Mathematics and Computers in Simulation 76 (2007) 8–12

The qualitative properties of the Stokes and Navier–Stokes system

for the mixed problem in a nonsmooth domain
Michal Beneš ∗
Department of Mathematics, Czech Technical University in Prague, Thákurova 7, 166 29 Prague 6, Czech Republic
Available online 13 February 2007

Abstract
We consider the mixed boundary value problem for the Stokes and steady Navier–Stokes equations in two-dimensional domain
with corner points on boundary, where the boundary conditions change their type. Our goal is to prove some regularity results near
corner points, where the boundary conditions change.
© 2007 IMACS. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

PACS: 02.30.Jr; 02.30.Sa; 02.60.Lj

Keywords: Navier–Stokes equations; Mixed boundary conditions; Regularity

1. The Stokes system

Let Ω be a two-dimensional Lipschitz domain. We suppose that Ω ⊂ R2 , Ω is a bounded domain, ∂Ω ⊂ C0,1 is

the boundary with corner points O1 , respectively, O2 , where the boundary conditions change their type. Further, we
suppose that ∂Ω = Γ 1 ∪ Γ 2 , Γ 1 and Γ 2 are closed, meas Γ 1 ∩ Γ 2 = 0 and meas Γ 1 > 0. We consider mixed boundary
value problem for the Stokes system
−u + ∇p = f, in Ω, (1)
∇.u = 0, in Ω, (2)
u = 0, on Γ1 , (3)
−p · n + (∇u + (∇u)T ) · n = 0 on Γ2 , (4)
where u denotes the velocity and p is the pressure. We consider the weak solution (u,p) ∈ [W1,2 (Ω)]2 × L2 (Ω). We will
investigate the regularity of the plane problem for the Stokes system (1) and (2) with Dirichlet, Neumann and mixed
boundary conditions. Applying (2) to (1) we get the Poisson equation
p = ∇ · f, (5)
where the right-hand side belongs to W−1,2 (Ω). Multiply Eq. (5) by the “cut-off function” η, the behavior of p1 = pη
near O1 , respectively, O2 , characterizes the regularity of p in a neighborhood of the corner point O1 , respectively, O2 .

∗ Tel.: +420 22435 4442; fax: +420 233 332 732.

E-mail address: benes@mat.fsv.cvut.cz.

0378-4754/$32.00 © 2007 IMACS. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.matcom.2007.02.004
 M. Beneš / Mathematics and Computers in Simulation 76 (2007) 8–12 9

Using polar coordinates (r, ω) and the substitution r = eτ and applying the complex Fourier transform with respect to
τ, we get

∂2 (p̂ τ
1e )
− 
− (iλ − 1)2 (p̂ τ
1 e ) = H̃1 (λ, ω) in G = (0, ω0 ), (6)
∂ω 2


where (p̂ τ τ
1 e ) = F (p̂1 e ). We can write the general solution of (6) in the form


(p̂ τ
1 e )(λ, ω) = 4c1 cos(iλ − 1)ω + 4c2 sin(iλ − 1)ω + Ip (λ, ω), (7)
where Ip (λ, ω) is particular solution with respect to the right-hand side H̃1 (λ, ω). We reduce our problem – using
known localization principle – to a boundary value problem in a special domain, namely in the infinite angle K. In the
same way as for Eq. (5), we rewrite the Stokes system (1) and (2)

