 pωˆY 1 ;H 1 p´1,1qq ď C}Ey8 pp
}p v q}L2 pωˆY q ď C}v}8 .
Finally, summarizing the results of Steps 1 and 2, the proof of Lemma 11.18
is complete.
385
11.6. The unfolded limit problems
11.6 The unfolded limit problems

Theorem 11.19. Let uε,δ be the solution of the elasticity problem (11.14).
Then, for the whole sequence pε, δq and for θ P r0, `8s, the following conver-
gence holds:
1 ` ˘ ` ˘
Tε,δ epuε,δ q Ñ EM pUqÈw u8 Èyθ pp
uq strongly in L2 pω ˆY q9 , (11.56)
δ
and uθ “ u “ pU , u,8 upq belonging to IDθ is the solution of the rescaled and
unfolded problem
$ ż ` ˘
’ 1
’
’ aijkl Eij,M pUq ` Eij,w puq
8 ` Eij,y
θ
pp
uq
’
’
& 2 ωˆY ` ˘
ˆ Ekl,M pVq ` Ekl,w p:
v q ` Ekl,y
θ
v q dx1 dy
pp (11.57)
’
’ ż ´ ¯
’
’ 1 BV3
’
% “ f ¨ V ´ gα dx1 , @v “ pV, v8 , vpq P IDθ .
ω 3 Bxα
Proof. Due to hypotheses of Section 11.2 and of Lemma 11.18, the Lax-
Milgram theorem applies to Problem (11.57) which, therefore, has a unique
solution. This uniqueness implies it is enough to prove convergence (11.56)
for a subsequence, as is done now.
Case 1. θ P r0, `8q.
Let v “ pV, v8 , vpq be given in IDθ with V “ pVm , V3 q P IDM and p8v , vpq in
V8 ˆ Vper
1
where
! )
.
V8 “ Φ P C 1 pω ˆ r´1, 1sq3 | Φp¨, y3 q “ 0 on Bω for all y3 P r´1, 1s ,
! )
.
Vper “ Ψ P C 1 pω ˆ Y q3 | Ψ Y 1-periodic and Ψp¨, yq “ 0 on Bω for all y P Y .
Consider the following test displacement:
wε,δ “ vδ ` vε,δ ,
where, for every x in Ωδ ,

” BV3 1 ´ x ¯ı ” ´ x ¯ı
vδ pxq “ δVα px1 q´ x3 px q`δ 2 v8α x1 , eα ` V3 px1 q ` δ 2 v83 x1 ,
3 3
e3 ,
Bxα δ δ
´ ! x1 ) x ¯
v x1 ,
3
vε,δ pxq “ δεp , .
ε δ
A straightforward computation gives
1 ` ˘ ` ˘
Tδ epvδ q Ñ EM pVq ` Ew v8 strongly in L2 pΩq9 .
δ
Hence,
1 ` ˘ ` ˘
Tε,δ epvδ q Ñ EM pVq ` Ew v8 strongly in L2 pω ˆ Y q9 .
δ
386
Also,
εδ ´ Bp
vα vβ ¯´ 1 ! x1 ) x3 ¯
Bp
eαβ pvε,δ qpxq “ ` x, ,
2 Bxβ Bxα ε δ
´
δ Bp vα Bp
vβ ¯´ ! x1 ) x ¯
x1 ,
3
` ` , ,
2 Byβ Byα ε δ
εδ ´ Bp
vα v3 ¯´ 1 ! x1 ) x3 ¯
Bp
eα3 pvε,δ qpxq “ ` x, ,
2 Bx3 Bxα ε δ
ε Bpvα ´ 1 ! x1 ) x3 ¯ δ Bp v 3 ´ 1 ! x1 ) x 3 ¯
` x, , ` x, ,
2 By3 ε δ 2 Byα ε δ
v3 ´ 1 ! x1 ) x3 ¯
Bp Bpv3 ´ 1 ! x1 ) x3 ¯
e33 pvε,δ qpxq “ εδ x, , `ε x, , .
Bx3 ε δ By3 ε δ
1 ` ˘
Tε,δ epvε,δ q Ñ Eyθ pp
vq strongly in L2 pω ˆ Y q9 ,
δ
and then,
1 ` ˘ ` ˘
Tε,δ epvε,δ q Ñ EM pVq ` Ew v8 ` Eyθ pp
vq strongly in L2 pω ˆ Y q9 .
δ
Taking vε,δ as test displacement in (11.14), unfolding the equality with
Tε,δ , dividing by 2δ 3 , and passing to the limit, give (11.57) with v as the test
function. The density of the product space V8 ˆ Vper in L2 pω; Wq ˆ L2 pω; Dθ q
give (11.57) for every v P IDθ , θ P r0, `8q.
Case 2. θ “ `8.
Choose as test function wε,δ “ vδ ` vε,δ with vδ given as in Case 1 and
” ´ ! x1 )¯ x B Vp ´ ! x1 )¯ı ´ ! x1 )¯
vε,δ pxq “ δε Vpα x1 , x1 , eα ` δεVp3 x1 ,
3 3
´ e3
ε δ Byα ε ε
´ ! x1 ) x ¯
` δ 2 vp x1 ,
3
, ,
ε δ
with Vp P Vper
1
and vp P V , where
! 1 ˇ 1
)
.
1
Vper “ Ψ P C 1 pω ˆ Y q3 ˇ Ψp¨, y 1 q “ 0 on Bω @y 1 P Y ; Ψ Y 1 ´ periodic ,
! 1 ˇ )
.
V “ ψ P C 1 pω ˆ Y ˆ r´1, 1sq3 ˇ ψp¨, y3 q “ 0 on Bpω ˆ Y 1 q @ y3 P r´1, 1s .
By a simple computation, one can check that

1 ` ˘
Tε,δ epvε,δ q Ñ Ey8 pp
δ
with
” B Vp3 ı
vpp¨, yq “ Vpα p ¨ , y 1 q ´ y3 p ¨ , y 1 q eα ` Vp3 p ¨ , y 1 qe3 ` vpp ¨ , yq,
Byα
387
11.7. Homogenization
which means in fact, that
1 ` ˘ ` ˘
Tε,δ epwε,δ q Ñ EM pVq ` Ew v8 ` Ey8 pp
δ
and we conclude as in Case 1.
11.7 Homogenization
The aim of this section is to give the expressions of the warping u8 and the
microscopic displacement u p in terms of the membrane displacement Um and
of the bending U3 .
With the choice V “ 0, Problem 11.57 becomes
ż
1 ` ` ˘ ˘` ` ˘ ˘
aijkl Eij,M pUq ` Eij,w u8 ` Eij,y
θ
uq Ew v8 ` Ekl,y
pp θ
v q dx1 dy “ 0.
pp
2 ωˆY
This shows that the warping u8 and the microscopic displacement u p can be
written in terms of the tensor EM pUq. For θ P r0, `8s, define the space
! ˇ )
WDθ “ ψ8 ` ψp ˇ ψ8 P W, ψp P Dθ .(9)
Note that for ψr in WDθ ,

ż ż
ψ8 “ ψr dy 1 , ψp “ ψr ´ ψr dy 1 .
Y1 Y1
To every function ψr in WDθ , associate the symmetric tensor

` ˘
r “ Ew ψ8 ` E θ pψq.
IEθy pψq p
y
Due to the properties of the functions in Dθ , one has

› ›2 › ›2
› θ ›
r ›2 2
›IEy pψq 1 ›› B ψ81 ›› 1 ›› B ψ82 ››
“ › `
L pY q 4 By3 ›L2 p´1,1q 4 › By3 ›L2 p´1,1q
› › (11.58)
› B ψ83 ›2 › ›
`› › › ` ›Eyθ pψq p ›2 2 .
›
By3 L2 p´1,1q L pY q
Set
¨ ˛ ¨ ˛ ¨ ˛
1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
M11 “ ˝0 0 0‚, M12 “ ˝1 0 0‚, M22 “ ˝0 1 0‚.
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(9) As for the space Dθ itself, WDθ only takes three values, WD0 , WD, WD8 .
388
The tensor EM having 6 components (due to symmetries) one introduces

6 correctors
Ć Ą
χαβ
m,θ P WDθ , χαβ
b,θ P WDθ , pα, βq P tp1, 1q, p1, 2q, p2, 2qu,
defined respectively by
ż
` Ć ˘ θ
aijkl pyq Mαβ αβ r
ij ` IEij,y pχm,θ qpyq IEkl,y pψqpyq dy “ 0,
θ
ż Y
(11.59)
` Ą ˘ θ
aijkl pyq y3 Mαβ αβ r
ij ` IEij,y pχb,θ qpyq IEkl,y pψqpyq dy “ 0,
θ
Y
for all ψr P WDθ .

r can be written in the form
As a consequence, u
u 8 y3 q ` u
rp¨, yq “ up¨, pp¨, yq
Ć B 2 U3 Ą (11.60)
“ eαβ pUm qχαβ pyq ` χαβ pyq for a.e. y P Y .
m,θ
Bxα Bxβ b,θ
11.7.1 The limit problems in the mid surface

From now on, we add the superscript θ, θ P r0, `8s, to the limit membrane
fields Um and to the bending U3 .
Theorem 11.20. The limit displacement
U θ “ pUm
θ
, U3θ q belongs to IDM “ Hγ10 pωq2 ˆ Hγ20 pωq.
It is the solution of the homogenized problem

$ż ” ´
’
’ B 2 V3
’
’ ahom,θ hom,θ
1 β 1 eαβ pUm qeαβ pVm q ` bαβα1 β 1 eαβ pUm q
θ θ
’
’
αβα
Bxα1 Bxβ 1
’
’
ω
’
’
’
’
& B 2 U3θ ¯ B 2 U3θ B 2 V3 ı 1
` eα1 β 1 pVm q ` chom,θ
αβα1 β 1 dx
Bxα Bxβ Bxα Bxβ Bxα1 Bxβ 1 (11.61)
’
’ ż ż
’
’ BV3 1
’
’ “ 1
f ¨ V dx ´
1
’
’ gα dx ,
’
’ 3 Bx α
’
’
ω ω
%
@V “ pVm , V3 q P IDM ,
where ż
1 “ Ćαβ ‰ α1 β 1
ahom,θ
αβα1 β 1 “ aijkl pyq Mαβ
ij ` IEij,y pχm,θ q Mkl dy,
θ
2 Y
ż
1 “ Ąαβ ‰ α1 β 1
bhom,θ
αβα1 β 1 “ aijkl pyq y3 Mαβ
ij ` IEij,y pχb,θ q Mkl dy,
θ
(11.62)
2 Y
ż
1 “ Ąαβ ‰ α1 β 1
chom,θ
αβα1 β 1 “ aijkl pyq y3 Mαβ
ij ` IEij,y pχb,θ q y3 Mkl dy.
θ
2 Y
389
Proof. In problem 11.57, choose as test displacement V “ pVm , V3 q in IDM

and v8 “ 0, vp “ 0. Replacing u
r by its expression (11.60), yields
ż ” ı
` Ć αβ ˘ B 2 U3 ` Ą αβ ˘
aijkl pyq eαβ pUm q Mαβ ` IE θ
p χ q ` y 3 M αβ
` IE θ
p χ q
ωˆY
ij ij,y m,θ
Bxα Bxβ ij ij,y b,θ
1 1
” B 2 V3 ı 1
ˆ Mα β
eα1 β 1 pVm q ` y3 dx dy
kl
Bxα1 Bxβ 1
ż ż
2 BV3 1
“ 2 f ¨ V dx1 ´ gα dx .
ω 3 ω Bxα
Then Problem (11.61) with the homogenized coefficients given by (11.62) is

obtained by a simple computation.
Taking into account the variational problems (11.59) satisfied by the cor-
rectors, it is easily seen that the homogenized coefficients are also given by
the following expressions:
ż
hom,θ 1 “ Ćαβ ‰“ α1 β 1 α1 β 1 ‰
Ć
aαβα1 β 1 “ aijkl pyq Mαβij ÌEij,y pχm,θ q Mkl ÌEkl,y pχm,θ q dy,
θ θ
2 Y
ż
1 “ Ąαβ ‰“ α1 β 1 Ćα1 β 1 ‰
bhom,θ
1
αβα β 1 “ aijkl pyq y3 Mαβij ÌEij,y pχb,θ q Mkl ÌEkl,y pχm,θ q dy,
θ θ
2 Y
ż (11.63)
1 “ αβ αβ ‰“
Ć α1 β 1 Ćα1 β 1 ‰
“ aijkl pyq Mij ÌEij,y pχm,θ q y3 Mkl ÌEkl,y pχb,θ q dy,
θ θ
2 Y
ż
1 “ Ąαβ ‰“ α1 β 1 Ć α1 β 1 ‰
chom,θ
1
αβα β 1 “ aijkl pyq y3 Mαβij ÌEij,y pχb,θ q y3 Mkl ÌEkl,y pχb,θ q dy
θ θ
2 Y
The second expression of the bhom,θ

αβα1 β 1 ’s is a consequence of the properties of
the coefficients of the Hooke tensor.
Remark 11.21. From (11.59), we deduce that the left-hand side operator in
Problem (11.61) is uniformly bounded.
Lemma 11.22. The left-hand side operator in Problem (11.61) is uniformly

elliptic.
Proof. Using formulas (11.63) of the homogenized coefficients, one obtains

hom,θ ` m b ˘
ahom,θ m m b m hom,θ b
αβα1 β 1 ταβ τα1 β 1 ` bαβα1 β 1 ταβ τα1 β 1 ` ταβ τα1 β 1 ` cαβα1 β 1 ταβ τα1 β 1
b
ż
1 “ ‰“ ‰
“ aijkl Mij ` IEθij,y pΨq Mkl ` IEθkl,y pΨq dy,
2 Y
where ` m ˘ αβ
M “ ταβ ` y3 ταβ
b
M ,
and
m Ć b Ą
Ψ “ ταβ χαβ αβ
m,θ ` ταβ χb,θ .
390
Then, in view of (11.12),

ż
“ ‰“ ‰
aijkl Mij ` IEθij,y pΨq Mkl ` IEθkl,y pΨq dy
Y
ż
“ ‰“ ‰
ě c0 Mij ` IEθij,y pΨq Mij ` IEθij,y pΨq dy.
Y
Following the same lines of Step 1 in Lemma 11.18, we get

ż
“ ‰“ ‰ ` m m ˘
Mij ` IEθij,y pΨq Mij ` IEθij,y pΨq dy ě C ταβ ταβ ` ταβ
b b
ταβ ,
Y
where the constant C is independent of θ P r0, `8s.
11.8 Complements
Again, we consider the solution uε,δ of Problem (11.14). In this section, we
will follow the lines of the previous sections, especially those of Section 11.5.
In the next subsection 11.8.1 we shall pass to the limit with δ Ñ 0 (di-
mension reduction) first, and with ε Ñ 0 (homogenization) afterwards. In
Subsection 11.8.2, the order of passing to the limit is inverted, ε Ñ 0 first,
followed by δ Ñ 0. The proofs are similar to the ones given in the previous
sections and they are only sketched.
11.8.1 Dimension reduction followed by homogenization

Proposition 11.23. Let uε,δ be the solution of (11.14). If first δ Ñ 0 (with
ε fixed) and then ε Ñ 0, the limit problem is the same as that obtained when
ε
pε, δq Ñ p0, 0q with Ñ `8.
δ
Proof. Step 1. Reduction of dimension.
As is Section 11.5, denote by Uε,δ , Rε,δ and uε,δ , the elements of the
decomposition of uε,δ` given by Theorems
˘ 11.4. Then, up to subsequence of
tδu, there exist Uε “ Uε,m , Uε,3 P IDM and uε P L2 pω; H 1 p´1, 1qq3 , with
ż1 ż1
uε,i px1 , y3 q dy3 “ uε,α px1 , y3 qy3 dy3 “ 0 a.e. for x1 P ω,
´1 ´1
such that as δ Ñ 0 for ε fixed,

1
Uε,δ,m á Uε,m weakly in Hγ10 pωq2 ,
δ
Uε,δ,3 ÝÑ Uε,3 strongly in Hγ10 pωq,
Rε,δ á ´∇Uε,3 weakly in Hγ10 pωq2 ,
1` ˘
∇Uε,δ,3 ` Rε,δ á Zε weakly in L2 pωq2 ,
δ
391
11.8. Complements
as well as
1 ` ˘
2
Tδ uε,δ á uε weakly in L2 pω; H 1 p´1, 1qq3 ,
δ
1 ` ˘
Tδ epuε,δ q á EM pUε q ` Ew pu8 ε q weakly in L2 pΩq9 ,
δ
where u8 ε p¨, y3 q “ uε p¨, y3 q ` y3 Zα,ε eα and Uε “ pUε,m , Uε,3 q P IDM .
Due to estimates (11.10) and (11.16),
}Uε,m }H 1 pωq ` }Uε,3 }H 2 pωq ` }u8 ε }L2 pω;H 1 p´1,1qq ď C,
with a constant not depending on ε.

Now choose in Problem (11.14) the test displacement vδ introduced in the
proof of Theorem 11.19. Dividing by 2δ 3 , unfolding the equality by Tδ , and
then passing to the limit as δ Ñ 0, allows to obtain
ż ´! x1 ) ¯´ ¯
1
aijkl , y3 Eij,M pUε q ` Eij,w pu8 ε q
2 Ω ε
´ ż ż
` ˘¯
(11.64)
1 BV3 1
ˆ Ekl,M pVq ` Ekl,w v8 dx1 dy3 “ f ¨ V dx1 ´ gα dx .
ω 3 ω Bxα
Applying the results of Part I, in particular Theorem 1.47 and Proposi-
tion 2.13, there exist
` ˘
pm P L2 pω; H 1 pY 1 qq2 ,
U “ Um , U3 P IDM , u8 P L2 pω; Wq, U per,0
p8 P L2 pω ˆ Y 1 ; Wq,
p3 P L2 pω; H 1 pY 1 q X H 2 pY 1 qq, u
U per,0 per
such that
” p3
BU ı
. p 1 p8 yq P L2 pω; D8 q.
p3 p¨, y 1 qe3 ` up¨,
pp¨, yq “ U
u α p¨, y q ´ y3 p¨, y 1 q eα ` U
Byα
Step 2. Homogenization.
Now, letting ε go to 0, the following convergences hold:
Uε,m á Um weakly in Hγ10 pωq2 ,

Uε,3 á U3 weakly in Hγ20 pωq,
` ˘
Tε ∇Uε,m á ∇Um ` ∇y1 U pm weakly in L2 pω; H 1 pY 1 qq4 ,
` 2 ˘
Tε D Uε,3 á D2 U3 ` Dy21 U p3 weakly in L2 pω ˆ Y 1 q4 ,
` ˘
p8 weakly in L2 pω ˆ Y 1 ; H 1 p´1, 1qq3 ,
Tε u8 ε á u8 ` u
and finally,
` ˘ ` ˘
Tε EM pUε q ` Ew pu8 ε q á EM pUq ` Ew u8 ` IE8
y pp
uq weakly in L2 pω ˆ Y q9 ,
where pU, u,
8 upq P ID8 .
392
` ˘
For V “ V1 , V2 , V3 P IDM , the next step consists in choosing the test
function in problem (11.64) as pVε,m , Vε,3 , v8ε q defined for all x P Ωδ , by
´ ! x1 )¯
Vε,α pxq “ Vα px1 q ` εVpα x1 , , Vpα P Cc8 pω; Cper
1
pY 1 qq,
ε
´ ! x1 )¯
Vε,3 pxq “ V3 px1 q ` ε2 Vp3 x1 , , Vp3 P Cc8 pω; Cper
2
pY 1 qq,
ε
and
´ ! x1 ) ¯
v8ε pxq “ v8 px1 , y3 q ` vp8 x1 , , y3 , v8 P L2 pω; Wq, vp8 P L2 pω ˆ Y 1 ; Wq.
ε
Unfolding the resulting identity, then passing to the limit as ε goes to 0 and
using a density argument allow to obtain Problem 11.57 for θ “ `8.
11.8.2 Homogenization followed by dimension reduction

Proposition 11.24. Let uε,δ be the solution of (11.14). If first ε Ñ 0 (with
δ fixed) and then δ Ñ 0, the limit problem is the same as that obtained when
ε
pε, δq Ñ p0, 0q and goes to 0.
δ
Proof. Step 1. Homogenization.
Following the homogenization procedure from Chapter 3, thanks to the a
priori estimates established in the preceding subsection, there exist uδ in IDδ
and upδ in L2 pΩδ ; Hper,0
1
pY 1 qq3 such that, up to a subsequence, for ε Ñ 0 and
δ fixed,
uε,δ á uδ weakly in H 1 pΩδ q3 ,
Tε p∇uε,δ q á ∇uδ ` ∇y1 u
pδ weakly in L2 pΩδ ˆ Y 1 q3 .
Therefore (see Proposition 2.13),
` ˘
Tε epuε,δ q á epuδ q ` ey1 pp
uδ q weakly in L2 pΩδ ˆ Y 1 q6 ,
where ¨ ˛
1 Bp
uδ,3
e pp
uδ q
11,y 1 e 12,y 1 pp
uδ q
˚ 2 By1 ‹
˚ ‹
˚ ‹
˚ uδ,3 ‹
1 Bp
˚ ‹
ey1 pp
uδ q “ ˚e12,y1 pp
uδ q e22,y1 pp
uδ q ‹.
˚ 2 By2 ‹
˚ ‹
˚ ‹
˝ 1 Bpuδ,3 1 Bp
uδ,3 ‚
0
2 By1 2 By2
Choose in Problem (11.14) as test displacement
´ ! x1 )¯
vpxq ` εp
v x, with v P IDδ , vp P Cc8 pΩδ ; Cper
1
pY 1 qq3 .
ε
393
11.8. Complements
By unfolding the result, passing to the limit and using a density argument,
the following variational problem for puδ , u pδ q P IDδ ˆ L2 pΩδ ; Hper,0
1
pY 1 qq3 is
obtained:
$ż ´ x ¯` ˘` ˘
’
’ a y1 ,
3
eij puδ q ` eij,y1 pp v q dxdy 1
uδ q ekl pvq ` ekl,y1 pp
& 1
ijkl
δ
Ωδ ˆY
ż (11.65)
’
’ 1 3
% “ fδ ¨ v dx, @pv, vpδ q P IDδ ˆ L pΩδ ; Hper,0 pY qq .
2 1
Ωδ
Step 2. Reduction of dimension.

Estimates (11.10)-(11.32), the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality as well as
the two-dimensional Korn inequality for periodic displacements (see (2.15) in
Proposition 2.11), give the following a priori estimate for the homogenized
solution uδ :
}epuδ q}L2 pΩδ q ` }ey1 pp
uδ q}L2 pΩδ ˆY 1 q ` }p
uδ }L2 pΩδ ;Hper
1 pY 1 qq ď Cδ
3{2
,
where C is independent of δ.
Now, decompose uδ as done Subsection 11.1.2 and denote by Uδ , Rδ and
uδ the terms of the decomposition (11.5). Thanks to the above a priori
p in L2 pω; D0 q, and
estimate, there exist u
` ˘
U “ Um , U3 P IDM , u P L2 pω; H 1 p´1, 1qq3 q,
satisfying
ż1 ż1
1
ui px , y3 q dy3 “ uα px1 , y3 qy3 dy3 “ 0 for a.e. x1 P ω,
´1 ´1

1
Uδ,m á Um weakly in Hγ10 pωq2 ,
δ
Uδ,3 á U3 weakly in Hγ10 pωq,
Rδ á ´∇U3 weakly in Hγ10 pωq2 ,
1` ˘
∇Uδ,3 ` Rδ á Z weakly in L2 pωq2 ,
δ
and also
1
Tδ puδ q á u weakly in L2 pω; H 1 p´1, 1qq3 ,
δ
1 ` ˘ ` ˘
Tδ epuδ q á EM pUq ` Ew u8 weakly in L2 pΩq9 ,
δ
1 ` ˘
Tδ ey1 ppuδ q á IE0y pp
uq weakly in L2 pω ˆ Y q9 ,
δ
where
8 y3 q “ up¨, y3 q ` y3 Zα eα ,
up¨, pU, u,
8 upq P ID0 , U “ pUm , U3 q P IDM .
394
Take as test function in Problem (11.65),

´ ´ x3 ¯¯
vδ pxq, δ vp x1 , y 1 , ,
δ
where vδ was introduced in Step 1 of the proof of Theorem 11.19, and vp is
in L2 pω; D0 q. Dividing by 2δ 3 , applying the operator Tδ and passing to the
limit with δ Ñ 0, allow to obtain Problem 11.57 with θ “ 0.
Remark 11.25. As noted in [44], the two limiting processes do not commute
since the limit problems vary with θ.
11.8.3 Continuous dependence with respect to θ

We start by exhibiting some properties of the homogenized coefficients ob-
Ć Ą
tained in the preceding sections. Choose successively χαβ αβ
m,θ and χb,θ as test
functions in (11.59) to obtain the estimates
Ć Ą
}IEθy pχαβ
m,θ q}L2 pΩq ď C, }IEθy pχαβ
b,θ q}L2 pΩq ď C, (11.66)
where the constant C does not depend on θ. Then, from (11.41) it follows
that for all θ P p0, `8q,
Ć Ą
}χαβ
m,θ }H 1 pΩq ď Cp1 ` θq, }χαβ
b,θ }H 1 pΩq ď Cp1 ` θq.
Lemma 11.26. The homogenized coefficients (11.63) are continuous func-

tions with respect to θ on r0, `8s.
Ć Ą
Proof. Step 1. We first prove the continuity of the function θ ÞÑ pχαβ αβ
m,θ , χb,θ q
on p0, `8q for the strong topology of the space H 1per pY q.
Let pθ, θ1 q be in p0, `8q2 . Then, for every ψr “ ψ8 ` ψp P WD Ă H 1per pY q3 ,
¨ ˛
B ψp1
˚ 0 0
By3 ‹
˚ ‹
˚ ‹
˚
1 ˚
‹
θ r θ r
1
θ p θ p
1 θ ´ θ ˚ B ψ2 ‹
p
‹.
IEy pψq ´ IEy pψq “ Ey pψq ´ Ey pψq “
2 ˚ By3 ‹
0 0
˚ ‹
˚ ‹
˚ ‹
˝ B ψp p
B ψ2 B ψ3 ‚
p
1
2
By3 By3 By3
This equality, together with equations (11.59) and (11.52)-(11.53), give the
following estimates with constants independent of pθ, θ1 q:
ˇż ˇ
ˇ Ć Ć r dy ˇˇ
ˇ aijkl IEθij,y pχαβ
m,θ ´ χ αβ
m,θ 1 q IE θ
kl,y p ψq
Y
´1 ¯ 1 Ć
θ r
ď C |θ ´ θ1 | ` 1 }IEθy pχαβ
m,θ 1 q}L2 pY q }IEy pψq}L2 pY q
θ1
´1 ¯´ 1 Ć
¯
θ r
` C |θ ´ θ1 | ` 1 1 ` }IEθy pχαβ m,θ 1 q}L2 pY q }IEy pψq}L2 pY q .
θ
395
11.8. Complements
Ć Ć
Take χαβ αβ
m,θ ´ χm,θ 1 as test function and use (11.66) to get
´1 ¯
Ć Ć 1 1
}IEθij,y pχαβ ´ χ αβ
1 q}L 2 pY q ď C |θ ´ θ | ` ` 1 .
m,θ m,θ
θ1 θ
Then
´1 ¯
Ć Ć 1 1 1
}χαβ ´ χ αβ
1 }H 1 pY q ď C |θ ´ θ | ` ` θ ` θ . (11.67)
m,θ m,θ
θ1 θ
In the same way,
´1 ¯
Ą Ć 1 1 1
}χαβ αβ
b,θ ´ χb,θ 1 }H 1 pY q ď C |θ ´ θ | ` ` θ ` θ .
θ1 θ
As a consequence, the homogenized coefficients (11.63) are locally Lipschitz
continuous on p0, `8q.
Step 2. Similarly, for θ “ 0, we prove the continuity at 0 of the function
Ć Ą
θ ÞÑ pχαβ αβ
m,θ , χb,θ q for the strong topology of WD0 .
Recall that
Ć 8 z Ą 8 y
χαβ αβ αβ
m,θ “ χm,θ ` χm,θ , χαβ αβ αβ
b,θ “ χb,θ ` χb,θ . (11.68)
Ą Ą
From (11.66) and (11.53), up to a subsequence, there exist Υαβ αβ
m and Υb
in WD0 , such that as θ Ñ 0,
Ć Ą
χαβ αβ
m,θ á Υm weakly in WD0 ,
z
B χαβ
m,θ
θ á 0 weakly in L2 pY q3 ,
By3
Ą Ą
χαβ αβ
b,θ á Υb weakly in WD0 ,
y
B χαβ
b,θ
θ á 0 weakly in L2 pY q3 .
By3
Then, taking ψr “ ψ8 ` ψp in WD as test function in (11.59), and passing to

the limit, gives
ż
` Ą αβ ˘ 0
aijkl Mαβ r
ij ` IEij,y pΥm q IEij,y pψq dy “ 0,
0
ż Y
` Ąαβ ˘ 0
aijkl y3 Mαβ p
ij ` IEij,y pΥb q IEij,y pψq dy “ 0.
0
Y
By density, these equalities hold true for any ψr in WD0 . Hence,
Ą Ć Ą Ą
Υαβ αβ
m “ χm,0 and Υαβ αβ
b “ χb,0 .
396
It is then easily proved that the whole sequence strongly converges to its
limit in WD0 . Consequently, the homogenized coefficients are continuous
functions at θ “ 0.
Step 3. The continuity of the homogenized coefficients at `8, is proved
through the continuity of the function
` Ć θ Ą αβ ˘
θ ÞÑ IEθy pχαβ
m,θ q, IEy pχb,θ q
for the strong topology of L2 pY q6 . To do so, it is sufficient to show that the

following function is continuous:
Ć
θ ÞÑ IEθy pχαβ
m,θ q.
Ą
A similar proof corresponding to IEθy pχαβ
b,θ q will give the result.
Recalling (11.68), estimates (11.58) and (11.66) imply
8 `z˘
}χαβ
m,θ }H 1 p´1,1q ď C, }Eyθ χαβ
m,θ }L2 pY q ď C. (11.69)
In Proposition 11.13 the domain Yθ was viewed as a thin periodic plate of

z
thickness 2{θ. Now the displacement χαβ
m,θ is decomposed in the same way as
in Step 1 above. Due to estimates (11.67) and (11.69), up to a subsequence
8 y
(of tθu), there exist Υαβ αβ
m in W and Υm in D8 , such that
8 8αβ
χαβ
m,θ á Υm weakly in W,
` z ˘ ` αβ ˘
8 y
Eyθ χαβ
m,θ á Ey Υm weakly in L2 pY q6 .
Take as test function in (11.59) ψr “ ψ8 ` ψp in WD , where

” p ı ` ˘
p
ψpyq “ Ψp α py 1 q ´ y3 B Ψ3 py 1 q eα ` Ψ
p 3 py 1 qe3 ` 1 ψp y 1 , y3 for a.e. y P Y.
Byα θ
Ą 8αβ y
Passing to the limit gives (here we set Υαβm “ Υm ` Υ m )
αβ
ż
` Ą ˘
aijkl Mαβ 8 αβ q IE8 pψqr dy “ 0.
ij ` IEij,y pΥ m kl,y
Y
By the density of WD in WD8 , this equality holds true for any ψr in WD8 .
Hence
Ą Ć
Υαβ αβ
m “ χm,8 ,
and as before, the whole sequence strongly converges. Consequently, the

homogenized coefficients are continuous at θ “ `8.
397
11.8. Complements
The required continuity is now a consequence of Lemmas 11.22, 11.26 and

Remark 11.21 :
Theorem 11.27. The function
θ ÞÝÑ U θ “ pUm
θ
, U3θ q,
is continuous on r0, `8s for the strong topology of IDM .
398
Part VI
An application: sharp
error estimates
Part VI An application: sharp error astimates
The goal of the last part of this book is to establish precise error esti-
mates and correctors for the homogenization of second order elliptic problems
(Chapters 13 and 14).
Some preliminary results are obtained in Chapter 12 which starts with
classical estimates for functions of W 1,p pΩq in layers of small thickness δ
near the boundary of Ω. These estimates are then used to control the dis-
1
tance between a function and its local average for the case of rW 1,p pΩqs1 and
´1,p
W pΩq (Proposition 12.5 which extends Proposition 1.38). The latter are
used in the proof of Proposition 12.10, which, for ϕ in W 1,p pΩq, controls the
1
distance between ∇Qε pϕq and its unfolding in L8 pY ; pW 1,p pΩqq1 q. This is
an important ingredient to obtain the projection theorems of Chapter 13 and
the error estimates of Chapter 14.
The boundary layer corrector for the homogenization of the Dirichlet
problem is the solution of a Dirichlet problem with highly oscillating bound-
ary conditions. These problems are of interest in their own right and Chap-
ter 13 concerns their study and the corresponding error estimates. Here,
the homogenized limit depends on the choice of the subsequence of ε and
on the nature of the boundary of the domain (hyperplane or smooth hy-
persurface; see Sections 13.1 and 13.7). This precludes the existence of any
asymptotic expansion beyond the second term for the solution of a general
homogenization problem. The last section of Chapter 13 concerns projection
results from W 1,p pY q to Wper
1,p
pY q measured by the “periodicity defect” (see
Definition 13.33 and Proposition 13.38).
In Chapter 14, all the previous results are combined to get the error
estimates for the homogeneous Dirichlet problem (Theorem 14.3) and for the
homogeneous Neumann problem (Theorem 14.10).
401
Chapter 12
The scale-splitting
operators revisited
In Section 1.4, some estimates and convergence were obtained for functions
in W 1,p pRN q, p P r1, `8s (cf. Proposition 1.38 to Theorem 1.41). This
chapter is devoted to similar estimates and convergences for functions in
Lp pRN q. Accordingly, the estimates are shifted by one order of derivation,
e.g. (12.6). These results play a fundamental role in the following chapters
on error estimates. They also use estimates involving oscillating functions
which are given at the end of this chapter.
12.1 Notations and preliminary results

Let Ω be a domain in RN with bounded Lipschitz boundary. Recall some
notations introduced in Chapter 1 and that will be used in the sequel:
dpY q “ the diameter of Y,

ρpxq “ dist px, BΩq, @x P RN (see (1.46)),
(
Wρ1,p pΩq “ φ P Lp pΩq | ρ∇φ P Lp pΩqN (see Subsection 1.4.3).
Set ! ρpxq )
ρε pxq “ inf 1, for x P RN .
εdpY q
For δ ą 0, introduce the sets
. (
δ “ x P Ω | ρpxq ă δ ,
Ωbl
. ( (12.1)
Ωbδ “ x P RN | ρpxq ă δ .
The next lemma and proposition give some classical estimates in a neigh-
borhood of the boundary of an open set.

