Electronic Journal of Dierential Equations, Vol. 2011 (2011), No. 18, pp. 19. ISSN: 1072-6691. URL: http://ejde.math.txstate.

edu or http://ejde.math.unt.edu ftp ejde.math.txstate.edu

EXISTENCE OF SOLUTIONS FOR QUASILINEAR PARABOLIC EQUATIONS WITH NONLOCAL BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
BAILI CHEN

Abstract. We prove the existence of a generalized solution a quasilinear parabolic equation with nonlocal boundary conditions, using the Faedo-Galerkin approximation.

1. Introduction In this paper, we are concerned with the existence of a generalized solution of the following quasilinear parabolic equation with nonlocal boundary conditions: u u (|u|p2 ) + |u|p2 u = f (x, t), t xi xi i=1 u(x, t) =
n

x , t [0, T ] x

(1.1) (1.2) (1.3)

k(x, y)u(y, t)dy, u(x, 0) = u0 (x).

As a physical motivation, problem (1.1)(1.3) arises from the study of quasi-static thermoelasticity. The main diculty of this problem is related to the presence of both quasilinear term in (1.1) and nonlocal boundary condition (1.2). Literatures to this type of problem are very limited. We only found [4] in which the authors study a quasilinear parabolic equation with nonlocal boundary conditions dierent from (1.2). The quasilinear term in (1.1) makes it dicult to apply classical methods like semi-group method or method of upper and lower solutions. However, we found that Faedo-Galerkin method serves as a convenient tool for this type of problem. We proved the existence of a generalized solution of problem (1.1)(1.3) by constructing approximate solution using Faedo-Galerkin method and applying weak convergence and compactness arguments. It is well known that Faedo-Galerkin method is used to prove the existence of solutions for linear parabolic equations in [6]. In [5], Faedo-Galerkin method is coupled with contraction mapping theorems to prove the existence of weak solutions of semilinear wave equations with dynamic boundary conditions. Bouziani et al. use Faedo-Galerkin method to show the existence of a unique weak solution for a linear
2000 Mathematics Subject Classication. 35K20, 35K59, 35B45, 35D30. Key words and phrases. Faedo-Galerkin method; nonlocal boundary conditions; a priori estimates; quasilinear parabolic equations; generalized solution. c 2011 Texas State University - San Marcos. Submitted April 22, 2010. Published February 3, 2011.
1

B. CHEN

EJDE-2011/18

parabolic equation with nonlocal boundary conditions. Lions book [7, Chapter 1], collects the work of Dubinskii and Raviart, in which they use Faedo-Galerkin method to prove the existence and uniqueness of weak solution for a quasilinear parabolic equation with homogeneous boundary condition. Problem (1.1)(1.3) is the extension of the problem in [7, p. 140] in which the boundary conditions are homegeneous. This article is organized as follows: in section 2, we give the denition of the generalized solution of problem (1.1)(1.3) and introduce the function spaces related to the generalized solution. In section 3, we demonstrate the construction of an approximation solution by Faedo-Galerkin method and derive a priori estimates for the approximation solution. Section 4 is devoted to the proof of existence of the generalized solution by compactness arguments. 2. Preliminaries In this article, we use the following notation: : regular and bounded domain of Rn ; : boundary of ; (, ): usual inner product in L2 (); W k,p (): Sobelev space on ; H r (): Sobelev space W r,2 (); Lp (): Lp space dened on ; | |p : norm in Lp (); | |p, : norm in Lp (); H r (): dual space of H r (); | |H r () : norm in H r (); c: nonzero constant which may take dierent values on each occurrence; C: nonnegative constant which may take dierent values on each occurrence; : continuous embedding; K(x): norm of k(x, y) in Lq () with respect to y, i.e., K(x) = ( |k(x, y)|q dy)1/q ; Ki (x): norm of Di k(x, y) in Lq () with respect to y, i.e., Ki (x) = ( | k(x,y) |q dy)1/q . xi In this article, we make the following assumptions: (A1) n 2, p > n, r > n + 2; 2 1 (A2) p + 1 = 1; q (A3) f Lq (0, T ; Lq ()) and u0 L (); (A4) For any x , K(x) < , Ki (x) < ; n 1 p1 (A5) Ki (x)d < 1 p . i=1 K(x) Here we give an example of a function k(x, y) which satises assumptions (A4) and (A5): When n = 2, p = 3 and is an unit square, let k(x, y) = x1 x2 (y1 y2 )2/3 . It is easy to verify that K(x) = ( |k(x, y)|q dy)1/q and Ki (x) = ( | k(x,y) |q dy)1/q xi satisfy assumptions (A4) and (A5). With assumption (A1), using Sobelev embedding theorems, see [1], we have H r () W 2,p () W 1,p () Lp () L2 (). Dene a space V : V = {v H r () : v(x) = k(x, y)v(y)dy, f or x }
r