∂2 (û
1,1 ) 
∂(p̂ τ
1e )
− − (iλ)2 (û 
1,1 ) + (iλ − 1) cos ω(p̂
τ
1e )− sinω = F̃1 , (8)
∂ω 2 ∂ω
∂2 (û
2,1 ) 
∂(p̂ τ
1e )
− − (iλ)2 (û 
2,1 ) + (iλ − 1) sinω(p̂
τ
1e )+ cosω = F̃2 , (9)
∂ω 2 ∂ω
∂(û
1,1 ) ∂(û
2,1 )
(iλ)(û
1,1 ) cos ω − sin ω + (iλ)(û
2,1 ) sinω + cosω = 0, (10)
∂ω ∂ω
where F̃1 (λ, ω) = F (F̂1 ), F̃2 (λ, ω) = F (F̂2 ), F̂1 = f̂1,1 e2τ , F̂2 = f̂2,1 e2τ . The general solution of (8) and (9) has the
form
u
1,1 (λ, ω) = c3 cos(iλω) + c4 sin(iλω) + c1 cos(iλ − 2)ω + c2 sin(iλ − 2)ω + I1 (λ, ω), (11)
u
2,1 (λ, ω) = c5 cos(iλω) + c6 sin(iλω) − c1 sin(iλ − 2)ω + c2 cos(iλ − 2)ω + I2 (λ, ω). (12)
Now we transform the “Dirichlet–Dirichlet” boundary conditions to the forms
u 
1,1 (λ, 0) = u 
2,1 (λ, 0) = u 
1,1 (λ, ω0 ) = u2,1 (λ, ω0 ) = 0 (13)
and denote by LλDD the operator of problem (8)–(10) with boundary conditions (13), respectively, the
“Neumann–Neumann” boundary conditions to the forms
∂u
1,1 ∂u
2,1  τ
= − p̂1 e = 0, ω = 0, (14)
∂ω ∂ω
∂u
1,1  τ
∂u
2,1  τ
+ sinω0 (p̂ 1e )= − cosω0 (p̂ 1 e ) = 0, ω = ω0 , (15)
∂ω ∂ω
and denote by LλNN the operator of problem (8)–(10) with boundary conditions (14) and (15), respectively, the mixed
“Dirichlet–Neumann” boundary conditions to the forms
u 
1,1 = u2,1 = 0, ω = 0, (16)
∂u
1,1  τ
∂u
2,1  τ
+ sinω0 (p̂ 1e )= − cosω0 (p̂ 1 e ) = 0, ω = ω0 , (17)
∂ω ∂ω
and denote by LλDN the operator of problem (8)–(10) with boundary conditions (16) and (17).
If λ is no eigenvalue of Lλ[··] , then for any right-hand side from L2 (G) there exists a uniquely determined solution
2
(ũ1 , p̃1 ) ∈ [W 2,2 (G)] × W 1,2 (G). The eigenvalues of Lλ[··] are the zeros of determinants D[··] (λ) of corresponding
matrixes of coefficients c1 , c2 , c3 , c4 , c5 and c6 (substituting the general solution to the corresponding boundary
conditions and the continuity equation we get three linear systems of six equations) given by
DDD (λ) = DNN (λ) = (iλ)2 sin2 [ω0 ] − sin2 [(iλ)ω0 ] = 0, λ = 0, (18)
DDN (λ) = (iλ)2 sin2 [ω0 ] − cos2 [(iλ)ω0 ] = 0. (19)
10 M. Beneš / Mathematics and Computers in Simulation 76 (2007) 8–12

Let (u,p) ∈ [W1,2 (Ω)]2 × L2 (Ω) be the corresponding uniquely determined weak solution. From theory of V.A.
2
Kondra’tev (see [1]), it follows that (u, p) ∈ [V 2,2 (Ω, 1 + δ)] × V 1,2 (Ω, 1 + δ) for a small positive real number δ.
2
In order to get more qualitative regularity results, we will investigate the weak solution (u, p) ∈ [V 2,2 (Ω, 1 + δ)] ×
V 1,2 (Ω, 1 + δ) using the theory developed in [3]. Since fi,1 ∈ V 0,2 (K, β) for β ≥ 0, we get
 
|x|2β |fi,1 (x)|2 dx = e2(τ+τβ) |f̂i,1 (τ, ω)|2 dτ dω < ∞, for all β ≥ 0.
K S

Furthermore, we have
 ∞  ∞  ∞
2
e2(τ+τβ) |f̂i,1 (τ, ω)|2 dτ = (e2τ |f̂i,1 (τ, ω)|) e2τh dτ = |F̂i (τ, ω)|2 e2τh dτ < ∞,
−∞ −∞ −∞

i = 1,2, h = β − 1, β ≥ 0. Hence, it follows that the Fourier transform of F̂i (τ, ω) is meaningful in the half-plane
h = Im λ ≥ −1 for almost ω ∈ (0, ω0 ). Following regularity result holds for our case: if no eigenvalues of Lλ lie
on the line Im λ = h = β − 1, β ≥ 0, then the inverse Fourier transform
 ∞+ih
1 iλτ
ûi,1,h (τ, ω) = √ ui,1 (λ, ω) e dλ = ui,1,h (x) ∈ V 2,2 (K, β), (20)
2π −∞+ih
i = 1,2, exists, where ûi,1,h (x) is uniquely determined solution of the corresponding problem in the infinite angle from
V 2,2 (K, β). Analogously, we get for the pressure p̂1 ∈ V 1,2 (K, β), where β = h + 1.

