Next Article in Journal
Channel Competition and Coordination of a Dual-Channel Supply Chain under Interval Demand
Next Article in Special Issue
Euler–Darboux–Poisson Equation in Context of the Traveling Waves in a Strongly Inhomogeneous Media
Previous Article in Journal
(Iq)–Stability and Uniform Convergence of the Solutions of Singularly Perturbed Boundary Value Problems
Previous Article in Special Issue
Mathematical Analysis of Mixed Convective Peristaltic Flow for Chemically Reactive Casson Nanofluid
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Optimal Dirichlet Boundary Control for the Corotational Oldroyd Model

by
Evgenii S. Baranovskii
* and
Mikhail A. Artemov
Department of Applied Mathematics, Informatics and Mechanics, Voronezh State University, 394018 Voronezh, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Mathematics 2023, 11(12), 2719; https://doi.org/10.3390/math11122719
Submission received: 4 June 2023 / Revised: 11 June 2023 / Accepted: 13 June 2023 / Published: 15 June 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Theoretical Research and Computational Applications in Fluid Dynamics)

Abstract

:
In this article, we investigate an optimal control problem for the coupled system of partial differential equations describing the steady-state flow of a corotational-type Oldroyd fluid through a bounded 3D (or 2D) domain. The control function is included in Dirichlet boundary conditions for the velocity field; in other words, we consider a model of inflow–outflow control. The main result is a theorem that states sufficient conditions for the solvability of the corresponding optimization problem in the set of admissible weak solutions. Namely, we establish the existence of a weak solution that minimizes the cost functional under given constraints on controls and states.

1. Introduction

The Oldroyd model is one of the basic macroscopic models for viscoelastic fluid dynamics. This model was originally introduced by Oldroyd [1]. Following the work [2], we write the system of governing equations for the isothermal flow of an incompressible Oldroyd fluid with diffusive stress in the dimensionless form:
R e v t + div ( v v ) ( 1 r ) Δ v + π div E = f , · v = 0 , W e D a E D t + E ζ Δ E = 2 r D ( v ) ,
where
  • R e denotes the Reynolds number, R e 0 (this number characterizes the inertial effects in the fluid flow);
  • W e denotes the Weissenberg number, W e 0 (this number characterizes elasticity properties of the fluid);
  • v is the velocity vector;
  • the symbol ⊗ denotes the tensor product of vectors, v w = def ( v i w j ) i , j = 1 d for any vectors v , w R d , d = 3 (or 2);
  • the operator ∇ denotes the gradient with respect to the spatial variables x 1 , , x d , that is, = def x 1 , , x d ;
  • the operator Δ denotes the Laplacian with respect to the spatial variables x 1 , , x d , that is, Δ = def · = i = 1 d 2 x i 2 ;
  • the operator div is defined by the formula
    div S = def i = 1 d S i 1 x i , , i = 1 d S i d x i ,
    for any matrix-valued function S = ( S i j ) i , j = 1 d ;
  • r is an interpolation parameter, 0 r 1 (in the literature, the case 0 < r < 1 is often referred to as the Jeffreys model, whereas the case r = 1 is referred to as the Maxwell model);
  • π is the pressure;
  • E is the non-Newtonian (elastic) part of the stress tensor;
  • ζ is the diffusive parameter of the elastic stress, ζ 0 ;
  • D ( v ) is the rate-of-strain tensor, D ( v ) = ( v + ( v ) ) / 2 ;
  • W ( v ) is the vorticity tensor, W ( v ) = ( v ( v ) ) / 2 ;
  • f is the external force applied to the fluid;
  • D a / D t denotes Oldroyd’s objective derivative defined by the formula
    D a S D t = def S t + ( v · ) S + S W ( v ) W ( v ) S a ( S D ( v ) + D ( v ) S ) ,
    in which the parameter a interpolates between the upper-convected model ( a = 1 ) and the lower-convected model ( a = 1 ), while the median case a = 0 corresponds to the corotational model.
As can be seen from (1), Oldroyd’s model describes the behaviour of a viscoelastic fluid, using an approach that is based on a consideration of the extra stress interpolating between the purely viscous contribution ( r = 0 ) and the purely elastic contribution ( r = 1 ).
The Oldroyd model has been carefully scrutinized by mathematicians. We refer readers to Saut [3] and Renardy & Thomases [4] for the excellent reviews on mathematical issues (such as the existence and uniqueness of solutions to initial value problems and steady-state flows, flow stability, numerical simulations, etc.) and some open problems for this model and its modifications.
In this paper, we deal with an optimal boundary control problem for the stationary version of system (1) with the corotational (Jaumann) derivative D 0 / D t . It is assumed that the flow region is a bounded domain Ω R d , d = 2 , 3 , with locally Lipschitz boundary Γ . The control parameter is included in Dirichlet boundary conditions for the velocity field v on Γ . Main our aim is to obtain sufficient conditions for the solvability of the optimization problem in the class of H 1 -weak solutions.
The present work continues the investigation by Artemov [5], in which a flow control problem is considered for a simplified version of system (1) with the material derivative d / d t instead of the objective derivative D a / D t under the assumption that ζ = 0 . Note that Doubova & Fernandez-Cara [6] obtained the approximate controllability results for the linearized motion equations (in which all nonlinear terms are neglected) of the Oldroyd fluid in a bounded flow domain with boundary of class C 2 . Later, Artemov [7] established the unique solvability of the optimal starting control problem for the linear partial differential equations describing the unsteady creeping flow of a viscoelastic fluid of the Oldroyd kind. We also mention here that there are many mathematical results related to various control problems for the classical Euler equations (inviscid fluid) and the Navier–Stokes equations (Newtonian fluid) [8,9,10,11,12,13] as well as for magnetohydrodynamic equations [14,15,16,17,18]. In general, control and optimization problems for hydrodynamic models demand careful investigation because these are not merely of academic interest but have important applications in engineering sciences and industry, for example, in the formation of fluid flows with required properties through channels and pipeline networks.
Our article is organized as follows. In Section 2, we introduce necessary notations and functional spaces as well as give some results on the solvability of a class of finite-dimensional operator equations with a numerical parameter. Section 3 is devoted mainly to studying the solvability and energy estimates of solutions to the Dirichlet–Neumann problem for the corotational Oldroyd model in the weak formulation (see Theorem 1). In Section 4, we formulate an optimal boundary control problem for Oldroyd fluid flows and prove the main result of the work—Theorem 2 about the existence of weak solutions that minimize the cost functional under given constraints on controls and states.