(2.1)

It is easy to see that V is a subspace of H (). Denition 2.1. Dene a generalized solution of problem (1.1)(1.3) as a function u, such that

EJDE-2011/18

EXISTENCE OF SOLUTIONS

(i) u L (0, T ; L2 ()) C([0, T ], H r ()); (ii) du Lq (0, T ; H r ()); dt (iii) u(x, 0) = u0 (x); (iv) for all v V and a.e. t [0, T ], ( du u , v) ( (|u|p2 ), v) + (|u|p2 u, v) = (f, v) . dt xi xi i=1
n

(2.2)

Remark 2.2. From the proof of existence theorem in section 4, we will see that each inner product in the identity (2.2) is a function of t in Lq (0, T ), hence the identity holds for a.e. t [0, T ]. On the other hand, since u(t) V , the boundary condition (1.2) is satised. 3. Construction of an approximate solution and a priori estimates Since V is a subspace of H r (), which is separable. We can choose a countable set of distinct basis elements wj , j = 1, 2, , which generate V and are orthonormal in L2 (). Let Vm be the subspace of V generated by the rst m elements: w1 , w2 , , wm . We construct the approximate solution of the form:
m

um (x, t) =
j=1

gjm (t)wj (x),

(x, t) [0, T ].

(3.1)

where (gjm (t))m remains to be determined. j=1 Denote the orthogonal projection of u0 on Vm as u0 = PVm u0 , then u0 u0 in m m 0 V , as m . Let (gjm )m be the coordinate of u0 in the basis (wj )m of Vm ; m j=1 j=1 m 0 0 i.e., u0 = j=1 gjm wj , let gjm (0) = gjm . m m We need to determine (gjm (t))j=1 to satisfy
n

(um , wj ) (
i=1

um (|um |p2 ), wj ) + (|um |p2 um , wj ) = (f, wj ), xi xi

1 j m.

Integrating by parts on the second term of left-hand side, we have

n

(um , wj ) +
i=1 n

(|um |p2 Di um )(Di wj ) dx (3.2) 1 j m.

i=1

(|um |p2 Di um )wj d + (|um |p2 um , wj ) = (f, wj ),

The above system is a system of ordinary dierential equations in (gjm (t))m . By j=1 Caratheodory theorem [3], there exists solution (gjm (t))m , t [0, tm ). j=1 We need a priori estimates that permit us to extend the solution to the whole domain [0, T ]. We derive a priori estimates for the approximate solution as follows: Multiply (3.2) by gjm (t), then sum over j from 1 to m, we have
n

(um , um ) +
i=1 n

(|um |p2 Di um )(Di um )dx 1 j m.

i=1

(|um |p2 Di um )um d + (|um |p2 um , um ) = (f, um ),

B. CHEN

EJDE-2011/18

which gives 1 d 4 |um (t)|2 + 2 2 2 dt p

n n

(Di (|um |
i=1 p2

p2 2

um ))2 dx + |um (t)|p p (3.3)

= (f, um ) +
i=1

(|um |

Di um )um d.

Integrating with respect to t from 0 to T on both sides, we obtain 1 |um (T )|2 + 2 2

T T 0

4 p2

(Di (|um |
i=1 T n 0

p2 2

um ))2 dxdt +
0

|um (t)|p dt p (3.4)

=
0

(f, um )dt +
i=1

(|um |

p2

1 Di um )um ddt + |um (0)|2 . 2 2

This gives 1 |um (T )|2 + 2 2

T T 0

4 p2

(Di (|um |
i=1 T 0 n

p2 2

um ))2 dxdt +
0

|um (t)|p dt p (3.5)

|(f, um )|dt +
i=1

|(|um |

p2

1 Di um )um |ddt + |um (0)|2 . 2 2

The rst term in the right-hand side of (3.5) can be estimated as follows:
T T

|(f, um )|dt =
0 0 T

|f um |dxdt |f |q |um |p dt
0 T

(hlders inequality) o

(3.6)

p 1 p 1 p1 ( |um |p + |f |q )dt. (Youngs inequality) p p p

Next, we estimate second term in the right-hand side of (3.5): For x , we have |um (x, t)| =

|k(x, y)um (y, t)|dy |k(x, y)|q |um |p .