12.1. Notations and preliminary results
Lemma 12.1. Suppose p P r1, `8s. Let O be an open set given in an or-
thonormal coordinate system pO; e1 , . . . , eN q by a map f : r´α, αsN ´1 Ñ R,
Lipschitz continuous, such that
ˇ (
O “ px1 , xN q P RN ˇ f px1 q ă xN ă f px1 q ` β, x1 P p´α, αqN ´1 .
where x1 “ px1 , . . . , xN ´1 q and α, β are strictly positive constants.
Denote by BOf the lower part of the boundary of O, i.e.,
ˇ (
BOf “ px1 , xN q P RN ˇ xN “ f px1 q, x1 P p´α, αqN ´1 .
For every η P p0, βs, set
ˇ (
Oη “ px1 , xN q P RN ˇ f px1 q ă xN ă f px1 q ` η, x1 P p´α, αqN ´1 .
Then, for every ϕ P W 1,p pOq, p P r1, `8s, one has
` ˘
}ϕ}Lp pOη q ď C η 1{p }ϕ}Lp pBOf q ` η}∇ϕ}Lp pOη q ,
` ˘ (12.2)
}ϕ}Lp pBOf q ď Cη ´1{p }ϕ}Lp pOη q ` η}∇ϕ}Lp pΩq .
The constant depends on α and β as well as the Lipschitz constant of f but
not on p.
Proof. Let ϕ be in C 1 pOq and p P r1, `8q. For all x1 P p´α, αqN ´1 , one has
ż ż ˇ Bϕ ˇp
ˇ ˇ ˇ ` ˘ˇ p´1
ˇ ˇ
ˇϕpx1 , tqˇp dt ď 2p´1 η ˇϕ x1 , f px1 q ˇp ` 2 η p
ˇ px1 , tqˇ dt,
Ipx1 q p Ipx1 q Bx N
where Ipx1 q “ rf px1 q, f px1 q ` ηs. Hence, for a.e. x1 P p´α, αqN ´1
ż
ˇ ˇ ˇ ` ˘ˇ a
ˇϕpx1 , tqˇp dt ď 2p η ˇϕ x1 , f px1 q ˇp 1 ` |∇f px1 q|2
Ipx1 q
ż ˇ Bϕ ˇp
ˇ ˇ
` 2p η p ˇ px1 , tqˇ dt.
1
Ipx q Bx N
Integrating with respect to x1 P p´α, αqN ´1 yields

` ˘
}ϕ}Lp pOη q ď C η 1{p }ϕ}Lp pBOf q ` η}∇ϕ}Lp pOη q .
The constant depends on α and β but not on p. By the density of C 1 pOq in

W 1,p pOq, this inequality is also satisfied for every ϕ in W 1,p pOq, p P r1, `8q.
Passing to the limit with respect to p, this estimate holds true for every ϕ in
W 1,8 pOq.
Inequality (12.2)2 is shown in a similar way.
Proposition 12.2. Suppose p P r1, `8s. There exist δ0 and C which only
depend on BΩ, such that for every φ in W 1,p pΩq and every δ P p0, δ0 s,
` ˘
}φ}Lp pΩbl
δ q
ď C δ 1{p }φ}Lp pBΩq ` δ}∇φ}Lp pΩblδ q
pď Cδ 1{p }φ}W 1,p pΩq q,
` ˘ (12.3)
}φ}Lp pBΩq ď Cδ ´1{p }φ}Lp pΩbl δ q
` δ}∇φ}L p pΩq .
404
Chapter 12. The scale-splitting operators revisited
Remark 12.3. As soon as (12.3)1 holds for every δ in some p0, δ0 s, it holds
for every δ ą 0. Indeed, for δ in p0, δ0 s this inequality is given by (12.3)1
with constants independent of δ while for δ ě δ0
` ˘
}φ}Lp pΩbl
δ q ď }φ}L p pΩq ď C }φ}Lp pBΩq ` }∇φ}Lp pΩq
C ` 1{p ˘
ď 1{p
δ }φ}Lp pBΩq ` δ}∇φ}Lp pΩq .
inft1, δ0 u
Proof of Proposition 12.2. Since the boundary of Ω is Lipschitz, there exist

constants α, β, C, M strictly positive, a finite number N of orthonormal local
coordinate systems in pOr ; e1r , . . . , eN r q and N maps fr : r´α, αsN ´1 Ñ R,
Lipschitz continuous with constant M , 1 ď r ď N , such that,
N !
ď ˇ )
BΩ “ px1r , xN,r q ˇ xN,r “ fr px1r q, x1r P p´α, αqN ´1 ,
r“1
N !
ď ˇ )
C Ă
Ωbl px1r , xN,r q ˇ fr px1r q ă xN,r ă fr px1r q ` β, x1r P p´α, αqN ´1 Ă Ω,
r“1
N !
ď ˇ )
ΩbC Ă px1r , xN,r q ˇ |xN,r ´ fr px1r q| ă β, x1r P p´α, αqN ´1 ,
r“1
where x1r “ px1,r , . . . , xN ´1,r q.

Set
. a a
δ0 “ inftC, β{ 1 ` M 2 and δ̄ “ δ 1 ` M 2.
Through easy geometrical arguments one shows that for every δ P p0, δ0 s,
N !
ď ˇ )
Ωbδ Ă px1r , xN,r q ˇ |xN,r ´ fr px1r q| ă δ̄, x1r P p´α, αqN ´1 Ă Ωbδ̄ .
r“1
Then, combining estimates (12.2) for every local maps, estimates (12.3) are
obtained for every δ P p0, δ0 s.
Recalling that Λε is included in Ωbl
εdpY q , from Remark 12.3 it follows that
for every ε ą 0,
` ˘
}ϕ}Lp pΛε q ď }ϕ}Lp pΩbl q ď C ε1{p }ϕ}Lp pBΩq ` ε}∇ϕ}Lp pΩq , (12.4)
εdpY q
where C depends only on BΩ and dpY q, but not upon p and ε.

Corollary 12.4. There is a constant C depending on BΩ and independent
of p and δ, such that for every ψ in W01,p pΩq (resp. in W 1,p pRN q),
}ψ}Lp pΩbl
δ q
ď Cδ}∇ψ}Lp pΩq ,
(12.5)
(resp. }ψ}Lp pΩbδ q ď Cδ 1{p }ψ}W 1,p pRN q ).
405
12.2. Shifted estimates
Proof. Estimate (12.5)1 is an immediate consequence of Remark 12.3. Pro-

ceeding as in the proof of Proposition 12.2 and due to Remark 12.3, it gives
` ˘
}φ}Lp pΩb zΩbl q ď C δ 1{p }φ}Lp pBΩq ` δ}∇φ}Lp pRN q ď Cδ 1{p }φ}W 1,p pRN q .
δ δ
This inequality, together with that in Remark 12.3, gives (12.5)2 .
12.2 Shifted estimates

Proposition 12.5 (Compare with Proposition 1.38). Suppose p P r1, `8s.
Let Ω be a bounded domain in RN with a Lipschitz boundary. Then, for every
ϕ in Lp pΩq,
}ϕ1Ωp ε ´ Mε pϕq}rW 1,p1pΩqs1 ď Cε}ϕ}Lp pΩq ,
1
}ϕ ´ Mε pϕq}rW 1,p1pΩqs1 ď Cε}ϕ}Lp pΩq ` Cε1{p }ϕ}Lp pΩbl q, (12.6)
εdpY q
}ϕ ´ Mε pϕq}W ´1,p pΩq ď Cε}ϕ}Lp pΩq .
Likewise, for every ϕ in Lp pRN q,

Ăε pϕq}W ´1,p pRN q ď Cε}ϕ}Lp pRN q ,
piq }ϕ ´ M
1` ˘ (12.7)
piiq Ăε pϕq á 0
ϕ´M weakly in W ´1,p pRN q.
ε
For p “ `8, the convergence holds in W ´1,8 pRN q for the weak-˚ topology.
1
Proof. Let ϕ be in Lp pΩq and ψ be in W 1,p pΩq. One has
ż ż
` ˘ ` ˘
ϕ1Ωp ε ´ Mε pϕq ψ dx “ ϕ ψ ´ Mε pψq dx.
Ω pε
Ω
Then estimate (1.38)1 implies (12.6)1 .

1 1
Again, let ϕ be in Lp pΩq and ψ be in W 1,p pΩq (resp. in W01,p pΩq). The
above equalities and the definition of Mε give
ż ż ż
` ˘ ` ˘
ϕ ´ Mε pϕq ψ dx “ ϕ ψ ´ Mε pψq dx ` ϕ ψ dx.
Ω pε
Ω Λε
Estimates (1.38)1 and (12.4) then give (12.6)2,3 .

For Ω “ RN , the same computation, together with inequality (1.38)1 ,
proves (12.7)(i).
1
It remains to prove convergence in (12.7)(ii). To do so, for ψ in W 1,p pRN q,
consider
ż Ăε pϕq ż Ăε pψq
ϕ´M ψ´M
ψ dx “ ϕ dx
RN ε RN ε
ż
1 Trε pψq ´ MĂε pψq
“ Trε pϕq dxdy.
|Y | RN ˆY ε
406
Applying Proposition 1.39 for Ω “ RN , we obtain

ż Ăε pϕq ż
ϕ´M 1
lim ψ dx “ ϕpxq y c ¨ ∇ψpxq dxdy “ 0.
εÑ0 RN ε |Y | RN ˆY
This ends the proof.
Remark 12.6. The equivalent of (1.38)(ii) of Proposition 1.38 with a deriva-
tive shift does not hold in general. Indeed, this would imply the existence of
a uniform estimates of the form
@ϕ P Lp pΩq, }Trε pϕq ´ M

Ăε pϕq}W ´1,p pΩˆY q ď Cε}ϕ}Lp pΩq , (12.8)
but the latter is false. A counter example to this inequality is constructed

.
with the help of the sequence tϕε uε defined by ϕε pxq “ Φptx{εuY q for a non
constant Φ in Lp pY q satisfying MY pΦq “ 0. Since Trε pϕε qpx, yq “ Φpyq1Ωp ε
a.e. in Ω ˆ Y , Proposition 1.8 implies
´ |Ω| ¯1{p
}ϕε }Lp pΩq Ñ }Φ}Lp pY q .
|Y |
Also MĂε pϕε q “ 0. This contradicts (12.8). Further down (see (12.15)), we
show that an estimate similar to (12.8) can be established when replacing ϕ
by the scale-splitting operator Qε pϕq.
q for w measurable on RN :
Recall the definition of w
q
wpxq “ wp´xq for a.e. x P RN .
Lemma 12.7. Suppose p P r1, `8s. For every ϕ in Lp pRN q and θ in

1
Lp pRN q, the following equalities hold:
ż ż
piq MĂε pϕqpxq M Ăε pθqpxq dx “ Ăε pϕqpxq
M q M q
Ăε pθqpxq dx,
RN RN
ż ż
piiq Qrε pϕqpxq MĂε pθqpxq dx “ MĂε pϕqpxq
q Q q
rε pθqpxq dx, (12.9)
RN RN
ż ż
piiiq rε pϕqpx, yq θpxq dx “
Trε ˝ Q q Trε ˝ Q
ϕpxq q
rε pθqpx, yq dx.
RN RN
The last equality is satisfied for every y P Y .

Proof. piq For a.e. x in RN one can write
”xı !x)
x “ εξ ` εy, with ξ “ P G, y“ P Y.
ε Y ε Y
ÿ
N
Hence, with b “ bi , one has ´x “ ´εpξ ` bq ` εpb ´ yq. Since ´pξ ` bq
i“1 ” ´x ı ! ´x )
belongs to G and b ´ y to Y , they are and , respectively.
ε Y ε Y
407
Then definition 1.21 and Remark 1.22 give

` ˘
Ăε pwqp´xq “ M
M Ăε pwq ´ εpξ ` bq
ż ż
1 ` ˘ 1 ` ˘
“ w ´εpξ ` bq ` εz dz “ q εξ ` εpb ´ zq dz
w
|Y | Y |Y | Y
ż
1 ` ˘
“ w Ăε pwqpεξq
q εξ ` εz 1 dz 1 “ M q “MĂε pwqpxq,
q
|Y | Y
which implies identity (i).
piiq It is immediate from the above equalities that for every ξ P G,
Ăε pwqp´εξq “ M
M Ăε pwqpεξ
q ´ εbq.
Now, using the explicit expression (1.62) of Qrε pϕq and the first equality
in (1.55), we compute successively
ż ÿ ÿ ` ˘
Ăε pθqpxq dx “ ε |Y |
N
Qrε pϕqpxqM Ăε pϕq εξ ` εκ M
M Ăε pθqpεξq
2 N
RN ξPG N κPt0,1u
ε |Y | ÿ
N ÿ
Ăε pθqpεξ ´ εκq
Ăε pϕqpεξqM
“ N M
2 ξPG κPt0,1uN
εN |Y | ÿ ÿ
Ăε pθqp´εξ ´ εκq
Ăε pϕqp´εξqM
“ M
2N ξPG
κPt0,1uN
ε |Y | ÿ
N ÿ
Ăε pϕqpεξ q
Ăε pθqpεξ
“ N M q ´ εbqM ` εκ ´ εbq
2 ξPG κPt0,1uN
εN |Y | ÿ ÿ Ă q
Ăε pθqpεξ
“ Mε pϕqpεξq
q M ` εκq
2N ξPG
κPt0,1uN
ż
“ M Ăε pϕqpxq
q Q q
rε pθqpxq dx.
RN
piiiq Again, due to the explicit expression (1.62) of Q rε pϕq and to the first
equality in (1.55), we proceed as in the proof of (12.9)(ii), to get
ż ż
rε pϕqp¨, yqθ dx “
Trε ˝ Q rε pϕqp¨, yqM
Trε ˝ Q Ăε pθq dx
RN RN
ÿ ÿ ` ˘
“ εN |Y | Ăε pϕq εξ `εκ M
qκ pyqM Ăε pθqpεξq
ξPG κPt0,1uN
ż
“ M q Trε ˝ Q
Ăε pϕq q yq dx
rε pθqp¨,
RN
ż
“ q Trε ˝ Q
ϕ q yq dx,
rε pθqp¨,
RN
which ends the proof of the lemma.
408
Proposition 12.8 (Compare with Proposition 12.5). Suppose p P r1, `8s.

(i) For every ϕ P Lp pRN q
› › › ›
›Qrε pϕq ´ ϕ› ´1,p N “ ›Rr ε pϕq› ´1,p N ď Cε}ϕ}Lp pRN q . (12.10)
W pR q W pR q
(ii) Moreover (compare with (1.75))
1r ÿN
Bϕ
Rε pϕq á ´ MY pyi q weakly in W ´1,p pRN q. (12.11)
ε i“1
Bx i
For p “ `8, the convergence holds in W ´1,8 pRN q for the weak-˚ topology.
Proof. (i) Due to (12.7)1 , to prove (12.10), it is enough to estimate the
› ›
quantity ›Q Ăε pϕq› ´1,p N . To do so, let ψ in W 1,p1pRN q. A simple
rε pϕq ´ M
W pR q
computation shows that
ż ż
` ˘ ` ˘
Ăε pϕq ´ Q
M rε pϕq ψ dx “ Ăε pϕq ´ Q
M rε pϕq MĂε pψq dx
RN RN
ż (12.12)
` ˘` ˘
` Ăε pϕq ´ Q
M rε pϕq ψ ´ M Ăε pψq dx.
RN
Propositions 1.24(i), 1.64(i) and 1.38(i) (with RN instead of Ω), give an upper
bound for the last term in the right-hand side above,
ˇż ` ˘` ˘ ˇ
ˇ Ăε pϕq ´ Qrε pϕq ψ ´ M Ăε pψq dxˇˇ ď Cε}ϕ}Lp pRN q }∇ψ}Lp1pRN q . (12.13)
ˇ M
RN
The next to the last term, according to equalities (12.9), becomes

ż ´ ¯
Ăε pϕq ´ Q
M rε pϕq MĂε pψq dx
RN
ż ´ ¯ (12.14)
“ Ă
Mε pϕq Ă q r q
q Mε pψq ´ Qε pψq dx,
RN
which, by using Proposition 1.64(iv), is evaluated as

ˇż ` ˘ ˇ
ˇ rε pϕq M
Ăε pϕq ´ Q Ăε pψq dxˇˇ ď Cε}ϕ|| q Lp1pRN q
ˇ M q Lp pRN q }∇ψ}
RN
ď Cε}ϕ}Lp pRN q ||∇ψ||Lp1pRN q .
This estimate, combined with (12.13) and (12.7)1 , proves (12.10).
(ii) Now, taking into account equality (12.12) and (12.14), one writes
ż rε pϕq ż Ăε pϕq ż Ăε pϕq ´ Q rε pϕq
ϕ´Q ϕ´M M
ψ dx “ ψ dx ` ψ dx
RN ε RN ε RN ε
ż Ăε pϕq ´ Qrε pϕq ż q ´Q
Ăε pψq q
rε pψq
M Ăε pϕq M
ψ dx “ M q dx
RN ε RN ε
ż Ă
` ˘
` Ăε pϕq ´ Q
M rε pϕq ψ ´ Mε pψq dx.
RN ε
409
Then (1.39) (with Ω “ RN ) and (1.75) imply the convergence
1 Ă q ¯ ÿN
B ψq
pMε pψq ´ Q q Ñ´
rε pψq MY pyi q
1
strongly in Lp pRN q.
ε i“1
Bxi
Finally, this convergence, (12.7)2 and (1.39) (with Ω “ RN ), give

ż ż ´ÿ
rε pϕq B ψq ¯
N
ϕ´Q
lim ψ dx “ ´ q
ϕ MY pyi q dx,
εÑ0 RN ε RN i“1
Bxi
from which the conclusion follows after performing an integration by parts

and a change of variable.
Proposition 12.9 (Compare with Proposition 1.38). Suppose p P r1, `8q.
Let ϕ be in Lp pRN q.
(i) Then,
› ›
rε pϕq ´ M
›Trε ˝ Q Ăε ˝ Q
rε pϕq› 8 ď Cε}ϕ}Lp pRN q , (12.15)
L pY ;W ´1,p pRN qq
with the constant C depending only on Y .

(ii) For every y in Y , one has the following weak convergence in W ´1,p pRN q:
1´ r r Ăε ˝ Q
¯
rε pϕq á y c ¨ ∇ϕ.
Tε ˝ Qε pϕqp ¨ , yq ´ M (12.16)
ε
1
Proof. (i) For ψ in W 1,p pRN q,
ż ż
` ˘ ` ˘
Ăε pϕq ´ M
M Ăε ˝ Qrε pϕq ψ dx “ ϕ´Q rε pϕq MĂε pψq dx
RN RN
ż ż (12.17)
` ˘ ` ˘
“ r
ϕ ´ Qε pϕq ψ dx ` ϕ´Q rε pϕq pMĂε pψq ´ ψq dx.
RN RN
By Proposition 1.64(i), (12.10) and (1.39) (with Ω “ RN ), one has the esti-
mate
}MĂε pϕq ´ MĂε ˝ Q rε pϕq}W ´1,p pRN q ď Cε}ϕ}Lp pRN q . (12.18)
Then, proceeding as in the proof of (12.10), we obtain
rε pϕqp¨, yq ´ M
}Trε ˝ Q Ăε pϕq}W ´1,p pRN q ď Cε}ϕ}Lp pRN q , @y P Y.
This, together with (12.18), gives (12.15).

1
(ii) Again, from equalities (12.17) with ψ in W 1,p pRN q,
ż
1` Ă Ăε ˝ Q
˘
rε pϕq ψ dx
Mε pϕq ´ M
RN ε
ż ż
` ˘ Ă
“
1r
Rε pϕq ψ dx ` rε pϕq Mε pψq ´ ψ dx.
ϕ´Q
RN ε RN ε
410
Then, from convergences (12.11), (1.39) (with Ω “ RN ) and (1.72)(i), one

gets
1` Ă Ăε ˝ Q
rε pϕq
˘
Mε pϕq ´ M
ε
ÿN
Bϕ
á´ MY pyi q weakly in W ´1,p pRN q. (12.19)
i“1
Bx i
Now, (12.9)(i) and (iii) imply that for every y in Y ,

ż ż q yq ´ M q
Trε ˝ Q Ăε pϕq rε pψqp¨,
Trε ˝ Q Ăε pψq
ψ dx “ q
ϕ dx.
RN ε RN ε
At this point, recall the strong convergence proved in Corollary 1.68,
1 r `r ˘ ÿN
B ψq
Tε ˝ Qε ´ M q ¨ , yq Ñ
Ăε pψqp yi strongly in Lp pRN ˆ Y q.
ε i“1
Bxi
The dependence of the left-hand side is affine with respect to each yi (it is in
Q1 pY q). Therefore it implies the point-wise convergence for every y P Y ,
1 r `r ˘ ÿN
B ψq
Tε ˝ Qε ´ M q ¨ , yq Ñ
Ăε pψqp yi strongly in Lp pRN q.
ε i“1
Bxi
Recalling that from (1.18), Trε ˝ M

Ăε “ M
Ăε , we finally get for every y P Y
ż ż ´ÿ
Trε ˝ Q Ăε pϕq B ψq ¯
N
lim ψ dx “ q
ϕ yi dx
εÑ0 RN ε RN i“1
Bxi
ż ´ÿ Bψ ¯ Aÿ E
N N
Bϕ
“´ ϕ yi dx “ yi , ψ .
RN i“1
Bxi i“1
Bxi W ´1,p pRN q,W 1,p pRN q
Together with (12.19), this implies (12.16).

(i) There exits a constant C “ CpY q, such that for every ϕ in W 1,p pRN q,
› ` ˘ ›
›Trε ∇Q rε pϕq›
rε pϕq ´ ∇Q ď Cε}∇ϕ}Lp pRN q . (12.20)
L8 pY ;W ´1,p pRN qq
(ii) The following weak convergence in W ´1,p pRN qN holds for y P Y :
1` r rε pϕqqp ¨ , yq ´ ∇Q
˘
rε pϕqp ¨ q á p∇2 ϕ ´ diag p∇2 ϕqq y c ,
Tε p∇Q (12.21)
ε
where diag p∇2 ϕq is the N 2 diagonal matrix with the same diagonal as ∇2 ϕ.
411
(iii) Let Ω be a bounded domain with Lipschitz boundary. There exists a con-
stant C depending on BΩ and dpY q, such that for every ϕ in W 1,p pV4εdpY q pΩqq
(cf. notation 1.63),
› ` ˘ ›
›Tε ∇Qε pϕq ´ ∇Qε pϕq› 8
L pY ;pW 1,p1 pΩqq1 q
1 (12.22)
ď Cε}∇ϕ}Lp pΩq ` Cε1{p }∇ϕ}Lp pΩb q.4εdpY q
1,p1
Proof. (i) Let Φ be in W pRN q. For 1 ď i ‰ j ď N and y P Y , one has
B ´ r ´ BQ
rε pϕq ¯ ´ B2 Q
rε pϕq ¯
Tε “ Trε ,
Byi Bxj Bxi Bxj
the latter being ε-piece-wise constant with respect to x. Consequently,
ż
B ´ r ´ BQrε pϕq ¯¯
Tε px, yq Φpxq dx
RN Byi Bxj
ż ´ B2 Q (12.23)
rε pϕq ¯
“ε r
Tε Ă
px, yq Mε pΦqpxq dx.
RN Bxi Bxj
rε pϕq
B2 Q
Using the explicit expression (1.64) of and equality (1.69), a discrete
Bxi Bxj
integration by parts yields
ż ´ B2 Q
rε pϕq ¯
Trε px, yqMĂε pΦqpxq dx
RN Bxi Bxj
ÿ” ÿ 1´ Ă ´ Bϕ ¯
“εN |Y | qij pyq M ε ˝ M εbi pεξ ` εκ ` εbj q
ξPG κPKij
κ
ε Bxi
´ ¯ ı ` ˘
´M Ăε ˝ Mεb Bϕ pεξ ` εκq M Ăε Φ pεξq
i
Bxi
ÿ” ÿ ´ Bϕ ¯ ı (12.24)
“εN |Y | Ă
κ pyqMε ˝ Mεbi
qij pεξ ` εκq
ξPG κPKij
Bxi
´ ¯
ˆM Ăε ˝ M´εb BΦ pεξq
j
Bxj
ÿ ż ´ Bϕ ¯ ´ ¯
“ Ăε ˝ Mεb Ăε ˝ M´εb BΦ dx.
κ pyq
qij M p¨ ` εκq M
κPK RN
i
Bxi j
Bxj
ij
Then, from Proposition 1.24 (i) and Proposition 1.58, we get

ˇż ´ B2 Q
rε pϕq ¯ ˇ › Bϕ › › BΦ ›
ˇ ˇ › › › ›
ˇ Trε px, yqΦpxq dxˇ ď C › › p N › › .
RN Bxi Bxj Bxj L pR q Bxi Lp1pRN q
Therefore, for every y P Y and i ‰ j,
› B ´ ´ BQrε pϕq ¯¯ ›
› ›
› Trε p ¨ , yq› ´1,p N ď Cε}∇ϕ}Lp pRN q .
Byi Bxj W pR q
412
On the other hand, due to (1.57)
B r ´ BQ
rε pϕq ¯ 1 B2 ´ r r ¯
Tε p ¨ , yq “ T ε ˝ Q ε pϕq p ¨ , yq ” 0. (12.25)
Byj Bxj ε Byj2
Thus, the last two results imply for every y P Y and j “ 1, . . . , N ,

› ´ BQ
rε pϕq ¯ ›
› ›
›∇y Trε p ¨ , yq› ď Cε}∇ϕ}Lp pRN q . (12.26)
Bxj W ´1,p pRN q
` ˘
This means that the map y ÞÑ Trε ∇Q rε pϕq p ¨ , yq is Lipschitz with values in
the space W ´1,p pRN qN . Moreover, it satisfies
` ˘
}∇y Trε ∇Q rε pϕq }L8 pY ;W ´1,p pRN qq ď Cε}∇ϕ}Lp pRN q .
This, by using the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality and recalling (1.17), yields

› ` ˘ › › ›
›Trε ∇Qrε pϕq ´ MY ˝ Trε p∇Qrε pϕqq› 8 ď Cε›∇ϕ›Lp pRN q ,
which reads,
› ` ˘ › › ›
›Trε ∇Qrε pϕq ´ M
Ăε p∇Q
rε pϕqq› 8 ď Cε›∇ϕ›Lp pRN qN .
Hence,
› ` ˘ › › ›
rε pϕq ´ M
›Trε ∇Q Ăε p∇Q
rε pϕqq› 1,8 ď Cε›∇ϕ›Lp pRN q .
W pY ;W ´1,p pRN qq
Then, inequality (12.20) follows using (12.7)(i) (with ∇Q rε pϕq in place of ϕ

and taking into account (1.80)3 ).
(ii) From (12.23), proceeding as the proof of the equalities in Lemma 12.7
B2 Qrε pϕq
with the explicit expression (1.64) of , one has for i ‰ j and for
Bxi Bxj
every y P Y ,
ż
1 B ´ r ´ BQrε pϕq ¯¯
Tε px, yq Φpxq dx
RN ε Byi Bxj
ż ´ B2 Q q ¯
rε pΦq
“ Ăε pϕqpxq
M q Trε px, yq dx.
RN Bxi Bxj
Passing to the limit for Φ P DpRN q, and using (1.74) gives for every y P Y
1 B ´ r ´ BQ
rε pϕq ¯¯ B2 ϕ
Tε p ¨ , yq Ñ in D1 pRN q.
ε Byi Bxj Bxi Bxj
With (12.26) and (12.25), this implies the convergence
1 ` ˘
rε pϕq p ¨ , yq á ∇2 ϕ ´ diagp∇2 ϕq
∇y Trε ∇Q weakly in W ´1,p pRN qN .
ε
413
On the one hand, since the sequence

! ´ ˘¯)
. 1 r` r ˘ `
Ăε ∇Q
rε pϕq
Iε “ Tε ∇Qε pϕq ´ M ,
ε ε
is uniformly bounded in W 1,8 pY ; W ´1,p pRN qqN , one can assume (up to a
subsequence, which will be irrelevant at the end of the proof due to the
uniqueness of the limit) that
Iε á W p¨, yq weakly in W ´1,p pRN qN , @y P Y.
Since MY pIε q “ 0 in W ´1,p pRN qN , one has
MY pW q “ 0 in W ´1,p pRN qN .
On the other hand,
∇y Iε p ¨ , yq á ∇2 ϕ ´ diagp∇2 ϕq weakly in W ´1,p pRN qN , @y P Y.
Hence, for every y P Y

` ˘
W “ p∇2 ϕ ´ diag ∇2 ϕq y c in W ´1,p pRN qN , (12.27)
and the whole sequence converges.

rε pϕq in place of ϕ), conver-
Finally, by virtue of (12.7)(ii) (written for ∇Q
gence (12.21) follows.
1
(iii) Let Φ be in W 1,p pRN q. Proceeding as in the proof of (12.24), yields
ż
B ´ ´ BQ
rε pϕq ¯¯
Tε px, yqΦpxq dx
Ω Byi Bxj
ż ´ B2 Q
rε pϕq ¯
“ε Tε Ăε pΦqpxq dx.
px, yqM
Ωpε Bxi Bxj
Following along the lines of the computation (12.24), one obtains

ˇż ´ B2 Q
rε pϕq ¯ ˇ
ˇ Ăε pΦqpxq dxˇˇ
ˇ Tε px, yqM
Ωpε Bxi Bxj
ÿ „ˇ ż ´ ¯ ´ ¯ ˇ
ď qij pyq
ˇ
ˇ MĂε ˝ Mεb Bϕ p¨ ` εκq M Ăε ˝ M´εb BΦ dxˇˇ
κPKij
κ
Ωpε
i
Bxi j
Bxj
ˇ ż j
ˇ 1´ Ă ´ Bϕ ¯ ˇ ` ˘ ˇ
`ˇ Mε ˝ Mεbi p¨ ` εκ ` εbj qˇMĂε Φ dxˇˇ .
Ωb2εdpY q ε Bxi
Let now evaluate the two terms in the right-hand side of this inequality.
For the first term, one has
414
ˇż ´ ¯ ´ ¯ ˇ
ˇ
ˇ Ăε ˝ Mεb Bϕ p¨ ` εκq M
M Ăε ˝ M´εb BΦ dxˇˇ
pε
Ω
i
Bxi j
Bxj
› Bϕ › › BΦ ›
› › › ›
ď C› › p N › › .
Bxj L pR q Bxi Lp1pRN q
For the second term, making use of (12.5)2 , one gets
ˇż 1´ Ă ´ Bϕ ¯ ` ˘ ˇ
ˇ Ăε Φ dxˇˇ
ˇ Mε ˝ Mεbi p¨ ` εκ ` εbj qM
Ωb2εdpY q ε Bxi
› Bϕ › › ›
› › 1{p1 › Bϕ ›
ď C› › p b }Φ}Lp1pΩb q ď Cε › › }Φ}W 1,p pRN q .
Bxj L pΩ4εdpY q q 2εdpY q Bxj Lp pΩb4εdpY q q
Therefore,
ˇż B ´ r ´ BQ
rε pϕq ¯¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ Tε p¨, yqΦ dxˇ
Ω Byi Bxj
´ › Bϕ › › › ¯
› › 1 › Bϕ ›
ď C ε› › p N ` ε1{p › › p b }Φ}W 1,p pRN q ,
Bxj L pR q Bxj L pΩ4εdpY q q
so that, for every y P Y ,
› ´ ´ BQrε pϕq ¯¯ ›
›
›∇y Trε p¨, yq›pW ´1,p pΩqq1
Bxj
` › › 1› › ˘
ď C ε›∇ϕ›Lp pRN q ` ε1{p ›∇ϕ›Lp pΩb q
.
4εdpY q
rε pϕq
BQ
Using the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality and (12.6)1 (with in place
Bxj
of ϕ), this last inequality gives (12.22) written for Qrε pϕq. Finally, as Qε pϕq
rε pϕq, estimate (12.22) is straightforward.
is the restriction to Ω of Q
Proposition 12.11. Let p be in r1, `8q.
(i) For every λ P Lp pY q with MY pλq “ 0 and ϕ P Lp pRN q, the following
inequality holds:
› ´! ¨ ) ¯ ›
› rε pϕq››
›λ Q ď Cε}ϕ}Lp pRN q }λ}Lp pY q , (12.28)
ε Y W ´1,p pRN q
with a constant C independent of ε.

Moreover,
1 ´! ¨ ) ¯ r
λ Qε pϕq á 0 weakly in W ´1,p pRN q. (12.29)
ε ε Y
(ii) For every Λ P Lp pY qN such that MY pΛq “ 0, and Φ P W 1,p pRN q, the
following inequality holds:
› ´! ¨ ) ¯ ›
› rε pΦq››
›Λ ¨ ∇Q ď Cε}∇Φ}Lp pRN q }Λ}Lp pY q , (12.30)
ε Y W ´1,p pRN q
415
with a constant C independent of ε.

Moreover, one has the weak convergence in W ´1,p pRN q
ż
1 ´! ¨ ) ¯
N ´
ÿ ¯ B2 Φ
r 1
Λ ¨ ∇Qε pΦq á ´ yic Λpyq ¨ bi dy . (12.31)
ε ε Y i“1
|Y | Y Bx2i
1
(iii) Let tvε uε be a sequence in W 1,p pRN q, such that there exist v in
1 1 1,p1
W 1,p pRN q and vp in Lp pRN ; Wper pY qq satisfying the following convergences:
1
vε á v weakly in W 1,p pRN q,
and
Trε p∇vε q á ∇v ` ∇y vp weakly in Lp pRN ˆ Y qN .
1
Then, for every Λ P Lp pY qN such that MY pΛq “ 0,

ż
1 ´! ¨ ) ¯ rε pΦq vε dx
Λ ¨ ∇Q
RN ε ε Y
ż ÿN
1 BΦ Bv c
Ñ y Λpyq ¨ bi dxdy (12.32)
|Y | RN ˆY i“1 Bxi Bxi i
ż
1
` Λpyq ¨ ∇Φpxq vppx, yq dxdy.
|Y | RN ˆY
1
Proof. (i) For v in W 1,p pRN q, by unfolding we have
ż ´! ¨ ) ¯
λ rε pϕqv dx
Q
RN ε Y
ż (12.33)
1
“ rε pϕqpx, yqλpyqTrε pvqpx, yq dxdy.
Trε ˝ Q
|Y | RN ˆY
Recall (1.38)2 (with RN instead of Ω):
}Trε pvq ´ v}Lp1pRN ˆY q ď Cε}∇v}Lp1pRN q
Then, using Proposition 1.64(i) and estimate (12.15)1 in (12.33), we obtain

ˇż ´! ¨ ) ¯ ˇ ˇ ż ˇ
ˇ rε pϕqv dxˇˇ ď ˇˇ 1 rε pϕqpx, yqλpyq vpxq dxdy ˇˇ
ˇ λ Q Trε ˝ Q
RN ε Y |Y | RN ˆY
` Cε}ϕ}Lp pRN q }λ}Lp pY q }∇v}Lp1pRN q
ˇ 1 ż ˇ
ˇ rε pϕqpx, yqλpyq vpxq dxdy ˇˇ
Ăε ˝ Q
ďˇ M
|Y | RN ˆY
` Cε}ϕ}Lp pRN q }λ}Lp pY q }∇v}Lp1pRN q .
Observe that the first term in the right-hand side vanishes since MY pλq “ 0
by hypothesis. So, (12.28) is proved.
416
1
To prove convergence (12.29), take ϕ in DpRN q and v in W 1,p pRN q. We
have successively,
ż
1 ´! ¨ ) ¯ r
λ Qε pϕq v dx
RN ε ε Y
ż
1
“ λpyqTrε ˝ Qrε pϕqpx, yqTrε pvqpx, yq dxdy
ε|Y | RN ˆY
ż r Ă
“
1
λpyqTrε ˝ Qrε pϕqpx, yq Tε pvqpx, yq ´ Mε pvqpxq dxdy (12.34)
|Y | RN ˆY ε
ż
1 rε pϕqpx, yq´ M
Trε ˝ Q Ăε ˝ Qrε pϕqpxq
Ăεpvqpxqdxdy
` λpyq M
|Y | RN ˆY ε
ż
1 Ăε ˝ Qrε pϕqpxqMĂε pvqpxq dxdy.
` λpyqM
ε|Y | RN ˆY
The last integral vanishes using again the fact that MY pλq “ 0.
Proposition 1.39(ii) (with RN instead of Ω) and (1.73) of Corollary 1.66
give the following strong convergences:
1` r ˘
Ăε pvq Ñ y c ¨ ∇v strongly in Lp1pRN ˆ Y q,
Tε pvq ´ M
ε
1` r r Ăε ˝ Q
˘
rε pϕqp¨q Ñ y c ¨ ∇ϕ strongly in Lp pRN ˆ Y q.
Tε ˝ Qε pϕqp ¨ , yq ´ M
ε
Passing to the limit in the two remaining integrals in the right-hand side
of (12.34) and taking into account the above convergences lead to
ż ż
1 ´! ¨ ) ¯ r 1
λ Qε pϕqv dx Ñ λpyq y c ¨ ∇vpxq ϕpxq dxdy
RN ε ε Y |Y | RN ˆY
ż
1
` λpyq y c ¨ ∇ϕpxq vpxq dxdy “ 0,
|Y | RN ˆY
which implies convergence (12.29) for ϕ P DpRN q. Since DpRN q is dense in

Lp pRN q, the above convergence and estimate (12.28), actually give (12.29)
for ϕ in Lp pRN q.
1
(ii) Let v be in W 1,p pRN q. Proceeding as above yields
ż ´! ¨ ) ¯
Λ ¨ ∇Q rε pΦq v dx
RN ε Y
ż
1 ` ˘
“ Λpyq ¨ Trε ∇Q
rε pΦq px, yqTε pvqpx, yq dxdy.
|Y | RN ˆY
As before, Trε pvq can be replaced by v in the right-hand side of this equality.
Then the result follows by using (12.20) and the assumption MY pΛq “ 0.
417
For convergence (12.31), first take Φ P DpRN q and, as before, write

ż
1 ´! ¨ ) ¯ rε pΦq v dx
Λ ¨ ∇Q
RN ε ε Y
ż r Ă
` ˘
“
1
Λpyq ¨ Trε ∇Q rε pΦq px, yq Tε pvqpx, yq ´ Mε pvqpxq dxdy
|Y | RN ˆY ε
ż ` ˘ ` ˘
1 Trε ∇Q rε pΦq px, yq ´ M Ăε ∇Q rε pΦq pxq
Ăε pvqpxq dxdy.
` Λpyq ¨ M
|Y | RN ˆY ε
Taking into account convergence (12.27), yields
1” r ` r ˘ `
Ăε ∇Q rε pΦq
˘ı
Tε ∇Qε pΦq ´ M
ε ` ˘
á ∇2 Φ ´ diagp∇2 Φq y c weakly in Lp pRN ˆ Y qN .
On the other hand, due to Proposition 1.39(ii) and recalling (1.20)-(1.73),

the above convergence implies that
ż
1 ´! ¨ ) ¯ rε pΦq v dx
Λ ¨ ∇Q
RN ε ε Y
ż
1
Ñ Λpyq ¨ ∇Φpxq y c ¨ ∇vpxq dxdy
|Y | RN ˆY
ż
1 ` ˘
` Λpyq ¨ ∇2 Φ ´ diagp∇2 Φq y c vpxq dxdy
|Y | RN ˆY
ż
1
“´ Λpyq ¨ diagp∇2 Φq y c vpxq dxdy,
|Y | RN ˆY
which is (12.31) for Φ P DpRN q.

