Abstract
Let \({\mathcal B}\) be a sufficiently smooth rigid body (compact set of \({\mathbb R}^3\)) of arbitrary shape moving in an unbounded Navier–Stokes liquid under the action of prescribed external force, \(F \), and torque, \(M \). We show that if the data are suitably regular and small, and \(F \) and \(M \) vanish for large times in the \(L^2\)-sense, there exists at least one global strong solution to the corresponding initial-boundary value problem. Moreover, this solution converges to zero as time approaches infinity. This type of results was known, so far, only when \({\mathcal B}\) is a ball.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
The motion of a (finite) rigid body, \({\mathcal B}\), in an unbounded Navier–Stokes liquid has been the object of a number of deep researches. Particularly intriguing is the case when the motion of the body is not given and, in general, one prescribes total force, \(F \), and torque \(M \), acting on it. Since the presence of the body affects the flow of the liquid, and this, in turn, affects the motion of the body, the problem of determining the flow characteristics thus becomes highly coupled. It is this distinctive property that makes any mathematical problem related to body-liquid interaction especially interesting and challenging.
In this paper we are interested in the study of two basic questions related to the situation just described when the shape of \({\mathcal B}\) is not specified, and precisely: (i) existence of a global-in-time strong solutions to the relevant initial-boundary value problem, and (ii) their asymptotic behavior for all large times. Before stating our results, we would like to recall all known major contributions related to this type of investigation, which will also furnish the motivation for the present study.Footnote 1 The first existence result is due to Serre [16], who proves global existence of weak solutions a la Leray-Hopf. As the author himself observes, the proof is exactly the same as the classical one for the Navier–Stokes problem and presents no challenges. Instead, a less obvious task is to show existence of strong solutions having enough regularity as to solve the given equations (at least) at almost every point of the space-time. This question was first successfully tackled by Galdi and Silvestre [8] who proved existence of strong solutions, in the sense of Prodi-Ladyzhenskaya [14, 15], for data of arbitrary “size” –in a suitable class– at least in a time-interval [0, T) for some \(T>0\). Successively, a similar result, but with a different approach, was established by Cumsille and Tucsnak [4], when the body is allowed to rotate but not to translate, and \(F \equiv M \equiv 0\). In both papers [4, 8] the functional framework is the \(L^2\) Hilbert-setting. The study of existence of strong solutions in the \(L^q\) setting, \(q\in (1,\infty )\), was initiated by Wang and Xin [18], who established a local in time result with \(F \equiv M \equiv 0\), in the special case when \({\mathcal B}\) is a ball. Since the general shape of the body is a most relevant feature of our result here, let us briefly comment on how the hypothesis of \({\mathcal B}\) being a ball brings in some basic simplifications and mathematical properties that are lost in the general case. In the first place, this assumption eliminates the presence, in the linear momentum equation, of a term whose coefficient becomes unbounded at large spatial distances. Furthermore, as shown in [3, 18], the relevant linear operator, suitably defined, is the generator of an analytic semigroup, a property that is no longer valid for bodies of arbitrary shape, just because of the occurrence of the unbounded term [12, 17]. Local \(L^q\) existence for \({\mathcal B}\) of arbitrary shape was successively established by Geissert et al. [11], by maximal regularity theory, again with \(F \equiv M \equiv 0\). Concerning the question of global existence, it was first studied and positively answered by Cumsille and Takahashi [3]. In particular, they showed that if, in appropriate norms, the initial data are “small” and the external forces are summable over the whole half-line \((0,\infty )\) and “small,” there exists a (unique) corresponding solution defined for all times and belonging to a functional class similar to that considered in [8]. The method used in [3] is based on a particular cut-off technique that, on one hand, eliminates the difficulty due to the unbounded coefficient, but, on the other hand, is not able to provide any information on the large-time behavior of the solutions that, under the given assumption, are expected to reach, eventually, the rest-state. The question of the asymptotic behavior of solutions (along with their global existence) has been analyzed very recently in a remarkable paper by Ervedoza et al. [5], when \(F \equiv M \equiv 0\). The main tool is new \(L^p- L^q\) estimates for the body-liquid semigroup. Even though the estimates are proved for bodies of arbitrary shape, their use in showing global existence of solutions (for small data) along with their asymptotic decay to rest-state requires \({\mathcal B}\) to be a ball. In such a case, the authors also provide a sharp decay rate that implies that the center of mass of \({\mathcal B}\) can only cover a finite distance from its initial position, as expected on physical grounds.