2. Preliminaries

2.1. Notations and Function Spaces

For x , y R d , A , B R d × d , Φ ^ , Ψ ^ R d × d × d , by x · y , A : B , Φ ^ Ψ ^ denote the scalar products in the spaces R d , R d × d , R d × d × d , respectively, that is,
x · y = def i = 1 d x i y i , A : B = def i , j = 1 d A i j B i j , Φ ^ Ψ ^ = def i , j , k = 1 d Φ ^ i j k Ψ ^ i j k .
By M sym d × d we denote the set of all symmetric d × d -matrices.
Suppose Ω is a bounded locally Lipschitz domain in the space R d , where d = 2 , 3 , with boundary Γ , and the symbol X denotes one of the finite-dimensional spaces R , R d , R d × d , R d × d × d , and M sym d × d .
Let p 1 and k N . We use the notation L p ( Ω , X ) ( H k ( Ω , X ) , resp.) for Lebesgue (Sobolev, resp.) space of functions defined on Ω with values in X. Definitions of these spaces and description of their properties can be found in [19,20,21].
By C 0 ( Ω , X ) denote the space of C -smooth functions ω : Ω X such that
supp ( ω ) = def the closure of the set { x Ω : ω ( x ) 0 } Ω .
Let
C 0 , σ ( Ω , R d ) = def { v C 0 ( Ω , R d ) : · v = 0 i n Ω } , H σ k ( Ω , R d ) = def { v H k ( Ω , R d ) : · v = 0 i n Ω } , H 0 k ( Ω , R d ) = def the closure of the set C 0 ( Ω , R d ) in the Sobolev space H k ( Ω , R d ) , H 0 , σ k ( Ω , R d ) = def the closure of the set C 0 , σ ( Ω , R d ) in the Sobolev space H k ( Ω , R d ) .
Let us introduce the scalar products and the associated norms in the spaces H σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) and H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) as follows:
( v , w ) H σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) = def ( v , w ) L 2 ( Ω , R d × d ) + ( v , w ) L 2 ( Γ , R d ) , v H σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) = def ( v , v ) H σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) 1 / 2 , ( v , w ) H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) = def ( v , w ) L 2 ( Ω , R d × d ) , v H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) = def ( v , v ) H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) 1 / 2 .
Here the restriction of a vector function v to Γ is defined by the formula
v | Γ = def γ Γ v ,
where γ Γ : H 1 ( Ω , R d ) H 1 / 2 ( Γ , R d ) is the trace operator (see [22], Section 2.5).
By L n 2 ( Γ , R d ) ( H n 1 / 2 ( Γ , R d ) , resp.) denote the space of vector functions ψ L 2 ( Γ , R d ) ( ψ H 1 / 2 ( Γ , R d ) , resp.) that satisfy the condition of zero total flux on Γ :
Γ ψ · n d Γ = 0 ,
where n = n ( x ) is the unit exterior (with respect to Ω ) normal vector to Γ at a point x .
Lemma 1. 
The trace operator γ Γ : H σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) L n 2 ( Γ , R d ) is compact.
The proof of this lemma is given in the monograph [22], Section 2.6.
Let F be a Banach space. By F denote the dual space of F. As usual, · , · F × F denotes the duality bracket between spaces F and F.
The weak (strong) convergence in Banach and Hilbert spaces is denoted by ⇀ (→).