Now, take Φ in W 1,p pRN q and Ψ in DpRN q. From (12.30) we have
ˇ ż 1 ´! ¨ ) ¯ ” ` ˘ı ˇ
ˇ rε pΨq v dxˇˇ
rε pΦq ´ Q
ˇ Λ ¨ ∇ Q
RN ε ε Y
ď C}∇pΦ ´ Ψq}Lp pRN q }Λ}Lp pY q }∇v}Lp1pRN q .
Then convergence (12.31) for Ψ gives

ˇż
ˇ 1 ´! ¨ ) ¯ rε pΦq v dx
lim sup ˇˇ Λ ¨ ∇Q
εÑ0 RN ε ε Y
ż ÿ ˇ
1
N
BΦ Bv c ˇ
´ yi Λpyq ¨ bi dxdy ˇˇ
|Y | RN ˆY i“1 Bxi Bxi
ď C}∇pΦ ´ Ψq}Lp pRN q }Λ}Lp pY q }∇v}Lp1pRN q ,
from which (12.31) follows by density.
418
(iii) It remains to prove (12.32). To do so, we proceed as above, repla-

cing convergence (ii) of Proposition 1.39 by the following one (see Theo-
rem 1.41(ii)):
1`r ˘
Ăε pvε q á y c ¨ ∇v ` vp weakly in Lp1pRN ˆ Y q.
Tε pvε q ´ M
ε
This completes the proof of Proposition 12.11.
419
Chapter 13
* Strongly oscillating
nonhomogeneous Dirichlet
condition
This chapter is dedicated to the homogenization of the Dirichlet problem

with a strongly oscillating nonhomogeneous boundary data, that is
#
div pAε ∇uε q “ 0 in Ω,
(13.1)
uε “ g ε on BΩ.
´! x ) ¯
with Aε pxq ” A , where A belongs to Mpα, β, Y q and gε is in
ε Y
H 1{2 pBΩq.
In [125], the case of a strongly oscillating boundary data is investigated
under the assumptions
gε á g weakly in H ´1{2 pBΩq and ε1{2 }gε }H 1{2 pBΩq Ñ 0,
in which case the limit of the sequence tuε uε satisfies problem (13.22) with
the matrix field Ahom .
In this chapter, we consider the more complicated case for which the
Dirichlet data gε is of the form,
´¨¯
gε “ Ψ G|BΩ (13.2)
ε
where G belongs to H 1 pΩq, while Ψ is in Hper,0 1
pY q X L8 pY q and satis-
fies a condition (see (13.3)) which guarantees that gε is in H 1{2 pBΩq and
ε1{2 }gε }H 1{2 pBΩq is bounded (see (13.4)). In the limit problem, the Dirichlet
data differs from the limit of the sequence tgε uε , which is an effect of the
homogenization inside Ω (see Section 13.7 for such a situation).

13.1. The one dimensional case
This kind of problem, with a strongly oscillating boundary condition,

occurs when dealing with boundary layer corrector terms for the classical
Dirichlet problem (3.3). This will be studied in Chapter 14.
Section 13.1 considers the one-dimensional case and shows that one cannot
expect convergence of the full sequence of solutions.
The next section 13.2 introduces the setting for the study in higher di-
mensions of the space with notations and preliminary results.
Section 13.3 is dedicated to sharp estimates of the solution of this problem.
In Section 13.6, we characterize the asymptotic behavior (when ε goes to 0)
of the sequence tuε uε in the general case, while Section 13.7 is concerned with
the case of a domain with a boundary containing a flat part.
Several preliminary results, needed in Section 13.3 as well as in Chap-
ter 14 are introduced in Section 13.9, namely Theorem 13.41 and the key
Theorems 13.43 and 13.44. These are generalizations of projection results
onto spaces of periodic functions in the Hilbert setting (p=2), estimating the
distance from an element of W 1,p pY q to Wper
1,p
pY q via its “periodicity defect”,
1´1{p,p
expressed as the W norm of the differences of its traces on the opposite
faces of the unit cell Y (see Definition 13.33; cf. [120, 122]).
In this chapter the domain Ω is bounded with a Lipschitz or C 1,1 boundary.
We use the notations introduced in Section 12.1.
13.1 The one dimensional case

In this section, we investigate the solution of problem 13.1 in the one dimen-
sional case. ` ˘
Let A be in M α, β, p0, 1q and extend it by 1-periodicity in R. Let Ψ be
1
in Hper p0, 1q(1) . Problem (13.1) reads: Find uεΨ P H 1 pa, bq such that
$ ´ ´ ¯ ε¯
’
’ d ¨ duΨ
& A “ 0 in pa, bq,
dx ε dx
’ ´ ¯ ´ ¯
’
%uεΨ paq “ Ψ a , uεΨ pbq “ Ψ b .
ε ε
Its (explicit) solution is
żx
1
á¯ ” ´b¯ ´ a ¯ı dt
a Apt{εq
uεΨ pxq “ Ψ ` Ψ ´Ψ żb
ε ε ε 1
dt.
a Apt{εq
It is well-known (see [143]) that if 1, a and b are linearly independent over

the rational numbers, then for every pa0 , b0 q P r0, 1s2 there exists a sequence
of integers pNk qkPN , such that
` ( (˘
lim Nk a , Nk b “ pa0 , b0 q.
kÑ`8
(1) Actually, Ψ continuous and 1-periodic is enough for the analysis in this section.
422
Chapter 13. * Strongly oscillating nonhomogeneous Dirichlet condition
Choosing the subsequence tεk ukPN “ t1{Nk ukPN , one has

´! a ) ! b )¯
lim , “ pa0 , b0 q P r0, 1s2 .
εÑ0 ε ε
The corresponding sequence tuΨ
ek
ukPN weakly converges to uΨ P H 1 pa, bq
where
` ˘x ´ a
uΨ pxq “ Ψpa0 q ` Ψpb0 q ´ Ψpa0 q for every x P ra, bs.
bá
For this example, the homogenized coefficient is constant, explicitly given
by the formula
´ż 1 ¯´1
Ahom
“ Aptq´1 dt ,
0
and uΨ is the solution of

# 2
uΨ “ 0 in pa, bq,
uΨ paq “ Ψpa0 q, uΨ pbq “ Ψpb0 q.
If Ψ is not constant, one obtains infinitely many limit points for the full
sequence tuεΨ uε , each corresponding to a boundary condition pΨpa0 q, Ψpb0 qq
with pa0 , b0 q P r0, 1s2 .
13.2 Notations and preliminary results

In dimension higher than 1, the Dirichlet data (13.2) is of very specific type.
To ensure that it belongs to H 1{2 pBΩq, we need more information.
First, the following problem is variational and by the Lax-Milgram theo-
1
rem has a unique solution Ψ in Hper,0 pY q for given B in M pα, β, Y q and F
in L pY q :
2 N
$ż ` ˘
& B ∇y Ψ ` F ∇y ϕ dy “ 0,
Y (13.3)
%
@ϕ P Hper,0 pY q.
1
1
Every Ψ in Hper,0 pY q is the solution of such a problem, but not all are such
` . ˘
that the trace of Ψ ε is a multiplier for H 1{2 pBΩq.
If F is in L8 pY q (which is the case for the boundary layer correctors
` . ˘ in
Chapter 14), then, as was shown in Lemma 3.29, the trace of Ψ ε is a
multiplier for H 1{2 pBΩq. This observation justifies the following definition:
Definition 13.1 (The map KB and the space H B ). For B in M pα, β, Y q,

let KB denote the map which, to F in L8 pY qN , assigns the solution Ψ of
problem (13.3)., i.e.,
KB pF q “ Ψ.
423
13.2. Notations and preliminary results
Its kernel is the non trivial set

(
F P L8 pY q| divy F “ 0 in the sense of Hper
1
pY q (cf. footnotep10q page 123).
The range of this map is denoted H B . The natural norm on H B is therefore

. (
}Ψ}HB “ min }F }L8 pY q | Ψ “ KB pF q .
1,8
The space H B contains Wper,0 pY q (to see this, choose F “ ´B∇y Ψ for
1,8
Ψ P Wper,0 pY q!), so it is dense in Hper,0
1
pY q. By Lemma 3.29 the space H B is
8
included in L pY q and there exists a constant C depending only upon Y, α
and β, but independent of ε, such that
}Ψ}H 1 pY qXL8 pY q ď C}Ψ}HB .
Non trivial examples of elements of H A are given by the correctors: defi-

pj “ KA pAbj q, j “ 1, . . . , N .
nition (3.10) implies that χ
Actually, the elements of H B satisfy some important estimates that are
given in the next result.
´¨¯
Lemma 13.2. For every pΨ, wq P H B ˆ H 1 pΩq the product Ψ w belongs
ε
to H pΩq. In particular,
1
´¨¯
Ψ w P H 1{2 pBΩq.
ε |BΩ |BΩ
Furthermore, there is a constant C depending only on Y, α and β (and
independent of ε), such that
› ´¨¯ › ` ˘
› ›
›Ψ w|BΩ › 1{2 ď C}Ψ}HB ε´1{2 }w}L2 pBΩq ` }∇w}L2 pΩq . (13.4)
ε |BΩ H pBΩq
It also satisfies the following estimate:

› ´¨¯ › ` ˘
› ›
›Ψ w› ď C}Ψ}HB }w}L2 pBΩq ` ε1{2 }∇w}L2 pΩq . (13.5)
ε 2
L pBΩq
Proof. Let F be in L8 pY q and Ψ “ KB pF q.

` . ˘
Step 1. Proof of Ψ ε w P H 1 pΩq.
Corollary 3.30 implies that
´¨¯
Ψ w P H 1 pΩq, @w P H 1 pΩq.
ε
By the trace theorem,
” ´¨¯ ı ” ´¨¯ ı ´¨¯
Ψ w P H 1{2 pBΩq and Ψ w ”Ψ w .
ε |BΩ ε |BΩ ε |BΩ |BΩ
This last identity is obviously satisfied a.e. in BΩ for w in C 8 pΩq, and by a

density argument extends to every w in H 1 pΩq.
424

Estimates (12.3)1 , (3.46) and (3.43) give
› ´¨¯ ›
› ›
›Ψ w› ď C}w}L2 pΩbl q }Ψ}HB
ε L2 pΩbl
εdpY q
q εdpY q
´ ¯
ď Cε1{2 }w}L2 pBΩq ` ε1{2 }∇w}L2 pΩbl q }Ψ}HB ,
2εdpY q
› ” ´ ¨ ¯ ı› (13.6)
› ›
›∇ Ψ w ›
ε L2 pΩblεdpY q
q
´ ¯
ď Cε´1{2 }w}L2 pBΩq ` ε1{2 }∇w}L2 pΩbl q }Ψ}HB .
2εdpY q
! ρpxq )
Consider the function ρε pxq “ inf 1, (2)
, which takes the value 1
εdpY q
if and only if ρ ě εdpY q. Then the function
´¨¯
p1 ´ ρε q Ψ w “ 0 for ρ ě εdpY q,
ε
and belongs to H 1 pΩq. So, estimates (13.6) and (12.3)1 imply (after some
easy computations),
› ´¨¯ › ` ´1{2 ˘
› ›
›p1 ´ ρε q Ψ w› ď C ε }w}L 2 pBΩq ` }∇w}L2 pΩq }Ψ}H ,
B
(13.7)
ε H 1 pΩq
from which estimate (13.4) is straightforward by the trace theorem.

Finally, (13.5) follows by using estimates (13.7) and (13.6) in (12.3)2 .
13.3 The problem and first estimate

The problem considered in this chapter can now be stated precisely. For
A P Mpα, β, Y q, set ´! x ) ¯
Aε pxq “ A ,
ε Y
which belongs to Mpα, β, Ωq. For G P H 1 pΩq and Ψ P H B , consider the
following nonhomogeneous Dirichlet problem:
$
&div pAε ∇uεΨ,G q “ 0 in Ω,
´¨¯ (13.8)
%uεΨ,G “ Ψ G on BΩ.
ε
This problem is well-posed.
The first estimate for uεΨ,G is a an exact application of Lemma 13.2 and
is formulated as follows:
(2) See 1.46 for the definition of ρ.
425
13.4. Dirichlet problem with data in H ´1{2 pBΩq
Proposition 13.3. Let Ω be a bounded domain with a Lipschitz boundary.

Let Ψ be in H B , and G be in H 1 pΩq. The solution uεΨ,G of problem (13.8)
satisfies the estimate
` ˘
}uεΨ,G }H 1 pΩq ď C}Ψ}HB ε´1{2 }G}L2 pBΩq ` }∇G}L2 pΩq , (13.9)
with C independent of ε.
As can be easily seen, this estimate is not uniform for ε going to 0, as soon
as Ψ is not constant. This means that the usual H 1 theory cannot be applied
to go to the limit for problem (13.8). However, (13.5) is a uniform bound in
L2 pBΩq for the Dirichlet data. Therefore we need a theory for solutions in
the case of Dirichlet boundary condition in a space containing L2 pBΩq.
In the next section, we briefly recall the case where the trace space is
H ´1{2 pBΩq. This will essentially require that the boundary BΩ be at least
C 1,1 and the matrix field be Lipschitz. These considerations do not apply
directly to problem (13.8) (because of the oscillating Aε ), but will apply with
the homogenized matrix Ahom as a tool to obtain estimates for the solution
of the original problem (13.8).
13.4 Dirichlet problem with data in H ´1{2 pBΩq

We start by recalling a classical result in the theory of elliptic partial diffe-
rential equations (see, for instance [114]).
Proposition 13.4. Assume that BΩ Lipschitz and A is in Mpα, β, Ωq. For g

in H 1{2 pBΩq, there is a unique solution u in H 1 pΩq for the nonhomogeneous
Dirichlet problem #
div pA∇ u q “ 0 in Ω,
(13.10)
u “g on BΩ,
satisfying
c}g}H 1{2 pBΩq ď }u}H 1 pΩq ď C}g}H 1{2 pBΩq (13.11)
where c and C depends only upon α, β and Ω.
In the following we shall use the space Hρ1 pΩq, defined by (1.47) as
.
Hρ1 pΩq “ tϕ P L2 pΩq | ρ∇ϕ P L2 pΩqN u,
` ˘1{2
with the norm }ϕ}Hρ1 pΩq ” }ϕ}2L2 pΩq ` }ρ∇ϕ}2L2 pΩq .
Note that the elements of Hρ pΩq do not all have traces on BΩ (such an
1
example is given by ρ´ , P p0, 1{2q, which belongs to Hρ1 pΩq but cannot
have a trace on BΩ in any functional space). We need a subspace of Hρ1 pΩq
which admits traces (in a space which includes L2 pBΩq because of (13.5)).
426
Definition 13.5. Let A be in Mpα, β, Ωq. Introduce the subspace WA of

L2 pΩq defined as
. (
WA “ w P L2 pΩq X Hloc
1
pΩq | div pA∇wq “ 0 in D1 pΩq . (13.12)
Lemma 13.6. Assume that BΩ is Lipschitz and A is in Mpα, β, Ωq. Then,

the space WA is a subspace of Hρ1 pΩq and the injection from WA into Hρ1 pΩq
is continuous. Actually,
}w}L2 pΩq ď }w}Hρ1 pΩq ď C}w}L2 pΩq for every w P WA , (13.13)
where C depends only on BΩ, α and β.

Furthermore, if the coefficients of A belong to W 1,8 pΩq, then
2,p
WA Ă Wloc pΩq for every p P r1, 8q. (13.14)
Proof. For δ ą 0, let ρrδ “ pρ ´ δq` . For every w in WA , the test function
ρδ q2 w belongs to H01 pΩq and has a compact support. Then integrating by
pr
parts gives
ż ż ż
2 2
0“ div pA∇wq ρrδ w dx “ ρrδ A∇w∇w dx ` 2 w ρrδ A∇w∇r ρδ dx.
Ω Ω Ω
Hence, ż ż
2
ρrδ A∇w∇w dx “ ´2 w ρrδ A∇w∇r
ρδ dx,
Ω Ω
which implies
ρδ ∇w}L2 pΩq ď C}r

α}r ρδ ∇w}L2 pΩq }w}L2 pΩq ,
and then
}r
ρδ ∇w}L2 pΩq ď C}w}L2 pΩq .
Letting δ go to 0, yields
}ρ∇w}L2 pΩq ď C}w}L2 pΩq , (13.15)
which completes the proof of (13.13).

To end the proof, observe that inclusion (13.14) is a classical consequence
of Sobolev embeddings and of the results in [114, Chapter 9].
Remark 13.7. Let Γ denote the support of g (closed in BΩ). Set
.
ρΓ pxq “ distpx, Γq for every x P RN ,
(13.16)
ρrΓ,δ “ pρΓ ´ δq` .
Since pr
ρΓ,δ q2 u belongs to H01 pΩq, one can use it in place of pr
ρδ q2 u in the
former proof. Estimate (13.15) is then improved to
}ρΓ ∇ u }L2 pΩq ď C}u}L2 pΩq . (13.17)
427
From now on, we assume that the following hypothesis holds:
BΩ P C 1,1 and A P Mpα, β, Ωq with paij q1ďi,jďN P W 1,8 pΩq. (13.18)
The next result is a particular case of a classical one ([151, Chapter II,
Section 6]). In some sense, it extends the result of Proposition 13.4.
Proposition 13.8 (Trace theorem for the space WA ). Every function w in
WA admits a trace on BΩ which belongs to H ´1{2 pBΩq. The corresponding
trace operator TA is continuous, one to one and onto from WA to H ´1{2 pBΩq.
Consequently, there exists two constants c and C (depending only on Ω and
A, α, β and }A}W 1,8 pΩq ), such that
c}w}L2 pΩq ď }TA pwq}H ´1{2 pBΩq ď C}w}L2 pΩq for every w P WA . (13.19)
Note that this statement is similar to Proposition 13.4 but in the more
general setting WA and H ´1{2 pBΩq (replacing WA X H 1 pΩq and H 1{2 pBΩq).
Proof of Proposition 13.8.
Step 1. Problem (13.10) admits one solution for data g in H ´1{2 pBΩq.
We first show that for pu, gq satisfying (13.10) (i.e., g “ T rpuq in the usual
sense of the map H 1 pΩq Ñ H 1{2 pBΩq), the second inequality of (13.19) holds.
By Green’s formula, the variational formulation of Problem (13.10) is
$ż ż
’
& u div pt A∇φq dx “ g pt A∇φq ¨ n dσ,
Ω BΩ (13.20)
’
%
@φ P H0 pΩq X H pΩq.
1 2
Consider the solution φ P H01 pΩq of
div pt A ∇φq “ u in Ω.
By the regularity of BΩ and A (see (13.18)), φ belongs to H01 pΩq X H 2 pΩq

and satisfies the estimate,
}φ}H 2 pΩq ď C}u}L2 pΩq .
Then, taking φ as test in (13.20), one has successively,

ż ż
|u|2 dx “ g pt A∇ φ q ¨ n dσ ď }g}H ´1{2 pBΩq }pt A∇ φ q ¨ n}H 1{2 pBΩq
Ω BΩ
ď C}g}H ´1{2 pBΩq } φ }H 2 pΩq
ď C}g}H ´1{2 pBΩq }u}L2 pΩq ,
whence the estimate,
}u}L2 pΩq ď C}g}H ´1{2 pBΩq . (13.21)
428
By the density of H 1{2 pBΩq in H ´1{2 pBΩq, this defines a map SA from the
space H ´1{2 pBΩq to WA .
For g in H ´1{2 pBΩq, SA pgq “ u P WA is the solution of problem
#
div pA∇uq “ 0 in Ω,
(13.22)
u“g on BΩ.
Its variational formulation is

$ż
’ ` ˘ @ D
& u div tA ∇ϕ dx “ g, tA ∇ϕ ¨ n ´1{2 ,
H pBΩq,H 1{2 pBΩq
Ω (13.23)
’
%
@ϕ P H01 pΩq X H 2 pΩq.
Estimate (13.21) holds in the form
}SA pgq}L2 pΩq ď C}g}H ´1{2 pBΩq , (13.24)
showing that for given g in H ´1{2 pBΩq, the solution of (13.23) is unique.
Step 2. The solution map SA is one-to-one.
By the standard trace theorem for H 2 pΩq (see [151]) one has
(
∇ϕ ¨ n | ϕ P H 2 pΩq X H01 pΩq ” H 1{2 pBΩq. (13.25)
For every ϕ P H 2 pΩq X H01 pΩq, since ϕ “ 0 on BΩ, one has
∇ϕ “ p∇ϕ ¨ nqn a.e. on BΩ.
Hence, ` ˘
A ∇ϕ ¨ n “ tA n ¨ n p∇ϕ ¨ nq.
t
By hypothesis(13.18), the function ptA n ¨ nq´1 belongs to W 1,8 pBΩq. As

a consequence of (13.25) one has the identity,
t (
A ∇ϕ ¨ n | ϕ P H 2 pΩq X H01 pΩq ” H 1{2 pBΩq. (13.26)
If u “ 0 in (13.23), this implies g “ 0 which is the claim.

Step 3. The solution map SA is onto.
By (13.26), the map
φ P H01 pΩq X H 2 pΩq ÞÑ tA ∇ϕ ¨ n P H 1{2 pBΩq,
is onto. Its kernel, H02 pΩq, admits an orthogonal supplement HK . Hence
φ P HK ÞÑ tA ∇ϕ ¨ n P H 1{2 pBΩq,
is continuous, one-to-one and onto. It admits a continuous inverse R which

is one-to-one and onto from H 1{2 pBΩq to HK .
429
For every h in H 1{2 pBΩq, the function Rphq belongs to HK and satisfies
pt A∇Rphqq ¨ n “ h a.e. in BΩ and }Rphq}H 2 pΩq ď C}h}H 1{2 pBΩq ,
hence ` ˘
div tA ∇Rphq ď C}h}H 1{2 pBΩq .
Let u be in WA . The linear form on H 1{2 pBΩq,
ż
` ˘
h P H 1{2 pBΩq ÞÑ u div tA ∇Rphq dx,
Ω
´1{2
is continuous, so there exists g P H pBΩq such that
ż
` ˘ @ D
u div tA ∇Rphq dx “ g, h H ´1{2 pBΩq,H 1{2 pBΩq .
Ω
By the definition of WA , one has

ż
` ˘
u div tA ∇φ dx “ 0 for every φ P H02 pΩq.
Ω
Combining the last two equalities shows that u is the solution of (13.23) with
the boundary data g. This proves that SA is onto.
Step 4. The solution map SA is an isomorphism.
By the Banach isomorphism theorem, (13.24) implies inequalities (13.19)
with TA the inverse of SA .
The preceding proposition can be reformulated as follows:
Corollary 13.9. For every g in H ´1{2 pBΩq, problem (13.23) admits a unique
solution in WA and the solution operator SA is an isomorphism, i.e., the
following inequalities hold:
c}g}H ´1{2 pBΩq ď }SA pgq}L2 pΩq ď C}g}H ´1{2 pBΩq . (13.27)
Proposition 13.10. Under the hypotheses of Proposition 13.8, if g belongs to

L8 pBΩq, then SA pgq is in WA X L8 pΩq. Conversely, if u is in WA X L8 pΩq,
then TA puq is in L8 pBΩq and
}SA pgq}L8 pΩq “ }g}L8 pBΩq , @g P L8 pBΩq,

(13.28)
}TA puq}L8 pBΩq “ }u}L8 pΩq , @u P WA X L8 pΩq.
Proof. Step 1. Proof of equality (13.28)1 .

First, for g in H 1{2 pBΩq X L8 pBΩq, equality (13.28)1 is a consequence of
the weak maximum principle (see [114, Chapter 8]).
Now, let g be in L8 pBΩq and tgn un be a sequence in H 1{2 pBΩq X L8 pBΩq
satisfying
gn Ñ g strongly in Lp pBΩq for every finite p,
gn á g weakly-˚ in L8 pBΩq.
430
Then
SA pgn q Ñ SA pgq strongly in L2 pΩq.
From the equality
}SA pgn q}L8 pΩq “ }gn }L8 pBΩq ,
the sequence tSA pgn qun is uniformly bounded in L8 pΩq. Due to the above
strong convergence in L2 pΩq
SA pgn q Ñ SA pgq strongly in Lp pΩq for every p finite,

SA pgn q á SA pgq weakly-˚ in L8 pΩq.
As a consequence of the above strong convergences, one obtains
}SA pgq}L8 pΩq “ lim }SA pgq}Lp pΩq “ lim }g}Lp pBΩq “ }g}L8 pBΩq .
pÑ8 pÑ8
Step 2. Proof of equality (13.28)2 .

In view of (13.28)1 , it is enough to show that TA puq is in L8 pBΩq as soon
as u is in WA X L8 pΩq.
Let ω be an open set strictly included in Ω with a Lipschitz boundary.
By (13.14), u belongs to W 2,p pωq for p P r1, `8q. Therefore, by the regularity
of Bω, u belongs to C 0 pωq. Then, the weak maximum principle implies
}u|Bω }L8 pBωq “ }u}L8 pωq ď }u}L8 pΩq . (13.29)
Since div pA∇uq “ 0 in ω, Green’s formula gives

$ż ` ˘
ż
& u div tA ∇ϕ dx “ u|Bω tA ∇ϕ ¨ nBω dσ,
ω Bω (13.30)
%
@ϕ P H 2 pωq X H01 pωq.
Now, consider the covering by open sets of the boundary BΩ (given in

Section 12.1) and let O be one of them. There exists an orthonormal coordi-
nate system pO; e1 , . . . , eN q, a map f : r´α, αsN ´1 Ñ R, of class C 1,1 , such
that
ˇ (
O “ px1 , xN q P RN ˇ f px1 q ă xN ă f px1 q ` β, x1 P p´α, αqN ´1 ,
ˇ (
Γ “ px1 , xN q P RN ˇ xN “ f px1 q, x1 P p´α, αqN ´1 .
where x1 “ px1 , . . . , xN ´1 q and α, β are strictly positive constants. Here, Γ

is the part of the boundary of Ω parametrized by f .
Set η0 P p0, infpα, βq{2s and let ϕ be in H 2 pOq X H01 pOq with support
included in
ˇ (
O0 “ px1 , xN q P RN ˇ f px1 q ă xN ă f px1 q ` β ´ η0 , x1 P p´α, αqN ´1 ,
and such that support of ∇ϕ ¨ nBO is strictly included in Γ.
431
For every η P p0, η0 q, set

ˇ (
Oη “ px1 , xN q P RN ˇ f px1 q ` η ă xN ă f px1 q ` β, x1 P p´α, αqN ´1 ,
ˇ (
Γη “ px1 , xN q P RN ˇ xN “ f px1 q ` η, x1 P p´α, αqN ´1 .
Set
ϕη “ ϕp¨ ´ η eN q and note that ϕη P H 2 pOη q X H01 pOη q.
From (13.30) (with Oη in place of ω) one obtains

ż ż
` ˘
u div tA ∇ϕη dx “ u|Γη tA ∇ϕη ¨ nBOη dσ. (13.31)
Oη Γη
Define gη P L8 pΓq by
` ˘
gη x1 , f px1 q “ u|Γη px1 , f px1 q ` ηq for a.e. x1 P p´α, αqN ´1 .
From (13.29), the sequence tgη uη is bounded in L8 pΓq by }u}L8 pΩq . Thus,
up to a subsequence, there exists g ˚ P L8 pΓq such that
gη á g ˚ weakly-˚ in L8 pΓq.
Equality (13.31) implies

ż ż
` ˘
u 1Oη div tA ∇ϕη dx “ gη tAp¨ ´ ηeN q ∇ϕ ¨ nBO dσ. (13.32)
O Γ
The left-hand side is actually equal to

ż ż ´
` ˘ ÿ B 2 ϕη ¯
N
BAji Bϕη
u 1Oη div tA ∇ϕη dx “ u 1O η ` Aji dx.
O O i“1,j“1
Bxi Bxj Bxi Bxj
Since
1Oη ∇ϕη Ñ 1O ∇ϕ strongly in L2 pΩqN
1Oη D2 ϕη Ñ 1O D2 ϕ strongly in L2 pΩqN ˆN ,
passing to the limit in (13.32) yields
ż ż
`t ˘
u div A ∇ϕ dx “ g ˚ tA ∇ϕ ¨ nBO dσ.
O Γ
This equality is satisfied for every ϕ in H 2 pOq X H01 pOq such that support of
∇ϕ ¨ nBO is strictly included in Γ. By a density argument, it is also satisfied
for every ϕ in the same space with support included in O and support of
∇ϕ ¨ nBO included in Γ.
432
Taking into account the different open sets of the covering of BΩ (see
Proposition 12.2) and using a partition of unity associated to this covering,
one obtains some g ˚˚ P L8 pBΩq such that, for every ϕ P H 2 pΩq X H01 pΩq,
ż ż
`t ˘
u div A ∇ϕ dx “ g ˚˚ tA ∇ϕ ¨ n dσ
BΩ
Ω
@ D
“ TA puq, tA ∇ϕ ¨ n H ´1{2 pBΩq,H 1{2 pBΩq .
As a consequence TA puq “ g ˚˚ is in L8 pBΩq, and estimate in (13.28)2 follows

from (13.28)1 .
Finally, TA is one to one and onto from WA X L8 pΩq to L8 pBΩq and
SA|L8 pBΩq is its inverse.
13.5 Uniform estimates for solutions

We now use Lemma 13.2 to obtain the following uniform estimate:
Proposition 13.11. Let Ω be a bounded domain with a boundary of class
C 1,1 . Let Ψ be in H B , and G be in H 1 pΩq. The solution uεΨ,G of problem (13.8)
satisfies the estimates
` ˘
}uεΨ,G }Hρ1 pΩq ď C}Ψ}HB }G}L2 pBΩq ` ε1{2 }∇G}L2 pΩq . (13.33)
The constant C is independent of ε.

Note that Corollary 13.9 does not apply directly because the coefficients
of the matrix field Aε are not bounded in W 1,8 pΩq with respect to ε (unless
it is constant). The proof of estimate (13.33) will require several interme-
diate results. One of them follows from problem (13.43) below for which
Corollary 13.9 does apply since Ahom is with constant coefficients.
Lemma 13.12. Under the hypotheses of Proposition 13.11, the following
inequality holds for every w in H01 pΩq X H 2 pΩq:
ˇż ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ Ahom ∇uεΨ,G ∇w dxˇ ď Cε1{2 }uεΨ,G }H 1 pΩq }w}H 2 pΩq . (13.34)
Ω
Proof. We actually establish the two estimates (13.39) and (13.42) below,
which combined give (13.34).
Let w be in H01 pΩq X H 2 pΩq.
Step 1. Proof of estimate (13.39).
From (12.4) we get
` ˘
}∇w}L2 pΛε q ď C ε1{2 }∇w}L2 pBΩq ` ε}∇2 w}L2 pΩq ď Cε1{2 }w}H 2 pΩq . (13.35)
This estimate and (1.38)2 imply
}Tε p∇wq ´ ∇w}L2 pΩˆY q ď Cε1{2 }w}H 2 pΩq . (13.36)
433
13.5. Uniform estimates for solutions
Using w as test function in (13.8) and unfolding the result implies

ż ż
1
ApyqTε p∇uεΨ,G qpx, yq Tε p∇wqpx, yq dxdy “ ´ Aε ∇uεΨ,G ∇w dx.
|Y | ΩˆY Λε
Combining with (13.36) and (13.35), this gives

ˇż ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ ApyqTε p∇uεΨ,G qpx, yq ∇wpxqdxdy ˇ
ΩˆY (13.37)
ď Cε 1{2
}uΨ,G }H 1 pΩq }w}H 2 pΩq .
ε
pΨ,G
Now Theorem 13.44 furnishes an element u ε
in L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq satis-
fying
}Tε p∇uεΨ,G q ´ ∇uεΨ,G ´ ∇y u
pΨ,G
ε
}L2 pY ;pH 1 pΩqq1 q
(13.38)
ď Cε1{2 }∇uεΨ,G }L2 pΩq .
This estimate combined with (13.37) yields
ˇż ` ˘ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ pΨ,G
A ∇uεΨ,G ` ∇y u ε
∇w dxdy ˇ ď Cε1{2 }uεΨ,G }H 1 pΩq }w}H 2 pΩq . (13.39)
ΩˆY

1
Let χi in Hper,0 pY q X L8 pY q be the corrector for the adjoint problem
defined, for i P t1, . . . , N u, by
ż
` ˘
Apyq∇y ψpyq ∇y χi pyq ` bi dy “ 0, @ψ P Hper,0 1
pY q. (13.40)
Y
These functions satisfy the assumptions of Lemma 3.29 with tA in place of A

and F “ tAbi .
Introduce the function w pε in H01 pΩq defined as
Bw ´x¯
wε pxq “ ερε pxq pxq χi for a.e. x P Ω.
Bxi ε
By a straightforward computation, using also estimate (13.6) (for tA instead
of A and for F “ tAbi ) and (12.4),
› Bw ´ ¨ ¯›
› ›
›∇wε ´ ∇y χ i › ` }∇wε }L2 pΩbl q ď Cε1{2 }w}H 2 pΩq . (13.41)
Bxi ε L2 pΩq εdpY q
Now, in the original problem (13.8), use wε as test function, combine

the corresponding estimate with (13.41) and unfold the result. Since Λε is
included in Ωbl q , (13.41) allows to control the integral term on the boundary
εdpY ż
layer Λε , namely Aε ∇uεΨ,G ∇wε dx. As a consequence, we get the estimate

Λε
ˇż ´ Bw ¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ ApyqTε p∇uεΨ,G q Tε ∇y χi pyq dxdy ˇ ď Cε1{2 }uεΨ,G }H 1 pΩq }w}H 2 pΩq , .
ΩˆY Bxi
434
Bw
Applying (1.38)2 to gives
Bxi
› ´ Bw ¯ Bw ›
› ›
›Tε ´ › ď Cε1{2 }w}H 2 pΩq .
Bxi Bxi L2 pΩˆY q
Using this inequality and (13.38) yields,
ˇż ` ˘ Bw ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ A ∇uεΨ,G ` ∇y upΨ,G
ε
∇y χi dxdy ˇ ď Cε1{2 }uεΨ,G }H 1 pΩq }w}H 2 pΩq ,
ΩˆY Bx i
which, summing up from i “ 1 to i “ N , implies

ˇż ` ˘ ´ÿ N
Bw ¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ pΨ,G
A ∇uεΨ,G ` ∇y u ε
∇y χi dxdy ˇ ď Cε1{2 }uεΨ,G }H 1 pΩq }w}H 2 pΩq .
ΩˆY i“1
Bx i
pi ’s,
Now, by the definition of the original correctors χ
ż ´ ¯ ´ÿ
ÿ BuεΨ,G Bw ¯
N N
A ∇uεΨ,G ` pi ∇y
∇y χ χj dxdy “ 0.
ΩˆY i“1
Bxi j“1
Bxj
Thus, by subtraction
ˇż ´ ÿN
BuεΨ,G ¯ ´ ÿ N
Bw ¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ A∇ y p
u ε
´ p
χ i ∇ y χj dxdy ˇ
ΩˆY
Ψ,G
i“1
Bx i j“1
Bx j
ď Cε1{2 }uεΨ,G }H 1 pΩq }w}H 2 pΩq .