In view of all the above, the following basic question –brought to my attention by Professor Toshiaki Hishida– remains still open: Let \({\mathcal B}\) be of arbitrary shape, subject to prescribed force and torque that vanish (in suitable sense) as time goes to infinity. Does the body-liquid problem have a global solution that, in addition, ultimately tends to the rest-state?
Objective of this note is to give a positive answer to this question, under the assumption of “small” data. More precisely, we show (see Theorem 2.1) that the local solution constructed in [8] can, in fact, be extended to arbitrarily positive times, if the data are small enough. This is accomplished by means of a generalized Gronwall’s lemma, proved in Lemma 4.3. By the same tool and under the same hypotheses, we then prove that solutions must eventually converge to the state of rest. Unfortunately, we are not able to furnish a rate of decay, which thus leaves room to further investigation. However, in the case when \({\mathcal B}\) is a ball, we do provide such a decay that, in the \(L^2\) framework considered here, appears to be rather sharp; see Remark 4.1.
The plan of the paper is as follows. In Sect. 2 we formulate the problem and state our main result in Theorem 2.1. Successively, in Sect. 3 we prove two basic “energy equations” valid in the class of solutions considered in [8]; see Lemma 3.3. This requires some estimates on the time derivative of the velocity field and on the pressure field that are carried out in Lemmas 3.1 and 3.2. Finally, in Sect. 4 we give a proof of Theorem 2.1, by combining estimates obtained from the energy equations with the Gronwall-like lemma showed in Lemma 4.3.
2 Mathematical Formulation and Main Result
A rigid body \({\mathcal B}\) –that is, a sufficiently smooth, compact and connected set of \({\mathbb R}^3\)– is fully immersed in a quiescent Navier–Stokes liquid, \({\mathcal L}\), that fills the entire three-dimensional space exterior to \({\mathcal B}\). We suppose that, with respect to an inertial frame, , the body is subject to prescribed force, \(F =F (t)\), and torque, \(M =M (t)\), \(t\ge 0\). Following a standard procedure, we shall describe the motion of the coupled system \({\mathcal S}:=\{{\mathcal B},{\mathcal L}\}\) with respect to a frame, , attached to \({\mathcal B}\) and with its origin at the center of mass, G, of \({\mathcal B}\). In such a way, in particular, the domain occupied by \({\mathcal L}\) becomes time-independent, and we will denote it by \({\mathcal D}\) (\(:={\mathbb R}^3\backslash {\mathcal B}\)) and by \(\Sigma \) its boundary. Assuming, without loss of generality, that and coincide at \(t=0\), the equations governing the motion of \({\mathcal S}\) in are given by (see [6])
Here, u and p are velocity and pressure fields of \({\mathcal L}\), \(\varrho \) its (constant) density, and \(V(x,t):= \xi (t) + \omega (t) \times x,\) where \(\xi \) is the velocity of the center of mass of \({\mathcal B}\) and \(\omega \) its angular velocity. Also, T is the Cauchy stress tensor given by
with \(\mu \) shear-viscosity coefficient and \({\text {I}}\) identity. Moreover, m is the mass of \({\mathcal B}\) and \(\textsf{I}\) its inertia tensor relative to G. Furthermore,
with the tensor Q satisfying the following equation
In particular, Q is proper orthogonal, that is,
In order to state our main result, we need a suitable function space. Let
and define Footnote 2
We also set
The main objective of this paper is to show the following result.