Then we have |um (x, t)| K(x)|um |p for x . Similarly, we have |Di um (x, t)| Ki (x)|um |p for x . Then using hlders inequality and assumptions (A4) and (A5), we have o
T 0 n

(|um |p2 Di um )um d dt

i=1 T n 0 T

i=1 n

K(x)p1 |um |p1 Ki (x)|um |p ddt p (3.7) K(x)p1 Ki (x)d |um |p dt p

0 T i=1

=C
0

|um |p dt p

EJDE-2011/18

EXISTENCE OF SOLUTIONS

where C=

K(x)p1 Ki (x)d < 1

i=1

1 . p

With the above estimates and (3.5), we have 1 |um (T )|2 + 2 2

T T 0

4 p2

(Di (|um |
i=1

p2 2

um ))2 dxdt +
0

(1

1 C)|um (t)|p dt p p

p1 1 |f |q )dt + |um (0)|2 . 2 p 2 0 which holds for any nite T > 0. Under assumption (A1)-(A5), we have the following a priori estimates: (B) um is bounded in L (0, T ; L2 ()); p2 (C) |um | 2 |um | is bounded in L2 (0, T ; H 1 ()); (D) um is bounded in Lp (0, T ; Lp ()). Since T is an arbitrary positive number, we have (
p p1

|um |p < p

a.e. t

4. Existence of a generalized solution To prove the existence of a generalized solution, we rst prove the following lemma: Lemma 4.1. Let um , constructed in (3.1), be the approximate solution of (1.1) (1.3) in the sense of Denition 2.1. Then um is bounded in Lq (0, T ; H r ()). Proof. For v V H r , from (3.2), we have
n

(um , v) + (
i=1 n

(|um |p2 Di um )(Di v)dx (4.1)

p2 p2

i=1

(|um |

Di um )vd + (|um |

um , v) = (f, v).

The last term in the left-hand side can be estimated as in [7]: |(|um |p2 um , v)| | |um |p1 |q |v|p (|um |p )1/q |v|p p (|um |p )1/q C|v|H r , p since H r Lp . Hence | |um |p2 um |H r () C(|um |p )1/q < . The norm of p |um |p2 um in Lq (0, T ; H r ()) is bounded by
T

(C(|um |p )1/q )q dt p
0 p2

1/q

=
0

C q |um |p dt p

1/q

< .

Therefore, |um | um is bounded in Lq (0, T ; H r ()). n Next, we consider the term i=1 (|um |p2 Di um )vd in the left-hand side of (4.1):
n

v
i=1

(|um |p2 Di um )vd = (a(um ), v).

B. CHEN

EJDE-2011/18

We have
n

(|um |p2 Di um )vd

i=1 n

i=1 n

| (|um |p2 Di um )|q, |v|p, |

i=1

=
n

k(x, y)um (y, t)dy|p2

Di k(x, y)um (y, t)dy

q,

k(x, y)v(y, t)dy

p, p1 |(K(x)p2 Ki (x)|um |p )|q, |(K(x)|v|p )|p,

i=1 n

i=1 n

p1 |K(x)p2 Ki (x)|q, |K(x)|p, |um |p |v|p

i=1

|K(x)p2 Ki (x)|q, |K(x)|p, |um |p1 C|v|H r . p

Therefore,
n

|a(um )|H r ()
i=1

p1 |K(x)p2 Ki (x)|q, |K(x)|p, |um |p C < .

Then the norm of a(um ) in Lq (0, T ; H r ()) is bounded by

T 0 n

(|K(x)p2 Ki (x)|q, |K(x)|p, C)q |um |p dt p

i=1

1/q

< .