Using definition (13.40) of the χj ’s,
ż ´ ÿN
BuεΨ,G ¯ ´ ÿ N
Bw ¯
A∇y upΨ,G
ε
´ pi ∇y
χ χj dxdy
ΩˆY i“1
Bxi j“1
Bxj
ż ´ ÿN
BuεΨ,G ¯
“´ A∇y u pΨ,G
ε
´ pi ∇w dxdy.
χ
ΩˆY i“1
Bxi
Finally,
ˇż ´ ÿN
BuεΨ,G ¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ A∇y upΨ,G
ε
´ pi ∇w dxdy ˇ
χ
ΩˆY i“1
Bx i (13.42)
ď Cε 1{2
}uΨ,G }H 1 pΩq }w}H 2 pΩq .
ε

Combining (13.39) and (13.42) implies
ˇż ´ ÿN
BuεΨ,G ¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ A ∇uεΨ,G ` pi ∇w dxdy ˇ ď Cε1{2 }uεΨ,G }H 1 pΩq }w}H 2 pΩq .
∇y χ
ΩˆY i“1
Bx i
By the definition (3.19) (see also (3.22)) of the homogenized matrix Ahom ,
this is the claimed estimate (13.34).
435
13.5. Uniform estimates for solutions
Proof of Proposition 13.11. Recall that Ahom is constant, so Corollary 13.9

ε
applies for the solution uΨ,G of the problem (of type (13.22))
$
&div pAhom ∇ uΨ,G
ε
q “ 0 in Ω,
´¨¯ (13.43)
% uΨ,G
ε
“Ψ G on BΩ.
ε
ε
Clearly uΨ,G belongs to WAhom XH 1 pΩq and, by (13.5) and (13.27), it satisfies
` ˘
}uΨ,G
ε
}Hρ1 pΩq ď C }G}L2 pBΩq ` ε1{2 }∇G}L2 pΩq }Ψ}HB . (13.44)
Since ż
Ahom ∇uεΨ,G ∇v dx “ 0, @v P H01 pΩq,
Ω
from (13.34) we deduce that for every w P H01 pΩq X H 2 pΩq,
ˇż ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ Ahom ∇puεΨ,G ´ uΨ,G
ε
q∇w dxˇ ď Cε1{2 }uεΨ,G }H 1 pΩq }w}H 2 pΩq . (13.45)
Ω
Introduce now the solution wε in H01 pΩq of the adjoint variational problem
ż ż
Ahom ∇v ∇wε dx “ vpuεΨ,G ´ uΨ,G
ε
qdx, @v P H01 pΩq. (13.46)
Ω Ω
Since the boundary of Ω is C 1,1

, according to classical results,
wε P H01 pΩq X H pΩq
2
and }wε }H 2 pΩq ď C}uεΨ,G ´ uΨ,G
ε
}L2 pΩq , (13.47)
where the constant does not depend on ε.
As uεΨ,G ´ uΨ,G
ε
belongs to H01 pΩq, it can be used as v in (13.46), to get
ż
}uΨ,G ´ uΨ,G }L2 pΩq “
ε ε 2
Ahom ∇puεΨ,G ´ uΨ,G
ε
q ∇wε dx.
Ω
The last integral is now bounded by choosing wε as w in (13.45), so that,

because of estimate (13.47),
}uεΨ,G ´ uΨ,G
ε
}L2 pΩq ď Cε1{2 }uεΨ,G }H 1 pΩq .
This estimate, together with (13.9), yields
}uεΨ,G ´ uΨ,G
ε
}L2 pΩq ď C}Ψ}HB }G}H 1 pΩq .
The L2 -estimate of uεΨ,G (part of (13.33)) now easily follows from (13.44).
Choosing v “ ρ2 uεΨ,G in (13.8) as in the proof of Corollary 13.9, we get
}ρ∇uεΨ,G }L2 pΩq ď C}uεΨ,G }L2 pΩq ,
which concludes the proof of (13.33).
Remark 13.13. Using notation (13.16) and the arguments in Remark 13.7,
estimate (13.33) can be improved as follows:
}uεΨ,G }L2 pΩq ` }ρΓ ∇uεΨ,G }L2 pΩq
` ˘ (13.48)
ď C}Ψ}HB }G}L2 pBΩq ` ε1{2 }∇G}L2 pΩq .
436
13.6 Homogenization
Our aim is now to describe the asymptotic behavior as ε Ñ 0 of the sequence
tuεΨ,G uε of solutions of problem (13.8).
We start by considering the case G ” 1, that is, the problem
$
&div pAε ∇uεΨ,1 q “ 0 in Ω,
´¨¯ (13.49)
%uεΨ,1 “ Ψ on BΩ,
ε
for Ψ given in H B .
The direct homogenization of this problem is not possible in its weak
variational form (analogous to (13.20))
ż ż ´¨¯
uεΨ,1 div pt Aε ∇φqdx “ Ψ A ∇φ ¨ n dσ,
t ε
Ω BΩ ε
ε
even if the matrix field
` .A˘ is (Lipschitz (since it 8is not uniformly Lipschitz).
Also, the sequence Ψ ε |BΩ ε is bounded in L pBΩq (and not in H 1{2 pBΩq
unless Ψ is constant). But the estimate of the next proposition does not
allow for the convergence of the trace of uεΨ,1 on BΩ, the elements of Hρ1 pΩq
not having traces in general.
Proposition 13.14 (Homogenization of (13.49)). The sequence tuεΨ,1 uε is
bounded in Hρ1 pΩq. All its weak limit-points in Hρ1 pΩq actually belongs to
WAhom X L8 pΩq.
Proof. From (13.33)
}uεΨ,1 }Hρ1 pΩq ď C}Ψ}HB .
Let uΨ P Hρ1 pΩq be one of the limit point of the sequence tuεΨ,1 uε so that,
uεΨ,1 á uΨ weakly in Hρ1 pΩq. (13.50)
Step 1: uΨ is in L8 pΩq.
By the weak maximum principle
}uεΨ,1 }L8 pΩq ď }Ψ}L8 pY q ,
so that
uεΨ,1 á uΨ weakly-˚ in L8 pΩq,
and
}uΨ }L8 pΩq ď }Ψ}L8 pY q ď C}Ψ}HB .
Step 2: uΨ is in WAhom .
In view of Theorem 1.46, up to a subsequence, there exists
pΨ P L2ρ pΩ; Hper,0

u 1
pY qq,
437
such that
` ˘
Tε ρ∇uεΨ,1 á ρ∇uΨ ` ρ∇y u
pΨ weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN . (13.51)
In the
` course( of the proof, formula (13.55) will show that the whole sequence
tTε ρ∇uεΨ,1 q ε converges to this limit.
For arbitrary v in H01 pΩq, choose ρv as test function in (13.8), to get
ż ż
ρAε ∇uεΨ,1 ∇v dx “ ´ vAε ∇uεΨ,1 ∇ρ dx
Ω
żΩ (13.52)
v ε
“´ A pρ∇uΨ,1 q ∇ρ dx.
ε
Ω ρ
Since v belongs to H01 pΩq, the quotient v{ρ belongs to L2 pΩq (see [37]), and
from Proposition 1.9(i) it satisfies
´v ¯ v
Tε Ñ strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y q.
ρ ρ
Now, unfold the expression (13.52) and pass to the limit by using conver-
gence (13.51), to obtain
ż
` ˘
ρpxqApyq ∇uΨ pxq ` ∇y upΨ px, yq ∇vpxq dxdy
ΩˆY
ż
` ˘
“´ vpxqApyq ∇uΨ pxq ` ∇y upΨ px, yq ∇ρpxq dxdy,
ΩˆY
that is,
ż
` ˘ ` ˘
pΨ px, yq ∇ ρpxqvpxq dxdy “ 0.
Apyq ∇uΨ pxq ` ∇y u (13.53)
ΩˆY
Let ξp be in Hper,0
1
pY q and η in DpΩq. In (13.52), choose
´x¯
ηε pxq “ ε ξp ηpxq,
ε
as test function. Performing a similar computation as above yields
ż
` ˘ ` ˘
pΨ px, yq ∇y ξpyqηpxq
ρpxq Apyq ∇uΨ pxq ` ∇y u p dxdy “ 0.
ΩˆY
By the density of the tensor product DpΩq b Hper,0

1
pY q in L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq,
ż
` ˘ ` ˘
A ∇uΨ ` ∇y u pΨ ∇y ρϕ dxdy “ 0, @ϕ P L2 pΩ; Hper,0 1
pY qq. (13.54)
ΩˆY
Since ρ does not vanish in Ω, this last equality allows to express ∇y u pΨ in

pi (just as in (3.20)),
terms of the partial derivatives of uΨ and the correctors χ
ÿN
BuΨ
pΨ “
∇y u pi .
χ (13.55)
i“1
Bxi
438
Using this formula in (13.53), a simple computation shows that

ż
Ahom ∇uΨ ∇pρηq “ 0, @η P H01 pΩq. (13.56)
Ω
For φ in H02 pΩq, by the same argument as above, φ{ρ is in H01 pΩq, so that
substituting it to η in (13.56), proves that uΨ is in WAhom .
From here on, until the end of this section, for Ψ given in H B ,
we restrict the discussion to the subsequence which was selected to
define uΨ (see convergence (13.50)). For simplicity it is still denoted
tεu, and it is from this subsequence that further subsequences may
be extracted below.
One is led to the following definition:
Definition 13.15. For Ψ P H B , the trace of uΨ on BΩ (which makes sense
by Proposition 13.14) is denoted
θΨ “ TAhom puΨ q.
Due to Proposition 13.10, θΨ belongs to L8 pBΩq and satisfies
}θΨ }L8 pBΩq ď C}Ψ}HB .

! ´¨¯ )
Remark 13.16. As noted above, the sequence of traces Ψ is
ε |BΩ ε
8
bounded in L pBΩq, so admits weak-˚ limit points in that space. One would
expect that these limit points coincide with the traces TAhom puΨ q of the weak
limit points in Hρ1 pΩq of the sequence tuεΨ,1 uε . This is the case in one di-
mension. In higher dimensions, Remark 13.29 shows that this is not true in
general.
We are now in position to state the main results in this subsection for the
solutions of problem (13.8).
Theorem 13.17. For every G P H 1 pΩq, there is some uΨ,G in Hρ1 pΩq such
that,
uεΨ,G á uΨ,G weakly in Hρ1 pΩq, (13.57)
where the limit function uΨ,G is the solution of the homogenized problem,
# ` ˘
div Ahom ∇uΨ,G “ 0 in Ω,
(13.58)
uΨ,G “ θΨ G|BΩ on BΩ,
in the sense of Corollary 13.9 , i.e., for every φ P H 2 pΩq X H01 pΩq,
ż
` ˘ @ D
uΨ,G div tAhom ∇φ dx “ θΨ G|BΩ , tAhom ∇φ ¨ n H ´1{2 pBΩq,H 1{2 pBΩq ,
Ω
where θΨ P H ´1{2 pBΩq is the trace of uΨ on BΩ.
439
Proof. Step 1. Proof of convergence (13.57).

From (13.33), the sequence tuεΨ,G uε is bounded in Hρ1 pΩq. By Theo-
rem 1.46, up to a subsequence, there exists
pΨ,G q P Hρ1 pΩq ˆ L2ρ pΩ; Hper,0

puΨ,G , u 1
pY qq
such that
` ˘
pΨ,G
Tε ρ∇uεΨ,G á ρ∇uΨ,G ` ρ∇y u weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN . (13.59)
By (13.33) again
}uΨ,G }Hρ1 pΩq ď C}Ψ}HB }G}L2 pBΩq . (13.60)
At the end of the proof, a uniqueness argument will show that the whole
sequence tuεΨ,G uε converges to uΨ,G .
Step 2. The weak limit uΨ,G belongs to WAhom .
The proof follows the lines of Step 2 in Proposition 13.14.
Step 3. Proof of (13.58)2 .
Starting with G in W 1,8 pΩq, we compare the functions GuεΨ,1 and uεΨ,G ,
then the traces of their limits. For w P H01 pΩq, we have successively,
ż ż
A ∇pGuΨ,1 ´ uΨ,G q ∇w dx “
ε ε ε
Aε ∇pGuεΨ,1 q∇w dx
Ω
ż Ω
ż
“ uΨ,1 A ∇G ∇w dx ´ wAε ∇uεΨ,1 ∇G dx
ε ε
Ω
żΩ (13.61)
` Aε ∇uεΨ,1 ∇pGwq dx
ż żΩ
w ε
“ uεΨ,1 Aε ∇G ∇w dx ´ A pρ∇uεΨ,1 q∇G dx,
Ω Ω ρ
where we made use of problems (13.8) and (13.49) defining uεΨ,G and uεΨ,1 ,
respectively.
Now, since w is in H01 pΩq, the function w{ρ is in L2 pΩq and satisfies
}w{ρ}L2 pΩq ď C}∇w}L2 pΩq .
From this estimate as well as from (13.33), it follows that

ˇż ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ Aε ∇pGuεΨ,1 ´ uεΨ,G q ∇w dxˇ ď C}G}W 1,8 pΩq }∇w}L2 pΩq }Ψ}HB .
Ω
Note that the function GuεΨ,1 ´ uεΨ,G belongs to H01 pΩq. Therefore, one can
take it as w in the inequality above, to get
}∇pGuεΨ,1 ´ uεΨ,G q}L2 pΩq ď C}G}W 1,8 pΩq }Ψ}HB .
440
As a consequence, the limit function GuΨ ´ uΨ,G belongs to H01 pΩq. Thus,
TAhom puΨ,G q “ TAhom pGuΨ q “ TAhom puΨ qG|BΩ
“ θΨ G|BΩ in H ´1{2 pBΩq.
This proves the claim for G in W 1,8 pΩq.
For G in H 1 pΩq, we show that (13.58)2 holds in the sense of Corollary 13.9.
Consider a sequence tGn unPN of functions belonging to W 1,8 pΩq such that
Gn Ñ G strongly in H 1 pΩq.
From (13.27), one has
}TAhom puF,G q ´ TAhom puF,Gn q}H ´1{2 pBΩq ď C}uF,G ´ uF,Gn }L2 pΩq
ď C}G ´ Gn }L2 pΩq }Ψ}HB .
Passing to the limit gives (13.58)2 .
Step 4. Proof that the whole sequence uεΨ,G converges.
Recall that we only consider the sequence defining θΨ . Now, all the weak
limit-points of tuεΨ,G uε satisfy (13.58) which has a unique solution. Therefore
the whole sequence converges weakly.
Remark 13.18. From (13.53) and (13.54), one obtains
$ż ` ` ˘
’
’ A ∇uΨ,G ` ∇y u pΨ,G q ∇Φ ` ∇y Φ p dxdy “ 0,
’
’
’
& ΩˆY
p P H 1 pΩq ˆ L2 pΩ; H 1 pY qq such that
@pΦ, Φq (13.62)
’
’
0 per,0
’
’ ´Φ Φ p ¯
’
% , P H01 pΩq ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq,
ρ ρ
which is the limit unfolded formulation.
Proposition 13.19. The convergence of tuεΨ,G uε to uΨ,G is weak in L2 pΩq.
It is strong in L2ργ pΩq for every γ ą 0, that is,
ργ uεΨ,G Ñ ργ uΨ,G strongly in L2 pΩq. (13.63)
Proof. By (13.33), the sequence tuεΨ,G uε is uniformly bounded in L2 pΩq. So,
for every ω Ť Ω ,
}ργ puεΨ,G ´ uΨ,G q}2L2 pΩq ď }ργ puεΨ,G ´ uΨ,G q}2L2 pωq ` }ργ puεΨ,G ´ uΨ,G q}2L2 pΩzωq
“ ‰2γ
ď }ργ puεΨ,G ´ uΨ,G q}2L2 pωq ` C distpBΩ, ωq .
Observe that tuεΨ,G ´ uΨ,G uε is uniformly bounded in H 1 pωq, hence this se-
quence strongly converges to 0 in L2 pωq. Thus,
“ ‰2γ
lim sup }ργ puεΨ,G ´ uΨ,G q}2L2 pΩq ď C distpBΩ, ωq ,
εÑ0
from which convergence (13.63) follows.
441
The argument of convergence of the energy holds in this situation.
Proposition 13.20 (Convergence of the energy).

ż
lim ATε pρ1`γ ∇uεΨ,G q Tε pρ1`γ ∇uεΨ,G q dxdy
εÑ0 ΩˆY
ż (13.64)
` ˘ ` ˘
“ Aρ1`γ ∇uΨ,G ` ∇y u pΨ,G ρ1`γ ∇uΨ,G ` ∇y u
pΨ,G dxdy,
ΩˆY
and ż
ˇ 1`γ ε ˇ2
lim ˇρ ∇uΨ,G ˇ dx “ 0. (13.65)
εÑ0 Λ
ε
Proof. Choosing ρ2γ`2 uεΨ,G as test-function in (13.8) implies

ż
Aε ρ1`γ ∇uεΨ,G ρ1`γ ∇uεΨ,G dx
Ω
ż (13.66)
“ ´p2γ ` 2q Aε ρ1`γ ∇uεΨ,G ∇ρ ργ uεΨ,G dx.
Ω
Unfolding the two sides of this identity gives

ż
Aε ρ1`γ ∇uεΨ,G ρ1`γ ∇uεΨ,G dx
Ω
ż
1
“ ATε pρ1`γ ∇uεΨ,G q Tε pρ1`γ ∇uεΨ,G q dxdy (13.67)
|Y | ΩˆY
ż
` Aε ρ1`γ ∇uεΨ,G ρ1`γ ∇uεΨ,G dx,
Λε
respectively,
ż
Aε ρ1`γ ∇uεΨ,G ∇ρ ργ uεΨ,G dx
Ω
ż
1
“ ATε pρ1`γ ∇uεΨ,G q Tε p∇ρqTε pργ uεΨ,G q dxdy (13.68)
|Y | ΩˆY
ż
` Aε ρ1`γ ∇uεΨ,G ∇ρ ργ uεΨ,G dx.
Λε
The last integral above goes to 0. Indeed,

ˇż ˇ ż
ˇ ˇ
ˇ Aε ρ1`γ ∇uεΨ,G ∇ρ ργ uεΨ,G dxˇ ď CpεdpY qq2γ |ρ∇uεΨ,G | |∇ρ| |uεΨ,G | dx
Λε Λ
ż ε
ď CpεdpY qq 2γ
|ρ∇uεΨ,G | |∇ρ| |uεΨ,G | dx
Ω
ď CpεdpY qq 2γ
Ñ 0.
442
By (13.63) the first integral on the right-hand side of (13.68) converges,

ż
lim Aε ρ1`γ ∇uεΨ,G ∇ρ ργ uεΨ,G dx
εÑ0 Ω
ż
1 ` ˘
“ Aρ1`γ ∇uΨ,G ` ∇y u pΨ,G ∇ρ ργ uΨ,G dxdy.
|Y | ΩˆY
Therefore, from equality (13.66) it follows that

ˆż
εÑ0 ΩˆY
ż ˙
` ε 1`γ
A ρ ∇uΨ,G ρ
ε 1`γ
∇uΨ,G dx
ε
(13.69)
Λε
ż
` ˘
“ ´p2γ ` 2q Aρ1`γ ∇uΨ,G ` ∇y u pΨ,G ∇ρ ργ uΨ,G dxdy.
ΩˆY
On the other hand, choosing as test functions ρ2γ`2 uΨ,G and ρ2γ`2 u pΨ,G
in problem (13.62) gives
ż
` ` ˘
A ∇uΨ,G ` ∇y u pΨ,G q ∇pρ2γ`2 uΨ,G q ` ∇y pρ2γ`2 u
pΨ,G q dxdy “ 0,
ΩˆY
which reads as
ż
1 ` ˘ ` ˘
Aρ1`γ ∇uΨ,G ` ∇y u pΨ,G ρ1`γ ∇uΨ,G ` ∇y u
pΨ,G dxdy
|Y | ΩˆY
ż (13.70)
2γ ` 2 ` ˘
“´ pΨ,G ∇ρ ργ uΨ,G dxdy.
Aρ1`γ ∇uΨ,G ` ∇y u
|Y | ΩˆY
Comparing (13.69) and (13.70) we get

ˆż
εÑ0 ΩˆY
ż ˙
` Aε ρ1`γ ∇uεΨ,G ρ1`γ ∇uεΨ,G dx
Λε
ż
` ˘ ` ˘
“ Aρ 1`γ
∇uΨ,G ` ∇y u pΨ,G ρ1`γ ∇uΨ,G ` ∇y u pΨ,G dxdy.
ΩˆY
One concludes by applying Lemma 3.11.
Corollary 13.21. The following strong convergences hold:
` ˘ ´ÿN
BuΨ,G ¯
Tε ρ1`γ ∇uεΨ,G Ñ ρ1`γ ∇uΨ,G ` ρ1`γ ∇y pi
χ
i“1
Bxi (13.71)
strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
443
13.7. The case of flat parts of the boundary
where γ ą 0, and also

ˆ ˙
ÿ BuΨ,G ´ ¨ ¯
N
ρ1`γ uεΨ,G ´ uΨ,G ´ ε pi
χ Ñ0 strongly in H 1 pΩq.
i“1
Bxi ε
Proof. Convergence (13.71) is a consequence of that given in (13.64), com-

bined with Lemma 3.11. The second convergence then follows by using
also (13.63), Proposition 1.29(ii) and convergence (13.65), in view of the
properties of the averaging operator applied to convergence (13.71).
13.7 The case of flat parts of the boundary

We consider the case of a connected open part Γ of the boundary of Ω which
is included in an affine hyperplane H orthogonal to a non null vector of G.
For simplicity, we choose G “ ZN . Set H “ b ` H0 (where b belongs to RN
and H0 is a vector hyperplane).
13.7.1 The general case

Proposition 13.22. Let θΨ “ TAhom puΨ q be the trace (given by defini-
tion 13.15) of a limit point of the sequence tuεΨ,1 uε . Then,
θΨ|Γ is constant on Γ.
Proof. Set Dpa; Rq “ Bpa, Rq X Ω where a P Γ and R ą 0. One chooses

R small enough so that Dpa, Rq is a half closed ball. Let ηR be a smooth
cut-off function whose support is included in Dpa, Rq and which is equal to
1 in Dpa, R{2q.
Consider h a vector in H0 such that Dpa, Rq`h is included in Ω. Denote it
Dpa ` h, Rq. There exists a sequence thε uε of vectors belonging to H0 X ε ZN
converging to h and such that Dpa, Rq ` hε is also included in Ω.
Let
vε “ uεΨ,1 ηR p¨ ` aq and wε “ uεΨ,1 ηR p¨ ` a ` hε q.
Then
v ε á uΨ ηR p¨ ` aq and wε á uΨ ηR p¨ ` a ` hq weakly in Hρ1 pΩq.
For every ϕ P H01 pDpa, Rqq the function vε satisfies

ż ż
Aε ∇vε ∇ϕ dx “ uεΨ,1 Aε ∇ηR p¨ ` aq ∇ϕ dx
Dpa,Rq Dpa,Rq
ż
´ ϕAε ∇uεΨ,1 ∇ηR p¨ ` aq dx,
Dpa,Rq
444
while wε satisfies
ż
Aε ∇wε ∇ϕp¨ ` hε q dx
Dpa`hε ,Rq
ż
“ uεΨ,1 Aε ∇ηR p¨ ` a ` hε q ∇ϕp¨ ` hε q dx
Dpa`hε ,Rq
ż
´ ϕp¨ ` hε qAε ∇uεΨ,1 ∇ηR p¨ ` a ` hε q dx.
Dpa`hε ,Rq
After a change of variables, observing that Aε p¨ ´ hε q “ Aε a.e. in RN , one

obtains, for every ϕ P H01 pDpa, Rqq,
ż ż
Aε ∇wε p¨ ´ hε q ∇ϕ dx “ uεΨ,1 p¨ ´ hε qAε ∇ηR p¨ ` aq ∇ϕ dx
Dpa,Rq Dpa,Rq
ż
´ ϕAε ∇uεΨ,1 p¨ ´ hε q ∇ηR p¨ ` aq dx.
Dpa,Rq
Since ´¨ ´ h ¯ ´¨¯
ε
Ψε “ Ψε a.e. in RN ,
ε ε
the function wε p¨ ´ hε q ´ vε belongs to H01 pDpa, Rqq. Due to estimate (13.33)
and to the fact that ϕ{ρ belongs to L2 pDpa, Rqq, it follows that the sequence
twε p¨ ´ hε q ´ vε uε is uniformly bounded in H01 pDpa, Rqq. Then, as in the
proof of Theorem 13.17 (Step 3), one has
TAhom puΨ p¨ ´ hqηR p¨ ` aqq “ TAhom puΨ ηR p¨ ` aqq in L8 pBDpa, Rq X BΩq.
Consequently,
θΨ p¨ ´ hq “ θΨ in L8 pBDpa, R{2q X BΩq.
A connectedness argument now shows that θΨ is constant on Γ.
13.7.2 A particular case

In this subsection we assume that Γ is included in the hyperplane
a1 x1 ` . . . ` aN xN “ 0, pa1 , . . . , aN q P ZN ztp0, . . . , 0qu.
What is important here is that the hyperplane contains the origin (in Sec-
tion 13.1, this corresponds to a “ 0).
.
The intersection H “ H X ZN is a subgroup of dimension N ´ 1. Hence,
from Subsection 2.2.4, there exists a basis of ZN such that the first N ´
1 vectors lie in the hyperplane. This new basis of ZN (and of RN !) is
.
still denoted B “ pb1 , . . . , bN q, the periodicity cell Y is again the open
parallelotope associated with B. Its face on the hyperplane is denoted Y 1 ,
this is the open parallelotope generated by the vectors b1 , . . . , bN ´1 .
445
Therefore, without loss of generality, one can assume that the hyperplane
H is equal to RN ´1 ˆ t0u. One can also assume that
. N ´1
Ω Ă RN ` “R ˆ p0, `8q.
The aim of this subsection is to determine the restriction of the trace on Γ
of the limit function uΨ,G given by Theorem 13.17.
To do so, we introduce a specific unfolding operator which mixes the
periodic unfolding operator in RN ´1 and a scaling in the direction bN . This
operator can be seen as a partial unfolding operator (after the affinity) where
O “ p0, `8q and Ω “ RN ´1 (see Section 1.5).
Definition 13.23 (The unfolding operator for a flat boundary layer). For φ
measurable function on RN ` , the unfolding operator Tε is defined as follows:
#
´ ” x1 ı ¯
Tε# pφqpx1 , y 1 , yN q “ φ ε ` εy 1 , εyN ,
ε Y1
.
for a.e. px1 , y 1 , yN q P RN ´1 ˆ Y # where Y # “ Y 1 ˆ p0, `8q.
Introduce the notation
` ˘ . 1,p
Wp RN ` “ φ P Wloc pR` q | φ|RN ´1 ˆp0,ζq belongs to
N
(
W 1,p pRN ´1 ˆ p0, ζqq, @ζ ą 0 .
The following properties of Tε# are simply derived from those of the usual
unfolding operator in fixed domains:
Lemma 13.24. `Suppose ˘ p P `r1, `8s. The˘ operator Tε# is linear` Nand
˘ con-
N ´1
tinuous
` N˘ from L p
R N
`` into
˘ L p
R ˆ Y #
. For every φ in L 1
R ` , ψ in
L R` and Φ P W R` one has
p p N
ż ż
1 1 1 1
piq T pφqpx , yq dx dy “
#
φpxq dx,
|Y | RN ´1 ˆY # ε ε RN`
1{p
|Y |
piiq }Tε# pψq}Lp pRN ´1 ˆY # q “ }ψ}Lp pRN
`q
,
ε1{p
piiiq @ ζ ą 0, Tε# pΦq Ñ Φ|Γ strongly in Lp pRN ´1 ˆ Y 1 ˆ p0, ζqq.
` ˘ ` ˘
This˘ operator maps Lp RN
` ` into Lp RN ´1 ˆ Y # . If φ belongs to
Wp R N` (p P r1, `8s), one has
∇y Tε# pφq “ εTε# p∇φq.

We introduce the following spaces:
!
.
L “ Φ P Hloc1
pY # q | ∇y Φ P L2 pY # qN ,
)
Φp¨, yN q is Y 1 periodic for a.e. yN P p0, `8q ,
! )
.
L0 “ Φ P L | Φpy 1 , 0q “ 0 for a.e. y 1 P Y 1 .
446
We endow L with the norm

´ ¯1{2
}φ}L “ }Φp¨, 0q}2L2 pY 1 q ` }∇y Φ}2L2 pY # q .
Denote (
Lζ “ Φ P L | ∇y Φ “ 0 in Y 1 ˆ pζ, `8q .
ď
It is known that Lζ is dense in L.
ζą0
From now on, in problems (13.8) we assume that G is such that
G P W 1,8 pΩq and supportpG|BΩ q Ă interiorpΓq. (13.72)
Then, we extend uεΨ,G and G by 0 in RN

` zΩ. These extensions are still denoted
uεΨ,G and G. Lemma 13.24 together with estimates (13.9) and (13.44) imply
C
}Tε# puεΨ,G q}L2 pRN ´1 ˆY # q ď ? }uεΨ,G }L2 pΩq
ε
C ` ˘
ď }Ψ}HB }G|BΩ }L2 pHBΩ q ` ε1{2 }∇G}L2 pΩq ,
ε
and
ε
}∇y Tε# puεΨ,G q}L2 pRN ´1 ˆY # q ď C ? }uεΨ,G }H 1 pΩq
ε
` ˘
ď C}Ψ}HB }G|BΩ }L2 pHBΩ q ` ε1{2 }∇G}L2 pΩq .
Theorem 13.25. Let uεΨ,G be the solution of problem (13.8) with G satisfy-
ing (13.72). Then, there exists a unique u#
Ψ,G in L pΓ; Lq satisfying
2
∇y Tε# puεΨ,G q á ∇y u#
Ψ,G weakly in L2 pRN ´1 ˆ Y # qN (13.73)
and
u#
Ψ,G|Y 1
“ G|Γ Ψ|Y 1 . (13.74)
Moreover, if Ψ is the unique solution in L of the variational problem,

$ż
& Apyq∇y Ψpyq ∇y Φpyq dy “ 0,
Y# (13.75)
%
Ψ|Y “ Ψ|Y , @Φ P L0 ,
1 1
then u#
Ψ,G “ G|Γ Ψ.
Proof. Let v P C 8 pΩq, such that v “ 0 on BΩzΓ, and Φ P L0 X Lζ . Consider

the function ´! x ) ¯
vε pxq “ εvpxqΦ .
ε Y
447
Observe that vε belongs to H01 pΩq. So, we can take it as test function in
problem (13.8). Then, by unfolding the result with Tε# , we obtain
ż ´
` ˘
Apyq∇y Tε# uεΨ,G px1 , yq εTε# p∇vqpx1 , yqΦpyq
RN ´1 ˆY # (13.76)
¯
`Tε# pvqpx1 , yq∇y Φpyq dx1 dy “ 0.
From Lemma 13.24(ii), one has for every ζ ą 0,
εTε# p∇vq Ñ 0 strongly in L8 pRN ´1 ˆ Y # qN ,

Tε# pvq Ñ v|Γ strongly in L8 pRN ´1 ˆ Y 1 ˆ p0, ζqq.
Passing to the limit in (13.76) gives

ż
1 1 1
Apyq∇y u# Ψ,G px , yq v|Γ px q ∇y Φpyq dx dy “ 0, @Φ P L0 X Lζ .
RN ´1 ˆY #
Ť
As L0 X ζą0 Lζ is dense in L0 , this identity is still true for Φ in L2 pΓ; L0 q,
ż
1 1 1
Ψ,G px , yq ∇y Φpx , yq dx dy “ 0,
Apyq∇y u# @Φ P L2 pΓ; L0 q.
RN ´1 ˆY #
Recalling (13.74) and problem (13.75), the last assertion of the theorem is
easily obtained. Since the solution of (13.75) is unique, convergence (13.73)
holds for the whole sequence.
We now give some properties of the function Ψ which are essential for the
proof of Theorem 13.28 below.
Lemma 13.26. There exist two strictly positive constants c and C indepen-
dent of ζ such that the solution of problem (13.75) satisfies
ż
|∇y Ψpyq|2 dy ď Ceć ζ , @ζ ě 0,
Y 1 ˆpζ,`8q
ż (13.77)
2
yN |∇y Ψpyq|2 dy ď C.
Y#
` ˘N
Moreover, ∇y Ψ belongs to L1 Y # , and there exits a real number Ψp8q,
such that, as ζ Ñ `8,
Ψp¨, ζq Ñ Ψp8q strongly in L2 pY 1 q. (13.78)
Furthermore
}Ψ ´ Ψp8q}L2 pY 1 ˆpζ,`8qq ď C eć ζ{2 @ζ ě 0. (13.79)
448
Proof. Step 1. Proof of estimates (13.77).

1
For φ in Hloc pR` q X L0 , take Φpyq “ φpyN q as test function in (13.75) to
get,
N ż ´ÿ
ÿ BΨ ¯ 1
N
aN j pyq pyq dy “ 0 for a.e. yN P R` . (13.80)
j“1 Y
1
j“1
Byj
For every n in N, set

ż
Un “ |∇y Ψpyq|2 dy,
Y 1 ˆpn,`8q
and
` ˘
πn ptq “ inf supp0, t ´ nq, 1 , @t P R` .
Then, choosing now y ÞÑ πn pyN qΨpyq as test function in (13.75), gives

ż
Apyq∇y Ψpyq πn pyN q∇y Ψpyq dy
Y#
ż
` Apyq∇y Ψpyq bN Ψpyq dy “ 0.
Y 1 ˆpn,n`1q
Since
πn pyN q “ 1 for yN ě n ` 1,
according to equality (13.80) this implies
ż
` ˘
αUn`1 ď Apyq∇y Ψpyq bN Ψpyq ´ MY 1 pΨqpyN q dy, (13.81)
Y 1 ˆpn,n`1q
where
ż
1
MY 1 pΨqpyN q “ Ψpy 1 , yN q dy 1 for a.e. yN P p0, `8q.
|Y 1 | Y1
From (13.81) and due to the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality applied in

every cross-sections Y 1 ˆ tyN u, one obtains
Un`1 ď CpUn ´ Un`1 q, @n P N.
The constant does not depend on n. This implies (13.77)1 .