2.2. Solvability Results for a Class of Finite-Dimensional Operator Equations

Lemma 2. 
Let B be a bounded domain in R N such that
  • the zero vector 0 belongs to B ;
  • the domain B has the central symmetry property: if h B , then h B .
Suppose that ϕ : B ¯ × [ 0 , 1 ] R N is a continuous mapping that satisfies the following conditions:
  • ϕ ( h , λ ) 0 , for all ( h , λ ) B × [ 0 , 1 ] ;
  • ϕ ( · , 0 ) : B ¯ R N is an odd mapping, i. e., ϕ ( h , 0 ) = ϕ ( h , 0 ) , for all h B ¯ .
Then the operator equation ϕ ( h , λ ) = 0 has at least one solution h λ B , for any λ [ 0 , 1 ] .
The proof of this statement is based on applying methods of Brouwer’s degree theory (for details, see [23], Section 5).

3. Dirichlet–Neumann Problem for the Corotational Oldroyd Model

Let us consider the Dirichlet–Neumann boundary value problem describing the steady-state flow of an incompressible Oldroyd fluid through the domain Ω :
R e div ( v v ) ( 1 r ) Δ v + π div E = f in Ω , · v = 0 in Ω , W e D 0 E D t + E ζ Δ E = 2 r D ( v ) in Ω , v = u on Γ , E n = O on Γ ,
where
  • u is a given vector-valued function;
  • O is a given matrix-valued function;
For the sake of simplicity of further discussion, we will assume that O ( x ) is equal to the zero matrix for all x Γ . Moreover, assume that the following two inclusions hold:
f [ H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) ] , u H n 1 / 2 ( Γ , R d ) .
Definition 1 
(Weak solution). A pair ( v , E ) is said to be a weak solution of boundary value problem (2) if
( v , E ) H σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) × H 1 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) , γ Γ v = u
and the equalities
R e i = 1 d Ω v i v · w x i d x + ( 1 r ) Ω v : w d x + Ω E : D ( w ) d x = f , w [ H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) ] × H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) ,
W e i = 1 d Ω v i E : F x i d x + W e Ω ( E W ( v ) W ( v ) E ) : F d x + Ω E : F d x + ζ Ω E F d x = 2 r Ω D ( v ) : F d x ,
hold for any w H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) and F H 1 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) .
Remark 1. 
If a triplet ( v , E , π ) is a classical solution of problem (2), then the pair ( v , E ) is a weak solution of this problem. On the other hand, having a weak solution in hand, we can obtain the pressure π by using the De Rham theory (see, for example, [24], Chapter I, Section 1).
Theorem 1 
(Solvability and energy estimates). Suppose that
0 r < 1 , ζ > 0 , u = 0 .
Then boundary value problem (2) has at least one weak solution ( v 0 , E 0 ) satisfying the following energy estimates:
v 0 H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) 1 1 r f [ H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) ] ,
2 r ( 1 r ) v 0 H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) 2 + E 0 L 2 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) 2 + ζ E 0 L 2 ( Ω , R d × d × d ) 2 2 r 1 r f [ H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) ] 2 .
Proof. 
Using the Galerkin scheme and Lemma 2, we perform the proof in five steps.
Step 1: Galerkin’s approximation. Consider two sequences { w j } j = 1 and { F j } j = 1 such that
  • { w j } j = 1 is an orthonormal basis in H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) ;
  • { F j } j = 1 is an orthonormal basis in H 1 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) .
Let us fix m N and consider the auxiliary finite-dimensional problem:
Find a pair v m , E m such that
λ R e i = 1 d Ω v m i v m · w j x i d x + ( 1 r ) Ω v m : w j d x + λ Ω E m : D ( w j ) d x = λ f , w j [ H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) ] × H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) , j = 1 , , m ,
