CC BY
3
ISSN 2304-0122 Ufa Mathematical Journal. Vol. 15. No 2 (2023). P. 100-118.
doi: 10.13108/2023-15-2-100
ANALYSIS OF A THERMO-ELASTO-VISCOPLASTIC CONTACT PROBLEM WITH WEAR AND DAMAGE
A. CHOUIA, A. AZEB AHMED AND F. YAZID
Abstract. This paper presents a quasistatic problem of a thermo-elaso-visco-plastic body in frictional contact with a moving foundation. The contact is modelled with the normal compliance condition and the associated law of dry friction. The model takes into account wear of the contact surface of the body caused by the friction and which is described by the Archard law. The mechanical damage of the material, caused by excessive stress or strain, is described by the damage function, the evolution of which is determined by a parabolic inclusion. We list the assumptions on the data and derive a variational formulation of the mechanical problem. Existence and uniqueness of the weak solution for the problem is proved using the theory of evolutionary variational inequalities, parabolic variational inequalities, first order evolution equation and Banach fixed point.
Keywords: Thermo-elasto-viscoplastic material, damage, wear, frictional contact, existence and uniqueness, fixed point arguments, weak solution.
Mathematics Subject Classification: 74H20, 74H25, 74M15, 74F05, 74R20, 49J40.
1. Introduction
Thermo-mechanical contact problems are of essential importance in analysis and design of structural elements interacting through localized or distributed contact forces and undergoing monotonic or oscillatory relative slip or sliding motion. The elevated temperature regimes are then generated either by environmental conditions or by frictional dissipation at the contact interface. The frictional sliding motion usually generates progressive wear coupled with such effects as localized plastic deformation, damage growth, oxidation and phase transformation, wear debris, etc. in the contact layer. The wear is defined as the material loss or change in surface texture occurring when two surfaces of mechanical components contact each other. As the contact process evolves, the contacting surfaces evolve too, via their wear. There exists a large engineering and mathematical literature devoted to this topic. The wear phenomenon subjects of numerous experimental and theoretical studies. We mention here the references [1], [3], [17], [18], [26], [27], [28], [30], [33], [42]. Numerical methods for wear problems with application to implanted knee joints were developed in [27]. An original analytical approach to wear was performed in [11]. General models for frictional contact with wear can be found in [33, 42] as well as in survey [41]. The mathematical analysis of various models of frictional contact with wear, including existence and uniqueness results of the weak solution, was carried out in [20], [21], [23], [25], [29]. Thermo-mechanic contact problems with the evolution of the temperature parameter with wear were treated in [5, 12, 13, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40]. The damage subject is extremely important in design engineering, since it directly affects the useful life of
A. Chouia, A. Azeb Ahmed and F. Yazid, Analysis of a thermo-elasto-viscoplastic contact
problem with wear and damage.
© A. Chouia, A. Azeb Ahmed and F. Yazid 2023.
The reported study by A. Chouia, A. Azeb Ahmed and F. Yazid was supported by the General Direction of Scientific Research and Technological Development (DGRSDT), Algeria.
Submitted April 16, 2022.
the designed structure or component. There exists a very large engineering literature on it. Models taking into account the influence of the internal damage of the material on the contact process were investigated mathematically. General novel models for damage were derived in [8], [10] from the virtual power principle. Mathematical analysis of one-dimensional damage models can be found in [7], [9]. The three-dimensional case has been investigated in [4], [17]. The damage function ( is restricted to have values between zero and one. As ( = 1, there is no damage in the material, for ( = 0 the material is completely damaged, while in the case 0 < ( < 1 there is a partial damage and the system has a reduced load carrying capacity, Quasistatic contact problems with damage were investigated in [7, 14, 16, 24],
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we introduce the notation and mention some preliminary material. In Section 3 we describe the frictional contact problem, state the assumptions on the data and derive its variational formulation. Finally, in Section 4 we establish the existence of a weak solution to the model.
2. Notation and preliminaries
As it has been already mentioned in the previous section, we start by introducing the notation together with some preliminary results. For further details we refer to [6], [16], [22], Throughout the paper d G {1,2, 3} and Sd represents the space of second order svmmetrie tensors on Rd or, equivalentlv, the space of symmetric matrices of order d. The zero element of the spaces Rd and Sd will be denoted by 0. The inner product and norm on Rd and Sd are defined by
u ■ v = ulVl, ||v|| = (v ■ v)1/2 Vu = (Ui), v = (Vi) G Rd,
* ■ T = ayTtJ, ||r|| = (r ■ r)1/2 Va = ), r = fo) G
where the subscripts i, j range between 1 and d and, unless stated otherwise, the summation convention over repeated indices is adopted.
The symbol Q denotes a bounded do main of Rd with a Lipschitz continuous boundary r and rb r2, r3 represents a partition of r into three measurable parts such that meas(r1) > 0, We use x = (xi) for a generic point in Q U T, An index that follows a comma represents the partial derivative with respect to the corresponding component of the spatial variable x G Q U r, for instance, fti = df/dxi.
We use standard notation for Sobolev and Lebesgue spaces associated to Q and T, In particular, we use the spaces L2(Q)d, L2(r2)d, L2(r3)^d H 1(Q)d, endowed with their canonical inner products and associated norms. Moreover, we recall that for an element v G H 1(Q)d we sometimes write v for the trace 'jv G L2(r)d of v to r. In addition, we consider the following spaces:
H = L2(Q)d = {u = (Ul) : ut G L2(Q)}, Q = {^ = (^) : al3 = a3l G L2(Q)}, H1 = {u = (Ui) : e(u) G Q}, Q1 = {^ G Q/Div a G H},
where e : H1 ^ Q is the deformation operator defined by
e(u) = (eij(u)), £ij(u) = *2(uiti + ui,i), 1 ^ i,j ^ d, Vu G H1. (2.1) By Div : Q1 ^ H we denote the divergence operator given by the formulae
Div<j = (Diva)i = (&ij,j), 1 ^ i,j ^ d, Va G Q-]_. (2.2)
The spaces H, Q, ff^d Q1 are real Hilbert spaces endowed with the canonical inner products
(u, v)H = UiVidx Vu, v G H,
(a, t)Q = J &ijTijdx Va, r G Q, n
(u, v)Hl = (u, v)H + (e(u), e(v))Q Vu, v G Hu
(a, t)Ql = (a, t)Q + (Div a, Div t)H Va, r G Q\.
The associated norms on these spaces are denoted by || ■ ||#, || ■ ||q, || ■ Hh1 and || ■ Hq15 respectively. Let V the closed subspace of H 1(Q)d defined by
V = {v G H : v = 0 onrj,
endowed with the inner product
(u, v)v = (e(u), e(v))Q Vu, v G V, (2.3)
and let || ■ ||y be the associated norm:
||v|v = ||^(v)||q Vu G V. (2.4)
Since meas(r1) > 0, Korn's inequality holds and there exists a constant Ck > 0, that depends only on Q and such that
||e(v)|k ^ ck||v||HW Vv G V.