On the other hand, from (13.77)1 one obtains
ż ÿż
2
yN |∇y Ψpyq|2 dy “ 2
yN |∇y Ψpyq|2 dy
Y# 1
nPN Y ˆpn,n`1q
ÿ
ďC pn ` 1q2 ećn ď C,
nPN
and this is precisely (13.77)2 .
449

By Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and (13.77)1 , it follows that for all k P N,
ż ÿż
|∇y Ψpyq|dy “ |∇y Ψpyq|dy
Y 1 ˆpk,`8q 1
něk Y ˆpn,n`1q
ÿ ´ż ¯1{2
ď |∇y Ψpyq|2 dy
něk Y 1 ˆpn,n`1q
ÿ
ďC ećn{2 ď C ećk{2 .
něk
From the trace theorems, for every k P N one has
}Ψp¨, kq ´ Ψp¨, k ` 1q}L2 pY 1 q ď C}∇y Ψ}L2 pY 1 ˆpk,k`1qq ď Cećk{2 ,

}Ψp¨, kq ´ MY 1 pΨqpkq}L2 pY 1 q ď C}∇y Ψ}L2 pY 1 ˆpk,k`1qq ď Cećk{2 .
Then, for every l P N,
ÿ
k`l´1
}Ψp¨, kq ´ Ψp¨, k ` lq}L2 pY 1 q ď C ećj{2 ď Cećk{2 .
j“k
Taking the mean value over the cross-sections Y 1 ˆ tku and Y 1 ˆ tk ` lu, gives
|MY 1 pΨqpkq ´ MY 1 pΨqpk ` lq| ď C}Ψp¨, kq ´ Ψp¨, k ` lq}L2 pY 1 q ď Cećk{2 .
As a consequence, tΨp¨, kqukPN and tMY 1 pΨqpkqukPN are Cauchy sequences

in L2 pY 1 q, respectively in R. Both converge to the same limit which is a
constant function denoted Ψp8q.
Proceeding as in the previous step, we first show that
ż
ˇ ˇ
ˇΨpy 1 , yN q ´ Ψpy 1 , ryN sqˇ2 dy 1 ď C ećryN s for every yN P R` ,
Y1
where ryN s is the integer part of yN . This, together with the convergences
obtained in the previous step imply (13.79).
Corollary 13.27. The following estimates hold:

› ´ x ¯›
› ›
›ρH ∇Ψ › ď Cε1{2 ,
ε L2 pΩq
› ´¨¯ › (13.82)
› ›
›Ψ ´ Ψp8q› ď C ećζε{2 for every ζ ą 0
ε L2 pΩXtxN ąζuq
where ρH pxq “ distpx, Hq “ |xN |. The constant does not depend on ε.
450
Proof. From (13.77)2 and Lemma 13.24, one has

› ´ ¨ ¯›2 ż ˇ ´ x ¯ˇ2
› › ˇ ˇ
›ρH ∇Ψ › 2 “ x2N ˇ∇Ψ ˇ dx
ε L pΩq ε
Ω
ż
ε ˇ
2 ˇ
ˇ2
“ yN ∇y Ψpyqˇ dx1 dy.
|Y | RN ´1 ˆY #
Then, from (13.79) and again Lemma 13.24, estimate (13.82)2 follows.
Now, we are in a position to give an explicit formula for the restriction of
the function θΨ (see Theorem 13.17) to the flat part Γ of Ω.
Theorem 13.28. All limit points uΨ of the sequence tuεΨ,1 uε have the same
trace on Γ, namely
TAhom puΨ q|Γ “ θΨ|Γ “ Ψp8q.
Moreover, for G given in H 1 pΩq such that the restriction G|BΩ has a
support included in Γ, the whole sequence tuεΨ,G uε converges to the unique
solution of # ` ˘
div Ahom ∇uΨ,G “ 0 in Ω,
uΨ,G “ Ψp8q G|BΩ on BΩ.
› ´ ¨ ¯›
› ›
Proof. Step 1. ›uεΨ,G ´ G Ψ › is bounded.
ε H01 pΩq
Let φ be in H0 pΩq and G P W
1 1,8
pΩq with support included in Γ.
The function defined for a.e. y P Y # by
ÿ
y ÞÑ Gpεξ 1 ` εyqφpεξ 1 ` εyq,
ξ 1 PH
belongs to L0 . Using it in (13.75), gives

ż ´ ÿ ¯
Apyq∇y Ψpyq ε ∇x pGφqpεξ 1 ` εyq dy “ 0,
Y# ξ 1 PH
or equivalently (after multiplication by εN ´1 )

ż
` ˘
Apyq∇y Ψpyq εTε# ∇x pGφq px1 , yq dx1 dy “ 0.
RN ´1 ˆY #
Making an inverse unfolding yields

ż ´x¯
Aε pxq∇Ψ ∇pGφqpxq dx “ 0.
Ω ε
Hence,
ż ´ ´ ¨ ¯¯
Aε ∇ GΨ ∇φ dx
ε
Ω
ż ´¨¯ ż ´¨¯ (13.83)
“ ´ Aε ∇Ψ φ∇G dx ` Aε Ψ ∇G ∇φ dx.
Ω ε Ω ε
451
Since φ belongs to H01 pΩq,

›φ› ›φ›
› › › ›
› › 2 ď› › 2 ď C}∇φ}L2 pΩq .
ρH L pΩq ρ L pΩq
This estimate and (13.82) give
ˇż ´¨¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ Aε ∇Ψ φ∇G dxˇ ď Cε1{2 }∇φ}L2 pΩq }∇G}L8 pΩq . (13.84)
Ω ε
Now, recall that
ż
Aε ∇uεΨ,G ∇φ dx “ 0, @φ P H01 pΩq.
Ω
This equality, together with (13.83) and (13.84), yields

ˇż ´ ´¨¯ ¯ ż ´¨¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ Aε ∇ uεΨ,G ´ Ψ G ∇φ dx ` Aε Ψ ∇G ∇φ dxˇ
Ω ε Ω ε (13.85)
ď Cε 1{2
}∇φ}L2 pΩq }∇G}
L8 pΩq .
On the one hand,
´¨¯
.
wε “ uεΨ,G ´ G Ψ P H01 pΩq.
ε
On the other hand, estimates (13.82)2 and (13.85) show that the sequence
twε uε is uniformly bounded in H01 pΩq.
Step 2. Asymptotic behavior of the sequence twε uε .
Again from (13.82)2 one has, for every ζ ą 0, the following convergences:
´¨¯
Ψ á Ψp8q weakly in L2 pΩq,
ε
´¨¯
Ψ Ñ Ψp8q strongly in L2 pΩ X txN ą ζuq.
ε
p in
Now, proceeding as in Section 3.1, we obtain that there exist w and w
L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq such that
wε á w weakly in H01 pΩq,

Tε p∇wε q Ñ ∇w ` ∇y w
p strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN .
The pair pw, wqp P H01 pΩq ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper,0

1
pY qq is the unique solution of the
following variational problem:
$ż ´ ¯` ˘
’
’ Apyq ∇wpxq ` ∇y wpx, p yq ∇φpxq ` ∇y φpx, p yq dxdy
’
’
’
& ΩˆYż
` ˘
’ ` Apyq Ψp8q ∇Gpxq ∇φpxq ` ∇y φpx, p yq dxdy “ 0, (13.86)
’
’
’
’
ΩˆY
%
@φ P H01 pΩq, @φp P L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq.
452
p in terms of the χ
As in (3.21), we express w pi ’s, ∇w and ∇G, as follows:
N ´
ÿ ¯
Bw BG
p yq “
wpx, pxq ` Ψp8q pxq χpi px, yq.
i“1
Bxi Bxi
Replacing this expression in (13.86), gives

ż
` ˘
Ahom ∇ w ` Ψp8qG ∇φ dx “ 0, @φ P H01 pΩq,
Ω
so that the function w ` Ψp8qG belongs to WAhom .

! ´ ¨ ¯)
Step 3. Asymptotic behavior of the sequence GΨ .
ε ε
For every ζ ą 0, estimates (13.82)1 imply the convergences,
´¨¯
ρH ∇Ψ Ñ 0 strongly in L2 pΩqN ,
´¨¯ε
∇Ψ Ñ 0 strongly in L2 pΩ X txN ą ζuqN .
ε
Besides, from (13.82)2 , one also has

´¨¯
GΨ á G Ψp8q weakly in Hρ1 pΩq.
ε
Finally, since the limit function w “ u#

Ψ,G ´ Ψp8qG belongs to H0 pΩq, the
1
# ´1{2
trace of Ψp8qG is equal to the trace of uΨ,G in H pBΩq. Hence
TAhom pu#
Ψ,G q “ G|Γ θΨ “ G|Γ Ψp8q in H ´1{2 pΓq.
Thus θΨ “ Ψp8q in H ´1{2 pΓq.
Remark 13.29. Assume that the matrix field A satisfies
aN j “ 0 a.e. in Y for j “ 1, . . . , N ´ 1, and aNN depends only on yN .
From (13.80) it follows that
MY 1 pΨq “ MY 1 pΨqpyN q “ Ψp8q, @yN P r0, `8q.
Hence, for the sequence tuεΨ,1 uε , the limit Dirichlet boundary condition which
is MY 1 pΨq on Γ (for every limit point) coincides with that of uΨ on Γ.
In the general case, these two boundary conditions can be distinct, which
is an effect of the homogenization process in Ω.
453
13.8. A variant of problem (13.8)
13.8 A variant of problem (13.8)

We briefly mention a variant of the results given in Proposition 13.3 and The-
orem 13.17 which could be of interest. It uses a different boundary
“ ` . ˘ condition
‰
1
with Ψ more general. For Ψ in Hper pY q and G in H 1 pΩq, Ψ ε G |BΩ does
not necessarily belongs to H 1{2 pBΩq. Here, this is compensated by replacing
G by Qε pGq. Corollary 1.72 implies the equivalent of Lemma 13.2 in this
setting:
Lemma 13.30. For every pΨ, Gq P Hper 1
pY q ˆ H 1 pΩq, one has
› ´¨¯ › (
› ›
›Ψ Qε pGq› ď C}Ψ}H 1 pY q }G}L2 pBΩq ` ε1{2 }∇G}L2 pΩq ,
ε L2 pBΩq
› ´¨¯ › (
› ›
›Ψ Qε pGq› 1{2 ď Cε´1{2 }Ψ}H 1 pY q }G}L2 pBΩq ` ε1{2 }∇G}L2 pΩq .
ε H pBΩq
In particular › ´ ¨ ¯›
› ›
›Ψ › ď C}Ψ}H 1 pY q .
ε L2 pBΩq
Now, problem (13.8) can be replaced by
$
&div pAε ∇vΨ,G
ε
q“0 in Ω,
´¨¯ (13.87)
%vΨ,G “ Ψ
ε
Qε pGq on BΩ.
ε
Proposition 13.31 (Compare with Theorem 13.17). Problem (13.87) admits
a unique solution satisfying (see (13.33))
` ˘
}vΨ,G
ε
}Hρ1 pΩq ď C}Ψ}H 1 pY q }G}L2 pBΩq ` ε1{2 }∇G}L2 pΩq . (13.88)
The constant is independent of ε.

Consider a subsequence (still denoted ε) such that
ε
vΨ,1 á vΨ weakly in Hρ1 pΩq.
Then, for every G P H 1 pΩq, there exists vΨ,G P Hρ1 pΩq such that (for the same
subsequence)
ε
vΨ,G á vΨ,G weakly in Hρ1 pΩq.
The limit function vΨ,G belongs to the space WAhom and is characterized as
the solution of problem
# ` ˘
div Ahom ∇vΨ,G “ 0 in Ω,
vΨ,G “ θΨ G|BΩ on BΩ.
Here θΨ “ TAhom pvΨ q belongs to L2 pBΩq and satisfies
}θΨ }L2 pBΩq ď C}Ψ}H 1 pY q . (13.89)
454
Proof. The proof is similar to that of Theorem 13.17. For the proof of esti-
mate (13.89) use (13.27) for G P W 1,8 pΩq, to obtain
}θΨ G|BΩ }H ´1{2 pBΩq “ }TAhom puΨ,G q}H ´1{2 pBΩq ď C}uΨ,G }Hρ1 pΩq .
This, together with (13.60), implies that

}θΨ G|BΩ }H ´1{2 pBΩq ď C}G}L2 pBΩq }Ψ}H 1 pY q .
Consequently, the (linear) form
@ D @ D
G|BΩ ÞÑ θΨ , G|BΩ H ´1{2 pBΩq,H 1{2 pBΩq ” θΨ G|BΩ , 1 H ´1{2 pBΩq,H 1{2 pBΩq ,
extends uniquely to a linear form on L2 pBΩq and prove (13.89).

Remark 13.32 (see ` Remark 13.29).( From Lemma 13.30, it is easily seen
. ˘
that the sequence Ψ ε |BΩ Qε pGq|BΩ ε is bounded in L2 pBΩq. Its weak limit
` . ˘ (
points are the product of G|BΩ with the weak limit points of Ψ ε |BΩ ε , the
latter being actually in L8 pBΩq. As in the preceding case, these weak limit
points are not necessarily the traces of the weak limit points of the sequence
tvΨ,G
ε
uε . This gap is an effect of the homogenization process.
13.9 Complements
In this section, p belongs to p1, `8q and Ω is a bounded domain with a
Lipschitz boundary.
13.9.1 Projection operators on spaces of periodic func-

tions
In the following X denotes a separable reflexive Banach space. The Banach
space W 1´1{p,p pYk ; Xq is endowed with the norm
´ż ż
}Ψpyq ´ Ψpy 1 q}pX ¯1{p
1
}Ψ}W 1´1{p,p pYk ;Xq “ }Ψpyq}pX dy ` dydy .
Yk Yk ˆYk |y ´ y 1 |p`N ´2
Definition 13.33. For φ in W 1,p pY ; Xq, we call “periodic defect” of φ the
following quantity:
. ÿ
N
DX pφq “ }φ|bj `Yj ´ φ|Yj }W 1´1{p,p pYj ;Xq ,
j“1
which is a continuous semi-norm on W 1,p pY ; Xq whose kernel is Wper

1,p
pY ; Xq.
The aim of this section is to prove that the distance between a function
f in W 1,p pY ; Xq and the space of periodic functions Wper
1,p
pY ; Xq is bounded
above by constant times the periodic defect DX pf q of f . In Proposition 13.34
we investigate the case X “ R, then in Proposition 13.38 we consider the cases
X “ Lp pRN q and X “ W ´1,p pRN q.
455
13.9. Complements
Proposition 13.34. There exists a continuous projection
p : W 1,p pY q ÝÑ Wper
1,p
pY q,
and a constant C (depending only upon p and Y ) such that
}φ ´ ppφq}W 1,p pY q ď C DR pφq,
for all φ P W 1,p pY q.
For p “ 2, the projection p can be replaced by an orthogonal projection

from H 1 pY q onto Hper
1
pY q. This case has been investigated in [120].
For the proof of Proposition 13.34 and in the sequel, we need some pre-
liminary notations and results. For k P t0, . . . , N u, introduce the spaces
W0 “ W 1,p pY q,
! ˇ )
Wk “ φ P W 1,p pY q ˇ φpyq “ φpy ` bi q for a.e. y P Yi , i P t1, . . . , ku ,
WN “ Wper
1,p
pY q.
Let tPk u1ďkďN be a family of parallelotopes defined by (see Figures 13.1

and 13.1 bis in the case N “ 3)
$
’
’ P “ p0, 2q ˆ p´1, 2qN ´1 ,
’ 1
&
Pk “ p´1, 2qk´1 ˆ p0, 2q ˆ p´1, 2qN ´k 2 ď k ď N ´ 1,
’
’
’
%
PN “ p´1, 2qN ´1 ˆ p0, 2q.
The face yk “ 0 of Pk , denoted Yk , plays a special role. It contains at its

center the face Yk of Y , surrounded by 2N ´1 ´ 1 of its copies.
The Banach spaces W 1´1{p,p pBPk q and W 1´1{p,p pYk q that are used widely
in this chapter, are equipped with their standard norms.
Recall that for every k P t1, . . . , N u, there exists a continuous lifting
operator
rk : W 1´1{p,p pBPk q ÞÑ W 1,p pPk q,
with
}rk pΦ|BPk q}W 1,p pPk q ď C}Φ|BPk }W 1´1{p,p pBPk q .
Consider the subspace T rpWk´1 q|Yk of W 1´1{p,p pYk q, consisting of the traces
on Yk of the elements of Wk´1 , k P t1, . . . , N u.
456
y
2 Domain P1 for N = 3
(in blue the unit cell Y)
y1
0
-1 1 2 y3
Extending functions of the subspace W1 to the set :

-1
Figure 13.1: The parallelotope P1 for N “ 3
y3 Domain P1 for N = 3
y2
1
-1 0 1 2 y1
-1
Period translations in directions ± y 1
y1 Domain P1 for N = 3
2
y3
1
-1 0 1 2 y2
-1
Figure 13.1 bis: The parallelotopes Pk , k “ 2 and 3, for N “ 3
457
13.9. Complements
Lemma 13.35. For k “ 1, . . . , N , the subspace T rpWk´1 q|Yk is closed in

W 1´1{p,p pYk q. There exists a continuous lifting rrk from T rpWk´1 q|Yk to
Wk´1 (i.e. a continuous right-inverse of the trace operator from Wk´1 to
W 1´1{p,p pYk q).
Proof. Every function ψ belonging to Wk´1 (1 ď k ď N ) is extended as
follows to obtain an element of W 1,p pPk q:
‚ if k ě 2, by using the periodicity in the direction b1 , . . . , bk´1 , extend ψ
in a function defined on p´1, 2qk´1 ˆ p0, 1qN ´k`1 (this step is omitted for
k “ 1),
‚ then extend the resulting function by a reflection with respect to the hy-
perplane yk “ 1,
‚ finally, if k ă N , extend by reflections with respect to
yk`1 “ 0, yk`1 “ 1, . . . , yN “ 0, yN “ 1. (13.90)
The result is a function Ψ such that
Ψ P W 1,p pPk q and }Ψ}W 1,p pPk q ď C}ψ}W 1,p pY q .
By construction, the trace of Ψ|Yk is obtained from the trace Ψ|Yk “ ψ|Yk
by performing
‚ translations with respect to the vectors b1 , . . . , bk´1 and
‚ reflections with respect to (13.90).
Hence Ψ|Yk only depends on ψ|Yk and
}Ψ|Yk }W 1´1{p,p pYk q ď C }ψ|Yk }W 1´1{p,p pYk q ,
(see Figure 13.2 and 13.2 bis in the case N “ 3).

Let λ be the cut-off function defined on r´1, 2s by
$
&s ` 1
’ if s P r´1, 0s,
λpsq “ 1 if s P r0, 1s,
’
%
2´s if s P r1, 2s.
Now consider the function

ź
N
r
Ψpyq “ Ψpyq λpyi q for a.e. y P Pk .
i“1
r |BP “ 0 except on Yk “ 0, where it only

Observe that by construction, Ψ k
depends on ψ|Yk and λ, namely
ź
N
r |Y pyq “ Ψpyq
Ψ λpyi q for a.e. y P Yk .
k
i“1,i“k
458
Figure 13.2: The face Y1 of the parallelotope P1 for N “ 3
The face
Figure 13.2 bis: The face Yk of the parallelotope Pk (k “ 2, 3) for N “ 3
459
13.9. Complements
Therefore,
r W 1´1{p,p pBP q ď C}ψ|Y }W 1´1{p,p pY q ,

}Ψ} k “ 1, . . . , N. (13.91)
k k k
For k “ 1, set rr1 pψ|Y1 q “ r1 pΨ r |BP q|Y . Obviously rr1 pψ|Y q belongs to W0
1 1
and rr1 pψ|Y1 q|Y1 “ ψ|Y1 on Y1 .
For k P t2, . . . , N u and a.e. y P Y , set
1 ÿ´
k´1
rrk pψ|Yk qpyq “ r |BP qpyq ` rk pΨ
rk pΨ r |BP qpy ´ bi q
2pk ´ 1q i“1 k k
¯
r |BP qpy ` bi q .
` rk pΨ k
r
By the definition of the map rk and the properties of Ψ,
r |BP q|y “´1 “ 0,

rk pΨ k
r |BP q|y “0 “ rk pΨ
rk pΨ r |BP q|y “1 ,
k k
r |BP q|y “2 “ 0.
rk pΨ k
Consequently, the function rrk pψ|Yk q belongs to Wk´1 .

Moreover, by construction, for a.e. y P Yk , i P t1, . . . , k ´ 1u,
r |BP q|y “0 py ´ bi q “ ψ|Y py ´ bi qλpyi ´ 1q “ ψ|Y pyqλpyi ´ 1q,

rk pΨ k k k k
r |BP q|y “0 py ` bi q “ ψ|Y py ` bi qλpyi ` 1q “ ψ|Y pyqλpyi ` 1q,

rk pΨ k k k k
from which it follows that
r |BP qpyq ` rk pΨ
rk pΨ r |BP qpy ´ bi q ` rk pΨ
r |BP qpy ` bi q “ 2ψ|Y pyq.
k k k k
This implies that the function rrk pψ|Yk q satisfies the equality
rrk pψ|Yk q|Yk “ ψ|Yk (13.92)
and, due to (13.91), also the estimate
rk pψ|Yk q}W 1,p pY q ď C}ψ|Yk }W 1´1{p,p pYk q ,

}r
so that, it is the required lifting.

At this point, it is easy to see that T rpWk´1 q|Yk is complete (indeed, a
Cauchy sequence in T rpWk´1 q|Yk is mapped by rrk on a Cauchy sequence in
the space Wk´1 !).
Proposition 13.34 will be obtained by combining the following N ´ 1

elementary projection results, which are of interest in their own right.
460
Lemma 13.36. For k P t0, . . . , N ´1u, there is a continuous linear projection

qk`1 from Wk to Wk`1 , and a constant C such that, for every ψ in Wk ,
}ψ ´ qk`1 pψq}W 1,p pY q ď C}ψ|bk`1 `Yk`1 ´ ψ|Yk`1 }W 1´1{p,p pYk`1 q . (13.93)
Proof. Step 1. For k “ 0, . . . , N , denote by Sk the isometry on W 1,p pY q

which to φ assigns its flip Sk pφq defined by
.
Sk pφqpyq “ φpy1 , . . . , 1 ´ yk , . . . , yN q,
and set
.
Lk pφqpyq “ p1 ´ yk qφpyq ´ yk Sk pφqpyq. (13.94)
The map Lk is linear and continuous from W 1,p pY q into itself. Clearly, Sk2 is
the identity, and
Sk pφq|Yk “ φ|bk `Yk and Sk pφq|bk `Yk “ φ|Yk . (13.95)
Furthermore, Sk maps every Wj pj “ 0, . . . N q into itself, while Lk maps every

Wj pj “ 0, . . . k ´ 1q into itself. Note that Lk does not map any space Wj
into itself because the straightforward identity Sk ˝ Lk ” ´Lk , implies that
Lk pφq is anti-periodic with respect to yk for every φ in W 1,p pY q.
Note also that
Lk pφq|Yk ” φ|Yk . (13.96)
Step 2. For ψ in Wk , set
. 1 ` ˘
qk`1 pψq “ ψ ` Lk`1 ˝ rrk`1 pSk`1 pψq ´ ψq|Yk`1 .
2
Obviously, qk`1 is linear continuous from Wk into itself. Moreover, (13.96)
together with (13.95) and (13.92), imply estimate (13.93).
It remains to check that the range of qk`1 is in Wk`1 , that is, to show
that for every ψ in Wk , qk`1 pψq is periodic in the direction bk`1 . Indeed,
by (13.92), (13.95) and (13.96) again,
1
qk`1 pψq|Yk`1 “ ψ|Yk`1 ` pψ|bk`1 `Yk`1 ´ ψ|Yk`1 q
2
1
“ pψ|bk`1 `Yk`1 ` ψ|Yk`1 q,
2
while
1
qk`1 pψq|bk`1 `Yk`1 “ ψ|bk`1 `Yk`1 ´ pψ|bk`1 `Yk`1 ´ ψ|Yk`1 q
2
1
“ pψ|bk`1 `Yk`1 ` ψ|Yk`1 q.
2
Hence qk`1 pψq belongs to Wk .
461
13.9. Complements
Proof of Proposition 13.34. At this point, it is straightforward to check that

.
for 0 ď i ă j ď N , the map pij “ qj ˝ ¨ ¨ ¨ ˝ qi`1 is a linear continuous
projection from Wi to Wj and satisfies
ÿ
j´1
}φ ´ pij pφq}W 1,p pY q ď C }φ|qk`1 `Yk`1 ´ φ|Yk`1 }W 1´1{p,p pYk`1 q .
k“i
.
Finally set p “ p0N , this is the required projection.
Corollary 13.37. The projection p defined in Proposition 13.34 induces
continuous projections from
W k,p pRN ; W 1,p pY qq to W k,p pRN ; Wper

1,p
pY qq, k P N.
We still denote these continuous projections p. We easily obtain from Propo-

sition 13.34, that for every function f in W k,p pRN ; W 1,p pY qq
}f ´ ppf q}W k,p pRN ;W 1,p pY qq ď C DW k,p pRN q pf q. (13.97)
Moreover,
´ż ¯ ż ` ˘
piq p φpx, ¨q dx “ p φpx, ¨q dx, @φ P L1 pRN ; W 1,p pY qq,
` R RN
N
piiq p ∇x φq “ ∇x ppφq, @φ P W 1,p pRN ; W 1,p pY qq.

(13.98)
The next proposition plays a crucial role in the error estimates.
Proposition 13.38. For every function f in Lp pRN ; W 1,p pY qq, its projec-
tion ppf q belonging to Lp pRN ; Wper
1,p
pY qq, satisfies
}f ´ ppf q}W 1,p pY ;W ´1,p pRN qq ď C DW ´1,p pRN q pf q. (13.99)
The constant depends only on N and p.

Moreover, if ω is an open subset of RN such that f px, yq “ 0 for a.e.
px, yq P ω ˆ Y , then ppf qpx, yq “ 0 for a.e. px, yq P ω ˆ Y .
For the proof, recall the classical result (see [114]): for every function f
in W ´1,p pRN q, there exists a unique solution w P W 1,p pRN q of the equation
´Δw ` w “ f in D1 pRN q.
It satisfies the estimate,
}w}W 1,p pRN q ď C}f }W ´1,p pRN q .
Moreover, if f P Lp pRN q, then
}w}W 2,p pRN q ď C}f }Lp pRN q .
As a consequence, we obtain the following lemma:
462
Lemma 13.39. For every f P W 1,p pY ; W ´1,p pRN qq, there exists a unique
solution w P W 1,p pY ; W 1,p pRN qq of the equation,
´ Δx wpyq ` wpyq “ f pyq in D1 pRN q for a.e. y P Y. (13.100)
It satisfies for j “ 1, . . . , N , the a priori estimates

}w}W 1,p pY ;W 1,p pRN qq ď C}f }W 1,p pY ;W ´1,p pRN qq ,
(13.101)
}w|Yj }W 1´1{p,p pYj ;W 1,p pRN qq ď C}f|Yj }W 1´1{p,p pYj ;W ´1,p pRN qq .
Moreover, if f P Lp pRN ; W 1,p pY qq, then w P W 2,p pRN ; W 1,p pY qq and
}w}W 2,p pRN ;W 1,p pY qq ď C}f }Lp pRN ;W 1,p pY qq . (13.102)
The constants depend only on N and p.

Proof of Proposition 13.38. Let w P W 2,p pRN ; W 1,p pY qq be the solution of
problem (13.100). From (13.101), it follows that w satisfies the estimate,
}w}W 1,p pY ;W 1,p pRN qq ď C}f }W 1,p pY ;W ´1,p pRN qq .
By taking the traces of (13.100) on Yj and bj ` Yj for j P t1, . . . , N u, gives

` ˘ ` ˘
´Δx w|bj `Yj ´ w|Yj pyq ´ w|bj `Yj ´ w|Yj pyq
` ˘ (13.103)
“ f|bj `Yj ´ f|Yj pyq for a.e. y P Yj .
On the other hand, since w P W 2,p pRN ; W 1,p pY qq, by (13.98) (ii) it follows
that ppwq is the solution of the equation (3)
´ Δx ppwqpyq ` ppwqpyq “ ppf qpyq in Lp pRN q for a.e. y P Y. (13.104)
Due to estimate (13.97), equality (13.103) and Lemma 13.39, ppwq satisfies
ÿ
N
}w ´ ppwq}W 1,p pY ;W 1,p pRN qq ď C }w|bj `Yj ´ w|Yj }W 1´1{p,p pYj ;W 1,p pRN qq
j“1
ÿ
N
ďC }f|bj `Yj´ f|Yj }W 1´1{p,p pYj ;W ´1,p pRN qq .
j“1
Since Δx is a continuous linear operator from W 1,p pRN q into W ´1,p pRN q,
}Δx pw ´ ppwqq}W 1,p pY ;W ´1,p pRN qq ď C}w ´ ppwq}W 1,p pY ;W 1,p pRN qq .
Therefore, as ppf q “ ppwq ´ Δx ppwq is in Lp pRN ; Wper

1,p
pY qq and
` ˘ ` ˘
f ´ ppf q “ w ´ ppwq ´ Δx w ´ ppwq ,
(3) This formula can actually be taken as the definition of p acting on every element of
W 1,p pY ; W ´1,p pRN qq.
463
13.9. Complements
it follows that f ´ ppf q satisfies estimates (13.99).

To prove the last statement of the proposition, choose in (13.100) a test
function ψ P Dpωq, to get for a.e. y P Y ,
ż ż ż
∇x wpyq∇ψ dx ` wpyqψ dx “ ψ f pyqdx “ 0.
RN RN RN
This together with (13.98)(i)-(ii) implies

ż ż
∇x ppwqpyq∇ψ dx ` ppwqpyqψ dx “ 0
RN RN
ż
“ ppf qpyqψ dx for a.e. y P Y,
RN
which concludes the proof of the proposition.
13.9.2 Projection theorems for unfolded functions on

the space of periodic functions
Theorem 13.40. For φ P W 1,p pRN q, there exists φpε P Lp pRN ; Wper 1,p
pY qq,
such that
` ˘
}φpε }Lp pRN ;W 1,p pY qq ď C }φ}Lp pRN q ` ε}∇φ}Lp pRN q ,
` ˘
}Trε pφq ´ φpε }W 1,p pY ;W ´1,p pRN qq ď Cε }φ}Lp pRN q ` ε}∇φ}Lp pRN q .
The constant depends only on p and Y .

Proof. First, for j P t1, . . . , N u, introduce a “double unfolding operator” for
ψ in Lp pRN q(4) ,
´ ”xı ¯ ` ˘
Trεj pψqpx, yq “ ψ ε ` εy for a.e. px, yq P RN ˆ int Y Y pY ` bj q .
ε Y
We have, for a.e. px, yq P RN ˆ Y ,
Trεj pψqpx, yq “ Trε pψqpx, yq,

Trε j pψqpx, y ` bj q “ Trε pψqpx ` εbj , yq.
These identities and a simple change of variables give for ψ in DpRN q and Ψ
1
in W 1,p pRN q,
ż
` ˘
Trε j pψqp¨, y ` bj q ´ Trε j pψqp¨, yq Ψ dx
R N
ż
` ˘
“ Trε pψqp¨, yq Ψp¨ ´ εbj q ´ Ψ dx for a.e. y P Y.
RN
˚
(4) This is similar to the operator TεY introduced for the proof of Theorem 4.28.
464
1
Since Ψ belongs to W 1,p pRN q,
}Ψp¨ ´ εbj q ´ Ψ}Lp1 pRN q ď Cε}∇Ψ}Lp1 pRN q .
Thus, for a.e. y P Y ,
ˇż ` ˘ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ Trεj pψqp¨, y ` bj q ´ Trεj pψqp¨, yq Ψ dxˇ
R N
› ›
ď Cε}∇Ψ}Lp1 pRN q ›Trε pψqp¨, yq›Lp pRN q ,
which implies
› ›
›Trεj pψqp¨, y ` bj q ´ Trεj pψqp¨, yq› ´1,p N ď Cε}Trε pψqp¨, yq}Lp pRN q ,
W pR q
so that (recall Proposition 1.8(iii)),

› ›
›Trεj pψqp¨, ¨ ` bj q ´ Trεj pψq› p ď Cε}ψ}Lp pRN q . (13.105)
The space DpRN q being dense in Lp pRN q, this estimate is valid for every
ψ P Lp pRN q.
Now, let φ be in W 1,p pRN q. Applying (13.105) for φ and for ∇φ, we
obtain
› ›
›Trεj pφqp¨, ¨ ` bj q ´ Trεj pφq› p ď Cε}φ}Lp pRN q ,
› ›
›Trεj p∇φqp¨, ¨ ` bj q ´ Trεj p∇φq› p ď Cε}∇φ}Lp pRN q .
L pY ;W ´1,p pRN qN q
` ˘
Note that, as for Trε , the formula ∇y Trεj pφq “ εTrεj p∇φq also holds for
Trεj . Therefore, the above estimates give ,
› ›
›Trεj pφqp¨, ¨ ` bj q ´ Trε pφq› 1,p
W pY ;W ´1,p pRN qq
` ˘
ď Cε }φ}Lp pRN q ` ε}∇φ}Lp pRN q .
From this inequality we deduce the estimate of the difference of the traces of
y ÞÑ Trε pφqp¨, yq on BY , and consequently, on all the faces Yj ,
› ›
›Trεj pφqp¨, ¨ ` bj q ´ Trεj pφq› 1´1{p,p
W pYj ;W ´1,p pRN qq
` ˘
Finally, the periodic defect of the function y ÞÑ Trε pφqp¨, yq is estimated by

ÿ
N
› ›
DW ´1,p pRN q pTrε pφqq “ ›Trε pφqp¨, ¨ ` bj q ´ Trε pφq›
W 1´1{p,p pYj ;W ´1,p pRN qq
j“1
` ˘
Choose φpε “ p ˝ Trε pφq. Because p is a continuous projection from

L pΩ; W 1,p pY qq onto Lp pΩ; Wper
p 1,p
pY qq, we obtain the first estimate of the
theorem, the second one follows from (13.99) of Proposition 13.38.
465
13.9. Complements
We will need in the following to work in the sets Ωbδ and Ωbl
δ which were
defined for δ ą 0, by (12.1). that we recall here,
. (
Ωbδ “ x P RN | ρpxq ă δ ,
. (
δ “ x P Ω | ρpxq ă δ .
Ωbl
Theorem 13.41. For every φ P W 1,p pΩq, there exists φpε P Lp pΩ; Wper
1,p
pY qq,
such that ` ˘
}φpε }Lp pΩ;W 1,p pY qq ď C }φ}Lp pΩq ` ε}∇φ}Lp pΩq ,
and
` ˘
}Tε pφq ´ φpε }W 1,p pY ;pW 1,p pΩqq1 q ď Cε }φ}Lp pΩq ` ε}∇φ}Lp pΩq
1` ˘
` Cε1{p }φ}Lp pΩbl q ` ε}∇φ}Lp pΩbl q .
2εdpY q 2εdpY q
Furthermore,
` ˘
}Tε pφq ´ φpε }W 1,p pY ;W ´1,p pΩqq ď Cε }φ}Lp pΩq ` ε}∇φ}Lp pΩq .

Proof. With notation recalled above, set
! ´ ρpxq ´ εdpY q ¯)
ρpε pxq “ sup 0, inf 1, for x P Ω.
εdpY q
Let φ be in W 1,p pΩq. Consider the function φε “ ρpε φ which belongs to

W01,p pΩq, and extend it by 0 outside Ω (extension still denoted φε ). Due
to (12.4), it satisfies
}φε }Lp pRN q ď }φ}Lp pΩq ,
}φ ´ φε }Lp pΩq ď }φ}Lp pΩbl q,

2εdpY q
C (13.106)
}∇φε }Lp pRN q ď }∇φ}Lp pΩq ` }φ}Lp pΩbl q,
ε 2εdpY q
C
}∇pφ ´ φε q}Lp pΩq ď }∇φ}Lp pΩbl q` }φ}Lp pΩbl q.
2εdpY q ε 2εdpY q
Now, apply Theorem 13.40 to obtain a function φpε P Lp pRN ; Wper 1,p
pY qq such
that,
` ˘
}φpε }W 1,p pY ;Lp pRN qq ď C }φε }Lp pRN q ` ε}∇φε }Lp pRN q
` ˘
ď C }φ}Lp pΩq ` ε}∇φ}Lp pΩq ,
` ˘ (13.107)
r p
}Tε pφε q ´ φε }W pY ;W
1,p ´1,p pR qq ď Cε }φε }L pR q ` ε}∇φε }L pR q
N p N p N
` ˘
ď Cε }φ}Lp pΩq ` ε}∇φ}Lp pΩq .
466
Observe that, according to Proposition 13.38,
φpε “ 0 p ε qq ˆ Y.
a.e. in pRN zΩ
1 1
Let Ψ be in W 1,p pΩ; Lp pY qq, extend it in a function, still denoted Ψ,
1 1
belonging to W 1,p pRN ; Lp pY qq and satisfying
}Ψ}W 1,p1 pRN ;Lp1 pY qq ď C}Ψ}W 1,p1 pΩ;Lp1 pY qq .
Since the support of φε is included in Ω p ε , a simple computation yields

@ D
Trε pφε q´ φpε , Ψ Lp pY ;W ´1,p pRN qq,Lp1 pY ;W 1,p1 pRN qq
ż ż
` ˘ ` ˘
“ Trε pφε q ´ φpε Ψ dxdy “ Tε pφε q ´ φpε Ψ dxdy,
RN ˆY ΩˆY
Then, thanks to Proposition 1.8 (iii) and (13.106),
}Tε pφ ´ φε q}Lp pΩˆY q ď C}φ}Lp pΩbl q.