λ W e i = 1 d Ω v m i E m : F j x i d x + λ W e Ω ( E m W ( v m ) W ( v m ) E m ) : F j d x + Ω E m : F j d x + ζ Ω E m F j d x = 2 λ r Ω D ( v m ) : F j d x , j = 1 , , m ,
v m = j = 1 m a m j w j , E m = j = 1 m b m j F j ,
where
  • a m 1 , , a m m , b m 1 , , b m m are unknown real numbers;
  • λ is the homotopy parameter, λ [ 0 , 1 ] .
Step 2: A priori estimates for Galerkin’s solutions. Suppose a pair ( v m , E m ) satisfies relations (7)–(9). We multiply (7) by a m j and sum up the corresponding equalities over j from 1 to m. Since
i = 1 d Ω v m i v m · v m x i d x = 1 2 i = 1 d Ω v m i | v m | 2 x i d x = 1 2 Γ ( v m · n ) | v m | 2 = 0 d x 1 2 Ω ( · v m ) = 0 | v m | 2 d x = 0 ,
we arrive at the equality
( 1 r ) v m H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) 2 + λ Ω E m : D ( v m ) d x = λ f , v m [ H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) ] × H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) .
Next, we multiply (8) by b m j and sum up the corresponding equalities over j from 1 to m. Taking into account the following relationships
i = 1 d Ω v m i E m : E m x i d x = 1 2 i = 1 d Ω v m i | E m | 2 x i d x = 1 2 Γ ( v m · n ) | E m | 2 = 0 d x 1 2 Ω ( · v m ) = 0 | E m | 2 d x = 0 ,
( E m W ( v m ) W ( v m ) E m ) : E m = 0 ,
we obtain
E m L 2 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) 2 + ζ E m L 2 ( Ω , R d × d × d ) 2 = 2 λ r Ω D ( v m ) : E m d x .
Let us multiply (10) by 2 r and sum with (11). This yields that
2 r ( 1 r ) v m H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) 2 + E m L 2 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) 2 + ζ E m L 2 ( Ω , R d × d × d ) 2 = 2 r λ f , v m [ H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) ] × H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) ,
whence
2 r ( 1 r ) v m H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) 2 + E m L 2 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) 2 + ζ E m L 2 ( Ω , R d × d × d ) 2 2 r f [ H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) ] v m H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) .
Multiplying both sides of the last inequality by 1 / ( 2 r ( 1 r ) v m H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) ) , we arrive at
v m H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) 1 1 r f [ H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) ] .
Finally, it follows from (12) and (13) that
2 r ( 1 r ) v m H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) 2 + E m L 2 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) 2 + ζ E m L 2 ( Ω , R d × d × d ) 2 2 r 1 r f [ H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) ] 2 .
Step 3: Solvability of the Galerkin approximation. Note that the right-hand side of estimate (14) is independent of λ and m. Applying Lemma 2, we establish the solvability of system (7)–(9) for any λ [ 0 , 1 ] and m N .
Step 4: Passage to the limit as m . Fix λ = 1 . Let { ( v m , E m ) } m = 1 be a sequence of solutions of system (7)–(9). It follows from (14) that the norms v m H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) and E m H 1 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) are majorized by a positive constant that does not depend on m. Hence, without loss of generality it can be assumed that
v m v 0 weakly in the space H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) as m ,
E m E 0 weakly in the space H 1 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) as m .
Since the following embeddings
H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) L 4 ( Ω , R d ) , H 1 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) L 4 ( Ω , M sym d × d )
are compact (see [22], Section 2.6), we see that