A proof of Korn's inequality may be found in ([19],p.79). It follows that || ■ Urn(n)^d || ■ ||v are equivalent norms on V and therefore (V, || ■ ||y) is a real Hilbert space. Moreover, by the Sobolev trace Theorem, there exists a constant c0 > 0 which depends on Q, r^d r3 such that
||v||LW ^ ^011 v11 y Vv G V. (2.5)
Next, we introduce the closed subspace E of H 1(Q) defined by
E = V G H 1(Q) : u = 0 on r U r2},
endowed with the canonical inner product of H 1(Q). Moreover, by the Sobolev trace Theorem, there exists a constant c1 > 0 which depends on Q, r^d r3 such that
||u||L2(r3) ^ cMe VU G E. (2.6)
The following Friedrichs-Poincare inequality holds on E:
^ cF|M|E Vu G E. (2.7)
The space L2(Q) is identified with its dual and with a subspace of the dual E 'of E, that is, E C L2(Q) C E', and we say that the inclusions above define a Gelfand triple. The notation (■, ■,)e',e represents the duality pairing between E^d E.
For any element v G V we denote by vv and vr its normal and tangential components on the boundary r given by
Vv = v ■ V, vT = v — Vv V.
In a similar manner, we recall that the normal and tangential components of the stress field <r on the boundary r are defined by
av = (av) ■ v, <jT = <jv — avv.
Finally, it is well known that if a is a regular function, then the following Green formula holds:
J a ■ e(v) dx + J Div a ■ v dx = J av ■ v da Vv G V. (2.8)
n n r
Let T > 0. For every real Banaeh space X we use the classical notation for the spaces C(0,T; X) and C 1(0, T; X) for the space of continuous and continuously diiferentiable functions from [0, T] to X, respectively, with the norm
||f||c(o,t;X) = m* ||f(t)h, ||f|c1(0,T;X) = m^fWH* + H^H*),
respectively. Moreover, we use the dot above to indicate the derivative with respect to the time variable.
Finally, for k G N and p G [1, ro], we use the standard notation for the Lebesgue spaces and for the Sobolev spaces Lp(0,T; X) Mid Wk,p(0,T; X), 1 ^ p ^ ro, 1 ^ k. Moreover, if X1 and X2 are real Hilbert spaces then X1 x X2 denotes the product Hilbert space endowed with the canonical inner product (■, ■ )xlXx2.
3. Mechanical and variational formulations
Let Q C Rd (d =2, 3) be a domain occupied by a thermo-viseoelastie-viseoplastie body with a Lipsehitz boundary r which is partitioned into three disjoint measurable parts r1, r^d r3, the measure of ^ is strictly positive and, in addition, r3 is a plane. Bv [0,T], T > 0, we denote the time interval of an interest. We admit an external heat source gih applied in Q x (0, T). The body is clamped on r1 x (0,T), so the displacement field vanishes there. A surface traction of density f2 act on r2 x (0,T), and a body force of densitv f0 is applied in Q x (0,T). The body is in frietional contact on r3 with a moving obstacle, the so-called foundation. In this paper we assume that the material behavior follows a thermo-viseoelastie-viseoplastie constitutive law with damage given by
t
a(t) = Ae(\i(t)) + Be(u(i)) - M(0(t)) + J Q(a(s), e(u(s)),((s))ds, (3.1)
0
e(t) - div(£V0(t)) = -M ■ vu(t) + qth(t), (3.2)
where, hereinafter <r denotes the stress tensor, u ^te displacement field, u is the
velocity, e(u) is the linearized strain tensor, B is the temperature field, M represents the thermal expansion tensor, ^d B are nonlinear operators describing the purely viscous and the elastic properties of the material, respectively, and Q is a nonlinear constitutive function which describes the viseoplastie behavior of the material, where ( is an internal variable describing the damage of the material caused by viseoplastie deformations.
The evolution of the temperature field 9 is governed by a heat equation obtained from the conservation of energy and defined by (3.2), where K = (k^) represents the thermal conductivity tensor, div(^V^) = (k^dti) and qth represents the density of volume heat sources.
The inclusion used for the evolution of the damage field is
c - AC + dVK«) 9 ^(a,s(u),e,(),
where K denotes the set of admissible damage functions defined as
K = {tf G H1 (Q) : 0 ^ •& ^ 1 a.e. in Q},
difK denotes the subdifferential of the indicator function ipK and ^ is a given constitutive function which describes the sources of the damage in the system.
We now briefly describe the boundary conditions on the contact surface T3, based on the model derived in [34], [35]. We assume that a wear of the contact surface occurs as a result of the relative slip between the surface and the foundation and the frietional forces modify the asperities on the surface by removing small amounts of the material and possibly rearranging the remaining undulations. We introduce a wear function w : r3 x [0,T] ^ R which will
measure the wear of the contact surface T3, The wear is identified as the normal depth of the material that is lost. We use the modified version of Archard law:
w(t) = —kw ||v* ||av (t). (3.3)
where kw > 0 is a wear coefficient and v* is the tangential velocity of the foundation. For the
sake of simplicity we assume in the rest of the section that the motion of the foundation is v*
and could wear. Therefore, we assume that av (t) satisfies a normal compliance contact condition with wear, that is
—au(t) = pv(uv(t) — w(t)) on r3, (3.4)
where pv represents the normal compliance function, this condition shows that at each moment t, the reaction of the soft layer depends on the current value of the penetration represented by uv(t) — w(t). Indeed, we assume that a wear process of the foundation takes place and the debris are immediately removed from the system. Thus, the penetration becomes uv (t) — w(t) instead of uv (t) as in the case without wear.
The corresponding generalization of Coulomb law of dry friction may be stated as
H&T(t)H ^Pr(UV(t) — w(t)) on r3, (3.5)
||ov(t)H <pT(uv(t) — w(t)) ^ ur(t) = v*, (3.6)
HaT(t)H =pT(uv(t) — w(t)) ^ uT(t) = v* — aaT(t), a ^ 0. (3.7)
Here pT represents the tangential compliance function (called the friction bound) and ur is the tangential velocity of the body. Equations (3.6) and (3.7) can be interpreted physically in the following way. Condition (3.6) characterizes the behavior of the body in the so-called stick zone. It implies that as the tangential stress is insufficient, the boundary sticks to the foundation and moves at the same velocity as the foundation. Condition (3.7) describes the so-called slip zone, that is, as the tangential stress reaches its greatest value, the boundary does not move in tandem with the foundation. The scalar a ^ 0 is a multiplier indicating the relative direction of the slip between the body and the foundation. Finally, the associated temperature boundary condition on r3 reads as
dB
— kZ3 — v3 = ke(B — BF) — kT(||ur — v*||) on r x (0,T), (3.8)
where Bp is the temperature of the foundation, ke is the heat exchange coefficient between the body and the obstacle, and kT : r3 x R+ ^ R+ is a given tangential function.