2εdpY q
This inequality and (12.3)1 imply

ˇż ˇ
ˇ ˇ 1
ˇ Tε pφ ´ φε qΨ dxdy ˇ ď Cε1{p }φ}Lp pΩbl q }Ψ}Lp1 pY ;W 1,p1 pΩqq
2εdpY q
ΩˆY
which, with (13.107)2 , gives

` ˘
}Tε pφq ´ φpε }Lp pY ;pW 1,p1 pΩqq1 q ď Cε }φ}Lp pΩq ` ε}∇φ}Lp pΩq
1
` Cε1{p }φ}Lp pΩbl q.
2εdpY q
1 1
If Ψ belongs to Lp pY ; W01,p pΩqq, from (12.5)1 , we get
ˇż ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ Tε pφ ´ φε qΨ dxdy ˇ ď Cε}φ}Lp pΩbl q }Ψ}Lp1 pY ;W 1,p1 pΩqq ,
2εdpY q
ΩˆY
that is,
` ˘
}Tε pφq ´ φpε }Lp pY ;W ´1,p pΩqq ď Cε }φ}Lp pΩq ` ε}∇φ}Lp pΩq .
In the same way we show that

` ˘
}∇y Tε pφq ´ ∇y φpε }Lp pY ;pW 1,p1 pΩqq1 q ď Cε }φ}Lp pΩq ` ε}∇φ}Lp pΩq ,
1` ˘
` Cε1{p }φ}Lp pΩbl q ` ε}∇φ}Lp pΩbl q ,
2εdpY q 2εdpY q
` ˘
}∇y Tε pφq ´ ∇y φpε }Lp pY ;W ´1,p pΩqq ď Cε }φ}Lp pΩq ` ε}∇φ}Lp pΩq ,
467
13.9. Complements
Theorem 13.42. For every φ P W 1,p pRN q, there exists
φpε P Lp pRN ; Wper

1,p
pY qq
such that
}φpε }Lp pRN ;W 1,p pY qq ď C}∇φ}Lp pRN q ,
(13.108)
}Trε p∇φq ´ ∇φ ´ ∇y φpε }Lp pY ;W ´1,p pRN qq ď Cε}∇φ}Lp pRN q .
The constant depends only on p and Y .

rε pφq ` R
Proof. Decompose φ as φ “ Q r ε pφq. From Corollary 1.68,
r ε pφq}W ´1,p pRN q ď C}R

}∇R r ε pφq}Lp pRN q ď Cε}∇φ}Lp pRN q .
This estimate and those of Proposition 12.10, as well and that derived from
Theorem 13.40 applied to Rr ε pφq, easily prove the claim of the theorem.
The next result is the equivalent of Theorem 13.42 for bounded domains.
Theorem 13.43. For every φ P W 1,p pΩq there exists φpε P Lp pΩ; Wper
1,p
pY qq,
such that
}φpε }Lp pΩ;W 1,p pY qq ď C}∇φ}Lp pΩq ,
(13.109)
}Tε p∇φq ´ ∇φ ´ ∇y φpε }Lp pY ;W ´1,p pΩqq ď Cε}∇φ}Lp pΩq .
The constant depends only on p, Y and BΩ.

Proof. Extend φ in a function belonging to W 1,p pRN q, still denoted φ, and
satisfying (1.79). Theorem 13.42 furnishes a function φpε P Lp pRN ; Wper
1,p
pY qq,
such that
}φpε }Lp pΩ;W 1,p pY qq ď }φpε }Lp pRN ;W 1,p pY qq ď C}∇φ}Lp pRN q ď C}∇φ}Lp pΩq .
1 1
Now, for Φ be in Lp pY ; W01,p pΩqq (extended by 0 in Y ˆ pRN zΩq),
ż ż
` ˘ ` ˘
p
Tε p∇φq ´ ∇φ ´ ∇y φε Φ dxdy “ Trε p∇φq ´ ∇φ ´ ∇y φpε Φ dxdy
ΩˆY ΩˆY
ż
´ Trε p∇φqΦ dxdy.
Λε ˆY
Since
ż ż
` ˘ ` ˘
Trε p∇φq ´ ∇φ ´ ∇y φpε Φ dxdy “ Trε p∇φq ´ ∇φ ´ ∇y φpε Φ dxdy,
ΩˆY RN ˆY
estimate (13.108)2 in Theorem 13.42 leads to

ˇż ` ˘ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ Trε p∇φq ´ ∇φ ´ ∇y φpε Φ dxdy ˇ ď Cε}∇φ}Lp pΩq }Φ}Lp1 pY ;W 1,p1 pΩqq .
0
ΩˆY
468
Also, by (12.4)
}Φ}Lp1 pΛε ˆY q ď Cε}Φ}Lp1 pY ;W 1,p1 pΩqq ,
0
hence
ˇż ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ Trε p∇φqΦ dxdy ˇ ď Cε}Trε p∇φq}Lp pRN ˆY q }Φ}Lp1 pY ;W 1,p1 pΩqq
0
Λε ˆY
ď Cε}∇φ}Lp pRN q }Φ}Lp1 pY ;W 1,p1 pΩqq
0
ď Cε}∇φ}Lp pΩq }Φ}Lp1 pY ;W 1,p1 pΩqq

0
which in turn, taking into account the previous inequality, proves inequal-
ity (13.109)2 , which concludes the proof of the theorem.
Theorem 13.44. For any φ in W 1,p pRNq there exists φpε in Lp pΩ; Wper
1,p
pY qq,
satisfying (with notation (12.1)),
}φpε }Lp pΩ;W 1,p pY qq ď C}∇φ}Lp pΩq ,
}Tε p∇φq ´ ∇φ ´ ∇y φpε }Lp pY ;pW 1,p1 pΩqq1 q (13.110)

1
ď Cε}∇φ}Lp pΩq ` Cε1{p }∇φ}Lp pΩb q.
5εdpY q
The constant depends only on p, Y and BΩ(5) .
Proof. Decompose φ as
rε pφq ` R
φ“Q r ε pφq,
and apply Theorem 13.41 with the function
1r
Rε pφq|Ω .
ε
We obtain φpε in Lp pΩ; Wper

1,p
pY qq such that (see also Corollary 1.68),
C` r ˘
}φpε }Lp pΩ;W 1,p pY qq ď r ε pφq}Lp pRN q
}Rε pφq}Lp pRN q ` ε}∇R
ε
ď C }∇φ}Lp pRN q ,
that is (13.110)1 .
To prove (13.110)2 , recall that
` ˘ ` ˘
r ε pφq “ 1 ∇y Tε ˝ R
Tε ∇R r ε pφq .
ε
(5) pε in Lp pΩ; W 1,p pY qq (by subtracting
This theorem can be stated with the function φ per,0
p p
MY pφε q from the original φε ).
469
13.9. Complements
Then, from Theorem 13.41, we get successively,

` ˘
}Tε ∇R r ε pφq ´∇y φpε } p
` ˘
ď Cε }R r ε pφq}Lp pΩq ` ε}∇R r ε pφq}Lp pΩq
1` ˘
` Cε1{p }R r ε pφq}Lp pΩb r
q ` ε}∇Rε pφq}Lp pΩb q
2εdpY q 2εdpY q
1
ď Cε}∇φ}Lp pRN q ` Cε1{p }∇φ}Lp pΩb q.
4εdpY q
1
Besides, from the following formula (true for all Ψ P W 1,p pΩqN ):
ż ż ż
r
∇Rε pϕq ¨ Ψdx “ r
Rε pϕqΨ ¨ n dσ ´ r ε pϕq ¨ div pΨqdx,
R
Ω BΩ Ω
and from estimates (1.80) and (12.4)2 , it follows that
r ε pϕq} 1,p1
}∇R
1
pΩqq1 ď Cε}∇ϕ}Lp pRN q ` Cε }∇ϕ}Lp pΩb
1{p
pW 3εdpY q
q.
Summarizing the above inequalities, we finally get

` ˘
}Tε ∇R r ε pϕq ´ ∇y φpε } p
r ε pφq ´∇R
1
(13.111)
ď Cε}∇φ}Lp pRN q ` Cε1{p }∇φ}Lp pΩb q.
4εdpY q
On the other hand, by estimate (12.6)1 (with ∇Q rε pϕq in place of φ) and

by the second inequality of Proposition 1.64(iii),
rε pϕq ´ Mε p∇Q
}∇Q rε pϕqq} 1,p1
pW pΩqq1
1 (13.112)
ď Cε}∇ϕ}Lp pRN q ` Cε1{p }∇ϕ}Lp pΩb q.
5εdpY q
Now, using (12.22), this implies

› ` ˘ ›
›Trε ∇Qrε pϕq ´ ∇Q rε pϕq›
L8 pY ;pW 1,p1 pΩqq1 q
1
ď Cε}∇ϕ}Lp pRN q ` Cε1{p }∇ϕ}Lp pΩb q,
4εdpyq
which, together with (13.112), yields

› ` ˘ ›
Ăε pϕq ´ ∇Q
›Tε ∇Q rε pϕq›
L8 pY ;pW 1,p1 pΩqq1 q
1
ď Cε}∇ϕ}Lp pRN q ` Cε1{p }∇φ}Lp pΩb q.
5εdpY q
This inequality and the former one (13.111), give (13.110)2 .
470
Chapter 14
Some sharp error estimates
This chapter is dedicated to improvements on the error estimates obtained

by Griso in [120, 122] and [125] for the Dirichlet problem
$
&´div pAε ∇uε q “ f in Ω,
(14.1)
%
uε “ 0 on BΩ,
and for Neumann problem,
$
’
’ ´div pAε ∇uε q “ f in Ω,
’
’
&
Aε ∇uε ¨ n “ 0 on BΩ, (14.2)
’ ż
’
’
’
% uε dx “ 0,
Ω
where f is in L pΩq and

2
´! x ) ¯
Aε pxq ” A ,
ε Y
with A P M pα, β, Y q.
The method we present in this chapter is based on the use of the unfolding
operators. Several preliminary results, needed in the proofs and concerning
in particular, projection operators on spaces of periodic functions and the
notion of periodic defect, were established in Section 13.9 (Theorem 13.41
and the key Theorems 13.43 and 13.44).
Both global and interior error estimates are obtained for the homogeneous
Dirichlet problem and for the Neumann problem, studied in Section 14.1 and
in Section 14.2, respectively.
In the Dirichlet case we characterize the limit in H01 pΩq of the sequence
!1´ ÿN
Bu0 ´ ¨ ¯ ¯)
u ε ´ u0 ´ ε pj
χ ´ εβεDir ,
ε j“1
Bxj ε ε

14.1. Error estimates for the Dirichlet problem
where the function u0 is the solution of the homogenized problem and βεDir
is a boundary layer term introduced to take into account the homogeneous
Dirichlet condition which must be satisfied by the approximated solution.
The asymptotic behavior of this kind of sequence was studied in the pre-
vious chapter. We show that each limit point of the sequence tβεDir uε is
expressed in terms of the homogenized solution u0 and a function Θ belong-
ing to L8 pBΩqN . In most cases, there are infinitely many such limit points.
This shows that in the general case, it is not possible to give an asymptotic
expansion of uε beyond the first two classical terms.
In the case where Ω is a convex polyhedral domain, fε ” f in L2 pΩq and
for a well-chosen sequence tεu (see Subsection 14.1.1 for more details), we
show that the solution of the classical Dirichlet homogenization problem (3.3)
can be written as
ÿN
Bu0 ´x¯ ´ ´ ! x )¯¯
uε pxq “ u0 pxq ` ε pxq χ
pj ` ε u1 pxq ` εpu1 x,
j“1
Bxj ε ε
´ ´ ! x )¯¯
` ε β Dir pxq ` εβpDir x, ` ...,
ε
where all the functions
` in the right-hand side are bounded in the L2 -norm,
p . ˘
except the term β Dir
¨, ε which is bounded in the space L2ρ pΩq.
In the Neumann case, we only characterize the limit in H 1 pΩq of the
sequence
!1´ ÿN
Bu10 ´ ¨ ¯ ¯)
uε ´ u10 ´ ε pj
χ ´ εβεNe ,
ε j“1
Bxj ε ε
where the function u10 is the solution of the homogenized problem and βεNe
is a kind of corrector for the homogeneous Neumann condition as shown in
Section 14.2.
The techniques developed in this chapter can be transposed to a large
class of homogenization problems.
Other results concerning error estimates of these problems can be found
in [138–140, 171, 172].
In this chapter the domain Ω is bounded with a Lipschitz or C 1,1 boundary,
and B is an orthonormal basis.
14.1 Error estimates for the Dirichlet problem

The homogenization result for the Dirichlet problem (14.1) was given in Sub-
section 3.1.6. It states in particular, that
u ε á u0 weakly in H01 pΩq,
where u0 in H01 pΩq is the unique solution of the homogenized problem (3.18),
ż ż
Ahom ∇u0 ∇ϕ dx “ f ϕ dx, @ϕ P H01 pΩq, (14.3)
Ω Ω
472
Chapter 14. Some sharp error estimates
where the standard homogenized matrix Ahom is defined by formulas (3.19).

Our aim here is to improve upon the corrector result from Theorem 3.27.
For F P L8 pΩqN consider the function
Ψ “ KA pF q,
given by (13.3) (with B ” A) and introduce the vector function dr defined as,
. ` ˘
r “
dpyq Apyq∇y Ψpyq ` F pyq ´ MY A∇y Ψ ` F for a.e. y P Y, (14.4)
r “ 0.
which belongs to L2 pY qN and satisfies MY pdq
Then, the following result holds:
Lemma 14.1. For every w in H 1 pΩq and for every v P H01 pΩq,
ˇż ´¨¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ dr ¨ ∇w v dxˇ ď Cε}∇w}L2 pΩq }∇v}L2 pΩq . (14.5)
Ω ε
The constant does not depend on ε.
Furthermore, ż ´ ¯
1 ¨
lim dr ¨ ∇w v dx “ 0. (14.6)
εÑ0 ε Ω ε
Let tvε uε be a sequence in H01 pΩq such that there exist v in H01 pΩq and vp
in L2 pΩ; Hper
1
pY qq satisfying
vε á v weakly in H 1 pΩq,
(14.7)
Tε p∇vε q á ∇v ` ∇y vp weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN .
Then
ż ´¨¯ ż
1 r 1 r ¨ ∇wpxq vppx, yq dxdy.
lim d ¨ ∇w vε dx “ dpyq (14.8)
εÑ0 ε Ω ε |Y | ΩˆY
Proof. Step 1. Proof of (14.5). ż ´ ¯
¨
Due to Lemma 3.29 the integral dr ¨ ∇w v dx makes sense since,
` . ˘ Ω ε
by (3.44), ∇y Ψ ε v belongs to L2 pΩq. We extend the functions v and w
outside of Ω (v by 0 in RN zΩ and w as a function belonging to H 1 pRN q), the
extensions are still denoted v and w, so that clearly,
ż ´ ¯ ż ´¨¯
¨
dr ¨ ∇w v dx “ dr ¨ ∇w v dx. (14.9)
Ω ε RN ε
We shall repeatedly use the following estimates (coming from Corol-
lary 1.68, Proposition 1.64(iv) and (1.38)1 with Ω “ RN , respectively):
rε pvq}L2 pRN q ` ε}∇pv ´ Q
}v ´ Q rε pvqq}L2 pRN q ď Cε}∇v}L2 pΩq ,
}Q Ăε pvq}L2 pRN q ď Cε}∇v}L2 pΩq ,

rε pvq ´ M (14.10)
Ăε pwq ´ w}L2 pRN q ď Cε}∇w}L2 pRN q .
}M
473
According to estimates (3.44) and (14.10)1 one can replace v by Qrε pvq in the
right-hand side of (14.9). Then one substitutes M rε pvq in view of
Ăε pvq by Q
the first estimate in Proposition 1.71. The result is
ˇż ´x¯ ż ´x¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ r
d ¨ ∇wpxq vpxq dx ´ r
d Ă
¨ ∇wpxq Mε pvqpxq dx ˇˇ
ˇ ε ε
RN RN
ď Cε}∇w}L2 pΩq }∇v}L2 pΩq .
Now, applying the unfolding operator to the second integral and using
estimate (14.10)3 , one obtains
ˇż ´ ¯ ż ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ dr x ¨ ∇wpxq vpxq dx ´ 1 r r
dpyq ¨ Tε p∇wqpx, yq vpxq dxdy ˇˇ
ˇ ε |Y |
Ω R ˆY
N
On the other hand, by Theorem 13.42 in Subsection 13.9.2, there exists

pε in L2 pRN ; Hper
some function w 1
pY qq such that
}Trε p∇wq ´ ∇w ´ ∇y w
pε }L2 pY ;H ´1 pRN qq ď Cε}∇w}L2 pΩq ,
which used in the inequality above, leads to

ˇż ´ ¯ ż ˇ
ˇ ` ˘ ˇ
ˇ dr ¨ ¨ ∇w v dx ´ 1 r pε v dxdy ˇˇ
dpyq ¨ ∇w ` ∇y w
ˇ ε |Y | RN ˆY
Ω
Finally, estimate (14.5) follows easily, by taking into account the fact that
ż
` ˘
r ¨ ∇wpxq ` ∇y w
dpyq pε px, yq dy “ 0 for a.e. x P RN .
Y

First, assume w in DpRN q. We have successively,
ż ´x¯ ż
1 r 1 r ¨ Trε p∇wq Trε pvq dxdy
d ¨ ∇wpxq vpxq dx “ dpyq
ε Ω ε ε|Y | RN ˆY
ż r Ă
“
1 r ¨ Tε p∇wq ´ Mε p∇wq Trε pvq dxdy
dpyq
|Y | RN ˆY ε
ż r Ă
`
1 r ¨M
dpyq Ăε p∇wq Tε pvq ´ Mε pvq dxdy
|Y | RN ˆY ε
ż
1 r ¨M Ăε p∇wq MĂε pvq dxdy.
` dpyq
ε|Y | RN ˆY
474
The last integral is equal to 0 since MY pdq r “ 0. Proposition 1.25 (with

Ω “ R q and Proposition 1.39 allow to pass to the limit to get
N
ż ´ ¯
1 x
lim dr ¨ ∇wpxq vpxq dx
εÑ0 ε Ω ε
ż ´ÿ N ´ Bw ¯ ¯
1 r ¨
“ dpyq yc ¨ ∇ bj v dxdy
|Y | ΩˆY j“1
Bxj
ż
1 ` ˘` ˘
` r ¨ ∇w y c ¨ ∇v dxdy
dpyq
|Y | ΩˆY
ż ż ”ÿ ´ Bw ¯` ı
1
N
˘ ` ˘
“ ∇ r ¨ bj v ` dpyq
dpyq r ¨ ∇w ∇v ¨ y c dxdy
|Y | Y Ω j“1 Bxj
ż ż ” ı
1 r ¨ ∇wq v y c dxdy.
“ div pdpyq
|Y | Y Ω
The last integral vanishes since v is in H01 pΩq. We conclude by a density

argument (of DpRN q in H 1 pRN q), together with estimate (14.5).
Here again, we start with w in DpRN q, then proceeding as in Step 2
and thanks to (14.7), Proposition 1.39 and Theorem 1.41, convergence (14.8)
follows. This convergence, a density argument and estimate (14.5) allow to
conclude in the general case.
On the model of (14.4), we introduce the vector functions drj (j “

1, . . . , N ),
. ` ˘ ` ˘
drj pyq “ Apyq ∇y χ
pj pyq ` bj ´ MY Ap∇y χ
pj ` bj q for a.e. y P Y, (14.11)
where χpj are the correctors given by (3.10).

` By definition˘ (3.19) (with Apyq
in place of Bpx, yq), the second term MY Ap∇y χpj ` bj q is the j’th column
of the matrix Ahom .
Proposition 14.2. Let u0 be the solution of the homogenized problem (14.3).

Assume that u0 belongs to H 2 pΩq. Then the solution uε of (14.1) satisfies
the following estimate:
ˇż ´¨¯ ´ ÿN
Bu0 ´ ¨ ¯¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ A ∇ u ε ´ u0 ´ ε pj
χ ∇vdxˇ
Ω ε j“1
Bx j ε (14.12)
ď Cε}u0 }H 2 pΩq }∇v}L2 pΩq , @v P H01 pΩq.
Proof. Let v be in DpΩq. Recall (see Step 1 of Lemma 3.29) that

´¨¯
´1
div di “ 0 in Hloc pRN q and in particular in H ´1 pΩq.
ε
475
Bu0
Multiply (14.11) by v, integrate over Ω and sum on i, to get
Bxi
ż ´ ¨ ¯” ÿN ´ ¨ ¯ı ż
Bu0
A ∇u0 ` pi
∇y χ ∇v dx ´ Ahom ∇u0 ∇vdx
Ω ε i“1
Bx i ε Ω
ÿN ż ´ ¨ ¯ ´ Bu ¯
dri
0
` ∇ v dx “ 0, .
i“1 Ω
ε Bx i
Since ż ż
A hom
∇u0 ∇vdx “ Aε ∇uε ∇v dx,
Ω Ω
this rewrites in the form

ż ´¨¯ ´ ÿ Bu0 ´ ¨ ¯¯
N
A ∇ u ε ´ u0 ´ ε χpj ∇v dx
Ω ε j“1
Bxj ε
ÿN ż ´¨¯ ´ Bu ¯
dri
0
“ ¨∇ v dx (14.13)
i“1 Ω
ε Bx i
ÿN ż ´ ¨ ¯ ´ Bu ¯ ´ ¨ ¯
0
´ε A ∇ pi
χ ∇v dx.
i“1 Ω ε Bx i ε
pi ’s belong to L8 pY q (see Lemma 3.29), we first have

As the χ
ˇÿ N ż ´ ¨ ¯ ´ Bu ¯ ´ ¨ ¯ ˇ
ˇ 0 ˇ
ˇ A ∇ pi
χ ∇v dxˇ ď C}u0 }H 2 pΩq }∇v}L2 pΩq
i“1 Ω
ε Bx i ε
and then, from (14.5),
ˇÿ N ż ´¨¯ ´ Bu ¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
dri
0
ˇ ¨∇ v dxˇ ď Cε}u0 }H 2 pΩq }∇v}L2 pΩq .
i“1 Ω ε Bx i
These last two estimates and the density of DpΩq in H01 pΩq, give (14.12).
We are now in position to state the main theorem of this section.
Theorem 14.3. Suppose that u0 , the solution of the homogenized prob-

lem (14.3) belongs to H 2 pΩq. Then the solution uε of (14.1) satisfies the
following estimate:
› ÿN
Bu0 ´ . ¯››
›
›uε ´ u0 ´ ε pi
χ › 1 ď Cε1{2 }u0 }H 2 pΩq . (14.14)
i“1
Bx i ε H pΩq
476
Let βεDir in H 1 pΩq, be the boundary corrector for the nonhomogeneous Dirich-
let condition, i.e., the solution of the following Dirichlet problem: (1)
$
’ div pAε ∇βεDir q “ 0 in Ω,
&
ÿ Bu0 ´ ¨ ¯
N
(14.15)
’
%βε “ ´
Dir
pi
χ on BΩ.
i“1
Bxi ε
Then, the following estimate holds:

› ÿN
Bu0 ´ ¨ ¯ ›
› ›
›uε ´ u0 ´ ε pj
χ ´ εβεDir › 1 ď Cε}u0 }H 2 pΩq . (14.16)
j“1
Bx j ε H pΩq
Furthermore, if BΩ is of class C 1,1 , then

› ´ ÿN
Bu0 ´ . ¯¯›
› ›
}uε ´ u0 }L2 pΩq ` ›ρ ∇uε ´ ∇u0 ´ pi
∇y χ › 2 N
i“1
Bx i ε L pΩq (14.17)
ď Cε}u0 }H 2 pΩq .
The constants C are all independent of ε.
Proof. To begin with, note that problem (14.15) is of the form (13.8) from
Section 13.3. So, with the notation from (13.8), by linearity, one can write
ÿ
N
βεDir “ uεχp i , ´Bi u0 . (14.18)
i“1
Observe that by construction,
ÿ Bu0 ´ ¨ ¯
N
u0 ` ε pj
χ ` εβεDir P H01 pΩq.
j“1
Bx j ε
On the other hand, in view of (14.15), βεDir satisfies

ż ´¨¯
A ∇βεDir ∇v dx “ 0, @v P H01 pΩq.
Ω ε
Using this in (14.12), yields
ˇż ´¨¯ ´ ÿN
Bu0 ´ ¨ ¯ ¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ A ∇ u ε ´ u0 ´ ε pj
χ ´ εβεDir ∇vdxˇ
Ω ε j“1
Bx j ε
ď Cε}u0 }H 2 pΩq }∇v}L2 pΩq .
(1) Due to Lemma 3.29, since u P H 2 pΩq and the χ pi ’s in H A , the nonhomogeneous
0
Dirichlet problem (14.15) is well-posed (see also the discussions of Chapter 13).
477
Choosing in this inequality as test function

ÿ Bu0 ´ ¨ ¯
N
v “ u ε ´ u0 ´ ε pj
χ ´ εβεDir ,
j“1
Bx j ε
easily gives estimate (14.16).
Now, applying Proposition 13.3 to problem (14.15), the corresponding
estimate (13.9) takes the form
C
}βεDir }H 1 pΩq ď ? }u0 }H 2 pΩq .
ε
Using it in (14.16) proves (14.14).
If BΩ is of class C 1,1 , estimate (13.33) in Proposition 13.11 becomes
}βεDir }Hρ1 pΩq ď C}u0 }H 2 pΩq ,
which replaced in (14.16), leads to the L2 and Hloc

1
estimates of (14.17).
Estimate (14.16) can be written as }Uε }H 1 pΩq ď C}u0 }H 2 pΩq , where
´ ÿN
Bu0 ´ ¨ ¯ ¯
. 1
Uε “ u ε ´ u0 ´ ε pj
χ ´ εβεDir .
ε j“1
Bxj ε
The limit behavior of Uε is given in the next result.

Theorem 14.4. Supposing that u0 , the solution of the homogenized prob-
lem (14.3) is in H 2 pΩq, there exist pu1 , u
p1 q in H01 pΩq ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq,
such that
U ε á u1 weakly in H01 pΩq,
Tε pUε q Ñ u1 strongly in L2 pΩ; H 1 pY qq, (14.19)
p1
Tε p∇Uε q á ∇u1 ` ∇y u weakly in L pΩ ˆ Y q .
2 N
p1 q P H01 pΩqˆL2 pΩ; Hper,0

The pair (u1 , u 1
pY qq is the unique solution of problem
$ 1 ż ı
“ ‰“
’
’ Apyq ∇u pxq ` ∇ p
u px, yq ∇Ψpxq ` ∇ Φpx, yq dxdy
’
’ |Y | ΩˆY
1 y 1 y
’
’ ż
’
’
’
& 1
“ F0 px, yqΦpx, yq dxdy
|Y | ΩˆY (14.20)
’
’ ż
’ 1 “ ‰
’
’ ´ F1 px, yq ¨ ∇Ψpxq ` ∇y Φpx, yq dxdy,
’
’ |Y | ΩˆY
’
’
%
@Ψ P H01 pΩq, @Φ P L2 pΩ; Hper,0 1
pY qq,
where, for a.e. px, yq P Ω ˆ Y ,
ÿ
N ´ Bu ¯ ´ÿ
N ´ Bu ¯ ¯
dri pyq ¨ ∇
0 0
F0 px, yq “ pxq, F1 px, yq “ Apyq pi pyq∇
χ pxq .
i“1
Bx i i“1
Bxi
478
Proof. In view of estimate (14.16), the sequence tUε uε is uniformly bounded

in H01 pΩq. Hence, there exist functions u1 P H01 pΩq and u p1 P L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq
such that, up to a subsequence, convergences (14.19) hold.
From (14.13), the function Uε satisfies, for v P H01 pΩq,
ż ´¨¯ ÿN ” ż ´¨¯ ´ Bu ¯
1
dri
0
A ∇Uε ∇v dx “ ¨∇ v dx
Ω ε ε Ω ε Bx i
i“1
ż (14.21)
´ ¨ ¯ ´ Bu ¯ ´ ¨ ¯ ı
0
´ A ∇ pi
χ ∇v dx .
Ω ε Bxi ε
We transform this equality by unfolding and then, proceeding as in the
proof of Theorem 3.5 , we obtain thanks to convergence (14.8), the equa-
tion from (14.20). By Lax-Milgram’s theorem, problem (14.20) has a unique
solution. Consequently, convergences (14.19) hold for the whole sequence
tpUε , Tε p∇Uε quε .
Introduce the second order correctors χ pij P Hper,0
1
pY q for the Dirichlet
condition, defined for pi, jq P t1, . . . , N u2 , as the solutions of the cell problems,
$ż ż
’
’ p pyq ∇ “ dri pyq ¨ bj Φpyq dy
’
’ Apyq∇ y χ ij y Φpyq dy
’
& Y Y
ż
’
’ ´ Apyqp χi pyqbj ¨ ∇y Φpyq dy,
’
’
’
%
Y
@Φ P Hper,0
1
pY q.
We now express u p1 in terms of the first correctors and the second order
correctors for a.e. px, yq P Ω ˆ Y , in the form
ÿN
Bu1 ÿN
B 2 u0
p1 px, yq “
u pxq χ
pi pyq ` pij pyq.
χ
i“1
Bxi i,j“1
Bxi Bxj
It is easily checked that u1 is the solution of the homogenized problem,

$ż ż ÿ
’ N ´ż ¯ B2 u
’
’ Ahom ∇u1 ∇Ψ dx “ ´ 0
’
’ pij pyq
Apyq∇y χ ¨ ∇Ψ dx
’
’ Bx Bx
’
&
Ω Ω i,j“1 Y i j
ż ÿ N ´ż ¯ B2 u
’
’ ´ χi pyqbj
Apyqp
0
¨ ∇Ψ dx,
’
’ Bx Bx
’
’ Ω i,j“1 Y i j
’
’
% @Ψ P H 1 pΩq.
0
Proposition 14.5. Under the assumption of Theorem 14.4, the following

Tε p∇Uε q Ñ ∇u1 ` ∇y u p1 strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
ÿ Bu1 ´ ¨ ¯ ÿ ´ B2 u ¯ ´ ¨ ¯
N N
0
U ε ´ u1 ´ ε pi
χ ´ε Qε pij
χ Ñ0
i“1
Bx i ε i,j“1
Bx i Bx j ε
strongly in H 1 pΩq.
479
Moreover, if u0 belongs to H 3 pΩq, one has the strong convergence in H 1 pΩq,

ÿ Bu1 ´ ¨ ¯ ÿ ´¨¯
N N
B 2 u0
Uε ´ u1 ´ ε pi
χ ´ε pij
χ Ñ 0.
i“1
Bxi ε i,j“1
Bxi Bxj ε
Proof. The convergence of the energy, namely

$ ż
’
’ Aε ∇Uε ∇Uε dx
’
’ lim
’
’ εÑ0 Ω
’
& ż
1 “ ‰“ ‰
“ p1 ∇u1 ` ∇y u
A ∇u1 ` ∇y u p1 dxdy, (14.22)
’
’ |Y | ΩˆY
’
’ ż
’
’
’
% lim |∇Uε |2 dx “ 0,
εÑ0 Λ
ε
follows by reasoning as in the proof of Proposition 3.9. By standard weak

lower-semi-continuity and recalling (14.21),
ż
1 “ ‰“ ‰
A ∇u1 ` ∇y up1 ∇u1 ` ∇y u p1 dxdy
|Y | ΩˆY
ÿN ” ż ´¨¯ ´ Bu ¯
1
dri
0
ď lim ¨∇ Uε dx
εÑ0
i“1
ε Ω ε Bx i
ż ´ ¨ ¯ ´ Bu ¯ ´ ¨ ¯ ı
0
´ A ∇ pi
χ ∇Uε dx .
Ω ε Bxi ε
Each term of the above sum is estimated by using (3.45). One has for
every i P t1, . . . , N u,
ˇ1 ż ´¨¯ ´ Bu ¯ ż ´ Bu ¯ ´ ¨ ¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
dri
0 0
ˇ ¨∇ Uε dx ´ Aε ∇ pi
χ ¨ ∇Uε dxˇ
ε Λε ε Bxi Λε Bx i ε (14.23)
ď C}u0 }H 2 pΩb q.
εdpY q
We now pass to the limit in the left-hand side of this estimate. By (14.8),
ż ´ ¨ ¯ ´ Bu ¯
1
dri
0
lim ¨∇ Uε dx
εÑ0 ε Ω ε Bxi
ż ´ Bu ¯ (14.24)
1
dri pyq ¨ ∇
0
“ p1 px, yq dxdy.
pxq u
|Y | ΩˆY Bxi
To treat the second term in (14.23), we unfold the right-hand side of equal-
ity (14.21) with v replaced by Uε . Then, by Proposition 1.9(i) and (14.19),
ż ´ Bu ¯ ´ ¨ ¯
0
lim Aε ∇ χpi ∇Uε dx
εÑ0 Ω Bxi ε
ż ´ Bu ¯ `
1 0 ˘
“ A∇ pi ∇u1 ` ∇y u
χ p1 dxdy,
|Y | ΩˆY Bxi
which, together with (14.24), ends the proof of convergences (14.22).
480
Proceeding as in the proofs of Corollary 3.10 and Theorem 3.27, we obtain

the strong convergences in Proposition 14.5 (the last convergence being a
consequence of Lemma 3.29).
We end this
( section with a result giving the asymptotic behavior of the
sequence βεDir ε .
First, consider a limit point Ψ in Hρ1 pΩqN of the sequence (see (14.18)),
!ř
N )
uεχp i , ´Bi u0 bi ,
i“1 ε
so that, there exists a subsequence of ε (denoted ε1 ) such that the following

convergence holds:
ř
N 1
uχεp i , ´Bi u0 bi á Ψ weakly in Hρ1 pΩqN .
i“1
Let Θ be the trace of Ψ on BΩ in the sense of Proposition 13.8, i.e.,
Θ “ TAhom pΨq.
The function Θ belongs to L8 pBΩqN by Proposition 13.10.

( The question
is what is the relationship between Θ and the limit of βεDir ε . Here is the
answer.
Theorem 14.6. Let βεDir
1 be the solution of problem (14.15). One has the
convergence,
1 á β
βεDir weakly in Hρ1 pΩq,
Dir
where the function β Dir P Hρ1 pΩq is the solution of the problem
# ` ˘
div Ahom ∇β Dir “ 0 in Ω,
β Dir “ Θ ¨ ∇u0 on BΩ,
in the following sense:

$ż ` ˘
ż
` ˘` ˘
& β Dir div tAhom ∇φ dx “ Θ ¨ ∇u0|BΩ tAhom ∇φ ¨ n dσ,
Ω BΩ
%
@φ P H 2 pΩq X H01 pΩq.
Furthermore,
ÿ Bβ Dir ´ ¨ ¯
N
1 ´ β
βεDir Dir
´ ε1 pi 1 Ñ 0
χ 1
strongly in Hloc pΩq. (14.25)
i“1
Bxi ε
Proof. By Theorem 13.17, the sequence tβεDir 1 uε1 converges weakly in Hρ pΩq
1
to the function
. ř
N
β Dir “ uχp i , ´Bi u0 ,
i“1
481
whose trace in H ´1{2 pBΩq is given by
ÿ
N
Bu0 .
TAhom pβ Dir q “ ´ θχpi “ Θ ¨ ∇u0|BΩ .
i“1
Bxi |BΩ
Finally, convergence (14.25) is a consequence of Corollary 13.21.
14.1.1 An example
To conclude this section, we consider a particular type of convex polyhedral
domain Ω: we assume that Ω is the convex hull of a finite set of points
belonging to G (see Figure 14.1). We also assume that ε “ 1{k, k P N˚ .
Figure 14.1: A convex polyhedral domain
Under these conditions the whole sequence tβεDir uε converges weakly. Fur-
thermore, the following convergences hold:
ˆ ˙
ÿ Bu0 ´ ¨ ¯
N
1
u ε ´ u0 ´ ε pj
χ á β Dir ` u1 weakly in Hρ1 pΩq,
ε j“1
Bx j ε
as well as
ˆ ˙
ÿ Bu0 ´ ¨ ¯ ´ ! ¨ )¯
N
1
u ε ´ u0 ´ ε pj
χ ´ β Dir ´ εβpDir ¨,
ε j“1
Bxj ε ε
´ ! ¨ )¯
´ u1 ´ εp
u1 ¨, Ñ 0 strongly in Hloc
1
pΩq,
ε
where β Dir is given by Theorem 14.6 (with Θ determined on each face of BΩ
thanks to Theorem 13.28), βpDir is given by (13.55), and pu1 , u
p1 q is given by
Theorem 14.4.
482
Remark 14.7. By [132], the solutions of the homogenized problems (3.18)

and (3.33) are in H 2 pΩq for a right-hand side in L2 pΩq, when Ω is a convex
polyhedron whose edges are orthogonal to vectors in QN (as in the example
presented above). In this case, in general, there can be infinitely many limit
points Θ and they are constant on each face of BΩ (see Proposition 13.22,
Theorem 13.28 and also [111, 112]).
14.2 Error estimates for the Neumann problem

In this section we consider the Neumann problem (14.2). It was shown in
Subsection 3.1.2 that
uε á u10 weakly in V pΩq,
where (
V pΩq “ w P H 1 pΩq | MΩ pwq “ 0 ,
u10 is the unique solution of the homogenized problem (3.33), that is,
ż ż
1
A hom
∇u0 ∇ϕ dx “ f ϕ dx, @ϕ P V pΩq. (14.26)
Ω Ω
The homogenized matrix Ahom is defined by (3.19).