Hence, a(um ) is bounded in Lq (0, T ; H r ()). Next, we consider the second term in the left-hand side of (4.1). Integrating by parts gives
n

(|um |p2 Di um )(Di v)dx

i=1 n

(4.2) |um |
p2

1 = ( c i=1 Consider v
n i=1 n

um Di vd

|um |

p2

um vdx).

|u|p2 uDi vd = (I1 (u), v), we have: | |u|p2 u|q, |Di v|p,

|(I1 (u), v)|

i=1 n

p1

=
i=1 n

k(x, y)u(y, t)dy

q,

Di k(x, y)v(y, t)dy

p,

i=1

|(K(x)p1 |u|p1 )|q, |(Ki (x)|v|p )|p, p

EJDE-2011/18 n

EXISTENCE OF SOLUTIONS

=
i=1 n

|K(x)p1 |q, |Ki (x)|p, |u|p1 |v|p p |K(x)p1 |q, |Ki (x)|p, |u|p1 C|v|H r p
i=1

So we have

|I1 (um )|H r ()

i=1

p1 |K(x)p1 |q, |Ki (x)|p, |um |p C < .

With this, it is easy to see that norm of I1 (um ) in Lq (0, T ; H r ()) is bounded. Next, consider v |u|p2 uvdx = (I2 (u), v). From the proof of [7, Theorem 12.2], we know I2 (um ) is bounded in Lq (0, T ; H r ()). Since f Lq (0, T ; Lq ()) Lq (0, T ; H r ()), from (4.1) and the above discussion, we have um is bounded in Lq (0, T ; H r ()). With Lemma 4.1, we can use [7, Theorem 12.1]. We quote the theorem here. Theorem 4.2. Let B, B1 be Banach spaces, and S be a set. Dene
n

M (v) = (
i=1

|v|p2 (

v 2 ) dx)1/p xi

on S with: (a) S B B1 , and M (v) 0 on S, M (v) = ||M (v); (b) the set {v|v S, M (v) 1} is relatively compact in B. Dene the set F = {v : v is locally summable on [0, T ] with value in B1 , T (M (v(t)))p0 dt C, v bounded in Lp1 (0, T ; B1 )}. Where 1 < pi < , i = 0, 1. 0 Then F Lp0 (0, T ; B) and F is relatively compact in Lp0 (0, T ; B). We need Theorem 4.2 to prove the following lemma: Lemma 4.3. Let um , constructed as in (3.1), be the approximate solution of (1.1) (1.3) in the sense of Denition 2.1, then um u in Lp (0, T ; Lp ()) strongly and almost everywhere. Proof. Let S = {v : |v| 2 v H 1 ()}. Since H 1 () is also compactly embedded p2 in L2 (), the proof of [7, Proposition 12.1,p. 143] also works for |v| 2 v H 1 (), then (b) holds. Let B = Lp (), B1 = H r (), p0 = p, p1 = q, we have
T T n
p2

(M (um ))p0 dt =
0 0

(
i=1 T n 0 i=1

|um |p2 (

um 2 ) dx)dt xi
p2 2

=C

(Di (|um |

um ))2 dxdt <

Now with Lemma 4.1 and a priori estimates, conclusion follows easily from application of Theorem 4.2. Next, we prove that we can pass the limit in (4.1). Lemmas 4.44.7, below, show that we can pass the limit in each term in the left-hand side of (4.1).

B. CHEN

EJDE-2011/18

Lemma 4.4. Let um , as constructed in (3.1), be the approximate solution of (1.1) (1.3) in the sense of Denition 2.1, then (|um |p2 um , v) (|u|p2 u, v) as m . Proof. We need to show that |um |p2 um consequence of [7, Lemma 1.3]. |u|p2 u in Lq () weakly, this is a

Lemma 4.5. Let um , constructed as in (3.1), be the approximate solution of (1.1) (1.3) in the sense of Denition 2.1, then (|um |p2 Di um )vd (|u|p2 Di u)vd as m . Proof. By a priori estimates, um is bounded in Lp () for almost every t, then there exists subsequence of um , still denoted as um , converges to u weak star in Lp () (Alaoglus Theorem) for almost every t [0, T ]. Under the assumption that for xed x, |k(x, y)|q = ( |k(x, y)|q dy)1/q < ; i.e., k(x, y) Lq () for xed x , we have k(x, y)um (y, t)dy

k(x, y)u(y, t)dy

as m .

Similarly, Di k(x, y)um (y, t)dy

Di k(x, y)u(y, t)dy

as m .

Therefore, for x , we have |um (x, t)|p2 Di um (x, t) |u(x, t)|p2 Di u(x, t) a.e. Next, we prove that |(|um (x, t)|p2 Di um (x, t))|q, < . For x , we have um (x, t) =

k(x, y)um (y, t)dy,

|um (x, t)| < |k(x, y)|q |um |p K(x)C Since K(x) L (), we have |um |p, < . Similarly, we have |Di um |p, < and |v|p, < . Then |um |p2 Di um |um |
p2
p p2 ,

q,

|Di um |p,

(since

1 p2 1 = + , [1, p25]) q p p

= (|um |p, )p2 |Di um |p, < By Lemma [7, Lemma 1.3], we have: |um |p2 Di um |u|p2 Di u weakly in Lq () for a.e. t [0, T ]. Since |v|p, < , the proof is complete. Lemma 4.6. Let um , as constructed in (3.1), be the approximate solution of (1.1) (1.3) in the sense of Denition 2.1, then (|um |p2 Di um )(Di v)dx

(|u|p2 Di u)(Di v)dx.

Proof. From (4.2) we know, we need to prove: (i) |um |p2 um Di vd |u|p2 uDi vd; and (ii) |um |p2 um vdx |u|p2 uvdx. (i) From the proof of Lemma 4.5, we have, for x , |um (x, t)|p2 um (x, t) |u(x, t)|p2 u(x, t) almost everywhere, and | |um |p2 um |q, = |um |p1 < . p,

EJDE-2011/18

EXISTENCE OF SOLUTIONS

Therefore, we can apply [7, Lemma 1.3] to conclude that |um (x, t)|p2 um (x, t) |u(x, t)|p2 u(x, t) weakly in Lq (). Since Di v Lp (), (i) is proved. (ii) From Lemma 4.3, we have |um (x, t)|p2 um (x, t) |u(x, t)|p2 u(x, t) almost everywhere, for x . Since | |um |p2 um |q = |um |p1 < , by [7, Lemma 1.3], we p have: |um |p2 um |u|p2 u weakly in Lq (). Since v Lp (), we complete the proof of (ii). Lemma 4.7. Let um , as constructed in (3.1), be the approximate solution of (1.1) (1.3) in the sense of Denition 2.1, then (um , v) (u , v) and u(t) is continuous on [0, T ]. Proof. Since um is bounded in Lq (0, T ; H r ()), by Alaoglus theorem, there exists a subsequence, still denoted by um , converging to weak star in Lq (0, T ; H r ()). By slightly modifying the proof of [2, Theorem 1] (with the space Lq (0, T ; H r ()), 1 instead of L2 (0, T ; B2 (0, 1)).), we have = u and u(t) is continuous on [0, T ]. Based on the above discussion, we summarize the existence theorem as follows. Theorem 4.8. Under assumptions (A1)-(A5), there exists a generalized solution u of problem (1.1)(1.3), such that (1) u L (0, T ; L2 ()) C([0, T ], H r ()); p2 (2) |u| 2 u is bounded in L2 (0, T ; H 1 ()). (3) du Lq (0, T ; H r ()). dt (4) u(x, 0) = u0 (x). (5) for all v V and a.e. t [0, T ], ( u du (|u|p2 ), v) + (|u|p2 u, v) = (f, v) . , v) ( dt xi xi i=1
n

Acknowledgements. The author would like to thank the anonymous referee for the helpful comments and suggestions. References
[1] R. A. Adams, J. F. Fournier; Sobolev Spaces, Academic Press, 2003. [2] A. Bouziani, N. Merazga, S. Benamira; Galerkin method applied to a parabolic evolution problem with nonlocal boundary conditions, Nonlinear Anal., 69 (2008), 1515-1524. [3] E. A. Coddington, N. Levinson; Theory of Ordinary Dierential Equations, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1955. [4] T. D. Dzhuraev, J. O. Takhirov; A problem with nonlocal boundary conditions for a quasilinear parabolic equation, Georgian Math. J., 6 (1999), 421-428. [5] S. Gerbi, B. Said-Houari; Local existence and exponential growth for a semilinear damped wave equation with dynamic boundary conditions, Adv. Dierential Equations, 13 (2008), 1051-1074. [6] O. A. Ladyzenskaja, V. A. Solonnikov, N. N. Uralceva; Linear and Quasi-linear Equations of Parabolic Type, Nauka, Moscow 1967. [7] J. L. Lions; Quelques mthodes de rsolution des probl`mes aux limites nonlinaires, Dunod, e e e e 1969. [8] P. A. Raviart; Sur la rsolution et lapproximation de certaines quations paraboliques non e e linaires dgnres, Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 25 (1967), 6480. e e e e e Baili Chen Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Gustavus Adolphus College, Saint Peter, MN 56082, USA E-mail address: bchen@gustavus.edu