To simplify the notation, we do not indicate explicitly the dependence of various functions on the variables x G Q U r and t G [0,T], Then, the classical formulation of the thermo-meehanieal problem is as follows.
Problem V. Find a displacement field u : Q x [0,T] ^ Rd, a stress field a : Q x [0,T] ^ Sd, a temperature B : Q x [0,T] ^ R, a damage ( : Q x [0,T] ^ R and a wear function w :
r x [0,T] ^ R such, that
t
cr = Ae(u) + Be(u) — MB + J G(a(s), e(u(s)),((s))ds in Q x (0,T), (3.9)
o
e — dxv(KVB) = —M-Vil + qth in Q x (0,T), (3.10)
c — AC + d^K(0 3 ^(a, s(u),B,0 in Q x (0,T), (3.11)
Diva + f0 = 0 in Q x (0,T), (3.12)
u = 0 on r1 x (0,T), (3.13)
au = f2 on r2 x (0,T), e = 0 on r u r2 x (o,t),
- (Tv
pv(uv - w), \aT || ^ Pr(uv - w),
\aT|| < pT(uv - w) \aT|| = pT(uv - w)
de
u T
u T
v
v — aa7
on r3 x (0,T),
- kij~dxVj = ke(® - ) - kr
|Ur - V ||)
w = kw||v*||£v(uv - w) on r x (0,T), dC
7^ = 0 on r x (0,T), Of
w(0) = 0 on r3, u(0) = uo, 0(0) = 0o,
a> 0, on r3 x (0,T),
C (0) = Co in a
(3.14)
(3.15)
(3.16)
(3.17)
(3.18)
(3.19)
(3.20)
(3.21)
Here equations (3.9) and (3.10) represent the thermo-viscoelastic-viscoplastic constitutive law with damage introduced in the first section, the evolution of the damage is governed by the inclusion of parabolic type given by relation (3.11). Equation (3.12) represents the equilibrium equations for the stress. Equalities (3.13) and (3.14) are the displacement-traction boundary conditions, respectively. Condition (3.16) describes the frictional contact with normal compliance and wear described above on the potential contact surface T3, Equation (3.18) is an ordinary differential equation which describes the evolution of the wear function. Relation
d(
(3.19) describes a homogeneous Neumann boundary condition, where — is the normal derivaos
tive of C- In equation (3.20), the identity u>(0) = 0 means that at the initial moment the body is not subject to any prior wear. Next, the functions u0, 0o and Co in (3.21) are the initial data. In the study of the mechanical problem V, we consider the following assumptions. The viscosity operator A : Q x Sd ^ Sd satisfies the following conditions:
'(a) There exists LA > 0 such that ||^.(x,e1) - ^.(x,£2)|| ^ LAHe1 - £2|| for all £1, e2 G Sd,&.e, x G Q;
(b) There exists m^ > 0 such that(^.(x, e1) - ^.(x, £2)) ■ (e1 - £2) ^ m^ ||e1 - £2||2 < ,
for all £1, e2 G S , a.e. x G Q;
(c) The mapping x m ^.(x, e) is Lebesgue measurable on Q for any £ G Sd; k (d) The mapping x m ^.(x, 0) belongs to Q.
(3.22)
The elasticity operator B : Q x Sd m Sd satisfies the following conditions:
' (a) There exists a constant LB > 0 such that
||B(x, £1) - B(x, £2)|| ^ LB||£1 - £2|| for all £1, £2 G a.e. x G Q;
(b) The mapping x m B(x, e) is Lebesgue measurable on Q for any £ G Sd;
(c) The mapping x m B(x, 0) belongs to Q.
(3.24)
The viscoplastic operator Q : Q x Sd x Sd x R m Sd satisfies the following conditions: ' (a) There exists a constant Lg > 0 such that
||£ (x, 01, £1,(1) — Q (x, (J 2, £2,C2)H ^ Lg (||^1 — + ||£1 — £2 H + I6 — &I) for all 0 1, 02, s1, e2 G Sd, (1,(2 G R, a.e. x G Q. (b) The mapping x m Q(x, a, £,() is Lebesgue measurable on Q, for all a, e G Sd and < G R. ^ (c) The mapping x m Q (x, 0, 0, 0) belongs to Q.
The damage source function ^ : Q x Sd x Sd x R x R m R satisfies the following conditions:
(a) There exists a constant L^ > 0 such that
|^(x, 0-1, £1,81,(1) — ^(x, 02, £2 ,$2,(2)
^ L4, (H01 — 02H + ||£1 — £2H + — 021 + IC1 — C2I) < for all 01,02, £1, £2 G Sd, 01,02, (1,(2 G R, a.e. x G Q; (3.25)
(b) The mapping x m ^(x, a, £,0,() is Lebesgue measurable on Q, for all a, £ G Sd and 0,( G R;
(c) The mapping x m ^(x, 0, 0, 0, 0) belongs to L2(Q).
The normal compliance function pv : r3 x R m R+ satisfies the following conditions: (a) There exists Lv > 0 such that Ipv(x,u1) — pv(x,u2)I ^ Lv |w1 — u2I for all u1, u2 G R, a.e. x G r3; ^ (b) The mapping x m pv(x, u) is measurable on r3 for all u G R; (3.26)
(c) The mapping x m pv(x, 0) blongs to L2(r3). The tangential compliance function pT : r3 x R m R+ satisfies the following conditions: (a) There exists LT > 0 such that Ipr(x,w1) — pT(x,u2)I ^ LT Iu1 — u2I for all U]_, u2 G R, a.e. x G r3; * (b) The mapping x m pT(x, u) is measurable on r3 for all u G R; (3.27)
(c) The mapping x m pT(x, 0) blongs to L2(r3). The tangential function kT : r3 x R+ m R+ satisfies the following conditions:
(a) There exists MT > 0 such that \kT(x, r1) — kT(x, r2)I ^ MT Ir1 — r2I for all n, f'2 G R+ , a.e. x G r3; (3,28)
(b) The mapping x m kT (x, 0) G L2(r3) is measurable on r3, V r G R+. A particular example of a tangential function kT is given by
kT(x,r) = p(x)r, x G r3,
where p G L^(r3; R+) represents some rate coefficient for the gradient of the temperature.