v m v 0 strongly in the space L 4 ( Ω , R d ) as m , E m E 0 strongly in the space L 4 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) as m .
Therefore, one can pass to the limit as m in equalities (7) and (8) with λ = 1 ; this gives
R e i = 1 d Ω v 0 i v 0 · w j x i d x + ( 1 r ) Ω v 0 : w j d x + Ω E 0 : D ( w j ) d x = f , w j [ H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) ] × H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) ,
W e i = 1 d Ω v 0 i E 0 : F j x i d x + W e Ω ( E 0 W ( v 0 ) W ( v 0 ) E 0 ) : F j d x + Ω E 0 : F j d x + ζ Ω E 0 F j d x = 2 r Ω D ( v 0 ) : F j d x ,
for any j N .
Since the system { w j } j = 1 is a basis in the subspace H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) and the system { F j } j = 1 is a basis in the space H 1 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) , relations (17) and (18) remain valid if w j and F j are replaced by arbitrary vector functions w H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) and F H 1 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) , respectively. Thus, the pair ( v 0 , E 0 ) is a weak solution to problem (2).
Step 5: Energy estimates. From (13)–(16) it follows that energy estimates (5) and (6) hold. This completes the proof of Theorem 1. □
Analyzing the above proof, one can arrive at the following proposition.
Proposition 1 
(Passage to the limit as ζ 0 ). If { ( v ζ k , E ζ k ) } k = 1 is a sequence such that ( v ζ k , E ζ k ) is a weak solution of problem (2) with ζ = ζ k > 0 , 0 r < 1 , and u = 0 . Suppose
v ζ k v w e a k l y   i n   H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) a s k , E ζ k E w e a k l y   i n   L 2 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) a s k , lim k ( E ζ k , D ( v ζ k ) ) L 2 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) = ( E , D ( v ) ) L 2 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) , lim k ζ k = 0 ;
then the pair ( v , E ) is a weak solution of the Dirichlet boundary value problem for the stationary corotational Oldroyd model without diffusive stress:
R e div ( v v ) ( 1 r ) Δ v + π div E = f in Ω , · v = 0 in Ω , W e D 0 E D t + E = 2 r D ( v ) in Ω , v = 0 on Γ .
Remark 2 
(Uniqueness and regularity). Chupin & Martin [2] showed that problem (2) with u = 0 admits at most one weak solution if one of the following conditions is satisfied:
  • the norm f [ H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) ] is small enough;
  • the numbers R e and W e are small enough.
Moreover, if the domain Ω is of class C and each component of the vector function f belongs to the space C ( Ω ¯ ) , then each component of any weak solution of (2) belongs to the space C ( Ω ¯ ) .
Remark 3. 
Lions & Masmoudi [25] showed the global-in-time existence of weak solutions to evolution system (1) with ζ = 0 in dimensions 2 and 3 for general initial conditions, but the global solvability in the class of smooth solutions is an open problem for this model. Recently, Ye [26] obtained some results related to global regularity of solutions of high-dimensional Oldroyd’s model (in the corotational case) with the fractional dissipation term ( Δ ) α v . Various theorems on the well-posedness of the Oldroyd model with slip boundary conditions are proved in [27,28,29]. The first problem of Stokes for an Oldroyd-B fluid is investigated in [30]. Analytical solutions corresponding to the starting flow of an Oldroyd-type fluid between rotating cylinders are given in [31]. The paper [32] is devoted to studying the flow of Oldroyd fluids with fractional derivatives over a plate that applies shear stress to the fluid. Semi-analytical solutions for rivulet flows of non-Newtonian fluids are obtained in [33,34].