Theorem 2.1
Let \({{\mathcal D}}\) be of class \(C^2.\) Let \(F ,M \in L^2(0,\infty )\) and \(u_0 \in {\mathcal V}({\mathcal {D}})\) with \(u_0|_{\Sigma }=\xi _0+\omega _0\times x\). Then, there is \(\delta >0\) such that if
there exist functions \(u=u(x,t),\) \(p=p(x,t),\) \(\xi =\xi (t),\) \(\omega =\omega (t)\), and \(Q=Q(t)\) satisfying (2.1)–(2.3) a.e., such that
Moreover, for all \(T>0\),
Finally,
Before carrying out, in the following sections, the proof of the theorem, we would like to make some comments. The major aspect of our results is expressed by the asymptotic property (2.6), which states that, eventually, the coupled system \({\mathcal S}\) will go to rest, independently of the shape of \({\mathcal B}\). In fact, to date, this property was known only when \({\mathcal B}\) is a ball [5] and \(F \equiv M \equiv 0\). However, unlike [5], even with the additional assumption on \(F \) and \(M \), we are not able to furnish a rate of decay. We may guess that it is \(O(t^{-\frac{1}{2}})\), but a proof seems to be currently out of reach; see also Remark 4.1.
On the other side, in the case when either \(F \) or \(M \) is time-independent the existence of global strong solutions and, more intriguingly, the assessment of their asymptotic behavior represents a formidable open question. A remarkable example is the free-falling body problem where \(M =0\) and \(F =m_e g\), with \(m_e\) buoyant mass of \({\mathcal B}\) and g acceleration of gravity. In such a case it is expected that, at least for small \(m_e\), the coupled system \({\mathcal S}\) will tend, as \(t\rightarrow \infty \), to a steady-state configuration. However, as shown in [10], the steady-state problem may have multiple solutions, even for vanishingly small \(m_e\). One may thus conjecture that \({\mathcal S}\) will approach, eventually, one of the locally unique, stable configuration that are experimentally observed, at least when \({\mathcal B}\) has fore-and-aft symmetry, like homogeneous cylinder [13]. Nevertheless, even in this case, a rigorous proof is far from obvious.Footnote 3
3 Preliminary Results
The goal of this section is to derive a number of a priori estimates for solutions to (2.1)–(2.3) in a suitable function class that we define next.
Definition 3.1
We say that \((u,p,\xi ,\omega ,Q)\) is in the class \({\mathscr {C}}_T\), some \(T\in (0,\infty ]\), if, for all \(\tau \in (0,T)\),
The following results hold.