The thermal expansion tensor M = (mij) : Q x Rd m Rd, the heat sources density qth and the thermal conductivity tensor K : Q x Rd m Rd satisfy the following conditions:
M = (mZ3), mZ3 = m3Z G L™(Q), qth G C([0,T]; L2(Q)), (3.29)
£ = (h3) = (kji) G L™(Q), (3.30)
3ck > 0, such that kij&& ^ ck&& V£ G Rd. (3.31)
The densities of forces are assumed to have the following regularity:
fo G C([0,T]; L2(Q)d), f2 G C([0, T]; L2(r2)d). (3.32)
We assume that the initial conditions satisfies the following condition:
uo G V, do G E, Co e K, dp G L2(0,T; L2(^)), ke G R+) (3.33)
Finally, we define mappings
a : H1(Q) x H1(Q) ^ R, P : V x V x L2(r3) ^ R, f : V x V ^ R, 5 : [0,T] ^ R, and the functions 2 : E ^ E^d R : V ^ E', respectively, by
a«,£) = y VC -V^, (3.34) n
P(w, u, v) = Jpv(uv — w)vvda + JpT(uv — w)||vr — v*||da, (3.35) rs rs
f (u, v) = J f0.vdx + J f2 ■ v da, (3.36)
n r2
{S(t),^)E'xE = J qth(t)ydx + J ke0F(t)ydx, (3.37)
n rs
{Zt,v)E'xe = J kij + J ker^da, (3.38)
n J 1 rs
{Rv, y)E' xE = —J (M.Vv)^dx + j kT (||vr — v* H)^da. (3.39)
n rs
We end this section with the remark that Problem V represents the classical formulation of the frictional problem. In general, this problem has no classical solution, which has all the necessary classical derivatives. For this reason, as usual in the analysis of frictional contact problems, there is a need to associate to Problem V a new problem, a so-called variational formulation. Using standard arguments we obtain the variational formulation of the thermo-mechanical problem (3,9)-(3,21),
Problem Vv. Find a displacement field u : [0,T] ^ V, a stress field a : [0,T] ^ Q1; a temperature field 9 : [0,T] ^ E, a damage field ( : [0,T] ^ H1 (Q) and a wear function w : [0,T] ^ L2^) such that for all t G [0,T]
t
a(t) = Ae(ui(t)) + £e(u(i)) — M0(t) + j Q(a(s), e(u(s)),((s))ds, (3.40)
o
Mi), e(v) — e(u(t)))Q + P(w(t), u(t), v) — P(w(t), u(t), u(t))
> (f (t), v — u(i)) v Vv G V, j
m,i)—c (t))i2(n)+a(c (t),# — c (t))
> №(r(t), e(u(t)),9(t),((t)),# — C(t))L2(n), C(t) G K, W G K,[-0(i) + 2 9(t) = Ru(t) + S (t) in E', (3.43)
w(t) = kw ||v*(i)||^ (u„ (t) — w(t)), (3.44)
u(0) = uo, 0(0) = 0o, C (0) = Co, ^(0) = wo. (3.45)
We note that variational Problem Vy is formulated in terms of the displacement field, stress field, temperature field, damage field and wear function. The functions u, 0, ^d w satisfying (3,40)-(3,45) are called weak solution to contact problem V. The existence of the unique solution to Problem Vy is stated and proved in the next section.
4. An existence and uniqueness result
Theorem 4.1. Let assumptions (3,22)-(3,33) hold. Then there exists a unique solution (u, a, 0, (, w) to problem Vy. Moreover, this solution possesses the following properties:
u G C1 (0,T; V), (4.1)
0 G C([0, T]; Q1), (4.2)
0 G C([0, T]; L2(Q)) n L2(0,T; E) n W 1'2(0,T; E'), (4.3)
C G W 1'2(0, T; L2(Q)) n L2(0, T; H 1(Q)), (4.4)
w G C 1([0,T]; L2D). (4.5)
The proof of theorem 4.1 consists in several steps, which we shall provide in what follows. Throughout this section the assumptions of Theorem 4.1 are supposed to hold true. By C we denote generic positive constants which may depend on Q, r2, r3, B, M, pv, pT and T but are independent of t and the rest of input data, and whose value may change from place to place.
First, let (A, 'q, G C([0, T]; L2(r3) x Q x Q) be given and consider the following variational problem.
Problem Find a displacement field uXv^ : [0,T] m V and a stress field : [0,T] m Q1 such that for all t G [0,T]
(t) = Ae(u Xvii (t)) + Be(uXvi (t)) + v(t) + £(t), (4.6)
(t), £(v) — (t)))Q + P(X(t), uwVt(t), v)
— P(X(t), uXvi(t), uXvi(t)) ^ (f (t), v — uXvi(t))v Vv G V, ( ' j uA^ (0) = uo. (4.8)
For Problem we have the following result.
Lemma 4.1. There exists a unique solution (uA^, ) to Problem Vxv£ and it has its regularity expressed in (4.1)-(4.2).
Proof. We use the Riesz representation theorem to define the operators A : V m V, B : V m V and the function F : [0,T] m V by
(Au, v)v = (Ae(u), e(v))Q, (4.9)
(Bu, v)v = (Be(u), e(v))Q, (4.10)
(F(t), v)v = (f(t), v)v — (V(t)+ ((t), e(v))Q, (4.11)
for all u, v G V and t G [0,T], Assumptions (3.22)(b), (3.22)(c) and (3.22) imply that the operator A is a strongly monotone and Lipschitz continuous operator on V and B is a Lipsehitz continuous operator on V. For u G V and A G L2(r3^, the functional P(X, u, ■) is convex and lower semicontinuous on V. We use (2.5), (3.26) and (3.27) to find
P(X, u1, v2) — P(X, u1, v1) + P(X, u2, v1) — P(X, u2, v2) ^ C^(LU + LT)|u1 — u2 Hy 11 v 1 — v2 Hy,
(4.12)
for all ui, u2, vi, v2 G V. Moreover, using (3,32) it is easy to see that the function f defined by (3,36) satisfies f G C([0,T]; V) and, keeping in mind that (^, £) G C([0, T"]; Q x Q), we deduce from (4,11) that F G C([0,T]; V). It follows from a class of abstract evolutionary variational inequalities (see for example [15]) that there exists a unique function U\v£ G C([0,T]; V).
We use relation (4,6), assumptions (3,22), (3,23) and the regularity of the functions ^ and with the properties of the deformation tensor e to obtain that G C([0,T]; Q).
We choose a function v = vXv£(t) ± z in (4.7), where z G V(Q)d is arbitrary and we use definitions (3,35) and (3,36) to obtain
Div *Xvt (t) + f0(t) = 0, (4.13)
for all t G [0,T], The regularity of the functions f 0, the relation (4.13) and since G
C([0,T]; Q) show that G C([0, T]; Qi). The prooO is complete. □
In the second step, let fa G C([0,T]; L2(Q)) be given and consider the following variational problem for the damage field.