4. Optimal Boundary Control Problem for the Corotational Oldroyd Model

4.1. Problem Formulation and the Main Result

Consider the following optimal boundary control problem
R e div ( v v ) ( 1 r ) Δ v + π div E = f in Ω , · v = 0 in Ω , W e D 0 E D t + E ζ Δ E = 2 r D ( v ) in Ω , v = u on Γ , E n = O on Γ , ( v , u ) V ad × U ad , J ( v , E , u ) min .
where
  • u is the control function;
  • U ad is the admissible controls set;
  • V ad is the admissible states set;
  • J is the cost functional.
For simplicity, we will assume that
V ad = V ad ( R ) = def { v H σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) : v H σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) R } ,
where R is a positive constant.
Further, assume that J is a real-valued function defined on the Cartesian product H σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) × H 1 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) × L n 2 ( Γ , R d ) .
For K R + , let
N K = def { ( v , E , u ) H σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) × H 1 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) × L n 2 ( Γ , R d ) : | J ( v , E , u ) | K } .
Definition 2 
(Admissible weak solution). We shall say that a triplet ( v , E , u ) is an admissible weak solution of problem (19) if
  • ( v , E , u ) H σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) × H 1 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) × L n 2 ( Γ , R d ) ;
  • relations (3) and (4) hold for any w H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) and F H 1 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) ;
  • γ Γ v = u ;
  • ( v , u ) V ad ( R ) × U ad .
Denote the set of all admissible weak solutions of problem (19) by M ad .
Definition 3 
(Optimal weak solution). A triplet ( v , E , u ) is said to be an optimal weak solution of problem (19) if
  • ( v , E , u ) M ad ;
  • J ( v , E , u ) = inf ( v , E , u ) M ad J ( v , E , u ) .
Theorem 2 
(Main result). Suppose that
0 r < 1 , ζ > 0 , R 1 1 r f [ H 0 , σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) ]
and the following five conditions hold:
(i)
the cost functional J is bounded from below on its domain, that is, there exists a constant J min such that
J min J ( v , E , u )
for any ( v , E , u ) H σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) × H 1 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) × L n 2 ( Γ , R d ) ;
(ii)
the set N K is bounded in the Cartesian product H σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) × H 1 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) × L n 2 ( Γ , R d ) , for each positive number K ;
(iii)
for any sequence { ( v s , E s , u s ) } s = 1 such that
v s v weakly in H σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) as s , E s E weakly in H 1 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) as s , u s u strongly in L n 2 ( Γ , R d ) as s ,
we have
J ( v , E , u ) lim inf s J ( v s , E s , u s ) ;
(iv)
the admissible controls set U ad is closed in the subspace L n 2 ( Γ , R d ) ;
(v)
the inclusion 0 U ad holds.
Then problem(19)has at least one optimal weak solution.
Example 1. 
Consider the cost functional J : H σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) × H 1 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) × L n 2 ( Γ , R d ) R defined as follows:
J ( v , E , u ) = def θ 1 v v # H σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) 2 + θ 2 E E # H 1 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) 2 + θ 3 u u # L n 2 ( Γ , R d ) 2 ,
where
  • θ 1 , θ 2 , θ 3 are given positive constants (weight coefficients) such that 0 < θ i < 1 , i = 1 , 2 , 3 , and θ 1 + θ 2 + θ 3 = 1 ;
  • v # , E # , u # are given mappings characterizing the desired velocity field in Ω, the desired elastic extra-stress in Ω and the desired inflow-outflow regime on Γ, respectively.
Clearly, the functional J satisfies conditions (i)–(iii).
Remark 4. 
Another approach to the statement of boundary control problems for flow models is based on the use of boundary conditions for the dynamic pressure at permeable parts of the boundary of a flow region [35,36,37].