Our aim is to give a corrector result, the equivalent for this problem, of
Theorem 14.3 for the Dirichlet case from the preceding section; the procedure
here will be the same.
We start with some properties of the function dr defined by (14.4), com-
pleting the ones given in Lemma 14.1.
Lemma 14.8. For every pv, wq P H 1 pΩq ˆ H 1 pΩq,

ˇż ´¨¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ dr ¨ ∇v w dxˇ
Ω ε (14.27)
` ˘
ď Cε1{2 }w}H 1 pΩq ε1{2 }∇v}L2 pΩq ` }∇v}L2 pΩb q .
5εdpY q
If v belongs to H01 pΩq, then

ˇż ´¨¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ dr ¨ ∇v w dxˇ ď Cε}w}H 1 pΩq }∇v}L2 pΩq . (14.28)
Ω ε
Moreover, for every pV, wq P H 1 pΩqN ˆ H 1 pΩq,

ˇż ´¨˙ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ dr ¨ V w dxˇ ď Cε}w}H 1 pΩq }V }H 1 pΩq . (14.29)
Ω ε
The constants C do not depend on ε.
483
14.2. Error estimates for the Neumann problem
Proof. Step 1. Proof of (14.27).

We proceed as in the proof of Lemma 14.1, following the lines of the
p ε and the estimates from (14.10) by the
proof of (14.5). We replace RN by Ω
following ones:
}w ´ Qε pwq}L2 pΩp ε q ` ε}∇pw ´ Qε pwqq}L2 pΩp ε q ď Cε}∇w}L2 pΩq ,

}Qε pwq ´ Mε pwq}L2 pΩp ε q ď Cε}∇w}L2 pΩq ,
}Mε pwq ´ w}L2 pΩp ε q ď Cε}∇w}L2 pΩq .
First, one has

ˇż ´¨¯ ż ˇ
ˇ r 1 r ¨ Tε p∇vqpx, yq wpxq dxdy ˇˇ
ˇ d ¨ ∇v w dx ´ dpyq
Ωpε ε |Y | ΩˆY (14.30)
Estimates (3.46) and (12.4) imply that (recall the notations (12.1))
ˇż ´¨¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ dr ¨ ∇v w dxˇ ď Cε1{2 }w}H 1 pΩq }∇v}L2 pΩbl q. (14.31)
Λε ε 2εdpY q
Then, (14.30) and (14.31) lead to

ˇż ´¨¯ ż ˇ
ˇ 1 ˇ
ˇ dr ¨ ∇v w dx ´ dr ¨ Tε p∇vq w dxdy ˇ
Ω ε |Y | ΩˆY
ď Cε}∇w}L2 pΩq }∇v}L2 pΩq ` Cε1{2 }w}H 1 pΩq }∇v}L2 pΩbl q.

2εdpY q
By Theorem 13.44 there exists vpε P L2 pΩ; Hper

1
pY qq such that
}Tε p∇vq ´ ∇v ´ ∇y vpε }L2 pY ;pH 1 pΩqq1 q

ď Cε}∇v}L2 pΩq ` Cε1{2 }∇v}L2 pΩb q.
5εdpY q
Therefore
ˇż ´¨¯ ż
` ˘ ˇ
ˇ 1 r ¨ ∇v ` ∇y vpε w dxdy ˇˇ
ˇ dr ¨ ∇v w dx ´ dpyq
Ω ε |Y | ΩˆY
` ˘
ď C}w}H 1 pΩq ε}∇v}L2 pΩq ` ε1{2 }∇v}L2 pΩb q ,
5εdpY q
which is precisely estimate (14.27), since

ż
` ˘
r ¨ ∇vpxq ` ∇y vpε px, yq dy “ 0
dpyq for a.e. x P Ω.
Y

It is similar to that of Step 1 of the proof of Lemma 14.1.
484

Note first that due to (3.46) and (12.4),
ˇż ´¨¯ ˇ ` ˘
ˇ ˇ
ˇ dr ¨ V w dxˇ ď Cε }w}L2 pBΩq ` ε1{2 }∇w}L2 pΩbl q
Λε ε 2εdpY q
(14.32)
` ˘
ˆ }V }L2 pBΩqN ` ε1{2 }V }H 1 pΩbl q .2εdpY q
Then, proceeding as in the proof of (14.27), we get

ˇż ´¨¯ ż ˇ
ˇ r 1 r ¨ Tε pV qpx, yq wpxq dxdy ˇˇ
ˇ d ¨ V w dx ´ dpyq
Ωpε ε |Y | Ωp ε ˆY
ď Cε}∇w}L2 pΩq }V }L2 pΩq .
In this estimate, one can substitute V by Tε pV q to obtain a similar one since

(see (1.38)2 in Proposition 1.38).
}Tε pV q ´ V }L2 pΩp ε ˆY q ď Cε}V }H 1 pΩq . (14.33)
r “ 0,
On the other hand, as MY pdq
ż
r ¨ V pxq wpxq dxdy “ 0.
dpyq
p ε ˆY
Ω
Thus ˇż ´¨¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ dr ¨ V w dxˇ ď Cε}∇w}L2 pΩq }V }L2 pΩq .
p
Ωε ε
Inequality (14.29) then follows with (14.32).
We now introduce the corrector βεNe P H 1 pΩq for the homogeneous Neu-
mann condition. It will play an essential role in the estimates for the solution
of problem (14.2). It is defined by
$ż ż
’ ÿN ´ ¯ 1
’
’
’ A ε
∇β Ne
∇v dx “ ´
1
dri ¨ ¨ ∇v Bu0 dx,
’
’ ε
ε Ω ε Bxi
& Ω i“1
ż (14.34)
’
’ βεNe dx “ 0,
’
’
’
’ Ω
%
@v P H 1 pΩq,
where dri is given by (14.11).

Proposition 14.9. The function βεNe defined by (14.34), satisfies the follo-
wing estimates:
C
}∇βεNe }L2 pΩq ď ? }u10 }H 2 pΩq ,
ε (14.35)
}βεNe }L2 pΩq ď C}u10 }H 2 pΩq .
485
Proof. First, estimate (14.35)1 is an immediate consequence of the variational

formulation (14.34) and of estimate (14.27).
Now, we prove (14.35)2 . Due to (14.29), for every test function U P H 2 pΩq
in (14.34), one has
ˇż ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ Aε ∇βεNe ∇U dxˇ ď C}u10 }H 2 pΩq }U }H 2 pΩq . (14.36)
Ω
We now proceed as in the proof of the L2 -estimate of (13.33). Transforming

the integral of (14.36) by unfolding gives
ˇ 1 ż ż ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ ApyqTε p∇βεNe q Tε p∇U q dxdy ` Aε ∇βεNe ∇U dxˇ
|Y | Ωp ε ˆY Λε
ď C}u10 }H 2 pΩq }U }H 2 pΩq .
On the one hand, from (12.4),
}∇U }L2 pΛε q ď }∇U }L2 pΩbl q ď Cε1{2 }U }H 2 pΩq ,

εdpY q
therefore,
ˇż ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ Aε ∇βεNe ∇U dxˇ ď Cε1{2 }βεNe }H 1 pΩq }U }H 2 pΩq .
Λε
Using (14.33), one replaces Tε p∇U q by ∇U . That yields

ˇż ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ ApyqTε p∇βεNe q ∇U dxdy ˇ ď C}u10 }H 2 pΩq }U }H 2 pΩq . (14.37)
p ε ˆY
Ω
On the other hand, by Theorem 13.44, there is an element βpεNe in the

space L2 pΩ; Hper
1
pY qq, such that (recall estimate (14.35)1 )
}Tε p∇βεNe q ´ ∇βεNe ´ ∇y βpεNe }L2 pY ;pH 1 pΩqq1 q ď Cε1{2 }∇βεNe }L2 pΩq
(14.38)
ď C}u10 }H 2 pΩq .
To summarize, (14.37)-(14.38) give

ˇż ` ˘ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ A ∇βεNe ` ∇y βpεNe ∇U dxdy ˇ ď C}u10 }H 2 pΩq }U }H 2 pΩq . (14.39)
ΩˆY
Now we proceed as in Step 2 of the proof of Proposition 13.3. Let χi

(i P t1, . . . , N u) in Hper
1
pY q be the adjoint correctors defined by (13.40).
Consider the function U pε in H 1 pΩq defined for a.e. x P Ω by
´ ¯
pε pxq “ ε BU pxqχi x .
U
Bxi ε
486
By Corollary 1.72 and (12.4),

› BU ´ ¨ ¯›
› p ›
›∇Uε ´ ∇y χ › ď Cε}U }H 2 pΩq }χi }L2 pY q ,
Bxi ε L2 pΩq
}∇Upε }L2 pΩq ď C}U }H 2 pΩq }χi }H 1 pY q , (14.40)
pε }L2 pΩbl
}∇U q ď Cε1{2 }U }H 2 pΩq }χi }H 1 pY q .
εdpY q
Choosing U pε as test function in (14.34), estimates (14.40) together with

inequality (14.27), lead to
ˇż ˇ
ˇ pε dxˇˇ ď C}U }H 2 pΩq }χi }H 1 pY q .
ˇ Aε ∇βεNe ∇U
Ω
Since Λε is included in Ωbl 1

εdpY q , using estimate (14.40)3 and the H -estimate
Ne
in (14.35) of βε , we get
ˇż ˇ
ˇ pε dxˇˇ ď C}U }H 2 pΩq }χi }H 1 pY q ,
Λε
hence,
ˇż ˇ
ˇ pε dxˇˇ ď C}U }H 2 pΩq }χi }H 1 pY q .
pε
Ω
BU ´¨¯
pε by
Thanks to (14.40)1 one can replace in the integral ∇U ∇y χ i and
Bxi ε
preserve the same type of estimate. Unfolding the result yields
ˇż ´ BU ¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ ATε p∇βεNe q Tε ∇y χi dxdy ˇ
p ε ˆY
Ω Bx i
ď C}u10 }H 2 pΩq }U }H 2 pΩq }χi }H 1 pY q .

This inequality, estimate (1.38)2 and a summation from i “ 1 to N , give
ˇż ` ˘´ ÿN
BU ¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ A ∇βεNe ` ∇y βpεNe ∇y χi dxdy ˇ
ΩˆY i“1
Bx i
ď C}u10 }H 2 pΩq }U }H 2 pΩq }χi }H 1 pY q .

pi ’s defined by (3.10),
A similar computation using the original correctors χ
leads to
ż ´ ¯ ´ÿ
ÿ BU ¯
N N
BβεNe
A ∇βεNe ` pi ∇y
∇y χ χ dxdy “ 0.
ΩˆY i“1
Bxi j“1
Bxj j
Consequently,
ˇż ´ ÿN
BβεNe ¯ ´ ÿ BU ¯
N ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ A∇y βpεNe ´ pi ∇y
χ χj dxdy ˇ
ΩˆY i“1
Bxi j“1
Bxj
ď C}u10 }H 2 pΩq }U }H 2 pΩq .
487
Going back to definition (13.40) of the χj ’s, one obtains

ˇż ´ ÿN
BβεNe ¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ A ∇y βpεNe ´ pi ∇U dxdy ˇ ď C}u10 }H 2 pΩq }U }H 2 pΩq .
∇y χ
ΩˆY i“1
Bx i
This estimate and (14.39) imply

ˇż ´ ÿN
BβεNe ¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ A ∇βεNe ` pi ∇U dxdy ˇ ď C}u10 }H 2 pΩq }U }H 2 pΩq .
∇y χ
ΩˆY i“1
Bx i
By definition of the homogenized matrix Ahom , this reads

ˇż ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ Ahom ∇βεNe ∇U dxˇ ď C}u10 }H 2 pΩq }U }H 2 pΩq . (14.41)
Ω
Now, let Vε in H 1 pΩq be the solution of the following variational problem:

$ż ż
’
’ hom
∇v ∇V “ v βεNe dx,
’
’ A ε dx
’
& żΩ Ω
’
’ Vε dx “ 0,
’
’
’
%
Ω
@v P H 1 pΩq.
It is known that Vε belongs to H 2 pΩq and satisfies
}Vε }H 2 pΩq ď C}βεNe }L2 pΩq ,
with a constant not depending on ε. As a consequence, taking U ” Vε in
estimate (14.41), gives the required L2 -estimate (14.35)2 of βεNe .
We are now in a position to give the main theorem of this section.
Theorem 14.10. Let u10 be the solution of the homogenized problem (14.26).
Assume that it belongs to H 2 pΩq. Then the solution uε of the Neumann
problem (14.2) satisfies the following estimate:
› ÿN
Bu10 ´ . ¯››
›
›uε ´ u10 ´ ε pi
χ › 1 ď Cε1{2 }u10 }H 2 pΩq . (14.42)
i“1
Bx i ε H pΩq
Furthermore,
› ÿN
Bu10 ´ ¨ ¯ ›
› 1 ›
›uε ´ u ´ ε pi
χ ´ εβεNe › ď Cε}u10 }H 2 pΩq . (14.43)
0
i“1
Bx i ε H 1 pΩq
Suppose that BΩ is of class C 1,1 . Then uε satisfies

› ´ ÿN
Bu10 ´ . ¯¯›
› ›
}uε ´ u10 }L2 pΩq ` ›ρ ∇uε ´ ∇u10 ´ pi
∇y χ › 2
i“1
Bx i ε L pΩq (14.44)
ď Cε}u10 }H 2 pΩq .
The constants C are independent of ε.
488
Proof. By the definition (3.19) of Ahom (in our case bij px, yq ” aij pyq) and
the definition (14.11) of the dri ’s,
N ż
ÿ ´¨¯ ż ” ÿ ´ ¨ ¯ı
Bu1 Bu10
N
dri ¨ ∇v 0 dx “ Aε ∇u10 ` pi
∇y χ ∇v dx
i“1 Ω ε Bxi Ω i“1
Bxi ε
ż
´ Ahom ∇u10 ∇vdx.
Ω
Therefore,
ż ” ÿ Bu10 ´ ¨ ¯ ı
N
Aε ∇ uε ´ u10 ´ ε pi
χ ´ εβεNe ∇v dx
Ω i“1
Bxi ε
ż (14.45)
ÿN ´ Bu1 ¯ ´ ¨ ¯
“ ´ε Aε ∇ 0
pi
χ ∇v dx.
i“1 Ω
Bx i ε
which implies (14.43), as the χ pi ’s belong to L8 pY q and u10 to H 2 pΩq.

Since }βεNe }H 1 pΩq ď Cε´1{2 }u10 }H 2 pΩq , then (14.42) is a direct consequence
of (14.43).
To go further, we shall estimate the function ρ2 ∇βεNe . By definition, ρ2 βεNe

belongs to H01 pΩq. From (14.28), for every i P t1, . . . , N u,
ˇż ´¨¯ Bu1 ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ dri ¨ ∇pρ2 βεNe q 0 dxˇ
ε Bxi
Ω
´ ¯
ď C}u10 }H 2 pΩq }ρ∇βεNe }L2 pΩq ` }βεNe }L2 pΩq .
Taking ρ2 βεNe as test function in problem (14.34) and using the above in-
equality, one gets
ˇż ˇ ˇż ˇ
ˇ ˇ ˇ ˇ
ˇ Aε pρ∇βεNe q pρ∇βεNe q dxˇ ď 2ˇ Aε pρ∇βεNe q pβεNe ∇ρq dxˇ
Ω
` Ω
˘
` C}u10 }H 2 pΩq }ρ∇βεNe }L2 pΩq ` }βεNe }L2 pΩq ,
which implies the estimate
}ρ∇βεNe }L2 pΩq ď C}u10 }H 2 pΩq .
This, together with the L2 -estimate of βεNe , yields (14.44). The proof of
Theorem 14.10 is complete.
As for the Dirichlet problem, we are now interested in the asymptotic
behavior of the quantity
´ ÿN
Bu10 ´ ¨ ¯ ¯
. 1
Uε1 “ uε ´ u10 ´ ε pj
χ ´ εβεNe ,
ε j“1
Bxj ε
489
which, by (14.43) satisfies,

}Uε1 }H 1 pΩq ď C}u10 }H 2 pΩq .
Theorem 14.11. Under the hypotheses of Theorem 14.10, there exist u11 in
p11 in L2 pΩ; Hper,0
H 1 pΩq and u 1
pY qq, such that
piq Uε1 á u11 weakly in H 1 pΩq,

piiq Tε pUε1 q Ñ u11 strongly in L2 pΩ; H 1 pY qq, (14.46)
piiiq Tε p∇Uε1 q á ∇u11 ` ∇y u
p11 weakly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
and the pair (u11 , up11 q P H 1 pΩq ˆ L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq is the unique solution of
the problem
$ 1 ż “ ‰“ ı
’
’ Apyq ∇u11 pxq ` ∇y u p11 px, yq ∇Ψpxq ` ∇y Φpx, yq dxdy
’
’ |Y | ΩˆY
’
’ ż
’
’ “ ‰
’
& 1
“´ F px, yq ¨ ∇Ψpxq ` ∇y Φpx, yq dxdy,
|Y | ΩˆY (14.47)
’
’ ż
’
’
’
’ u11 pxq dx “ 0,
’
’
’
%
Ω
@Ψ P H 1 pΩq, @Φ P L2 pΩ; Hper,0 1
pY qq,
where for a.e. px, yq P Ω ˆ Y
´ÿ
N ´ Bu1 ¯ ¯
F px, yq “ Apyq ∇ 0
pxqp
χi pyq .
i“1
Bxi
Proof. By estimate (14.43), tUε1 uε is uniformly bounded in H 1 pΩq. Hence,

there exist functions u11 P H 1 pΩq and u
p11 P L2 pΩ; Hper,0
1
pY qq such that, up to
a subsequence, convergences (14.46) hold.
From (14.45), the function Uε1 satisfies, for all v in H 1 pΩq,
ż ÿN ż ´ Bu1 ¯ ´ ¨ ¯
Aε ∇Uε1 ∇v dx “ ´ Aε ∇ 0
pi
χ ∇v dx. (14.48)
Ω i“1 Ω Bx i ε
Transforming this equality by unfolding, proceeding as in the proof of Theo-
rem 3.5, one obtains the equation from (14.47) due to convergences (14.46).
This problem has a unique solution, and consequently, convergences (14.46)
hold for the whole sequence tpUε1 , Tε p∇Uε1 quε .
Introduce the second order correctors for Neumann condition χ p1ij for
pi, jq P t1, . . . , N u . They are solutions of the following cell problems:
2
$ 1
’
’ pij P Hper,0
χ 1
pY q,
’
& ż ż
1
Apyq∇y χ pij pyq ∇y Φpyq dy “ ´ χi pyqbj ¨ ∇y Φpyq dy, (14.49)
Apyqp
’
’
’
%
Y Y
@Φ P Hper,0
1
pY q.
490
p11 is expressed in terms of the first correctors χ

The solution u pi (i P t1, . . . , N u)
defined by (3.10), the second order correctors for Neumann condition defined
by (14.49), and the partial derivatives of u11 and u10 , as follows:
ÿN
Bu11 ÿN
B 2 u10 1
p11 px, yq “
u pxqp
χi pyq ` p pyq
χ for a.e. px, yq P Ω ˆ Y,
i“1
Bxi i,j“1
Bxi Bxj ij
so that u11 is the solution of the homogenized problem,

$ż ż ÿ N ´ż
’ ¯ B 2 u1
’
’ hom
∇u 1
∇Ψ “ ´ χi pyqbj 0
¨ ∇Ψ dx,
’
’ A dx Apyqp
’
& Ω
1
Ω i,j“1 Y Bx i Bx j
ż
’
’ u11 pxq dx “ 0,
’
’
’
’ Ω
%
@Ψ P H 1 pΩq.
Proposition 14.12. Under the assumption of Theorem 14.11, the following
Tε p∇Uε q Ñ ∇u11 ` ∇y u p11 strongly in L2 pΩ ˆ Y qN ,
ÿ Bu11 ´ ¨ ¯ ÿ ´ B 2 u1 ¯ ´ ¨ ¯
N N
Uε ´ u11 ´ ε pi
χ ´ε Qε 0
p1ij
χ Ñ0
i“1
Bx i ε i,j“1
Bx i Bx j ε
Moreover, if u10 belongs to H 3 pΩq then
ÿ Bu11 ´ ¨ ¯ ÿ B 2 u10 1 ´ ¨ ¯
N N
Uε ´ u11 ´ ε pi
χ ´ε p
χ Ñ0
i“1
Bxi ε i,j“1
Bxi Bxj ij ε
Proof. The convergence of the energy,
ż
lim Aε ∇Uε1 ∇Uε1 dx
εÑ0 Ω
ż
1 “ 1‰ “ 1‰
“ A ∇u11 ` ∇y u
p1 ∇u11 ` ∇y u
p1 dxdy, (14.50)
|Y | ΩˆY
ż
lim |∇Uε1 |2 dx “ 0
εÑ0 Λ
ε
is proved in the same way as in the Dirichlet case. By weak lower-semi-

continuity and (14.48),
ż
1 “ 1‰ “ 1‰
A ∇u11 ` ∇y u
p1 ∇u11 ` ∇y u p1 dxdy
|Y | ΩˆY
ÿN ż ´ Bu1 ¯ ´ ¨ ¯
ď ´ lim Aε ∇ 0
pi
χ ∇Uε1 dx.
εÑ0
i“1 Ω Bx i ε
491
pi ’s belong to L8 pY q and u10 to H 2 pΩq, it follows that

Since the χ
ˇÿ N ż ´ Bu1 ¯ ´ ¨ ¯ ˇ
ˇ ˇ
ˇ Aε ∇ 0
pi
χ ∇Uε1 dxˇ ď C}u10 }H 2 pΩbl q .
i“1 Λ ε
Bx i ε εdpY q
Now, we transform by unfolding the right-hand side of the equality (14.48)

written for v “ Uε1 . From Proposition 1.9(i) and convergences (14.46), we get
ż ´ Bu1 ¯ ´ ¨ ¯
lim Aε ∇ 0
χpi ∇Uε1 dx
εÑ0 Ω Bxi ε
ż ´ Bu1 ¯
1 ` 1˘
“ Apyq∇ 0
pi pyq ∇u11 ` ∇y u
χ p1 dxdy,
|Y | ΩˆY Bxi
which proves convergences (14.50).

Finally, proceeding as in the proof of Corollary 3.10, the strong conver-
gences from Proposition 14.12 are easily obtained.
492
List of Figures
1.1 Definition of rzsY and tzuY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

1.2 The domains Ω p ε and Λε . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1 ´ x¯ 1
1.3 The functions fε pxq “ sin 2π ` x and Tε pfε q for ε “ 8
4 ε 6
1.4 The functions fε and Tε pfε q . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1
1.5 The function f pxq “ xp2 ´ xq and Tε pf q for ε small. . . . . 10
2
2πx
1.6 The functions f pxq “ cos and Tε pf q for ε small. . . . . . 10
ε
1.7 A function and its piece-wise constant local average . . . . . 17
3.1 A two-component layered material under a frame-periodic de-

formation and a global bi-Lipschitz transformation . . . . . . 114
3.2 A domain with two small periodic scales ε and εδ. . . . . . . 115
4.1 Two versions of Y ˚ “ Y zS (in blue) for the same perforations 155
4.2 p ˚ (in dark blue) and Λ˚ (in light green) . . . 157
The sets Ω˚ε , Ω ε ε
4.3 An example of “strangely” perforated domain in two dimensions158
4.4 An example of Y ˚ (in dark blue); P in light beige . . . . . . 158
4.5 An example of set Sε in R3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
4.6 The corresponding unit cell. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
4.7 p Y (in dark blue) and Y (in dark blue and green) . 171
The set Ω ε
4.8 The sets Ω and Ω˚ε (green), Ω1 and pΩ1 q˚ε (green & beige) . . 174
4.9 The setting of the unilateral problem for cracks . . . . . . . . 195
4.10 The sets P, P,p Y and Y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
5.1 Uniform cone property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217

5.2 The set Ωr ˚ (in dark blue) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
ε
5.3 p ε (in grey) is not an open connected set
Ω . . . . . . . . . . . 227
5.4 The open sets Ωint p ext
ε , Ω and Ωε . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
1
5.5 The chain from ξ to ξ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228
6.1 Three possible configurations of the set Ωε . . . . . . . . . . 239

6.2 The physical domain Ωε and its components . . . . . . . . . . 240

Contemporary Mathematics 3, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3032-2
List of Figures
8.1 An example of a set Yk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268

8.2 Examples of sets Ωε . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268
8.3 An example of a set Σε . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
8.4 An example of a set Σ and an associated Σε . . . . . . . . . . 271
8.5 Examples of 3D geometries where the method can be applied 279
9.1 The sets B and Yδ˚ and the corresponding Ω˚ε,δ . . . . . . . . 288
9.2 p ε and Λε . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291
The sets Σε , Σ
10.1 An example of set Ωε,δ : an electrostatic screen . . . . . . . . 311

10.2 The set Yδ and the thin sieve Ωblεδ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319
10.3 An example of set F: the hole in the sieve . . . . . . . . . . . 328
10.4 The 3D geometry of the thick Neumann sieve . . . . . . . . . 328
10.5 A 2D cross-section of F and of the domain Ωns ε,δ . . . . . . . . 328
10.6 Side view . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 342
10.7 Perspective view . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 342
13.1 The parallelotope P1 for N “ 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457

13.2 The face Y1 of the parallelotope P1 for N “ 3 . . . . . . . . . 459
14.1 A convex polyhedral domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 482
494
Bibliography
[1] E. Acerbi, V. Chiadò Piat, G. Dal Maso and D. Percivale, An extension

theorem from connected sets, and homogenization in general periodic
domains. Nonlinear Anal. 18, 5 (1992), 481–496.
[2] R.A. Adams, J.J.F Founier, Sobolev Spaces, Academic Press, 2003.
[3] G. Allaire, Homogenization of the Navier-Stokes equations in open sets

perforated with tiny holes I. Abstract framework, a volume distribution
of holes. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 113 (1984), 209–259. September
1991, Volume 113, Issue 3, pp 209?259 — Cite as
[4] G. Allaire, Homogenization of the Stokes flow in a connected porous

medium, Asymptotic Analysis, 3 (1989), 203–222.
[5] G. Allaire, Homogenization and two-scale convergence, SIAM J. Math.

Anal., 23 (1992), 1482–1518.
[6] G. Allaire and M. Briane, Multiscale convergence and reiterated ho-

mogenization, Proc. Royal Soc. Edinburgh, 126 A (1996), 297–342.
[7] G. Allaire and C. Conca, Bloch wave homogenization and spectral

asymptotic analysis, J. Math. Pures Appl., 2, 77 (1998), 153–208.
[8] G. Allaire, C. Conca and M. Vanninathan, Spectral asymptotics of

the Helmholtz model in fluid-solid structures, International J. Numer.
Methods Engrg., 9, 46 (1999), 1463–1504.
[9] G. Allaire, A. Damlamian and U. Hornung, Two-scale convergence on

periodic surfaces and applications, in Proceedings of the International
Conference on Mathematical Modelling of Flow through Porous Media,
1995, A. Bourgeat and C. Carasso eds., World Scientific Publications,
Singapore,1996.
[10] G. Allaire and F. Murat, Homogenization of the homogeneous Neu-

mann problem with nonisolated holes, including Appendix with A.K.
Nandakumar, Asymptotic Analysis 7 (1993), 81–95.

Bibliography
[11] N. Ansini, The nonlinear sieve problem and applications to thin films,
Asymptotic Analysis, 39, 2 (2004), 113–145.
[12] N. Ansini, J.-F. Babadjian and C.-I. Zeppieri, The Neumann sieve
problem and dimensional reduction: a multiscale approach, Math.
Models and Methods in Appl. Sciences, 17, 5 (2007) 681–735.
[13] N. Ansini and A. Braides, Asymptotic analysis of periodically-

perforated nonlinear media, J. Math. Pures Appl., 81, 5, (2002),
439-451. Erratum: J. Math. Pures Appl., 84, 5 (2005) 147–148.
[14] T. Arbogast, J. Douglas and U. Hornung, Derivation of the double

porosity model of single phase flow via homogenization theory, SIAM
J. Math. Anal., 21 (1990), 823–836.
[15] J.-M. Arrieta and M. Villanueva-Pesqueira, Thin domains with non-

smooth periodic oscillatory boundaries. J. Math. Anal., Appl., 446, 1
(2017), 130–164.
doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2016.08.039
[16] H. Attouch, Famille d’opérateurs maximaux monotones et mesura-

bilité, Annali di Matematica pura et applicata, 5, Vol. CXX (1979),
35-111.
[17] H. Attouch, Variational Convergence for Functions and Operators, Pit-

man London 1984.
[18] H. Attouch, G. Buttazzo and G. Michaille,Variational Analysis in

Sobolev and BV Spaces: Applications to PDEs and Optimization, Se-
ries on Optimization, SIAM-MPS, Philadelphia 2006.
[19] I. Babuqska, Homogenization and its application. Mathematical and

computational problems. Numerical solution of partial differential
equations, III in Proc. Third Symposium (SYNSPADE), Univ. Mary-
land, College Park (1975), Academic Press, New York, 1976, 89–116.
[20] N. Bakhvalov and G. Panasenko, Homogenization: Averaging Pro-

cesses in Periodic Media, translated from the Russian (Nauka,
Moscow, 1984) by D. Letes, Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, Dor-
drecht, 1989.
[21] A. Bensoussan, J.-L. Lions and G. Papanicolaou, Asymptotic Analysis

for Periodic Structures, Stud. Math. Appl. 5, North Holland 1978.
[22] D. Blanchard, A. Gaudiello and G. Griso, Junction of a periodic family

of elastic rods with a 3d plate. Part I. J. Math. Pures Appl., 88 (2007)
1–33.
496
Bibliography
[23] D. Blanchard, A. Gaudiello and G. Griso, Junction of a periodic family

of elastic rods with a thin plate. Part II., J. Math. Pures Appl., 88
(2007), 149–190.
[24] D. Blanchard and G. Griso, Microscopic effects in the homogenization

of the junction of rods and a thin plate, Asymptotic Analysis, 56, 1
(2008), 1–36.
[25] D. Blanchard and G. Griso, Decomposition of deformations of thin

rods: application to nonlinear elasticity, Analysis and Applications, 7,
1 (2009), 21–71.
[26] D. Blanchard and G. Griso, Asymptotic behavior of structures made

of straight rods, Journal of Elasticity, 108, 1 (2012), 85–118.
[27] D. Blanchard and G. Griso, A simplified model for elastic thin shells,
[28] D. Blanchard and G. Griso, Junction between a plate and a rod of

comparable thickness in nonlinear elasticity, Journal of Elasticity, 112,
2 (2013), 79–109.
[29] D. Blanchard and G. Griso, Asymptotic behavior of a structure made

by a plate and a straight rod, Chinese Annals of Mathematics, Series
B 34, 3 (2013), 399–434.
[30] A. Blasselle and G. Griso, Mechanical modeling of the skin, Asymptotic

Analysis, 74, 3-4 (2011), 167–198.
[31] A. Bossavit, G. Griso and B. Miara, Modelling of periodic electromag-

netic structures. Bianisotropic materials with memory effects, J. Math.
Pures Appl., 84 (2005), 819–850.
[32] G. Bouchitté and I. Fragalà, Homogenization of thin structures by two-

scale method with respect to measures, SIAM J. Math. Anal., 32, 6
(2001), 1198-1226.
doi:10.1137/S0036141000370260
[33] A. Bourgeat, S. Luckhaus and A. Mikelic, Convergence of the homog-

enization process for a double-porosity model of immiscible two-phase
flow, SIAM. J. Math. Anal., 27 (1996), 1520–1543.
[34] A. Braides and A. Defranceschi, Homogenization of Multiple Integrals,

Oxford Lecture Series in Mathematics ans its Applications 12, Oxford
University Press, 1998.
[35] A. Braides and D. Lukkassen, Reiterated homogenization of integral

functionals, Math. Models and Methods in Appl. Sciences, 10, 1 (2000),
1–25.
497
Bibliography
[36] H. Brezis, Opérateurs maximaux monotones et semi-groupes de con-

tractions dans les espaces de Hilbert, North Holland Mathematics Stud-
ies, 5. North Holland Amsterdam-London, American Elsevier Publish-
ing Co. Inc., New York 1973.
[37] H. Brezis, Functional Analysis, Sobolev Spaces and Partial Differential

Equations, Universitext series, Springer, New York Dordrecht Heidel-
berg London, 2011.
doi 10.1007/978-0-387-70914-7
[38] M. Briane, A. Damlamian and P. Donato, H-convergence in perfo-

rated domains, in Nonlinear Partial Diff. Eqs. and Their Applications,
Collège de France Seminar vol. XIII, D. Cioranescu and J.-L. Lions
eds., 62–100, Pitman Research Notes in Mathematics Series, Long-
man, New York 1998.
[39] R. Brizzi and J.-P. Chalot, Boundary homogenization and Neumann

boundary value problem, Ricerche Mat., 46 (1997), 341–387.
[40] DAG Bruggeman, Berechnung verschiedener physikalisher konstanten

von heterogenen substanzen, Ann. Physik. 24 (1935), 634.
[41] B. Cabarrubias and P. Donato, Homogenization of a quasilinear elliptic

problem with nonlinear Robin boundary conditions, Applicable Anal.,
91, 6 (2011), 1–17.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00036811.2011.619982
[42] B. Cabarrubias and P. Donato , Homogenization of some evolution

problems in domains with small holes, Electron. J. Diff. Equ., 169
(2016), 1–26.
[43] D. Caillerie, Equations aux dérivées partielles à coefficients périodiques

dans des domaines cylindriques aplatis, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Série
1, 290 (1980), 143–146.
[44] D. Caillerie, Thin elastic and periodic plates, Math. Models and Meth-
ods in Appl. Sciences, 6, 1 (1984), 159-191.
[45] L. Carbone and R. De Arcangelis, Unbounded Functionals in the Cal-

culus of Variations. Representation, Relaxation, and Homogenization,
Chapman &Hall/CRC 2001.
[46] L. Carbone and C. Sbordone, Some properties of Γ-Limits of integral

functionals, Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. 4, 122 (1979), 1–60.
[47] J. Casado-Dı́az, Two-scale convergence for nonlinear Dirichlet prob-

lems in perforated domains, Proc. Royal Soc. Edinburgh, 130 A (2000),
249–276.
498
Bibliography
[48] J. Casado-Dı́az, M. Luna-Laynez, A multiscale method to the ho-

mogenization of elastic thin reticulated structures. Homogenization,
2001 (Naples), 155–168, Gakuto Internat. Ser. Math. Sci. Appl., 18,
Gakkōtosho, Tokyo, 2003.
[49] J. Casado-Dı́az, M. Luna-Laynez and J. D. Martı́n, An adaptation

of the multi-scale methods for the analysis of very thin reticulated
structures, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Série 1, 332 (2001), 223–228.
[50] J. Casado-Dı́az, M. Luna-Laynez and J. D. Martı́n, A new approach

to the analysis of thin reticulated structures, in Homogenization,
2001 (Naples), 257–262, Gakuto Internat. Ser. Math. Sci. Appl., 18,
Gakkōtosho, Tokyo, 2003.
[51] C. Castaing and M. Valadier, Convex Analysis and Measurable Multi-

functions, Lecture Notes in Math. 580, Springer, 1977.
[52] G. Chechkin, Homogenization in perforated domains, in Topics on con-

centration phenomena and problems with multiple scales, Lect. Notes
Unione Mat. Ital., 2, Springer, Berlin, 2006.
[53] G. Chechkin, D. Cioranescu, A. Damlamian, and Andrey L. Piatnitski,