Problem V^. Find a damage field : [0,T] ^ H i(Q) such that
(Ut),$ - Ut))L2{n) + a(Mt),# - Ut))
z (v(t),# - uvhm C(t) g k, w g k, t g [0,T],
(4.14)
U0) = Co. (4.15)
Lemma 4.2. Problem V^ has a unique solution which satisfies the regularity expressed in (4.4). Moreover, if Q is the solution of Problem V^. corresponding to fa G C([0,T]; L2(Q)), i = 1, 2, then there exists C > 0 such, that
t
IKiW - <2(t)\\hm ^ c J Iifai(s) - toWWhmds vt g [0,t]. (4.16)
0
Proof To solve we use a classical existence and uniqueness result on parabolic variational inequalities (see, for instance, [2]). By (4.14) we get:
(Ci - C2, Ci - C2)L2(Q) + a(Ci - C2, Ci - C2) ^ - fai - fa2)L2(n) v G [0, T].
Integrating the above inequality with respect to time and using the initial conditions (i(0) = (2(0) = (0 and the inequalitv a((i - (2, 0 - (2) Z 0, we find
t
1 WCiW - urnhm (fai(s) - fa2(s),(i(s) - (2(s))LHn) ds vt G [0,T],
0
which implies that
t t
WCiCO - bmhw \fai(S) - fa2(s)\2L2{Q)ds + J IICi(s) - (2(s)WlHn) ds.
00
This inequality combined with Gronwall inequality leads to (4.16) which completes the proof.
□
At the third step, we define the operator £ : C([0,T]; Q) ^ C([0,T]; Q) by
t
£G = Q(aXvt, e(ux^),Q where %(t) = i G(s) ds VG G C([0,T]; Q), (4.17)
and <jis the stress field
= Ae(u Xv£) + Be(uA^) + ^ + £. (4.18)
We observe that since ('q, £) E C([0,T]; Q x Q), it is straightforward to see that E
C([0,T]; Q). We hence obtain the following result.
Lemma 4.3. The operator £ has a unique fixed point G* E C([0,T]; Q).
Proof. The continuity of £G is a straightforward implication of the continuity of uXv£
and Cm and (3.24) . Moreover, let £2 E C([0,T]; Q) and Gu G2 E C([0,T]; Q) be their corresponding integrals in time and let E C([0,T]; L2(Q)). For the sake of simplicity, we
use the notation = ui; u= u^a-^ = ^^d = Q for i = 1, 2, Given t E [0,T] by (3.24) we find that
||£Gi(i) - £G2(t)\\Q ^ C(\\ai(t) - *2(i)Ho + ||ui(t) - U2(t)|v + ||Ci(t) - kWH^n)). (4.19) It follows from (4.17) and (4.18) that
t
|ki(*) - ^2(t)||Q ^ ^||Ui(t) - U2(t)||£ + ||ui(t) - U2(t)|^ + J\Gi(s) - G^lQ d8y (4.20)
0
Moreover by (4.6) and (4.7) we obtain
(^e(ui(t)) - Ae(u2(t)), e(ui(t)) - e(u2)W)q
+ (Be(ui(t)) - Be(u2(t)), e(ui(i)) - e(u2^)))q ^P(A, ui(i), u2(i)) - P(A, ui(i), ui(i)) + P(A, U2(i), ui(i)) - P(X, u2(t), u2(t)) - (£i(t) - &(*), №i(t)) - e(u2^))q. Also it follows from (3.22)(b), (3.23)(a) and (4.12) that
||ui(t) - u2(i)||y ^ C(|ui(t) - u2(t)|v + ||^i(t) - ^WHq)
Using this result, the inequality 2ab ^ a2 + b2 and (4.17), we obtain
t
||ui(t) - u2(t)|^ ^ C(|ui(t) - u2(t)H2v + j ||Gi(s) - G2(s)!Qds).
0
Since ui(0) = u2(0) = u0, we have
t
||ui(t) - u2(t)||V ^ cj ||ui(S) - u2(s)|^ds.
0
It follows from (4.23), (4.24) and (4.16) that
||u i(t) - u2(t)||V + ||Ci(t) - GWH^n) ^ c( J ||u i(S) - u2(S)||V ds
0
t
+ / ||^i(s) - M^Hl^n) ds (4.25)
(4.21)
(4.22)
(4.23)
(4.24)
+ y ||Gi(s) - G^HQ ds
0
)
t
Bv using the Gronwall Lemma, we find that
t
| | ui(t) - u2(t) 11 V +|| <i(t) - <2(t) 11 ^2(0) ^ cj | | Gi(8) - G2(8) 11 Q ds. (4.26)
0
This inequality combined with (4.20), (4.24), (4.26), (4.19) lead us to the following estimate:
t
| | £Gi(t) -£G2(t) 11 Q ^ cj | | Gi (s) - G2(s) 11 Q ds. (4.27)
0
Reiterating inequality (4.27) n times, we get:
Q nrj! n
11 £nGi - £nG2 | | c([0,T];Q) ^ n! 11 Gi - G2 | | c ([0,T];Q). (4.28)
Therefore, for n large enough, £n is a contractive operator on the Banaeh C([0,T]; Q) and we conclude that there exists a unique G* E C([0,T]; Q) such that £G* = G*. The proof is complete. □
At the forth step, let (A, E C([0,T]; £2(r3) x Q) be given and we consider the following auxiliary problem.
Problem Vvv. Find a displacement field uX^ : [0,T] ^ V, a stress field aXv : [0,T] ^ Qi and a temperature field 9Xv : [0,T] ^ E such, that
t
aXv(t) = Ae(uXv(t)) + Be(uXv(t)) + ^(t) + J Q(aXv(s), e(uXv(s)),^(s)) ds, (4.29)
0
(aXv(t), e(v) - e(uxv(t)))% + P(\(t), uXv(t), v)
- P(X(t), uxv(t), uxv(t)) > (f(i), v - uxv(t))v Vv E V, j
6xv (t) + ^ dxv (t) = nuxn (t) + S (t) in E', (4.31)
ux^ (0) = u0, Qxn (0) = 00. (4.32)
Lemma 4.4. There exists a unique solution |uX^, cXn,9Xv} to the auxiliary problem P^ obeying regularity (4.1)-(4.3). Moreover, if (u», <Ji,9i} and (i represents the solutions of Problems PVVi and VV^ respectively, for (/qi, E C([0,T]; Q x L2(Q)), i = 1, 2, then there exists C > 0 such, that
t
2
I I - *2(t) I1 2Q I I u i(t) - ü2(t) 11 2V + J I I u i(5) - u 2 (s) 11 2V ds
0 t
+ II Vl(t) - V2(t) 11 Q + j I I Cl (s) - <2(s) 11 |2(n)
(4.33)
0
t
I I u i(t) - u 2(t) 11 2V ^ C^ I I ^i(t) - T,2(t) 11 2q +j I I Ci(s) - C2(s) 11 |2(H) ds^j, (4.34)
0
t
I I Ol (t) - m 11 |2(Q) ^ c\ I I u i(a) - Ü2(s) 11 2y ds. (4.35)
Proof. Let G* e C([0,T]; Q) be the fixed point of the operator £ defined by (4,17) and uA^ = u\v£*, aXv = be the solution to problem obtained in Lemma 4,1 for £ = =
t
f G* (s)ds. Equation £G* = G* combined with (4.17) shows that uA^, &\n satisfies (4,29) 0
and (4,30), Then conditions (4,32), regularities (4,1) and (4,2) follow from Lemma 4,1, Using now the displacement field uA^ obtained in lemma 4,4, we obtain (4,31) and we know that the inclusion mapping of (E, || ■ ||E) into (L2(Q), || ■ ||l2(q)) is continuous and dense, we can write the Gelfand evolution triple
E C L2(Q) C E'.
The operator 2 is linear and coercive. Using Friedriehs-Poineare inequality, we have
(Zt,T}ExE' Z C||r|||. (4.36)
By (3.30) and (3.38) for all t,u e E, we have
d
(Zt,u)E'xe ^^ !k,j ^(n^NU^MU2^) + ke^T h^MLir). Using (2.6), we find
(ZT,IV)E'xE ^ C||r||E|M|E. (4.37)
On the other hand, from the definitions of K, S and the regularity of iiXv we deduce that
<pXv = WiXv + S e L2(0,T; E'). (4.38)
Since 90 e E, from inequalities (4.36), (4.37) and regularity (4.38), it follows that the operator 2 is hemieontinuous and monotone. Then by using classical arguments of functional analysis concerning parabolic equations (see, for instance, [31]), we prove easily the existence and uniqueness of 9Xr) satisfying
'dXv e C([0,T]; L2(Q)) n L2(0,T; E) U W 1'2(0,T; E'),
eXv (t) + Z eXv (t) = pXv (t) in E', (4.39)
eXv (0) = 00.
Consider now (,q1,p1), (lH2,^2) e C([0,T]; Q x L2(Q)) and for i = 1, 2, we denote
uA^i = = , = , (»i = Ci.
Using (4.29) and (3.24), we have
Wi(t) - *2(t)U2Q < q ||ui(t) - U2(t)U2V + ||ui(t) - u2(t)U2v
t
+ Hvi(t) - V2(t)rQ + i H*l(8) - ^2(s)|£ ds
(4.40)
+ J ||ui (S) - u2(s)||£ dS + j ||Ci(S) - C2(8)Hh(n) 00 Using a Gronwall argument and (4.24) in the above inequality, we deduce (4.33).
We use (4.29), (4.30), (4.33) and arguments similar to those used in the proof of (4.23) to obtain
t
||u i - u 2 || y ^ ^ jjui(t) - u2(t)|^ + J ||ui(S) - u2(8)H2v ds
+ I I U i(s) - Ü2(s) 11 tr ds + I I ^(S) - V2(s) 11 2q ds
0 0 t
+ I I Cl(s) -
0
) 11
This inequality combined with (4,24), (4,16) and Gronwall inequality leads us to (4,34), Now for e C([0, T]; V) we have for t e [0,T]:
- ^2(t),e1(t) - e2(t))E'XE + <ze1(t) - zd2(t),e1(t) - 02 (i))^
(4,41)
= (nili(t) -nil2(t),di(t) - 02(t))E'xE.
Then by integrating over (0,i), we get (4,35) by using (3,39), (3,29), (3,30) and (3,31), The proof is complete, □
Finally, as a consequence of these results and by using the properties of the operator M, and the function for t e [0,T] we consider the element
nx(V,VL)(t) = (ISPx(v)(t), n\(V,^)(t)) e Q x L2(Q), (4.42)
defined by the identities
n°A(^)(i) = -M(0Xv (t)), (4.43)
n\(V,^)(t)= 0(vXn(t), uXv(t),ex„(t),(,(t)). (4.44)
We have the following result.
Lemma 4.5. Forfar) e C ([0,T]; Q x L2(^)) the function nx(^, p) : [0,T] ^ Q x L2(Q) is continuous and there is a unique element (/q*,^,*) e C([0,T]; Q x L2(Q)) such that nx(/q*,^,*) = (V*,V* )•
Proof Let e C([0, T]; Q x L2(Q)) and ii,*2 e [0,T]. Using (4.43) and (3.29), we have
I | n°A(^)(ii) - ^(^2) 11 Q ^ I I M(0Xv (tl)) -M(0Xv (t2)) 11 Q
^ Lm 11 (ti) - 0Xv (t2) 11 L2(Q),
where Lm = sup 11 mitj| | l2{q)- Then due to the regularity of 9Xr) stated in Lemma 4.3 we deduce
from (4.45) that n°(^) e C([0,T]; Q). By similar arguments, from (4.44), (2.4) and (3.25) it follows that
| I n\(V,^)(ti) - n\(V,^)(t2) 11 L2(H) ^c (|| (ti) - uA^ (t2) 11 y
n 4,46)
+11 oXv (ti) - eXv (t2) 11 y +11 c(ii) - a^uw
Therefore, n(^) e C([0,T]; L2(Q)) and nA(^) e C([0,T]; Q x L2(Q)). Let now (tqi,^i), (^2,^2) e C([0,T]; Q x L2(Q)). We use the notation
uWVi = Ui, UXn. = Ui, eXn. = 0i, = (i for i = 1, 2.
We use similar arguments as in the proof of relations (4.45) and (4.46) to find that
I I nA(Wi)(i) - nA(^2)(i) 11 QxL2(Q) ( 11 Ui(i) - U2 (t) | y
+ i I m - d2(t) 11 ^ +1 I ci(t) - ut) 11 i2m),{■
t
t
for all t e [0,T]. We employ (4.24), (4.16), (4.34) and (4.35) to obtain
t
\\nx(Vl,fa)(t) - nx(V2,p2){t)\\2QxL2(n) ^ cj \\(Vi,Pi)(s) - (V2,Ms)\\2QxL2{n)ds Vi e [0,T].
0
Reiterating this inequality m times, we get:
C mr£ m
- nTi/n2,^2)\\c ([0,T];QxL2(Q)) C([0,T ];QxL2(Q)).
Thus, for m sufficiently large, U™ is a contraction on the Banach space C([0,T]; Q), and so nA has a unique fixed point. The proof is complete. □
Let A e C([0,T]; L2(r3)). At the fifth step, we consider the following variational problem. Problem Find a displacement field ux : Q x [0,T] ^ Rd, a stress field ux : Q x [0,T] ^ Sd, a temperature field 9X :Q x [0,T] ^ R, and a damage field (x :Q x [0,T] ^ R such, that
t
ax(t) = ^e(Ux(t)) + B(e(ux(t))) - M0x(t) + [ Q(ax(s), e(ux(s)),(x(s)) ds, (4.48)
(4.49)
(4.50)
(ax(t), e(v - ux(t)))Q + P(X(t), ux(t), v) - P(\(t), ux(t), ux(t))
z (f(t), v - ux(t))v Vv e V,
(Ut),# - <x(t))i?W + a(C(t),# - (x(t))
z e(ux(t)),dx(t),(w(t)),ti - (x(t))L2(n) (\(t) e K VV e K,
ex(t) + Z ex(t) = Kux(t) + S(t) in E', (4.51)
uA (0) = uo, 0A(0) = 00, Cx(0) = Co. (4.52)
Lemma 4.6. Problem Vx has a unique solution (uA,&X,9X,(X) satisfying (4,l)-(4,5).
Proof Let (vx,P\) e C([0,T]; Q x L2(Q)) the fixed point of Ux defined by (4.42)-(4.44) and uA = uA^A, 9X = QXvx, (x = be the solutions to problems and Vy obtained in Lemmata 4.4 and 4.2 for = (,qx,px). Let
t
ax(t) = M(ux(t))+ B(e(ux(t))) -Mex(t) + J Q(ax(s), e(ux(s)),(x) ds.
0
Equation U°x(,qx) = ^^d n\(,qx,px) = px combined with (4.43) and (4.44) shows that (ux, <JX,0X,(X) satisfies (4.48)-(4.51). Then (4.52) and the regularities (4,l)-(4,4) follow from Lemmata 4.2, 4.4 and assumptions on A, B, Q and M which concludes the existence part of the Lemma 4.6.
The uniqueness part of Lemma 4.6 is a consequence of the uniqueness of the fixed point of the operator nA defined by (4,42)-(4,44) and the unique solvabilitv of problems VXvx and The proof is complete. □
Now we consider an operator $ : C([0,T]; L2(r3)) ^ C([0,T]; L2(r3)) defined by
t
$X = kw\\v*\\ ypv(uv - X)ds Vt e [0,T]. (4.53)
0
Lemma 4.7. The operator $ has a unique fixed point X* e C([0,T]; L2(r3)).
Proof. Let Ai, A2 e C([0, T]; L2(r3)) and denote by ui; i = 1, 2, the solution of (4,49) in problem Py for A = X-i, that is, ui = uAi and we also let ui = uAi, Furthermore, in what follows by C we denote various positive constants which may depend on kW and v*. Taking into consideration (4,53), (2,5) and (3,26), we deduce that
I I $Ai(i) - $A2 (t) 11 1^3) ^C ( I I ui(s) - Ü2 (s) 11 2y dS
0
t
(4.54)
+ J I I Ai(s) - A2(s) 11 ^2(P3) ds). 0
We use similar arguments that those used in the proof of the relation (4,23) to find that t t
J I I u i(S) - li 2(s) 11 y ds ^ C (/ I I ui(s) - u2(s) 11 y ds
00
t
+ / I I Ai(s) - A2(s) 11 ^2(P3) ds). 0
Since ui(0) = u2(0) = u0, by using (4,55) we obtain
t
I I Üi(i) - Ü2 (t) 11 2V ^ C J I I Ü1 (S) - Ü2(s) 11 2y ds
0
(4.55)
(4.56)
^ Cj II ui (S) - u2(s) II y ds + Cj II Ai(s) - A2(S) II ^2(P3) ds. 00 Applying Gronwall inequality, we deduce
t
I I ui(i) - u2(i) 11 y ^ cj I I Ai(s) - A2(s) 11 ^ (r3 )ds. (4.57)
0
It follows from this inequality that
t t s
J I I Ui(s) - U2(s) 11 y ds ^ G^ J I I Ai(r) - A2(r) 11 ^3) drds. 0 0 0
Since s ^ t,
t s t t
jJ I I Ai(r) - A2(r) 11 ^2(P3) drds ^ C^ J I I Ai (r) - A2(r) 11 ^ drds
0 0 0 0
t t
= cj I I Ai(r) - A2(r) 11 h^drj ds. 00
Then
t t
i I I Ui(s) - U2(s) 11 y ds ^ C i I I Ai(s) - A2(s) 11 ^2(P3) ds. (4.58)
t
t
t
Combining now (4,54) with (4,58), we obtain
t
IliA^) - $A2(i)ll^) ^ cj ||Ai(s) - A2(s)|^(P3) ds. (4.59)
0
Reiterating this inequality n times, we arrive at
Cn
|$"'Ai - $ilA2|c; ([0,T];L2(r3)) ^ n\ Pi - ^2 ! C([0,T];L2 (Ü3)).
Thus, for n sufficiently large, $n is a contraction on C([0, T"]; L2(r3)), and so $ has a unique fixed point A* in this Banach space. The proof is complete. □
We now have all ingredients needed to provide the proof of Theorem 4.1.
Proof. Let A* be the fixed point of the operator £ given by (4.53). With (4,48)-(4,53) it is easy to verify that (uA*, <j\*, 0X*, (\*, A*) is the unique solution to problem Vv possessing regularities (4.1)-(4.5). □
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the anonymous referees for very helpful suggestions and comments which lead to the improvement of this paper. This research work is supported by the General Direction of Scientific Research and Technological Development (DGRSDT), Algeria,
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. K.T. Andrews, S. Wright, M. Shillor, A. Klarbring. A dynamic thermoviscoelastic contact problem with friction and wear 11 Int. J. Eng. Sci. 35:14, 1291-1309 (1997).
2. V. Barbu. Optimal control of variational inequalities. Boston, Pitman (1984).
3. K. Bartosz. Hemivariational inequalities approach to the dynamic viscoelastic sliding contact problem with wear // Nonl. Anal. Theory Methods Appl. 65:3, 546-566 (2006).
4. S. Boutechebak, A. Azeb Ahmed, Analysis of a dynamic contact problem for electro-viscoelastic materials 11 Milan Journal of Math. 86:1, 105-124 (2018).
5. A. Chudzikiewicz, A. Mvslinski. Thermoelastic wheel-rail contact problem with elastic graded-materials. 11 Wear. 271:1-2, 417-425 (2011).
6. G. Duvaut, J.L. Lions. Les inéquations en mécanique et en physique. Paris, Dunod (1972).
7. M. Frémond, K.L. Kuttler, B. Nedjar, M. Shillor. One-dimensional models of damage // Adv. Math. Sci. Appl. 8, 541-570 (1998).
8. M. Frémond, B. Nedjar. Dam,age in concrete: the unilateral phenomenon // Nucl. Eng. Design. 156:1-2, 323-335 (1995).
9. M. Frémond, KL. Kuttler, M. Shillor. Existence and uniqueness of solutions for a one-dimensional damage model 11 J. Math. Anal. Appl. 229:1, 271-294 (1999).
10. M. Frémond, B. Nedjar. Dam,age, gradient of damage and principle of virtual work // Int J. Solids struct. 33:8, 1083-1103 (1996).
11. I. Gorvacheva, Contact mechanics in tribology. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1988).
12. R.J. Gu, K.L. Kuttle, M. Shillor. Frictional wear of a thermoelastic beam // J. Math. Anal. Appl. 242:2, 212-236 (2000).
13. R.J. Gu, M. Shillor. Thermal and wear analysis of an elastic beam in sliding contact // Int. J. Solids Struct. 38:14, 2323-2333 (2001).
14. WT. Han, M. Shillor, M. Sofonea. Variational and numerical analysis of a quasistatic viscoelastic problem with normal compliance, friction and damage //J. Comp. Appl. Math. 137:2, 377-398 (2001).
15. W. Han, M. Sofonea. Evolutionary Variational inequalities arising in viscoelastic contact problems // SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 38:2, 556-579 (2000).
16. W. Han, M. Sofonea. Quasistatic Contact Problems in Viscoelasticity and Viscoplasticity. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI (2002).
17. K.L. Kuttler, M. Shillor. Dynamic contact with normal compliance wear and discontinuous friction coefficient 11 SIAM J. Math. Anal. 34:1, 10-27 (2002).
18. M.S. Mesai Aoun, M. Selmani, A. Azeb Ahmed. Variational analysis of a /fictional contact problem with wear and damage // Math. Model. Anal. 26:2, 170-187 (2021).
19. J. Necas, I. Hlavacek. Mathematical theory o/ elastic and elastoplastic bodies: an Introduction. Amsterdam, Elsevier (1981).
20. D. Ouchenane, Z. Khalili, F. Yazid, M. Abdalla, B.B. Cherif, I. Mekawv. A new result o/ stability /or thermoelastic-bresse system, o/ second sound related with forcing, delay, and past history terms 11 J. Funct. Spaces. 2021, id 9962569 (2021).
21. D. Ouchenane, Z. Khalili, F. Yazid. Global nonexistence of solution for coupled nonlinear KleinGordon with degenerate damping and source terms // Stud. Univ. Babe§-Bolvai Math. 67:4, 801-815 (2020).
22. P.D. Panagiotopoulos. Inequality problems in mechanics and applications. Birkhauser, Basel (1985).
23. M. Rochdi, M. Shillor, M. Sofonea. Analysis of a quasistatic viscoelastic problem with friction and damage 11 Adv. Math. Sci. Appl. 10:1, 173-89 (2002).
24. M. Rochdi, M. Shillor, M. Sofonea. Quasistatic viscoelastic contact with normal compliance and friction 11 J. Elast. 51:2, 105-126 (1998).
25. A. Rodriguez-Aros, J.M. Viano, M. Sofonea. Asymptotic analysis of a quasistatic /fictional contact problem with wear // J. Math. Anal. Appl. 401:2, 641-653 (2013).
26. J. Rojek, J.J. Telega. Numerical simulation o/ bone-implant system,s using a more realistic model o/the contact interfaces with adhesion // J. Theor. Appl. Mech. 37:3, 659-686 (1999).
27. J. Rojek, J.J. Telega, S. Stupkiewicz. Contact problems with friction, adhesion and wear in orthopaedic biomechanics, II: numerical implementation and application to implanted knee joints // J. Theor. Appl. Mech. 39:3, 679-706 (2001).
28. A. Saadallah, N. Chougui, F. Yazid, M. Abdalla, B.B. Cherif, I. Mekawv. Asymptotic Behavior of Solutions to Free Boundary Problem, with, Tresca Boundary Conditions // J. Funct. Spaces. 2021, id 9983950 (2021).
29. M. Shillor, M. Sofonea, J.J. Telega. Models and analysis of quasistatic contact. Springer, Berlin (2004).
30. M. Shillor, M. Sofonea. A quasistatic viscoelastic contact problem with friction // Int. J. Eng. Sci. 38:14, 1517-1533 (2000).
31. M. Sofonea, W. Han, M. Shillor. Analysis and Approximation of Contact Problems with Adhesion or Damage. Chapman, Hall/CRC Press, New York (2006).
32. M. Sofonea, F. Patrulescu, Y. Souleiman. Analysis of a contact problem with wear and unilateral constraint 11 Appl. Anal. 95:11, 2602-2619 (2016).
33. N. Stromberg, L. Johansson, A. Klarbring. Derivation and analysis of a generalized standard model for contact, friction and wear j j Int. J. Solids Struct. 33:13, 1817-1836 (1996).
34. N. Stromberg. Continuum thermodynamics of contact, friction and wear. Thesis No. 491, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Linkoping Institute of Technology, Linkoping (1995).
35. N. Stromberg, L. Johansson, A. Klarbring. Derivation and analysis of a generalized standard model for contact friction and wear j j Int J. Solids Struct. 33:13, 1817-1836 (1996).
36. K. Tahri, F. Yazid. Biharmonic-Kirchhoff type equation involving critical Sobolev exponent with singular term // Comm. Korean Math. Soc. 36:2, 247-256 (2021).
37. F. Yazid, D. Ouchenane, Z. Khalili. A stability result for Thermoelastic Timoshenko system, of second sound with distributed delay term // Math. Engin. Sci. Aerospace (MESA). 11:1, 163-175 (2020).
38. F. Yazid, D. Ouchenane, K. Zennir. Global nonexistence of solutions to system, of Klein-Gordon equations with degenerate damping and strong source terms in viscoelasticity // Stud. Univ. Babe§-Bolvai Math. 67:3, 563-578 (2022).
39. F. Yazid, D. Ouchenane. Exponential growth of solutions with Lp-norm of a Klein-Gordon wave equation with strong damping, source and delay terms. Discontinuity, Nonlinearitv, and Complexity, accepted (2020).
40. F. Yazid, N. Chougui, D. Ouchenane, F.S. Djeradi. Global well-posedness and exponential stability results for Bresse-Timoshenko type system, of second sound with distributed delay term, // Math. Meth. Appl. Sci., to appear.
41. A. Zmitrowicz. Wear patterns and laws of wear-a review // J. Theor. Appl. Mech. 44:2, 219-253 (2006).
42. A. Zmitrowicz. Variational descriptions of wearing out solids and wear particles in contact mechanics 11 J. Theor. Appl. Mech. 39:3, 791-808 (2001).
Abdallah Chouia, Faculty of Exact Sciences,
Laboratory of Operator Theory and PDE: Foundations and Applications University of El Oued, El Oued 39000, Algeria E-mail: chouia-abdallahSuniv-eloued.dz
Abdelaziz Azeb Ahmed, Faculty of Exact Sciences,
Laboratory of Operator Theory and PDE: Foundations and Applications University of El Oued, El Oued 39000, Algeria E-mail: aziz-azebahmed@univ-eloued. dz
Fares Yazid, Faculty of Sciences,
Laboratory of pure and applied mathematics University of Laghouat, Laghouat 03000, Algeria E-mail: [email protected]