4.2. Proof of the Main Result

The proof of Theorem 2 will be performed in three steps.
Step 1: Existence of admissible weak solutions. First we show that the set M ad is not empty. Consider a triplet ( v 0 , E 0 , 0 ) , where the pair ( v 0 , E 0 ) is a weak solution of problem (2) with the zero boundary data for the velocity field and the vector function v 0 satisfies estimate (5) (see Theorem 1). Taking into account the third inequality from (20) and condition (v), we deduce that
( v 0 , E 0 , 0 ) M ad ,
and hence M ad .
Step 2: Minimizing sequence. Let { ( v , E , u ) } = 1 M ad be a sequence such that
lim J ( v , E , u ) = inf ( v , E , u ) M ad J ( v , E , u ) .
From condition (i) it follows that the sequence { J ( v , E , u ) } = 1 is bounded. Using condition (ii), we deduce that the sequence { ( v m , E m , u m ) } m = 1 is bounded in the Cartesian product H σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) × H 1 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) × L n 2 ( Γ , R d ) . Hence, there exist a triplet ( v , E , u ) and a subsequence { s } s = 1 such that
v s v weakly in H σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) as s ,
E s E weakly in H 1 ( Ω , M sym d × d ) as s , u s u weakly in L n 2 ( Γ , R d ) as s .
Moreover, since the trace operator γ Γ : H σ 1 ( Ω , R d ) L n 2 ( Γ , R d ) is compact (see Lemma 1) and γ Γ v s = u s , we have
u s u strongly in L n 2 ( Γ , R d ) as s .
Step 3: Existence of optimal weak solutions. Now we shall show that the triplet ( v , E , u ) is an optimal weak solution to problem (19).
From condition (iv), { u s } s = 1 U ad , and the strong convergence (24) it follows that u U ad . Note also that v V ad ( R ) . Moreover, it is not difficult to prove that the pair ( v , E ) is a weak solution to problem (2) with u = u . This implies that
( v , E , u ) M ad .
Taking into account condition (iii) and (21)–(25), we derive
J ( v , E , u ) lim inf s J ( v s , E s , u s ) = inf ( v , E , u ) M ad J ( v , E , u ) J ( v , E , u ) ,
whence
J ( v , E , u ) = inf ( v , E , u ) M ad J ( v , E , u ) .
From (25) and (26) it follows that the triplet ( v , E , u ) is an optimal weak solution of problem (19). Thus, Theorem 2 is proved.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, E.S.B.; methodology, E.S.B.; writing—original draft preparation, E.S.B.; writing—review and editing, M.A.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Oldroyd, J.G. Non–Newtonian effects in steady motion of some idealized elastico-viscous liquids. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A 1958, 245, 278–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Chupin, L.; Martin, S. Stationary Oldroyd model with diffusive stress: Mathematical analysis of the model and vanishing diffusion process. J. Non–Newton. Fluid Mech. 2015, 218, 27–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Saut, J.-C. Lectures on the mathematical theory of viscoelastic fluids. In Lectures on the Analysis of Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations. Part 3; Lin, F., Zhang, P., Eds.; International Press: Somerville, MA, USA, 2013; pp. 325–393. [Google Scholar]
  4. Renardy, M.; Thomases, B. A mathematician’s perspective on the Oldroyd B model: Progress and future challenges. J. Non–Newton. Fluid Mech. 2021, 293, 104573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Artemov, M.A. Optimal boundary control for the incompressible viscoelastic fluid system. ARPN J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 2016, 11, 2923–2927. [Google Scholar]
  6. Doubova, A.; Fernandez-Cara, E. On the control of viscoelastic Jeffreys fluids. Systems Control Lett. 2012, 21, 573–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Artemov, M.A. On the unique solvability of the optimal starting control problem for the linearized equations of motion of a viscoelastic medium. Diff. Equ. 2021, 57, 1070–1075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Abergel, F.; Temam, R. On some control problems in fluid mechanics. Theor. Comput. Fluid Dyn. 1990, 1, 303–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Fursikov, A.V.; Imanuvilov, O.Y. Exact controllability of the Navier–Stokes and Boussinesq equations. Russ. Math. Surv. 1999, 54, 565–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Fursikov, A.V. Optimal Control of Distributed Systems. Theory and Applications; AMS: Providence, RI, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  11. Glass, O. Exact boundary controllability of 3-D Euler equation. ESAIM Control Optim. Calc. Var. 2000, 5, 1–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Fursikov, A.V. Flow of a viscous incompressible fluid around a body: Boundary-value problems and minimization of the work of a fluid. J. Math. Sci. 2012, 180, 763–816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Glass, O. Some questions of control in fluid mechanics. In Control of Partial Differential Equations; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; pp. 131–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Hou, L.S.; Meir, A.J. Boundary optimal control of MHD flows. Appl. Math. Optim. 