Lemma 3.1
Let \((u,p,\xi ,\omega ,Q)\) be a solution to (2.1)–(2.3) in the class \({\mathscr {C}}_T\). Then for a.a. \(t\in (0,T)\)
Proof
From the assumption, we immediately show
Moreover, by Schwarz and Sobolev inequalities
Thus, since \(r^{-1}\in L^\infty ({\mathcal D})\), the lemma follows from (3.7), (3.8) and (2.1)\(_1\). \(\square \)
Lemma 3.2
Let \((u,p,\xi ,\omega ,Q)\) be a solution to (2.1)–(2.3) in the class \({\mathscr {C}}_T\). Then for a.a. \(t\in (0,T)\)
Proof
Observing that, in the sense of distribution,
from (2.1)\(_1\) we get for a.a. \(t\in (0,T)\)
Let \(\psi =\psi (|x|)\) be a smooth, non-decreasing function such that \(\psi (|x|)=0\), if \(|x|\le R_*)\), while \(\psi (|x|)=1\) if \(|x|\ge 2R_*\). Setting \(\textsf{p}:=\psi \, p\), and extending \(\textsf{p}\) to zero outside \({\mathcal D}^{R_*}\), from (3.9) we find
where
Since \(u,p\in {\mathscr {C}}_T\), from Sobolev embedding theorem it follows that
This implies, in particular,
Therefore,
Problem (3.10)–(3.11) formally coincides with problem (III.1.20) studied in [7, pp. 149–150], for which, observing that \(\nabla \textsf{p}\in L^2({\mathbb R}^3)\) and recalling that \(\psi _R\equiv 1\) in \({\mathcal D}^{2R_*}\), one proves (see [7, eq. (III.1.23)]) that \(\nabla p\in L^{r}({\mathcal D}^{2R_*})\) for all \(r\in (1,6]\). By [7, Theorems II.2.1(i) and II.9.1] the latter in turn implies \(p\in L^\sigma ({\mathcal D}^{{2R_*}})\), for all \(\sigma \in (\frac{3}{2},\infty ]\), which completes the proof. \(\square \)
Lemma 3.3
Let \((u,p,\xi ,\omega ,Q)\) be a solution to (2.1)–(2.3) in the class \({\mathscr {C}}_T\). Then, the following relations hold, for all \(t\in (0,T)\)
where \(\Phi :=V\cdot \nabla u-\omega \times u\) .
Proof
Let
We test both sides of (2.1)\(_1\) by u, integrate by parts over \({\mathcal D}_R:={\mathcal D}\cap \{|x|<R\}\), \(R>R_*\), and use (2.1)\(_{2,3}\) to get
where we observed that \(\omega \times x\cdot n=0\) at \(\partial B_R\). Since \(u\in {\mathscr {C}}_T\), and also with the help of Lemma 3.2, it is readily seen that the surface integral in (3.13) is in \(L^1(R_*,\infty )\), so that we may let \(R\rightarrow \infty \) along a sequence to get
As a result, employing (2.1)\(_{5,6}\) in (3.14) we deduce (3.12)\(_1\). In order to show (3.12)\(_2\), we begin to observe that [8, Lemma 2.4(b)]
Moreover, for any \(R>R_*\), let \(\psi _R=\psi _R(|x|)\) be a non-decreasing, smooth function such that \(\psi _R(|x|)=1\), if \(|x|\le R\) and \(\psi _R(|x|)=0\), if \(|x|\ge 2R\), and
with C independent of x and R. We next test (2.1)\(_1\) by \(\psi _R\,\textrm{div}\,T(u,p)\) to get
By integration by parts, we show
Using (2.1)\(_{5,6}\) in the surface integral, we deduce
Next, integrating by parts and with the help of (3.15) we show
Now, using \(\textrm{div}\,u=\textrm{div}\,V=0\),
Substituting the latter in (3.19) and using Gauss theorem, we infer
Collecting (3.17), (3.18) and (3.20) we deduce
Let us denote by \({\mathcal F}(R)\) the last integral on the right-hand side of (3.21). Observing that \(\textrm{supp}\,(\psi _R)\subseteq \{R\le |x|\le 2R\}\) and recalling (3.16), we obtain
As a result, by assumption, Lemma 3.1, and Lemma 3.2, we show
Furthermore, since \((u,p)\in {\mathscr {C}}_T\) it readily checked that
We integrate both sides of (3.20) over (0, t), \(t\in (0,\tau ]\), let \(R\rightarrow \infty \) and employ (3.22), (3.23) along with Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem. If we differentiate with respect to t the resulting equation, we then end up with (3.12)\(_2\), which completes the proof of the lemma. \(\square \)
4 Proof of the Main Result
In this section we shall prove Theorem 2.1. Before beginning the proof, however, we premise further lemmas.
Lemma 4.1
Let \(u\in {\mathcal V}(\mathcal D)\). Then,
Moreover, there is \(c_1=c_1({\mathcal D})\) such that
Finally, \(u\in L^6({\mathcal D})\) and there is \(c_2=c_2({\mathcal D})\) such that
Proof
See [6, Section 4.2.1]. \(\square \)
Lemma 4.2
Let \(u\in {\mathcal V}({\mathcal D})\cap W^{2,2}({\mathcal D})\), \(\nabla p\in L^2({\mathcal D})\). Then, there is \(C=C({\mathcal D})\) such that
Proof
The lemma follows from [7, Lemma V.4.3] and Lemma 4.1. \(\square \)
Lemma 4.3
Let \(y:[0,T)\mapsto [0,\infty )\), \(T>0\), be absolutely continuous, such that
where \(G\in L^1(0,T)\), \(G(t)\ge 0\), and \(c_i\in [0,\infty )\), \(i=1,2\). Then, if –in case at least one of the constants \(c_i\) is not zero– it is also \(y\in L^1(0,T)\), there exists \(\eta >0\), such that from
it follows \(y\in L^\infty (0,T)\) and
In the case \(T=\infty \), we also have
and, if \(t\,G\in L^1(0,\infty )\), \(c_1=0\), and \(\alpha \ge 2\), even
Proof
Since \(y(0)\le \eta \), contradicting (4.3) means that there exists \(t_0\in (0,T)\) such that \(y(t)<M\,\eta \) for all \(t\in [0,t_0)\) and \(y(t_0)=M\,\eta \). Integrating both sides of (4.1) from 0 to \(t_0\), we deduce, in particular
Therefore, setting \(\mu =\max \{1,c_1,c_2\}\), from this inequality and (4.2) we find
so that, choosing \(\eta \in (0,(1/M)^{1/(\alpha -1)})\), we obtain \(y(t_0)<M\,\eta \), a contradiction that proves (4.3). In order to show the property (4.4), we observe that, in view of assumption (4.2) and being \(T=\infty \), there exists an unbounded sequence \(\{t_k\}\subset (0,\infty )\) such that
We then integrate (4.1) from \(t_k\) to arbitrary \(t>t_k\), and recall (4.3), to deduce, in particular,
for some \(c_3>0\) and all \(t>t_k\). In view of (4.2) with \(T=\infty \) and (4.6), the right-hand side of this inequality can be made as small as we please, by taking sufficiently large k, and property (4.4) follows. Finally, take in (4.1) \(c_1=0\) and \(\alpha \ge 2\). Multiplying both sides of the resulting inequality by \(t>0\) and setting \(Y(t):= t y(t)\), \(g(t):=t G(t)\), we get
which entails
with
Using Gronwall’s lemma, we show
By assumption and (4.3) it follows that \(\beta <\infty \) and \(h\in L^1(0,\infty )\), so that the lemma follows from (4.7). \(\square \)
Proof of Theorem 2.1
In [8, Theorem 4.1], it is shown the existence of a solution \((u,p,\xi ,\omega ,Q)\) to (2.1)–(2.3) in the class \({\mathscr {C}}_T\),,Footnote 4 where T is maximal, namely, either \(T=\infty \), or else there is \(\{t_k\}\in (0,T)\) such that
We shall show that, in fact, (4.8) cannot occur, provided the data satisfy (2.4) for suitable \(\delta >0\), thus implying that \((u,p,\xi ,\omega ,Q)\) exists for all times and is in \({\mathscr {C}}_\infty \). We begin to observe that, clearly, \((u,p,\xi ,\omega ,Q)\) satisfies (3.12) for all \(t\in (0,T)\). Thus, using Cauchy–Schwarz on the right-hand side of (3.12)\(_1\) and integrating over \(t\in (0,T)\) we get
Moreover, again by Cauchy–Schwarz inequality and Lemma 4.1,
Using the well-known trace inequality
along with Lemmas 4.1 and 4.2, we show
Finally, employing the embedding inequality
Hölder inequality, Lemmas 4.1 and 4.2, we show
Using (4.10)–(4.12) in (3.12)\(_2\) we infer