Corollary 1.2.1. For the “Dirichlet–Dirichlet” and “Neumann–Neumann” boundary conditions is for our main
problem the case ω0 = π. It follows from (18), that for ω0 = π no eigenvalue of LλDD and LλNN lie on the
2
line h = Im λ = s for s > −1, therefore (û1 , p̂1 ) ∈ [V 2,2 (K, β)] × V 1,2 (K, β), β is small positive number. It follows,
2
that (u, p) ∈ [V 2,2 (Ω, β)] × V 1,2 (Ω, β). For a bounded domain Ω we have the continuous imbedding (see [3])
Finally, we get the weak solution
2
(u, p) ∈ [W 2−β,2 (Ω)] × W 1−β,2 (Ω), β is small positive number. (21)

Analogously, for the “Dirichlet–Neumann” (mixed) boundary conditions we get:

Corollary 1.2.2. If no eigenvalues of LλND lie on the line Im λ = h = δ − 1, then

2
(u, p) ∈ [W 2−δ,2 (Ω)] × W 1−δ,2 (Ω), where δ = δ(ω0 ). (22)

It follows from (19), that for arbitrary ω0 ∈ (0, 2π), no eigenvalues of LλDN lie on the line Im λ = h = δ − 1, where
h ≥ −1/4, so we get the regularity result
2
(u, p) ∈ [W 5/4,2 (Ω)] × W 1/4,2 (Ω).

In special cases for ω0 = π, respectively, ω0 = π/2, we get

2 1
(u, p) ∈ [W 2−δ,2 (Ω)] × W 1−δ,2 (Ω), where δ > ,
2
respectively,
2
(u, p) ∈ [W 2−δ,2 (Ω)] × W 1−δ,2 (Ω), for arbitrary small positive δ.
 M. Beneš / Mathematics and Computers in Simulation 76 (2007) 8–12 11

2. The steady Navier–Stokes system

We solve the steady Navier–Stokes equation

−u + u∇u + ∇p = f in Ω, (23)
with continuity Eq. (2) and mixed boundary conditions (3) and (4). Denote
E(Ω) = {u ∈ [C∞ (Ω)]2 ; div u ≡ 0, supp u ∩ Γ2 ≡ 0}.
Denote further by V and H, respectively, the closures of E(Ω) in the norm [W1,2 (Ω)]2 and [L2 (Ω)]2 . We remark
that H, respectively, V are the Hilbert spaces with scalar products

(u, v) = (u, v)H = u · v dx,
Ω
respectively,

∂ui ∂ui
((u, v)) = (u, v)V = · dx.
Ω ∂xj ∂xj
Let u, v, w ∈ V, we define a trilinear continuous form b by setting

∂ui
b(u, v, w) = uj · · wi dx.
Ω ∂xj
Finally, denote D = {u; there exists f ∈ H such that ((u, v)) = (f, v) for every v ∈ V}.
Remark, that D → → L∞ (Ω), D → → V and V → → H. It follows from Corollary 1.2.1 and Corollary 1.2.2.
Theorem 2.1. Let f ∈ H, fH is “small enough”, then there exists a uniquely determined u ∈ D, such that
((u, v)) + b(u, u, v) = (f, v), for all v ∈ V.

SKETCH OF THE PROOF: Let g ∈ H. Then there exists uniquely determined w ∈ D, such that
((w, v)) = (g, v), for all v ∈ V.
Let u be a fixed point in D. Denote the operator Bu : D → H, given by the equation
(Bu (w), v) = b(u, w, v) + b(w, u, v) = ((u∇)w, v) + ((w∇)u, v), for all v ∈ V.

Lemma 2.1. Let u ∈ D. Then Bu is compact operator from D to H.

The operator Nu : D → H is given by the equation

(N(u), v) = ((u, v)) + b(u, u, v), for all v ∈ V.

Lemma 2.2. Let u ∈ D. The operator Gu , given by the equation

(Gu (w), v) = ((w, v)) + b(u, w, v) + b(w, u, v), for all v ∈ V,
is the Frechet derivative of N at the point u and G ∈ C1 (D).

Now we define the operator S : D → H, given by the equation

(S(w), v) = ((w, v)), for all v ∈ V.
We remark, that S is one-to-one from D to H.

Lemma 2.3. Let u0 ≡ 0. Then (using the Local Diffeomorphism Theorem, see [2]) we get: Gu0 = S is a one-to-one
operator from D to H.

The proof of Theorem 2.1 follows from lemmas listed above.

12 M. Beneš / Mathematics and Computers in Simulation 76 (2007) 8–12

Acknowledgement

The research was supported by the grant CTU0600111 of the Czech Technical University.

References

[1] V.-A. Kondra’tev, Boundary value problems for elliptic equations on domains with conical or angular points, Trudy Moskov. Mat. Obshch. 16
(1967) (in Russian).
[2] P. Kučera, Some properties of solutions to the nonsteady Navier–Stokes equations with mixed boundary conditions on an infinite time interval,
In: M. Feistauer, R. Rannacher, K. Kozel, (eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd Summer Conference on Numerical Modelling in Continuum Mechanics.
Part 2. Matfyzpress, Publishing House of the Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Prague, 1997, pp. 375–383.
[3] A. Kufner, A.-M. Sändig, Some Applications of Weighted Sobolev Spaces, Teubner-Texte zur Mathematik, Band 100, Leipzig, 1987.