On boundary value problem with singular inhomogeneity concentrated
on the boundary, J. Math. Pures Appl., 98 (2012), 115–138.
[54] D. Chenais, On the existence of a solution in a domain identification

problem, Journal Math. Anal. and Appl., 52 (1975), 189-219.
[55] V. Chiadò Piat and A. Piatnitski, Γ-convergence approach to varia-

tional problems in perforated domains with Fourier boundary condi-
tions, ESAIM: COCV, 16 (2010), 148–175.
[56] P.-G. Ciarlet, The finite element method for elliptic problems Studies
in Mathematics and its Applications, Vol. 4, North-Holland Publishing
Co., Amsterdam-New York-Oxford, 1978.
[57] P. Ciarlet & P.-G. Ciarlet, Another approach to linearized elasticity

and a new proof of Korn’s inequality, Math. Models and Methods in
Appl. Sciences, 15, 2 (2005) 259–271.
[58] P.-G. Ciarlet and P. Destuynder, A justification of the two-dimensional

linear plate model, J. Mécanique, 2, 18 (1979), 315–344.
[59] D. Cioranescu, A. Damlamian, P. Donato, G. Griso and R. Zaki, The

periodic unfolding method in domains with holes, SIAM J. Math.
Anal., 44, 2 (2012), 718–760.
[60] D. Cioranescu, A. Damlamian and G. Griso, Periodic unfolding and

homogenization, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Série 1, 335 (2002), 99–104.
499
Bibliography
[61] D. Cioranescu, A. Damlamian and G. Griso, The Stokes problem in

perforated domains by the periodic unfolding method. in Proceed-
ings Conference New Trends in Continuum Mechanics, Ed. M. Suliciu,
Theta , Bucarest, 2005, 67–80.
[62] D. Cioranescu, A. Damlamian and G. Griso, The periodic unfolding
method in homogenization, SIAM J. of Math. Anal., 40, 4 (2008),
1585–1620.
[63] D. Cioranescu, A. Damlamian, G. Griso and D. Onofrei, The periodic
unfolding method for perforated domains and Neumann sieve models,
J. Math. Pures Appl., 89 (2008), 248–277.
[64] D. Cioranescu, A. Damlamian and R. De Arcangelis, Homogenization
of nonlinear integrals via the periodic unfolding method, C. R. Acad.
Sci. Paris, Série 1, 339 (2005), 77–82.
of integrals with pointwise gradient constraints via the periodic un-
folding method, Ricerche di Matematica, 55, 1 (2006), 31–54.
of quasiconvex integrals via the periodic unfolding method, SIAM J.
of Math. Anal., 37, 5 (2006), 1435–1453.
[67] D. Cioranescu, A. Damlamian and Li Tatsien, The homogenization
of the elastic torsion problem and the related conductors problem, in
Partial Differential Equations: Theory, Control and Approximation.
In Honor of the Scientific Heritage of Jacques-Louis Lions, Springer-
Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014, 718–760.
[68] D. Cioranescu, A. Damlamian and J. Orlik, Homogenization via un-
folding in periodic elasticity with contact on closed and open cracks,
Asymptotic Analysis, 82 (2013) 201–232.
doi 10.3233/ASY-2012-1141
[69] D. Cioranescu and P. Donato, Homogénéisation du problème de Neu-
mann non homogène dans des ouverts perforés, Asymptotic Analysis,
1 (1988), 115–138.
[70] D. Cioranescu and P. Donato, An Introduction to Homogenization.
Oxford Lecture Series in Mathematics ans its Applications 17, Oxford
University Press, 1999.
[71] D. Cioranescu, P. Donato and H. Ene, Homogenization of the Stokes
problem with non homogeneous slip boundary conditions, Mathemat-
ical Methods in Applied Sciences, 19 (1996), 857–881.
[72] D. Cioranescu, P. Donato and R. Zaki, The periodic unfolding method
in perforated domains, Portugaliae Mathematica, 4 (2006), 467–496.
500
Bibliography
[73] D. Cioranescu, P. Donato and R. Zaki, Asymptotic behavior of elliptic

problems in perforated domains with nonlinear boundary conditions,
[74] D. Cioranescu and F. Murat, Un terme étrange venu d’ailleurs, in
Nonlinear partial differential equations and their applications, Collège
de France Seminar, II & III, ed. H. Brezis and J.L. Lions, Research
Notes in Math., 60-70, Pitman, Boston 1982, 98–138, 154–178.
[75] D. Cioranescu and F. Murat, A strange term coming from nowhere,
Topics in the Mathematical Modelling of Composite Materials, A.
Cherkaev and R. Kohn editors, Progress in Nonlinear Differential
Equations Appl., 31, Birkhäuser-Verlag, Boston 1997, 45–88.
[76] D. Cioranescu and A. Ould Hammouda, Homogenization of elliptic
problems in perforated domains with mixed boundary conditions, Rev.
Roumaine Math. Pures Appl., 53, 5-6 (2008), 389–406.
[77] D. Cioranescu and J. Saint Jean Paulin, Homogenization in open sets
with holes, J. Mathematical Anal. and Appl., 71 (1979), 590–607.
[78] D. Cioranescu and J. Saint Jean Paulin, Homogenization of Reticulated
Structures, Applied Mathematical Sciences 136, Springer-Verlag New
York, 1999.
[79] C. Conca and P. Donato, Non-homogeneous Neumann problems in
domains with small holes, RAIRO Model. Math. Anal. Numer., 22, 4
(1988), 561–607.
[80] A. Corbo Esposito, C. D’Apice and A. Gaudiello, Homogenization in
a perforated domain with both Dirichlet and Neumann boundary con-
ditions on the holes Asymptotic Analysis, 2002
[81] A. Corbo Esposito, P. Donato, A. Gaudiello and C. Picard, Homo-
genization of the p-Laplacian in a domain with oscillating boundary,
Commun. Appl. Nonlinear Anal., 4, (1997), 1–23.
[82] G. Dal Maso, An Introduction to Γ-Convergence, Birkhäuser Verlag,
1993.
[83] G. Dal Maso and F. Murat, Asymptotic behavior and correctors for
linear Dirichlet problems with simultaneously varying operators and
domains, Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré, Analyse Nonlinéaire, 21 (2004), 445–
486.
[84] A. Damlamian, Convergence et dualité des fonctions convexes dans les
espaces de Banach réflexifs, unpublished, 1975.
[85] A. Damlamian, Le problème de la passoire de Neumann, Rend. Sem.
Mat. Univ. Politec. Torino, 43, 3 (1985), 427–450.
501
Bibliography
[86] A. Damlamian, An elementary introduction to periodic unfolding, in

Proc. of the Narvik Conference 2004, A. Damlamian, D. Lukkassen,
A. Meidell, A. Piatnitski edts, Gakuto Int. Series, Math. Sci. Appl.,
vol. 24, Gakkōkotosho (2006), 119–136.
[87] A. Damlamian, From linear to nonlinear by the homogenizations of
cracks, in Current advances in nonlinear analysis and related top-
ics,T.Aiki, N.Kenmochi, M.Niezgódka, M.Ôtani edts,Gakuto Internat.
Ser. Math. Sci. Appl., 32, Gakkotosho, Tokyo, 2010, 25-40.
[88] A. Damlamian and P. Donato, Which sequences of holes are admissi-
ble for periodic homogenization with Neumann boundary condition?,
ESAIM : Control, Optimization and Calculus of Variations. Special
Volume: A Tribute to Jacques-Louis Lions, 8 (2002), 555–585.
[89] A. Damlamian and P. Donato, H 0 -convergence and iterated homoge-
nization, Asymptotic Analysis, 39 (1) (2004), 45–60.
[90] A. Damlamian and N. Meunier, The “strange term” in the periodic
homogenization for multivalued Leray–Lions operators in perforated
domains, Ricerche mat.,59 (2010), 281–312
doi: 10.1007/s11587-010-0087-4.
[91] A. Damlamian, N. Meunier and J. Van Schaftingen, Periodic homog-
enization for monotone multivalued operators, Nonlinear Analysis, 67
(2007), 3217–3239.
[92] A. Damlamian, N. Meunier and J. Van Schaftingen, Periodic homog-
enization for convex functionals using Mosco convergence, J. Ricerche
Mat., 57 (2008), 209–249.
doi: 10.1007/s11587-008-0038-5
[93] A. Damlamian and K. Pettersson, Homogenization of oscillating
boundaries, Discrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems, 23, 1&2
(2009), 197–219.
doi: 10.3934/dcds.2009.23.197
[94] A. Damlamian and M. Vogelius, Homogenization limits of the equa-
tions of elasticity in thin domains, SIAM J. Math. Anal., 18, 2 (1987),
435–451.
[95] E. De Giorgi, Sulla convergenza di alcune successioni d’integrali del
tipo dell’area, Rend. Mat., 6, 8(1975), 277–294.
[96] E. De Giorgi and S. Spagnolo, Sulla convergenza degli integrali
dell’energia per operatori ellittici del secondo ordine, Boll. Un. Mat.
Ital., 4, 8 (1973), 391–411.
[97] C.-J. de la Vallée-Poussin, Intégrales de Lebesgue, Fonctions d’ensem-
ble, Classe de Baire, Paris, 1916.
502
Bibliography
[98] T. Del Vecchio, The thick Neumann’s sieve, Ann. Mat. Pura. Appl.,
4, 147 (1987), 363–402.
[99] P. Donato, A. Gaudiello and L. Sgambati, Homogenization of bounded

solutions of elliptic equations with quadratic growth in periodically
perforated domains, Asymptotic Analysis, 16 (1998), 223–243.
[100] P. Donato, O. Guibé and A. Oropeza, Homogenization of quasi-

linear elliptic problems with nonlinear Robin conditions and
L1 data, in press in J. Math. Pures Appl., Available on:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpur.2017.10.002
[101] P. Donato and K. H. Le Nguyen, Homogenization of diffusion problems

with a nonlinear interfacial resistance, Nonlinear Differ. Equ. Appl. 22
(2015), 1345–1380. DOI 10.1007/s00030-015-0325-2
[102] P. Donato, H. Le Nguyen and R. Tardieu, The periodic unfolding

method for a class of imperfect transmission problems, Journal of
Math. Sci. , 176, 6 (2011), 891–927.
[103] P. Donato and Z.Yang, The periodic unfolding method for the wave
equation in domains with holes, Adv. Math. Sci. Appli., 22, 2 (2012),
521–551.
[104] P. Donato and Z.Yang, The periodic unfolding method for the heat
equation in perforated domains, Sci. China Math, 59 (2016), 891–906.
doi: 10.1007/s11425-015-5103-4
[105] N. Dunford and J. T. Schwartz, Linear Operators. Part I: General

Theory, Wiley Classics Lib., Wiley Interscience, New. York 1988.
[106] A. Ene and J. Saint Jean Paulin, On a model of fractured porous

media, in Mathematical modelling of flow through porous media Proc.
Conference St. Etienne, A. Bourgeat, C. Carasso, S. Luckhaus and A.
Mikelic eds., 402–409, World Scientific, 1995.
[107] H. Ene and E. Sanchez-Palencia, Equation et phénomènes de sur-

face pour l’écoulement dans un modèle de milieu poreux, Journal
Mécanique, 14 (1975), 73–108.
[108] G. Francfort, F. Murat and L. Tartar, Homogenization of monotone

operators in divergence form with x-dependent multivalued graphs,
Annali di Matematica, 188 (2009), 631–652.
doi: 10.1007/s10231-009-0094-9
[109] A. Gaudiello, O. Guibét and F. Murat, Homogenization of the brush

problem with a source term in L1 , Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 225
(2017), 1–64.
doi: 10.1007/s00205-017-1079-2,
503
Bibliography
[110] G. Geymonat, F. Krasucki and J.J. Marigo, Sur la commutativité des

passages à la limite en théorie asymptotique des poutres composites,
C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Série 1, 305, 2 (1987), 225–228.
[111] D. Gérard-Varet and N. Masmoudi, Homogenization in polygonal do-

mains, J. Eur. Math. Soc., 13 (2010), 1477–1503.
[112] D. Gérard-Varet and N. Masmoudi, Homogenization and boundary

layers, Acta Math., 209, 1 (2012), 133–178.
[113] M. Ghergu, G. Griso, H. Mechkour and B. Miara, Homogenization

of thin piezoelectric perforated shells, M2AN Math. Model. Numer.
Anal., 41, 5 (2007), 875–895.
[114] D. Gilbarg and N. S. Trudinger, Elliptic Partial Differential Equations

of Second Order, Springer Verlag, Heldelberg, New York, 1997.
[115] J. Gobert, Une inégalité fondamentale de la théorie de l’Elasticité,

Bull. Soc. Roy. Sci. Liège, 31 (1962), 182–191.
[116] G. Griso, Analyse asymptotique de structures réticulées. Thèse Uni-

versité Pierre et Marie Curie (Paris VI), 1996.
[117] G. Griso, Asymptotic behavior of structures made of plates, Analysis

and Applications, 3, 04 (2004), 325–356.
[118] G. Griso, Asymptotic behavior of curved rods by the unfolding method,

Math. Methods in the Applied Sciences, 27, 17 (2004), 2081–2110.
[119] G. Griso, Thin reticulated structures, in Progress in Partial Differ-

ential Equations. The Metz Surveys 3, ed. M. Chipot, J. Saint Jean
Paulin and I. Shafrir, Pitman (London), 1994, 161–182.
[120] G. Griso, Error estimate and unfolding for periodic homogenization,

Asymptotic Analysis, 40, 3-4 (2004), 269–286.
[121] G. Griso, Les méthodes d’éclatement en homogénéisation périodique

et en élasticité linéarisée. Thèse d’Habilitation, Université Pierre et
Marie Curie, 2005.
[122] G. Griso, Interior error estimates for periodic homogenization, Analysis

and Applications, 4 (2006), 61–79.
[123] G.Griso, Asymptotic behavior of structures made of curved rods, Ana-

lysis and Applications, 6, 1 (2008), 11-22.
[124] G. Griso, Decomposition of displacements of thin structures, J. Math.

Pures Appl., 9, 89 (2008), 199–233.
504
Bibliography
[125] G. Griso, Error estimates in periodic homogenization with a non-

homogeneous Dirichlet condition, Asymptotic Analysis, 87, 1-2 (2014),
91–121.
[126] G. Griso and E. Rohan, On homogenization of diffusion-deformation
problem in strongly heterogeneous media, Ricerche Mat., 56, 2 (2007),
161–188.
[127] G. Griso and M.-T. Sanchez, Homogenization of an elasticity problem
for a catalyst support by using the unfolding method, Asymptotic
Analysis, 67 (2010), 45–84.
[128] G. Griso and M. Villanueva-Pesqueira, Straight rod with different order
of thickness, Asymptotic Analysis, 94, 3-4 (2015), 255–291.
[129] G. Griso and L. Merzougui, Junctions between two plates and a family
of beams, Math. Models and Methods in Appl. Sciences, 41, 1 (2018),
58-79.
doi: 10.1002/mma.4594
[130] G. Griso, A. Migunova and J. Orlik, Asymptotic analysis for domains
separated by a thin layer made of periodic vertical beams, Journal of
Elasticity, 128, 2 (2017), 291–331.
[131] G. Griso and B. Miara, Homogenization of periodically heterogeneous
thin beams, Chin. Ann. Math., Series B, 39, 3 (2018), 397–426.
doi: 10.1007/s11401-018-0075-7
[132] P. Grisvard, Singularities in boundary value problems, Masson, Paris,
1992.
[133] Z. Hashin and S. Shtrikman, A variational approach to the theory of
the elastic behaviour of multiphase materials, J. Mech. Phys. Solids,
11 (1963), 127–140.
[134] W. Jäger and A. Mikelič, On the boundary conditions at the contact
interface between a porous medium and a free fluid, Annali Sc. Norm.
Sup. Pisa, 3 (1996), 403–465.
[135] W. Jäger and A. Mikelič, Homogenization of the Laplace equation in
a partially perforated domain, in Homogenization, Ser. Adv. Math.
Appl. Sci., 50, World Sci. Publ., 1999.
[136] W. Jäger and A. Mikelič, On the interface boundary condition of
Beavers, Joseph and Saffman, SIAM J. Appl. Math., 60, 4 (2000),
1111–1127.
[137] V. Jikov, S. Kozlov and O. Oleinik, Homogenization of Differential
Operators and Integral Functionals, translated from the Russian by G.
A. Yosifian. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1994.
505
Bibliography
Under V. Jikov, see also V. Zhikov [191–193].

[138] C. Kenig and Z. Shen, Homogenization of elliptic boundary value prob-
lems in Lipschitz domains, Math. Ann., 350 (2011), 867–917.
[139] C. Kenig and F. Lin and Z. Shen, Convergence rates in L2 for elliptic
homogenization problems, Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 203, 3 (2012),
1009–1036.
[140] C. Kenig and F. Lin and Z. Shen, Homogenization of elliptic systems
with Neumann boundary conditions, J. Amer. Math. Soc., 26 (2013),
901–937.
[141] D. Kinderlehrer and G. Stampacchia, An Introduction to Variational
Inequalities and Their Applications, Academic Press, 1980.
[142] S. Kaizu, The Poisson equation with semilinear boundary conditions
in domains with many tiny holes, J. Faculty of Science, Univ.Tokyo.
Sect. 1 A, 36, 1 (1989), 43–64.
[143] L. Kuipers and H. Niederreiter, Uniform Distribution of Sequences,
Wiley, New York, 1974.
[144] M. Lenczner, Homogénéisation d’un circuit électrique, C. R. Acad. Sci.
Paris, Série 2, 324 (1997), 537–542.
[145] M. Lenczner and D. Mercier, Homogenization of periodic electrical net-
works including voltage to current amplifiers, SIAM Multiscale Model.
Simul., 2, 3 (2004), 359–397.
[146] M. Lenczner and G. Senouci-Bereksi, Homogenization of electrical net-
works including voltage-to-voltage amplifiers, Math. Models and Meth-
ods in Appl. Sciences, 9, 6 (1999), 899–932.
[147] M. Lenczner, M. Kader M. and P. Perrier, Modèle à deux échelles de
l’équation des ondes à coefficients oscillants, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris,
Série 1, 328 (2000), 335–340.
[148] J. Leray and J.-L. Lions, Quelques résultats de Višik sur les problèmes
elliptiques nonlinéaires par les méthodes de Minty-Browder, Bull. Soc.
Math. France, 93 (1965), 97–107.
[149] J.-L. Lions, Remarks on Darcy’s law, IMA, Journal of Appl. Math., 46
(1991), 29–38.
[150] J.-L. Lions, D. Lukkassen, L. E. Persson and P. Wall, Reiterated ho-
mogenization of monotone operators, Chin. Ann. Math., Series B, 22,
1 (2001), 1–12.
[151] J.-L. Lions and E. Magenes, Problèmes aux limites non homogènes et
applications, vol. I, Dunod, Paris, 1968.
506
Bibliography
[152] R. Lipton and M. Avellaneda, Darcy’s law for slow viscous flow past a
stationary array of bubbles, Proc. Royal Soc. Edinburgh, 114 A (1990),
71–79.
[153] D. Lukkassen and G. Milton, On hierarchical structures and reiterated

homogenization, in Proc. Conf. Function Spaces, Interpolation Theory
and Related Topics in Honour of J. Peetre on his 65th Birthday 2000,
Walter de Gruyter, Berlin 2002, 311–324.
[154] D. Lukkassen, G. Nguetseng and P. Wall, Two-scale convergence, In-

ternational J. of Pure Appl. Math., 2, 1 (2002), 35–86.
[155] P. Marcellini, Periodic solutions and homogenization of non linear vari-

ational problems, Ann. Mat. Pura Appl., 4, 117 (1978), 139–152.
[156] V. Marchenko and E. Khruslov, Homogenization of Partial Differen-

tial Equations Translated from the 2005 Russian original by M. Gon-
charenko and D. Shepelsky, Progress in Mathematical Physics, 46,
Birkhääuser Boston, Inc., Boston 2006.
[157] O. Martio, John domains, bi-Lipschitz balls and Poincaréé inequality.

Rev. Roumaine Math. Pures Appl., 33, 1-2 (1988), 107–112.
[158] C.C. Mei and B. Vernescu, Homogenization Methods for Multiscale

Mechanics, World Scientific Publishing Co., NJ, 2010.
[159] G. Minty, Monotone (nonlinear) operators in a Hilbert space, Duke

Math. J., 29 (1962), 341–346.
[160] G. Milton, The Theory of Composites, Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge, 2002.
[161] C. B. Morrey, Multiple Integrals in the Calculus of Variations,

Grundlehren Math. Wiss., 130, Springer-Verlag, Berlin 1966.
[162] U. Mosco, Convergence of convex sets and of solutions of variational

inequalities, Advances in Math., 3 (1969), 510–585.
[163] F. Murat, The Neuman sieve, in Nonlinear Variational Problems ,

Isola d’Elba 1983, Research Notes in Math., 127, Pitman, Boston 1985,
24–32.
[164] F. Murat and L. Tartar, H-Convergence, in Topics in the Mathematical

Modelling of Composite Materials, A. Cherkaev and R. Kohn editors,
Progress in Nonlinear Differential Equations Appl., 31, Birkhäuser-
Verlag, Boston 1997, 21–44.
[165] M. Neuss-Radu, Some extensions of two-scale convergence, C. R. Acad.

Sci. Paris, Série 1, 322 (1996), 899–904.
507
Bibliography
[166] G. Nguetseng, Problemes d’écrans perforés pour l’équation de Laplace,

RAIRO Model. Math. Anal. Numer., 19, 1 (1985), 33–63.
[167] G. Nguetseng, A general convergence result for a functional related

to the theory of homogenization, SIAM J. Math. Anal., 20 (1989),
608–629.
[168] O. Oleinik, A. Shamaev and G.Yosifian, Mathematical Problems in

Elasticity and Homogenization, Studies in Mathematics and its Appli-
cations, 26, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1992.
[169] D. Onofrei, The unfolding operator near a hyperplane and its applica-
tion to the Neumann Sieve model, AMSA, 16 (2006), 239–258.
[170] D. Onofrei and B. Vernescu, Asymptotics of a spectral problem associ-

ated with the Neumann Sieve, Analysis and Applications, 3, 1 (2005),
69–87.
[171] D. Onofrei and B. Vernescu, Error estimates for periodic homoge-

nization with non-smooth coefficients, Asymptotic Analysis, 94 (3-4)
(2015), 255–291. Asymptotic Analysis, 54, 1-2 (2007), 103–123.
[172] D. Onofrei and B. Vernescu, Asymptotic analysis of second-order

boundary layer correctors, Applicable Anal., 91, 6 (2012), 1097–1110.
[173] A. Ould Hammouda, Homogenization of a class of Neumann problems

in perforated domains, Asymptotic Analysis 71 (1-2), (2011), 33–57.
[174] A. Ould-Hammouda and R. Zaki, Homogenization of a class of elliptic

problems with nonlinear boundary conditions in domains with small
holes, Carpathian Journal Math., 31 (1), (2015), 77–88
[175] A. Pankov, G-convergence and homogenization of nonlinear partial

differential operators, Mathematics and its Applications, 422, Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1997.
[176] C. Picard, Analyse limite d’équations variationelles dans un domaine

contenant une grille, RAIRO Model. Math. Anal. Numer., 21, 2 (1987),
293–326.
[177] M. Ptashnyk, Locally periodic unfolding method and two-scale conver-

gence on surfaces of locally periodic microstructures, SIAM Journal on
Multiscale Modeling and Simulation (2014).
doi: 10.1137/140978405
[178] P.-A. Raviart and J.-M. Thomas, Introduction à l’analyse numérique

des équations aux dérivées partielles, Mathématiques Appliqués pour
la Maı̂trise, Masson, Paris, 1983.
508
Bibliography
[179] E. Sanchez-Palencia, Non Homogeneous Media and Vibration Theory,

Lectur Notes in Physics, Springer Verlag, 1980.
[180] E. Sanchez-Palencia, Boundary value problems in domains containing

perforated walls, in Nonlinear partial differential equations and their
applications, Collège de France Seminar, III (Paris, 1980-1981), Res.
Notes in Math., 70, Pitman, Boston 1982 , 309–325.
[181] E. Sanchez-Palencia, Perturbation of eigenvalues in thermoelasticity

and vibration of systems with concentrated masses, in: Trends and
Appl. of Pure Math. to Mechanics, Lecture Notes in Physics, 195,
Springer Berlin, 1984, 346–368.
[182] E. Sanchez-Palencia and H. Tchatat, Vibration des systèmes élastiques

avec masses concentrées, Rendiconti Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Politec.
Torino, 42, 3 (1984), 43–63.
[183] J. Simon, Representation of distributions with explicit antiderivatives

up to the boundary, in Progress in Partial Differential Equations. The
Metz Surveys 2, (1992), Pitman, Longman Sci. Tech., Harlow, 1993,
201–215.
[184] E. Stein, Singular Integrals and Differentiability Properties of Func-

tions, Princeton University Press, 1971.
[185] L. Tartar, Incompressible flow in a porous medium–convergence of the

homogenization process, Appendix to [179].
[186] L. Tartar, The General Theory of Homogenization. A Personalized

Introduction, Lecture Notes of the Unione Matematica Italiana, 7,
Springer-Verlag, Berlin 2009.
[187] R. Temam, Navier-Stokes Equations, North Holland, 1984.
[188] M. Višik, Boundary value problems for quasilinear strongly elliptic

systems of equations having divergence form, (in Russian), Dokl. Akad.
Nauk SSSR, 138 (1961), 518–521.
[189] M. Višik, Trudy Moskovskogo matematičeskogo Obščestva, (in Rus-

sian), 12 (1963), 125–184.
[190] R. Zaki, Homogenization of a Stokes problem in a porous medium by

the periodic unfolding method, Asymptotic Analysis, 79 (2012), 229–
250.
[191] V. Zhikov, Connectedness and homogenization, examples of fractal

conductivity, Mat. Sbornik, 187, 8 (1996), 3–40.
509
Bibliography
[192] V. Zhikov, On an extension of the method of two-scale convergence and

its applications, Mat. Sbornik, 191, 7 (2000), 31–72 (Russian version);
Sbornik Mathematics 191 (7) (2000), 973–1014 (English version).
doi: 10.1070/SM2000v191n07ABEH000491
[193] V. Zhikov, On some estimates of homogenization theory, Dokl. Ros.
Akad. Nauk, 406, 5 (2006), 597–601 (Russian version); Dokl. Math.,
73 (2006), 96–99 (English version).
Under V. Zhikov, see also V. Jikov [137].
510
Notations and Symbols
Symbol Description
1 1
p1 The conjugate of p P r1, `8s, ` “ 1 (for Lebesgue and Sobolev spaces)
p p1
1 1 1
p˚ The Sobolev conjugate of p P r1, N q, “ ´ (from the Sobolev
p˚ p N
embedding theorems)
p
L pOq The real valued Lebesgue space for the measure space O (p P r1, `8s)
Lp pO; X q The X-valued Lebesgue space for the measure space O and the Banach
space X
W s,p pOq The Sobolev space for the domain O Ă RN (p P r1, `8s, s P p0, `8q;
H s pOq for p “ 2
W01,p pO; Γq The subspace of W 1,p pOq whose elements vanish on the subset Γ of O
(p P r1, `8s; H01 pO; Γq for p “ 2
W s,p pO; X q The vector-valued Sobolev space for the domain O Ă RN and the
Banach space X (p P r1, `8s, s P p0, `8q; H s pO; X q for p “ 2
1O The characteristic function of the set O
|O| The Lebesgue measure of the measurable set O in RN
Ť ω Ť O : ω is a subset of O such that ω is compact in O
dpOq The diameter of the set O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Oδint , Oδbl , Oδb Sets derived from a domain O . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34, 123, 403
r¨sY , tüY The integer and fractional part with respect to a unit cell Y . . . . . 6
c c˚ ˚
y ,y Centered variable in the domains Y, Y . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29, 182
B A basis for the group of macroscopic periods G . . . . . . . . . . 6, 156
r¨sr The extension operator by 0 outside a domain . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
Eε0 The extension operator by 0 into holes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
Eε The extension operator into holes by the local average . . . . . . . 167
G The group of macroscopic periods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 156

M pα, β, Oq A set of matrix field on the domain O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
MO The average operator over the domain O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Ma The average operator over the line segment a . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Mε The local average operator in fixed domains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
M˚
ε The local average operator in perforated domains . . . . . . . . . . 163
Mbε The local boundary average operator in perforated domains . . . . 184
bl ˘
Mbl
ε , Mε The boundary layer local average operator in domains with small holes
and its one-sided versions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292, 294
p ε , Λε The largest union of ε-cells included in the domain Ω, its complement
Ω 7
Ω˚
ε The domain Ω periodically perforated by holes of size ε . . . . . . . 157
p˚
Ω ˚
ε , Λε The largest union of perforated ε-cells included in the domain Ω, its com-
plement in Ω˚ε . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
Ω˚
ε,δ The domain Ω ε-periodically perforated by holes of size εδ . . . . . 289
Ωint bl b
δ , Ωδ , Ωδ Sets derived from the domain Ω . . . . . . . . . . . . 34, 123, 403
rε , Qoε , Qε
Q The Q1 -interpolating operators in fixed domains . . . . 45, 56, 57
Q˚
ε The Q1 -interpolating operators in perforated domains . . . . . . . 175
r ε , Rε The remainder scale-splitting operators in fixed domains
R . . . . 52, 57
R˚
ε The remainder scale-splitting operators in perforated domains . . 178
Σ ε , Σ˘
ε The ε-boundary layers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291, 294
Tε The unfolding operator in fixed domains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
TεY , TδZ The iterated unfolding operators in fixed domains . . . . . . . . 38, 40
Tε˚ The unfolding operator in perforated domains . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
Tεb The boundary unfolding operator in perforated domains . . . . . . 183
Tε,δ The unfolding operator in domains with small holes . . . . . . . . 289
bl
Tε,δ The unfolding operator for boundary layers with small holes . 292, 345
xε
T The partial unfolding operator with artificial periods . . . . . . . . 260
TεA The partial unfolding operator in converging domains . . . . . . . 270
Tδ The rescaling operator for thin plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363
Tε,δ The rescaling-unfolding operator for thin plates . . . . . . . . . . . 367
Tε# The unfolding operator for a flat boundary layer . . . . . . . . . . . 446
Uε The averaging operator in fixed domains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Uε˚ The averaging operator in perforated domains . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
Uεb The boundary averaging operator in perforated domains . . . . . . 184
512
Index
Average over a domain, def. 2.3.1 (81) Mean value operator, def. 1.9 (12),
Average over a line segment, def. 1.56 (44) with holes def. 4.6 (162)
Averaging operator Mosco convergence, def. 8.1 (264)
in fixed domains, def. 1.26 (20) for sequences of Lp spaces, 265
for measures, def. 2.45 (92) for sequences of W 1,p spaces, 265
in perforated domains, def. 4.17 (164) for sequences of W01,p spaces, 266
for boundaries, def. 4.49 (184)
Paving property, def. 2.1 (62)
Cayley transform, def. 3.37 (130) Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality, 25,
Convergence of domains def. 9.1 (285)
convergence in measure, def. 8.2 (264)
Hausdorff convergence, def. 8.3 (264) Q1 -interpolating operator
for W 1,p pRN q, def. 1.60 (45)
de la Vallée-Poussin criterion, def. 2.31 (84) for W01,p spaces, def. 1.73 (56)
for W 1,p pΩq , def. 1.75 (57)
Elementary displacement, def. 11.2 (361) for perforated domains, def. 4.31 (175)
Extension by zero (r¨sr ), def. 4.40 (179) for perforated domains, def. 4.64 (195)
Extension into holes
by local average, def. 4.22 (167) Rescaling operator for thin plates,
by zero, def. 4.2 (160) def. 11.5 (363)
Gamma-convergence, def. 3.57 (142) Scale-splitting operators, def. 1.60 (45),

Geometrical condition (Hp ), def. 4.30 (175) 52, def. 1.73 (56), def. 1.75 (57),
175, 178, 195
Integer and fractional part with respect to Sobolev-Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality,
a unit cell Y, pr¨sY , tüY q, (6) def. 9.1 (286)
Korn inequalities, 72, 231, 363 Unfolding operator

in fixed domains, def. 1.2 (7)
Local average operator with parameters, def. 1.49 (38)
in fixed domains, def. 1.21 (17) iterated, def. 1.51 (40)
for measures, def. 2.50 (94) for measures, def. 2.41 (90)
in perforated domains, def. 4.11 (163) in perforated domains, def. 4.1 (160)
near a hyperplane, def. 9.12 (292) for boundaries, def. 4.46 (183)
on boundaries in perforated domains, with artificial periods, 260
def. 4.48 (184) for small holes, def. 9.6 (289)
on each side of a sieve, def. 9.16 (294) for boundary layers with small holes,
on singular boundaries, def. 10.45 (345) def. 9.11 (292)
for boundary layers with small holes
(2), def. 10.44 (345)
Matrix set M pα, β, Oq, def. 3.1 (100)
rescaling-unfolding for thin plates,
Maximal monotone operators, def. 3.35 (129)
def. 11.10 (367)
convergence, def. 3.38 (130)
for a flat boundary layer,
measurable map, def. 3.43 (132)
def. 13.23 (446)
canonical extension, def. 3.44 (132)
Uniform cone property, def. 5.21 (217)
set VLLpO, p, q, α, mq, def. 3.51 (135)


The Periodic Unfolding Method Theory and Applications To Partial Differential Problems by Doina Cioranescu, Alain Damlamian, Georges Griso (Z

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Periodic Unfolding Method Theory and Applications To Partial Differential Problems by Doina Cioranescu, Alain Damlamian, Georges Griso (Z

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Series in Contemporary Mathematics 3

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/13634

The Periodic Unfolding

ISSN 2364-009X ISSN 2364-0103 (electronic)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018962117

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

To Jeanne and our daughters

To Anne-Marie, our children and grandchildren

Various mathematical methods were introduced to understand the limit

In 1987, the notion of “two-scale convergence” was originally introduced

The method of rescaling had long been used successfully to understand

singularities in diﬀerential geometry as well as in algebraic geometry. Many

(for an example of such a situation see Section 8.2).

• obtain a direct corrector result (possibly making use of the adjoint of

Doina Cioranescu, Alain Damlamian, Georges Griso (July 2018)

I Unfolding in Fixed Domains 1

2 Advanced topics for unfolding 61

3 Homogenization in ﬁxed domains 99

II Unfolding in Perforated Domains 151

5 Homogenization in perforated domains 199

5.4 A Fredholm alternative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216

6 A Stokes problem in a partially porous medium 237

III Partial Unfolding 255

8 Oscillating boundaries 263

IV Unfolding for small obstacles and strange terms 281

10 Homogenization in domains with “small holes” 297

10.2 Electrostatic screens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311

V Linear Elasticity 355

11.8.2 Homogenization followed by dimension reduction . . . 393

VI An application: sharp error estimates 399

13 * Strongly oscillating nonhomogeneous Dirichlet condition 421

14 Some sharp error estimates 471

List of Figures 493

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018 5

1.1 The unfolding operator

tzuY “ z ´ rzsY P Y. (1.1)

Figure 1.1: Deﬁnition of rzsY and tzuY

Figure 1.1 gives a paving on RN . We scale this paving by ε, a strictly

For Ω a domain in RN , consider a covering using the notations

p ε is the largest union of εpξ ` Y q cells (ξ P G) included in Ω, while

Remark 1.1. Note that, if Ω “ RN , the corresponding set Λε is empty, and

Λε Ă tx P Ω | dist px, BΩq ă ε diameter pY qu.

Hence its characteristic function 1Λε converges to 0 a.e. in Ω. Consequently,

Another easy consequence of Deﬁnition 1.2, is the following result con-

Tε pfε |Ω q Ñ f strongly in Lp pΩ ˆ Y q. (1.7)

Proof. Formula (1.6) is straightforward from Deﬁnition 1.2. Convergence (1.7)

Figure 1.4: The functions fε and Tε pfε q

Remark 1.7. Suppose p P p1, `8q. Let f in Lp pY q and fε be deﬁned

Proof. Recalling Deﬁnition 2.2 of Ωp ε , one has

On each pεξ `εY qˆY , by deﬁnition, Tε pφqpx, yq “ φpεξ `εyq is constant in x.

Property (iii) means that Tε is bounded uniformly with respect to ε from

where  is the modulus of uniform continuity of w. Because of the compact

A consequence of this deﬁnition is the estimate

Proposition 1.11. Suppose p P r1, `8s. For every Φ P Lp pΩ ˆ Y q,

}MY pΦq}Lp pΩq ď |Y |´1{p }Φ}Lp pΩˆY q . (1.10)

Proof. The case p “ `8 is straightforward. For p P r1, `8q, Hölder’s in-

where p1 is the conjugate of p. Then inequality (1.10) is obtained by integra-

Proposition 1.12. Let p P p1, `8q. Suppose that a sequence twε uε is

In particular, a necessary and suﬃcient condition for twε uε to converge

from which (i) follows.

Proposition 1.14. Suppose p P p1, `8q. Let f be in Lp pY q and tfε uε be

fε |Ω á MY pf q weakly in Lploc pΩq pLp pΩq when Ω is boundedq. (1.13)

Furthermore, convergence (1.13) is strong if and only if f is constant.

where is the modulus of uniform continuity of w. Because of the compact