and so, setting \(y:=\Vert D(u)\Vert _2^2\), \(G:=(c/\mu )(|F |^2+|M |^2)\) (4.13) furnishes, in particular,
Using multiple times Cauchy–Schwarz inequality, we show that (4.14) implies (4.1) with \(\alpha =3\). Moreover, from (4.9), we can find \(\delta >0\) such that if (2.4) holds, then assumption (4.2) of Lemma 4.2 is satisfied.Footnote 5 Thus, by that lemma, it follows that
which contradicts (4.8). As a result, \(T=\infty \) and therefore, by the second part of Lemma 4.3, we get
The latter, in conjunction with Lemma 4.1, entails (2.6). We next observe that, from (4.9) and Lemma 4.1, it follows that
while, by integrating both sides of (4.13) over \(t\in (0,\infty )\) and with the help of Lemma 4.2 and (4.15), we get
where the constant C depends only on the data. Finally, from the latter, (4.12) and Sobolev inequalityFootnote 6 we deduce
which completes the proof of the theorem. \(\square \)
Remark 4.1
Theorem 2.1 shows that, under the given assumptions on the data, the coupled system will eventually go to a state of rest in the sense specified in (2.6). However, as also mentioned earlier on, we are not able to provide a rate of decay. In fact, we cannot apply the result stated in the last part of Lemma 4.3 to the general case studied here, namely, a body of arbitrary shape. What prevents us from doing so is the presence of \(\Vert D(u)\Vert _2^3\) in (4.13) or, equivalently, \(y^\frac{3}{2}\) in (4.14). However, if \({\mathcal B}\) is a ball, that term does not occur. To show this, we notice that in this situation the term \((\omega \times x\cdot \nabla u-\omega \times u)\) is no longer present in (2.1)\(_1\) as well as are not the terms \(m\omega \times \xi \) and \(\omega \times (\textsf{I}\cdot \omega )\) in (2.1)\(_{5}\), (2.1)\(_{6}\), respectively (see, e.g., [5]). Therefore, (3.12)\(_2\) becomes
Arguing as in the proof of Theorem 2.1, one then shows
Consequently, combining the last two displayed relations and recalling that \(\Vert D(u(t))\Vert _2\) is uniformly bounded in t by the data, we deduce
and by applying Lemmas 4.1 and 4.3 we conclude
provided \(t^\frac{1}{2}\textrm{F},\, t^\frac{1}{2}\textrm{M}\in L^2(0,\infty )\).
Notes
We shall restrict ourselves to the three-dimensional case that is the focus of our work.
We shall use standard notation for function spaces, see [1]. So, for instance, \(L^q({\mathcal A})\), \(W^{m,q}({\mathcal A})\), \(W_0^{m,q}({\mathcal A})\), etc., will denote the usual Lebesgue and Sobolev spaces on the domain \({\mathcal A}\), with norms \(\Vert \,\cdot \Vert _{q,{\mathcal A}}\) and \(\Vert \,\cdot \Vert _{m,q,{\mathcal A}}\), respectively. Whenever confusion will not arise, we shall omit the subscript \({\mathcal A}\). The trace space on \(\partial {\mathcal A}\) for functions from \(W^{m,q}({\mathcal A})\) will be denoted by \(W^{m-1/q,q}(\partial {\mathcal A})\) and its norm by \(\Vert \,\cdot \Vert _{m-1/q,q,\partial {\mathcal A}}\). Occasionally, for X a Banach space, we denote by \(\Vert \cdot \Vert _X\) its associated norm. Moreover \(L^q(I;X)\), C(I; X) I real interval, denote classical Bochner spaces.
For a formal proof, see [2].
Possibly, by modifying p by adding a function of time.
References
Adams, R.A.: Sobolev Spaces. Academic Press, New York (1975)
Cox, R.G.: The steady motion of a particle of arbitrary shape at small Reynolds numbers. J. Fluid Mech. 23, 625–643 (1965)
Cumsille, P., Takahashi, T.: Wellposedness for the system modelling the motion of a rigid body of arbitrary form in an incompressible viscous fluid. Czechoslov. Math. J. 58, 961–992 (2008)
Cumsille, P., Tucsnak, M.: Wellposedness for the Navier–Stokes flow in the exterior of a rotating obstacle. Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 29, 595–623 (2006)
Ervedoza, S., Maity, D., Tucsnak, M.: Large time behaviour for the motion of a solid in a viscous incompressible fluid. Math. Ann. (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00208-021-02351-y
Galdi, G.P.: On the motion of a rigid body in a viscous liquid: a mathematical analysis with applications. Handb. Math. Fluid Mech. 1, 653–791 (2002)
Galdi, G.P.: An Introduction to the Mathematical Theory of the Navier–Stokes Equations. Steady-State Problems, 2nd ed. Springer Monographs in Mathematics. Springer, New York (2011)
Galdi, G.P., Silvestre, A.L.: Strong Solutions to the Problem of Motion of a Rigid Body in a Navier–Stokes Liquid Under the Action of Prescribed Forces and Torques. Nonlinear Problems in Mathematical Physics and Related Topics, I, pp. 121–144. International Mathematical Series (N. Y.), vol. 1. Kluwer/Plenum, New York (2002)
Galdi, G.P., Silvestre, A.L.: Existence of time-periodic solutions to the Navier–Stokes equations around a moving body. Pac. J. Math. 223, 251–267 (2006)
Galdi, G.P., Vaidya, A.: Translational steady fall of symmetric bodies in a Navier–Stokes liquid. J. Math. Fluid Mech. 3, 183–211 (2000)
Geissert, M., Götze, K., Hieber, M.: \(L^p\)-theory for strong solutions to fluid-rigid body interaction in Newtonian and generalized Newtonian fluids. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 365, 1393–1439 (2013)
Hieber, M., Sawada, O.: The Navier–Stokes equations in \({\mathbb{R} }^{n}\) with linearly growing initial data. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 175, 269–285 (2005)
Joseph, D.D., Liu, Y.J.: Orientation of long bodies falling in a viscoelastic liquid. J. Rheol. 37, 1–22 (1993)
Ladyzhenskaya, O.A.: The Mathematical Theory of Viscous Incompressible Flow. Gordon and Breach (1969)
Prodi, G.: Teoremi di tipo locale per il sistema di Navier-Stokes e stabilità delle soluzioni stazionarie. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 32, 374–397 (1962)
Serre, D.: Chute libre d’un solid dans un fluide visqueux incompressible. Exist. Jpn. J. Appl. Math. 40(1), 99–110 (1987)
Shibata, Y.: On a \(C^0\) Semigroup Associated with a Modified Oseen Equation with Rotating Effect. Advances in Mathematical Fluid Mechanics, pp. 513–551. Springer, Berlin (2010)
Wang, Y., Xin, Z.: Analyticity of the semigroup associated with the fluid-rigid body problem and local existence of strong solutions. J. Funct. Anal. 261, 2587–2616 (2011)
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Professor Toshiaki Hishida, for bringing the problem to my attention. I also thank Mr. Jan A. Wein for several helpful conversations.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Communicated by K. Pileckas.
In loving memory of Olga Ladyzhenskaya, a Founder of mathematical fluid mechanics.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This article is part of the Topical collection Ladyzhenskaya Centennial Anniversary edited by Gregory Seregin, Konstantinas Pileckas and Lev Kapitanski.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Galdi, G.P. Large-Time Behavior of a Rigid Body of Arbitrary Shape in a Viscous Fluid Under the Action of Prescribed Forces and Torques. J. Math. Fluid Mech. 25, 43 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00021-023-00790-y
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00021-023-00790-y