1995, 32, 143–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Alekseev, G.V. Solvability of control problems for stationary equations of magnetohydrodynamics of a viscous fluid. Sib. Math. J. 2004, 45, 197–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Alekseev, G.V.; Brizitskii, R.V. Control problems for the stationary MHD equations under mixed boundary conditions. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2019, 1268, 012005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Mallea-Zepeda, E.; Ortega-Torres, E. Control problem for a magneto-micropolar flow with mixed boundary conditions for the velocity field. J. Dyn. Control Syst. 2019, 25, 599–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Alekseev, G.V.; Brizitskii, R.V. Boundary control problems for the stationary magnetic hydrodynamic equations in the domain with non-ideal boundary. J. Dyn. Control Syst. 2020, 26, 641–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Adams, R.A.; Fournier, J.J.F. Sobolev Spaces, Vol. 40 of Pure and Applied Mathematics; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  20. Boyer, F.; Fabrie, P. Mathematical Tools for the Study of the Incompressible Navier–Stokes Equations and Related Models; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Castillo, R.E.; Rafeiro, H. An Introductory Course in Lebesgue Spaces; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Nečas, J. Direct Methods in the Theory of Elliptic Equations; Springer: Heidelberg, Germany, 2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Baranovskii, E.S.; Domnich, A.A. Model of a nonuniformly heated viscous flow through a bounded domain. Differ. Equ. 2020, 56, 304–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Temam, R. Navier–Stokes Equations. Theory and Numerical Analysis; North-Holland Publishing Company: Amsterdam, The Netherlands; New York, NY, USA; Oxford, UK, 1977. [Google Scholar]
  25. Lions, P.-L.; Masmoudi, N. Global solutions for some Oldroyd models of non-Newtonian flows. Chinese Ann. Math. Ser. B 2000, 21, 131–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Ye, Z. Global regularity of the high-dimensional Oldroyd-B model in the corotational case. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2020, 486, 123867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Roux, C. On flows of viscoelastic fluids of Oldroyd type with wall slip. J. Math. Fluid Mech. 2014, 16, 335–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Baranovskii, E.S.; Artemov, M.A. Global existence results for Oldroyd fluids with wall slip. Acta Appl. Math. 2017, 147, 197–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Baranovskii, E.S. Steady flows of an Oldroyd fluid with threshold slip. Commun. Pure Appl. Anal. 2019, 18, 735–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Fetecau, C.; Fetecau, C. The first problem of Stokes for an Oldroyd-B fluid. Int. J. Non-Linear Mech. 2003, 38, 1539–1544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Fetecau, C. Starting flows of an Oldroyd-B fluid between rotating co-axial cylinders. Proc. Rom. Acad. Ser. A 2005, 6, 3–10. [Google Scholar]
  32. Zafar, A.A.; Fetecau, C.; Mirza, I.A. On the flow of Oldroyd-B fluids with fractional derivatives over a plate that applies shear stress to the fluid. Math. Reports 2016, 18, 85–108. [Google Scholar]
  33. Ershkov, S.V.; Leshchenko, D. Note on semi-analytical nonstationary solution for the rivulet flows of non-Newtonian fluids. Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 2022, 45, 7394–7403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Ershkov, S.V.; Prosviryakov, E.Y.; Leshchenko, D. Marangoni-type of nonstationary rivulet-flows on inclined surface. Int. J. Non-Linear Mech. 2022, 147, 104250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Brizitskii, R.V. Study of a class of control problems for the stationary Navier–Stokes equations with mixed boundary conditions. J. Appl. Ind. Math. 2010, 4, 309–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Baranovskii, E.S. Optimal boundary control of nonlinear-viscous fluid flows. Sb. Math. 2020, 211, 505–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Baranovskii, E.S. Feedback optimal control problem for a network model of viscous fluid flows. Math. Notes 2022, 112, 26–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Baranovskii, E.S.; Artemov, M.A. Optimal Dirichlet Boundary Control for the Corotational Oldroyd Model. Mathematics 2023, 11, 2719. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11122719

AMA Style

Baranovskii ES, Artemov MA. Optimal Dirichlet Boundary Control for the Corotational Oldroyd Model. Mathematics. 2023; 11(12):2719. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11122719

Chicago/Turabian Style

Baranovskii, Evgenii S., and Mikhail A. Artemov. 2023. "Optimal Dirichlet Boundary Control for the Corotational Oldroyd Model" Mathematics 11, no. 12: 2719. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11122719

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop