arxiv: v1 [math.na] 2 Sep 2015

Transcription

1 The lower bound property of the Morley element eigenvalues arxiv: v1 [math.na] Sep 015 Yidu Yang, Hao Li, Hai Bi School of Mathematics and Computer Science, Guizhou Normal University, Guiyang, , China Abstract : In this paper, we prove that the Morley element eigenvalues approximate the exact ones from below on regular meshes, including adaptive local refined meshes, for the fourth-order elliptic eigenvalue problems with the clamped boundary condition in any dimension. And we implement the adaptive computation to obtain lower bounds of the Morley element eigenvalues for the vibration problem of clamped plate under tension. Keywords : fourth-order elliptic eigenvalue problems, Morley elements, regular mesh, lower bounds of eigenvalues, adaptive computation MSC : code 65N5,65N30 1 Introduction The Morley element is a non-conforming triangle element proposed by Morley [7] in 1968 for plate bending problems. Also, the Morley element was extended to arbitrarily dimensions by Wang and Xu [35, 36]. So, this element is also called the Morley-Wang-Xu element (see [19]). Using the Morley element to obtain the lower bounds for eigenvalues of fourth-order elliptic eigenvalue problems is a problem of concern from mathematical and mechanical community. In 1979 Rannacher [9] found through numerical computation that the Morley element can obtain the lower eigenvalue bounds for the vibration of clamped plate. This discovery is very important in engineering and mechanics computing. Lin et al. [40] first proved this discovery theoretically. Hu et al. [19] extended the work in [40] to m-th order elliptic eigenvalue problems in arbitrary dimensions, and Lin et al. [] also developed the work in [40] further. The references [19,, 40] studied the lower bound property in the asymptotic sense. How to check that whether the mesh size is small enough or not in practice? In fact, in computation the Morley eigenvalues will become more and more precise when the mesh is refined gradually. So it can be concluded that the condition that the mesh size is small enough is satisfied when the Morley 1

2 element eigenvalues reveal a stable monotonically increasing tendency. Thus, it can be deduced that the Morley element gives the lower eigenvalue bounds. The numerical examples in [11, 9] and Section 5 in this paper all support this conclusion. Hence, it is a very meaningful work to study the asymptotic lower bound. It is noteworthy that Carstensen and Gallistl [11] studied the guaranteed lower eigenvalue bounds for the biharmonic equation by a simple post-processing method for the Morley element eigenvalues. Although the eigenvalues corrected in [11] may not accurate than the Morley eigenvalues (see the numerical experiments report therein), the work [11] is also very important and meaningful. A posteriori error estimates and adaptive methods of finite element approximation are topics attracting more attention from mathematical and physical fields (see, e.g., [1,, 6, 8, 1, 15, 16, 18, 6, 34] and the references cited therein), and have also been applied to the Morley element method for plate problems (see, for example, [7, 17, 0, 4]). Based on the above work, this paper further studies the asymptotic lower bound property of the Morley element eigenvalues on regular meshes, including adaptive local refined meshes. The features of this paper are as follows: (1) For fourth-order elliptic eigenvalue problems with the clamped boundary condition in any dimension, including the vibrations of a clamped plate under tension, we prove in the asymptotic sense that the Morley element eigenvalues approximate the exact ones from below. () Under the saturation condition u u h h h t0, [19, 40] studied the approximation from below where t 0 is the singularity exponent of the eigenfunction u. However, this condition is not valid on adaptive meshes with local refinement. [] discussed the approximation from below on quasi-uniform meshes and gave the stability condition u u h h h. Developing the work in [19,, 40] we prove on regular meshes, including adaptive local refined meshes, that the lower bound property of the Morley element eigenvalue. (3) Thanks to [15, 4], we get the relationship between the Morley element eigenvalue approximation and the associated Morley element boundary value approximation with λ h u h as the right hand term, thus we obtain for the vibration problem of a clamped plate the reliable and effective a posteriori error estimators for the Morley element eigenpair which come from those given by Hu and Shi [0] for the plate bending problem. Shen [30] also discussed a posteriori error estimators for the Morley element eigenpair, while we focus in this paper on the reliability and effectiveness of the a posteriori error estimators on adaptive meshes. And thus, based on these a posteriori error estimator we implement the adaptive computation using the package of ifem [13]. The numerical results validate that the a posteriori error estimators are sharp, and the lower bound property of the Morley element eigenvalues on adaptive meshes. In this paper, regarding the basic theory of finite elements, we refer to [4, 10, 14, 8, 3]. Throughout this paper, C denotes a positive constant independent of mesh size, which may not be the same in different places. For simplicity, we use the notation a b to mean that a Cb, and use a b to mean that a b and b a. Finally, a b abbreviates a = b in the asymptotic sense.

3 preliminaries. Consider the fourth-order elliptic eigenvalue problem: Lu u γ u (a ij ) x j x i u (b ij ) + βu = λρu, inω, (.1) x j x i = 0, u = 0, on Ω, (.) where Ω R n (n =, 3, ) is a polyhedral domain with boundary Ω, u γ is the outward normal derivative on Ω, (a ij) n n and (b ij ) n n are symmetric matrices, a ij and b ij are appropriate smooth functions, β, ρ L (Ω), bij ξ i ξ j 0, x Ω and ξ R n, 0 β, a ij (i, j = 1,,, n) and ρ are bounded below by a positive constant on Ω. Let W m,p (Ω) be a Sobolev space with norm m,p and semi-norm m,p, H m (Ω) = W m, (Ω), H 0 (Ω) = {v H (Ω) : v Ω = v γ Ω = 0}. The weak form of (.1)-(.) is to seek (λ, u) R H 0 (Ω) with u b = 1 such that a(u, v) = λb(u, v), v H 0 (Ω), (.3) where a(u, v) = Ω b(u, v) = Ω ( a ij ρuvdx, u v + u b = b(u, u). u v b ij + βuv)dx, It is obvious that a(u, v) is a symmetric, continuous, and H0 (Ω)-elliptic bilinear form, and b(u, v) is a symmetric, continuous and positive definite bilinear form. Let u a = a(u, u). Then the norms u a, u,, and u, are equivalent, and u b is equivalent to u 0,. We assume π h = {κ} is a regular simplex partition of Ω and satisfies Ω = κ (see [14]). Let h κ be the diameter of κ, and h = max{h κ : κ π h } be the mesh size of π h. Let ε h = {F } denotes the set of faces ((n 1)-simplexes ) of π h, and let ε h = {l} denotes the set of faces (n )-simplexes of π h. When n =, l = z is a vertex of κ, and 1 v = v(z). meas(l) l Let π h (κ) denotes the set of all elements sharing common face with the element κ. Let κ + and κ be any two n-simplex with a face F in common such that the unit outward normal to κ at F corresponds to γ F. We denote the jump of v across the face F by [v] = (v κ+ v κ ) F. And the jump on boundary faces is simply given by the trace of the function on each face. 3

4 In [35], the Morley-Wang-Xu element space is defined by S h = {v L (Ω) : v κ P (κ), κ π h, [ v γ F ] = 0 F ε h, [v] = 0 l ε h}, F where P (κ) denotes the space of polynomials of degree less than or equal to on κ. The Morley-Wang-Xu element space S h L (Ω) and S h H 1 (Ω). When n =, the Morley-Wang-Xu element space is the Morley element space. The discrete eigenvalue problem reads: Find (λ h, u h ) R S h with u h b = 1 such that where a h (u h, v) = ( Let κ π h κ l a h (u h, v) = λ h b(u h, v), v S h, (.4) a ij u h v + u h v b ij + βu h v)dx. v p m,p,h = v p m,p,κ, v p m,p,h = v p m,p,κ, κ π h κ π h v m,h = v m,,h v m,h = v m,,h, m = 0, 1,. From Lemma 8 in [35] we know that,h is equivalent to,h,,h is a norm in S h, and a h (, ) is a uniformly S h -elliptic bilinear form, and h = a h (, ) 1 is a norm in S h. With regard to the error estimate of the Morley-Wang-Xu element approximation for biharmonic equations we refer to [1, 5, 31, 3, 35], and as for the biharmonic eigenvalue problems we refer to [19, 9] where the work can be extended to (.1)-(.). Define PF 0 1 f = fds, RF 0 f = f PF 0 f, meas(f ) P 0 κf = 1 meas(κ) F κ fdx, R 0 κf = f P 0 κf, where κ π h and F ε h. When ŵ W 1,ι (ˆκ) and 1 g < (n 1)ι n ι, by the trace theorem we get W 1,ι (ˆκ) L g ( ˆκ). Thus we can deduce w g ds h n gn ι 1 gn ι κ + hg+n 1 κ w g 1,ι,κ, κ π h, (.5) κ w g 0,ι,κ where ˆκ is a reference element, κ and ˆκ are affine-equivalent. We define E = ( n, ]. n 4

5 And we suppose that p E, 1 p = 1 1 p. Consider the following associated source problem (.6) and discrete source problem (.7): Find w H 0 (Ω), such that Find w h S h, such that Define the consistency term a(w, v) = b(f, v), v H 0 (Ω). (.6) a h (w h, v) = b(f, v), v S h. (.7) E h (w, v h ) = b(f, v h ) a h (w, v h ), v h S h + H 0 (Ω). Using the proof method in [31, 35] we obtain the following error estimate of the consistency term. Lemma.1. Let w W 3,p (Ω) be the solution of (.6), and p E, then v h S h + H0 (Ω) there holds E h (w, v h ) h n( 1 1 p )+1 ( w 3,p + h 1 n( 1 1 p ) f b ) v h h. (.8) Proof. For any v h S h, by Lemma 6 in [35](pp. 1, line 1) we get that there exists a piecewise linear function vh I on π h, vh I H1 0 (Ω), such that v h v I h m,,κ h m κ κ π h (κ) which together with the inverse inequality yields v h,,κ, m = 0, 1, v h vh I m,p,κ h n( 1 p 1 ) κ v h vh I m,,κ h n( 1 1 p )+ m κ v h,,κ, m = 0, 1, thus, by the Jensen s inequality, we get κ π h (κ) v h v I h m,p,h h n( 1 1 p )+ m v h,h, m = 0, 1. (.9) For any v H 0 (Ω), since p E, from the interpolation error estimates we know that there exists a piecewise linear function v I H 1 0 (Ω) such that (.9) is valid, and thus, v h S h + H 0 (Ω) there exists a v I h H1 0 (Ω) such that (.9) holds. Write From (.9) we have E h (w, v h ) = b(f, v h v I h) + b(f, v I h) a h (w, v h ). (.10) b(f, v h v I h) h f b v h,h. (.11) 5

6 Since v I h H1 0 (Ω), by the Green s formula we deduce b(f, vh) I a h (w, v h ) = {Lwvh I κ π h κ = { κ π h κ a ij w v h w (a ij ) (v h v x i x h) I j b ij w x i v h x j βwv h }dx w (v h vh I b ) ij βw(v h v x i x h)}dx I j w v h a ij γ i ds. (.1) x j κ π h 1 i,j n κ By the Hölder inequality and (.9) we get κ π h κ w (a ij ) (v h v x i x h)dx I j w 3,p,κ v h vh I 1,p,κ h n( 1 1 p )+1 u 3,p v h h, (.13) κ π h and κ π h κ b ij w x i (v h v I h ) x j βw(v h v I h)dx h w 1, v h h. (.14) It follows from the fact p E that W 1, (ˆκ) L p ( ˆκ), thus from the trace inequality (.5) and the interpolation error estimate we get and Rκ(a 0 w ij ) 0,p,F h 1 p κ R 0 w x i x κ(a ij ) 0,p,κ + h 1 1 p κ R 0 w j x i x κ(a ij ) 1,p,κ j h 1 1 p κ w 3,p,κ, Rκ 0 v h 0,p x,f h n κ j n 1 p 1 Rκ 0 v h 0,,κ + h n κ x j n 1 p Rκ 0 v h n 1 p 1,,κ h n κ v h,,κ. x j 6

7 From the above two relations, noting that F [ v h x j ]ds = 0 (see Lemma 4 in [35]) and R 0 F f 0,p,F f v 0,p,F for any v P 0 (κ), we deduce κ π h 1 i,j n κ = a ij κ π h 1 i,j n F κ F = w v h γ i ds x j κ π h 1 i,j n F κ F κ π h 1 i,j n F κ h 1 1 p + n n 1 p κ κ π h a ij w v h (γ F ) i df x j RF 0 w (a ij )R 0 v h F (γ F ) i df x j Rκ(a 0 w ij ) 0,p,F R 0 v h κ 0,p,F x j w 3,p,κ v h,,κ h n( 1 1 p )+1 w 3,p v h h. (.15) Substituting (.13), (.14) and (.15) into (.1), we get b(f, v I h) a h (w, v h ) h n( 1 1 p )+1 w 3,p v h h. Substituting (.11) into (.10), and combining the obtained conclusion with the above relation we get (.8). Define the solution operators T : L (Ω) H 0 (Ω) L (Ω) and T h : L (Ω) S h as follows: a(t f, v) = b(f, v), v H 0 (Ω), a h (T h f, v) = b(f, v), v S h. Then T, T h : L (Ω) L (Ω) are all self-adjoint completely continuous operators, and T h T b 0 (h 0). We need the following regularity assumption: f H 1 (Ω), T f W 3,q (Ω), q E, T f H +σ (Ω), and T f 3,q f 1, T f +σ C f 1, (.16) where σ = n( 1 1 q ) + 1. From Theorem in [9], we get that if Ω R and the inner angle ω at each singular point is smaller than 180 0, then q =. Let w W 3,p (Ω) (p E) be the solution of (.6), and let w h be the solution of (.7), then by the Strang Lemma we have w h w h h n( 1 1 p )+1 w 3,p, (.17) Further assume that (.16) is valid, then from the Nitsche-Lascaux-Lesaint Lemma we get w h w b h (1 1 p 1 q )n+ w 3,p. (.18) 7

8 Using the theory of spectral approximation we get the following lemma. Lemma.. Let (λ h, u h ) be the jth eigenpair of (.4) with u h b = 1, λ be the jth eigenvalue of (.3), u be the eigenfunction corresponding to λ which is approximated by u h, and u b = 1. Suppose that u W 3,p (Ω), p E, and (.16) holds, then λ h λ λ h n(1 1 p 1 q )+, (.19) u h u h λh n( 1 1 p )+1, (.0) u h u b λh n(1 1 p 1 q )+. (.1) Proof. From the theory of spectral approximation, we have (see, e.g., [4, 9], Lemma.3 in [39]) u h u b λ (T T h )u b, (.) u h u h = λ (T T h )u h + R, (.3) λ h λ λ (T T h )u b, (.4) where R (T T h )u b. Let f = u in (.6)-(.7), then w = T u, w h = T h u. Thus, from (.17), (.18) and (.3) we get (.0), and from (.18) and (.) we get (.1). Substituting (.18) into (.4), we get (.19). The proof is completed. thus, Noting that p q, p, q E and (.16), we have n( 1 1 p ) + 1 n(1 1 q ) + 1 = σ > n( 1 n n ) + 1 = n 0, (.5) n h n( 1 1 p )+1 h n( 1 1 q )+1 = h σ. (.6) 3 Asymptotic lower bounds for eigenvalues The identity in the following Lemma 3.1 (see, e.g., Lemma 3.1 in [41], Lemma 3. in [4]), which is an equivalent form of the identity in [39, 43] and is a generalization of the identity in [3], is an important tool in studying non-conforming element eigenvalue approximations. Lemma 3.1. Let (λ, u) R H0 (Ω) be an eigenpair of (.3), (λ h, u h ) R S h be an eigenpair of (.4), then the following identity is valid: λ λ h = u u h h λ h u u h b λ h b(u v, u h ) + a h (u v, u h ), v S h. (3.1) Define an interpolation operator I h : First, define I k : H (κ) P (κ) such that I κ : H (κ) P (κ), I κ v I κ v = v, l l F γ ds = v ds, (3.) F γ 8

9 where l and F denote any vertice and face of κ respectively. Next, define I h v κ = I κ v, κ π h. Lemma 3.. Let u W 3,p (Ω) (p E), and W 3,p (ˆκ) W s,g (ˆκ), then I h u u s,g,κ Ch n( 1 g 1 p )+3 s κ u 3,p,κ, s = 0, 1,. (3.3) where ˆκ is the reference element, κ and ˆκ are affine-equivalent. Proof. The proof is standard, e.g., see [10] or Theorem 15.3 of [14]. The following weak interpolation estimation plays an crucial role in our analysis. Lemma 3.3. Let u W 3,p (Ω) (p E), then a h (u I h u, u h ) h max i,j (max a ij(x) 1,,κ ) u u h h u h h κ + (h n( 1 1 p )+ u h u 1,,h u 3,p + h u 3,p u 1,p ) max b ij 0,. i,j + β 0, h 3 u 3,p u h h, (3.4) b(u I h u, u h ) h 3 u 3,p ρ(x) 0, u h h. (3.5) Proof. From (3.) and the Green s formula we deduce (u I h u) ds = 0, F ε. (3.6) x j F Let I 0 be the piecewise constant projection operator, then by (3.6) we have κ π h κ = κ π h κ I 0 a ij (u I h u) I 0 a ij (u I h u) x j u h dx u h γ i ds = 0, thus a h (u I h u, u h ) = { + κ π h κ (a ij I 0 a ij ) (u I h u) u h (u I h u) u h b ij + β(u I h u)u h }dx. (3.7) Noticing that u I h u,h u u h h, using the interpolation error estimates we deduce ( (a ij I 0 a ij ) (u I h u) u h dx κ π h κ h max (max a ij(x) 1,,κ ) u I h u h u h h i,j κ h max (max a ij(x) 1,,κ ) u u h h u h h. (3.8) i,j κ 9

10 Using the Hölder inequality and the error estimate of interpolation, we obtain κ κ From (.9), we get (u I h u) u h b ij dx ( u I h u 1,,h u h u 1,,h + u I h u 1,p,h u 1,p ) max i,j b ij 0, (h n( 1 1 p )+ u h u 1,,h u 3,p + h u 3,p u 1,p ) max b ij 0,. (3.9) i,j u h 0,p u h u I h 0,p + u I h 0,p h n( 1 1 p )+ u h,h + u I h 1, h n( 1 1 p )+ u h,h + u I h u h 1,,h + u h 1,,h u h h = λ 1 h. (3.10) Thus, we obtain β(u I h u)u h dx h 3 β 0, u 3,p u h 0,p κ π h κ h 3 β 0, u 3,p u h h. (3.11) Substituting (3.8), (3.9) and (3.11) into (3.7) we get (3.4). From the Hölder inequality and the error estimate of interpolation we obtain (3.5). The following lemma is another key in our analysis. Lemma 3.4. Let w W 3,p (Ω) (p E) be solution of (.6), and let w h be the solution of (.7), assume that (.16) is valid, then w h w b h σ w h w h + h 1+σ f b, (3.1) furthermore, under the conditions of Lemma., there holds thus Proof. u u h b h σ u h u h + h 1+σ. (3.13) Referring to (3.7), we have a h (T g I h T g, w h ) = { + κ π h κ (a ij I 0 a ij ) (T g I h T g) w h (T g I h T g) w h b i,j + β(t g I h T g)w h }dx h 1+σ g b w h h, E h (w, T g I h T g) = b(f, T g I h T g) a h (w w h, T g I h T g) a h (w h, T g I h T g) h +σ T g +σ f b + h σ T g +σ w w h h + h 1+σ g b w h h. (3.14) 10

11 By the Nitsche-Lascaux-Lesaint Lemma, (3.3), (3.14) and (.8), we have w w h b w w h h sup g L (Ω),g 0 { 1 T g I h T g h } g b + sup { 1 (E h (w, T g I h T g) + E h (T g, w w h ))} g H,g 0 g b h σ w w h h + h 1+σ f b, i.e., (3.1) is valid. From (3.1) and (.3) we get thus, T u T h u b h σ T u T h u h + h 1+σ u b h σ u h u h + h σ T u T h u b + h 1+σ, T u T h u b h σ u h u h + h 1+σ, which together with (.) yields (3.13). The proof is completed. The above (3.13) is first given in [] for biharmonic eigenvalue problems (see (60) in []) while a detailed proof is not provided. Here, we give a proof of (3.13) for more general fourth-order problems (.1)-(.). Based on the above lemmas, we can easily get the following theorems on the lower bound property of the Morley element eigenvalues for fourth order elliptic eigenvalue problems in any dimensions. Theorem 3.1. Under the conditions of Lemma., suppose that there exists p 0 satisfying p < p 0 <, u W 3,p (Ω), u W 3,p0 (Ω). And suppose that u h u h h 1 δ with δ (0, n/p 0 n/) be an arbitrarily small constant, then when h is small enough there holds Proof. Taking v h = I h u in (3.1) we get λ h λ. (3.15) λ λ h = u u h h λ h u u h b λ h b(u I h u, u h ) + a h (u I h u, u h ). (3.16) Next we shall compare the four terms on the right-hand side of (3.16). From (3.13), we get u u h b h σ u h u h + h 1+σ h σ u h u h, (3.17) which indicates that in (3.16) the second term is a quantity of higher order than the first term. From (3.5), we have b(u I h u, u h ) h 3 ρ(x) 0, u 3,p u h h, which implies that the third term is also a quantity of higher order than the first term. From (3.4) and (.6) we have a h (u I h u, u h ) h max a ij (x) 1, u u h h u h h i,j + h 1+σ u h u h + h + h 3. 11

12 Thus, the fourth term is quantity of higher order than the first one. Hence, (3.15) is valid. Theorem 3.. Under the conditions of Lemma., let a ij (x) be piecewise constants, b ij = 0 (i, j = 1,,, n). And suppose that u h u h h and h is small enough, then there holds λ h λ. (3.18) Proof. We shall compare the four terms on the right-hand side of (3.16). From (3.13) and (3.5) we know that the second and the third term are quantities of higher order than the first one, respectively. Noting that a ij (x) is a constant and b ij = 0, from (3.4) we have a h (u I h u, u h ) h 3 β 0, u 3,p u h h h 3 u 3,p. which indicates that the fourth term is quantity of higher order than the first one. Hence, (3.18) is valid. From the proof of Theorem 3. we know that the condition, u h u h h, can be weakened to u h u h h 1+ σ 3. Corollary 3.1. Under the conditions of Theorem 3., assume that u h u h h 1+ σ 3 and h is small enough, then there holds λ h λ. (3.19) One noticed early that the error of finite element eigenvalues is relevant to the value of eigenvalues, which means that the computation will be more difficult when the eigenvalue becomes larger (see Section 6.3 in [33]). However, we find when the value of eigenvalues is large, the lower bound for such eigenvalues can be obtained using the Morley element. Theorem 3.3. Under the conditions of Lemma., suppose p = and u u h h h u 3,. Then, for the eigenvalue λ that the value is large, when h is small enough it is valid that λ h λ. (3.0) Proof. We shall compare the four terms on the right-hand side of (3.16). From (3.13) and (3.5) we know that the second and third term are all quantities of higher order than the first one. A simple calculation shows that u 1, = u udx = u udx u b u a = λ 1, (3.1) and Ω Ω λ = u a u, = u 0, u 1, u 3, λ 1 4 u 3,. (3.) Substituting (3.1) and u h h λ 1 into (3.4), we get a h (u I h u, u h ) h max (max a ij(x) 1,,κ ) u u h h λ 1 i,j κ + (h u h u h u 3, + h u 3, λ 1 4 ) max b ij 0, + h 3 u 3, β 0, λ 1, i,j 1

13 by the stability assumption and (3.), we have u u h h h u 3, hλ 3 4, which indicates that, for the eigenvalue λ that the value is large, when h is small enough the absolute value of the fourth term is smaller than that of the first one. Thus, (3.0) is valid. Remarks 3.1. From [5, 19, 3, 38] we know that the saturation condition u u h h h t0 holds on the quasi-uniform mesh π h, where t 0 is the singularity exponent of the eigenfunction u. However, this condition isn t valid on adaptive meshes with local refinement. Inspired by [, 40] we change the condition u u h h Ch t0 into u h u h h 1 δ with δ (0, n/p 0 n/) be an arbitrary small constant in Theorem 3.1, and into u u h h h in Theorem 3., respectively. The modified conditions are valid not only for the quasiuniform mesh but also for many kinds of adaptive meshes. From (8.11) in [19] we know that the saturation condition u u h h h u 3, holds in Theorem 3.3. Remarks 3.. When the conditions of Theorem 3.1 or Theorem 3. hold, from Theorem 3.1 or Theorem 3. we know that u u h h is the dominant term among the four terms on the right-hand side of (3.16), i.e., which together with (.0) we obtain λ λ h u u h h, (3.3) 0 < λ λ h h (1 p )n+. (3.4) When p > q, (3.4) is slightly better than (.19). Remarks 3.3. Referring to [19, 4, 41] we can also use conforming finite elements to do the postprocessing to get the upper bound of eigenvalues. Remarks 3.4. We see that a h (u I h u, u h ) plays a crucial role in Theorem 3.1-Theorem 3.3, and we can get the following result: Under the conditions of Lemma., let ε 0 be a upper bound of a h (u I h u, u h ), and suppose that u h u h h and h is small enough, then there holds λ h ε 0 λ. (3.5) 4 A posteriori error estimates for eigenvalues [15, 4] gave the relationship between the conforming/nonconforming finite element eigenvalue approximation and the associated conforming/nonconforming finite element boundary value approximation (see Theorem 3.1 and Lemma 5.1 in [15], Theorem 3.1 in [4]). The following Lemma 4.1 is given in [4] (see Theorem 3.1 in [4]). Consider the source problem (.6) associated with (.3) with f = λ h u h, whose generalized solution is w = λ h T u h and the Morley element approximation is w h = λ h T h u h = u h. Lemma 4.1. Let (λ h, u h ) be the jth eigenpair of (.4) with u h b = 1, λ 13

14 be the jth eigenvalue of (.3), then there exists an eigenfunction u corresponding to λ with u b = 1, such that u h u h = λ h T u h T h u h h + R, (4.1) where R (T T h )u b. Proof. From the definition of T and T h we derive Denote u u h = λt u λ h T h u h = λt u λ h T u + λ h T u λ h T u h + λ h T u h λ h T h u h = (λ λ h )T u + λ h T (u u h ) + λ h (T T h )u h. (4.) R = u u h h λ h (T T h )u h h. Using the triangle inequality, (4.), (.) and (.4) we deduce R = u u h h λ h (T T h )u h h u u h λ h (T T h )u h h = (λ λ h )T u + λ h T (u u h ) h λ h λ + u u h b (T T h )u b, which proves (4.1). [4] also pointed out that one can use Lemma 3.1 to obtain the a posteriori error estimator of nonconforming finite element eigenvalues (see Lemma 3. and Section 4. in [4]). Hence we have the following Theorem 4.1: Theorem 4.1. Under the conditions of Theorem 3.1 or Theorem 3., it is valid that u h u h T (λ h u h ) T h (λ h u h ) h, (4.3) λ λ h T (λ h u h ) T h (λ h u h ) h. (4.4) Proof. From (.3) and (3.1) we know that under the conditions of Theorem 3.1 or Theorem 3., T u T h u b is a quantity of higher order than u h u h. So, from (4.1) we get (4.3). From Theorem 3.1 or Theorem 3. we know that u u h h is the dominant term in (3.16), i.e., λ λ h u u h h, (4.5) which together with (4.3) yields (4.4). Theorem 4.1 tells us that the error estimates of the Morley element eigenvalue and eigenfunction are reduced to the error estimates of the Morley element solution w h = u h of the associated source problem with the right-hand side f = λ h u h. Thus, the a posteriori error estimator of the Morley element solution for source problem becomes the a posteriori error estimator of the Morley element eigenfunction and eigenvalue. The a posteriori error estimates for the Morley plate bending element have been studied, for example, see [7, 0]. In the following we introduce the work in [0]: 14

15 Consider the source problem (.6) and discrete source problem (.7) where n =, a ij (x) is a constant, b ij = 0, and β = 0. Given any F ε h with the length h F = F, let γ F = (γ 1, γ ) be a fixed unit normal and ν F = ( γ, γ 1 ) be the tangential vector. Hu and Shi [0] defined the following estimator: η h (f, w h, κ) = h 4 κ f 0,,κ + h F [ 1 { ( w h) + ( w h ) T }ν F ] 0,,F, (4.6) F ε h κ η h (f, w h, Ω) = κ π h η h (f, w h, κ), (4.7) and proved the following lemma. Lemma 4.. Let w be the solution of (.6), and w h be the solution of (.7). Then w h w h η h (f, w h, Ω). (4.8) Combining Theorem 4.1 and Lemma 4. we get: Theorem 4.. Suppose that n =, a ij (x) are constants, b ij = 0 and β = 0. Then under the conditions of Theorem 3. there holds u h u h η h (λ h u h, u h, Ω), (4.9) λ h λ η h (λ h u h, u h, Ω). (4.10) From the above (4.8) and the proof of Theorem 3. in [40], Shen [30] also gave (4.9)-(4.10). The feature of our work is to point out that (4.9)-(4.10) are valid under the conditions of Theorem 3., i.e., on adaptive meshes. Lemma 4. and Theorem 4. can be extended to the case of a ij (x) and b ij = τ are constants, and β = 0. In this case η h (f, w h, κ) and η h (f, w h, Ω) need to be modified as follows. η h (f, w h, κ) = h 4 κ f 0,,κ + h κτ w h 1,κ + h F [ 1 { ( w h) + ( w h ) T }ν F ] 0,,F, (4.11) F ε h κ η h (f, w h, Ω) = κ π h η h (f, w h, κ). (4.1) Using the a posteriori error estimates and consulting the existing standard algorithm (see, e.g., Algorithm C in [15]), we obtain the following adaptive algorithm of the Morley element for the vibration problem of a clamped plate: Algorithm 1 Choose parameter 0 < θ < 1. Step 1. Pick any initial mesh π h0 with mesh size h 0. Step. Solve (.4) on π h0 for discrete solution (λ h0, u h0 ). Step 3. Let l = 0. Step 4. Compute the local indicators η h l (λ hl u hl, u hl, κ). Step 5. Construct π hl π hl by Marking Strategy E and parameter θ. 15

16 Step 6. Refine π hl to get a new mesh π hl+1 by Procedure Refine. Step 7. Solve (.4) on π hl+1 for discrete solution (λ hl+1, u hl+1 ). Step 8. Let l = l + 1 and go to Step 4. Marking Strategy E Given parameter 0 < θ < 1: Step 1. Construct a minimal subset π hl of π hl by selecting some elements in π hl such that ηh l (λ hl u hl, u hl, κ) θηh l (λ hl u hl, u hl, Ω). κ π hl Step. Mark all the elements in π hl. 5 Numerical experiments Consider the vibration problem of a clamped plate under tension: u τ u = λu, inω, (5.1) u = 0, u = 0, on Ω, (5.) γ where Ω R and τ is the tension coefficient. When τ = 0, (5.1)-(5.) is the vibration problem of a clamped plate without tension. The weak form of (5.1)-(5.) and the Morley element approximation is (.3) and (.4), respectively, with n =, a ij = 1, b ij = τ, β = 0 and ρ = 1. Weinstein and Chien [37] once obtained lower bounds of eigenvalues for this problem using relaxed boundary conditions in In section 3 and 4, we analyze the asymptotic lower bounds property and a posteriori error of the Morley element eigenvalues for this problem. Here we provide the numerical results. We compute the first two eigenvalues λ j, j = 1,. We show the subdivision way for generating initial triangulation for the given unit square and L-shaped domain in Fig. 1. We use the Morley element on uniform triangle meshes and the conforming Bogner-Fox-Schmit rectangle element (BFS element) on a uniform rectangle meshes to compute, respectively. The numerical results λ M j,h (j=1,) are listed in Tables 1-6. When Ω = (0, 1) (0, 1 ) (0, 1 ) ( 1, 1) is an L-shaped domain, we use Algorithm 1 with the Morley element to compute λ hl on adaptive meshes with the initial mesh diameter h = 3. We take θ = 0.5 and our program is compiled using the package of Chen [13]. The numerical results λ M j,h l (j=1,) are shown in Tables 7-9. In Tables 7-9, we use Ndof to denote the number of degrees of freedom. In Tables 1-6, the discrete eigenvalues λ BF j,h S are computed as upper bound. When τ = 0, in Tables 1, 4 and 7, we see that the discrete eigenvalues λ M j,h monotonically increase stably, and the Morley elements has already given the lower bounds of eigenvalues, which coincide with Theorem 3.. When τ > 0, the eigenvalues of this problem are very large. In Tables 5, 6, and λbf S j,h 8 and 9, we see that the discrete eigenvalues λ M j,h monotonically increase stably, and the Morley elements has already given the lower bounds of eigenvalues, which coincide with Theorem 3.1. And the numerical results in Tables and 3 16

17 Figure 1: Initial meshs Figure : τ = 0, adaptive meshes of the 7th iteration for the 1st(left) eigenvalue, and adaptive meshes of the 4th iteration for the nd(right) eigenvalue, on the L-shaped domain. coincide with Theorem 3.3. When Ω is an L-shaped domain, we depict the adaptive meshes at the lth iteration in Figs.-4, and the a posteriori error indicator curve in Fig.5. Comparing the results in Tables 4-6 and 7-9, we see that the approximations on adaptive meshes are more precise than those on uniform meshes. From Fig.5 it can be seen that the a posteriori error indicator curves are nearly parallel to a line with slope 1, which shows that the adaptive algorithm based on the a posteriori error estimators (4.6)-(4.7) and (4.11)-(4.1) achieves 1 about the convergence rate of O( Ndof ) and is successful. Table 1: τ = 0, the 1st and the nd eigenvalue on the unit square h Ndof λ M 1,h λ M,h Ndof λ BSF 1,h λ BSF,h

18 Figure 3: τ = 10, adaptive meshes of the 7th iteration for the 1st(left) eigenvalue, and adaptive meshes of the 4th iteration for the nd(right) eigenvalue, on the L-shaped domain. Figure 4: τ = 100, adaptive meshes of the 6th iteration for the 1st(left) eigenvalue, and adaptive meshes of the 4th iteration for the nd(right) eigenvalue, on the L-shaped domain. Table : τ = 10, the 1st and the nd eigenvalue on the unit square h Ndof λ M 1,h λ M,h Ndof λ BSF 1,h λ BSF,h Table 3: τ = 100, the 1st and the nd eigenvalue on the unit square h Ndof λ M 1,h λ M,h Ndof λ BSF 1,h λ BSF,h

19 Table 4: τ = 0, the 1st and the nd eigenvalue on the L-shaped domain h Ndof λ M 1,h λ M,h Ndof λ BSF 1,h λ BSF,h Table 5: τ = 10, the 1st and the nd eigenvalue on the L-shaped domain h Ndof λ M 1,h λ M,h Ndof λ BSF 1,h λ BSF,h Table 6: τ = 100, the 1st and the nd eigenvalue on the L-shaped domain h Ndof λ M 1,h λ M,h Ndof λ BSF 1,h λ BSF,h Table 7: τ = 0, θ = 0.5, the 1st and the nd eigenvalue on the L-shaped domain l Ndof λ M 1,h l Ndof λ M,h l l Ndof λ M 1,h l Ndof λ M,h l

20 Table 8: τ = 10, θ = 0.5, the 1st and the nd eigenvalue on the L-shaped domain l Ndof λ M 1,h l Ndof λ M,h l l Ndof λ M 1,h l Ndof λ M,h l Table 9: τ = 100, θ = 0.5,the 1st and the nd eigenvalue on the L-shaped domain l Ndof λ M 1,h l Ndof λ M,h l l Ndof λ M 1,h l Ndof λ M,h l

21 Figure 5: τ = 0, 10, 100, a posteriori error curve of the 1st and the nd eigenvalue on the L-shaped domain 6 Concluding remarks In this paper, for fourth-order elliptic eigenvalue problems with the clamped boundary condition in any dimension, including the vibrations of a clamped plate under tension, we discuss the lower bound property of the Morley element eigenvalues. We prove on regular meshes, including adaptive local refined meshes, that in the asymptotic sense the Morley element eigenvalues approximate the exact ones from below, which is a development of the work in [19,, 40]. Our analysis is an application of the identity (3.1), in which higher order contributions are identified. Our analysis and results about the lower bound property of the Morley element eigenvalues can be applied to general m-th order elliptic eigenvalue problems (see (6.5) in [19]). Acknowledgements. This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos , ). References [1] M. Ainsworth, J.T. Oden, A posteriori error estimates in the finite element analysis. New York: Wiley-Inter science, 011. [] M. Ainsworth, Robust a posteriori error estimation for nonconforming finite element approximation, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 4 (005): [3] M.G. Armentano, R.G. Duran, Asymptotic lower bounds for eigenvalues by nonconforming finit element methods, Electron Trans Numer. Anal., 17 (004), pp [4] I. Babuška, J. Osborn, Eigenvalue Problems, Handbook of Numerical Analysis. vol., North-Holand: Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., [5] I. Babuška, R.B. Kellog, Pitkaranta J. Direct and inverse error estimates for finite elements with mesh refinement, Numer. Math., 33 (1979), pp [6] I. Babuška, A. Miller, A feedback finite element method with a posteriori error estimation: Part I. The finite element method and some basic properties of the a posteriori error estimator, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 61 (1987), pp [7] Veiga L. Beirão da, J. Niiranen, R. Stenberg, A posteriori error estimates for the Morley plate bending element, Numer. Math., 106 ( 007), pp

22 [8] R. Becker, S. Mao, Z. Shi, A Convergent nonconforming adaptive finite element method with quasi-optimal complexity, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 47(6) (010), pp [9] H. Blum, R. Rannacher, On the boundary value problem of the biharmonic operator on domains with angular corners, Math. Method. Appl. Sci., (1980), pp [10] S.C. Brenner, L.R. Scott, The Mathematical Theory of Finite Element Methods. nd ed., Springer-Verlag, New york, 00. [11] C. Carstensen, D. Gallistl, Guaranteed lower eigenvalue bounds for the biharmonic equation. Numer. Math., 1 (014), pp [1] C. Carstensen, J. Hu, A. Orlando, Framework for the a posteriori error analysis of nonconforming finite elements. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 45(1) (007), pp [13] L. Chen, ifem: an innovative finite element methods package in MATLAB, Technical Report, University of California at Irvine, 009. [14] P.G. Ciarlet, Basic error estimates for elliptic proplems. Handbook of Numerical Analysis, vol., North-Holand: Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., [15] X. Dai, J. Xu, A. Zhou, Convergence and optimal complexity of adaptive finite element eigenvalue computations. Numer. Math., 110 (008), pp [16] R.G. Durán, C. Padra, R. Rodríguez, A posteriori error estimates for the finite element approximation of eigenvalue problems, Math. Mod. Meth. Appl. Sci., 13 (003), pp [17] D. Gallistl, Morley Finite Element Method for the Eigenvalues of the Biharmonic Operator, arxiv: [math.na], 014 [18] J. Gedicke and C. Carstensen, A posteriori error estimators for convection-diffusion eigenvalue problems, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., 68(014), pp [19] J. Hu, Y. Huang, Q. Lin, Lower bounds for eigenvalues of elliptic operators: By Nonconforming finite element methods, J. Sci. Comput., 61(014), pp [0] J. Hu, Z. Shi, A new a posteriori error estimate for the Morley element, Numer. Math., 11(1)(009), pp [1] P. Lascaux, P. Lesaint, Some nonconforming finite elements for the plate bending problem, Rev. Francaise Automat. Informat. Recherche Operationnelle Ser Rouge Anal Numer, R-1(1975), pp [] Q. Lin, H. Xie, Recent results on lower bounds of eigenvalue problems by nonconforming finite element methods. Inverse Problems and Imaging, 7(3) (013), pp [3] Q. Lin, H. Xie, J. Xu, Lower bounds of the discretization for piecewise polynomials, Math. Comp., 83(85) (014), pp [4] F. Luo, Q. Lin, H. Xie, Computing the lower and upper bounds of Laplace eigenvalue problem: by combining conforming and nonconforming finite element methods. Sci. China Math., 55 (01), pp [5] S. Mao, S. Nicaise, Z. Shi, Error estimates of Morley triangular element satisfying the maximal angle condition. Int. J. Numer. Anal. Model., 7 (010), pp [6] P. Morin, R.H. Nochetto, K. Siebert, Convergence of adaptive finite element methods. SIAM Rev, 44 (00), pp [7] L.S.D. Morley, The triangular equilibrium element in the solution of plate bending problems, Aero Quart 19 (1968), pp [8] J. T. Oden, J. N. Reddy, An Introduction to the Mathematical Theory of Finite Elements, Courier Dover Publications, New York, 01. [9] R. Rannacher, Nonconforming finite element methods for eigenvalue problems in linear plate theory, Numer. Math., 33 (1979), pp [30] Q. Shen A posteriori error estimates of the Morley element for the fourth order elliptic eigenvalue problem, Numer. Algor., 68 (015), pp [31] Z. Shi, On the error estimates of Morley element. Chinese J. Numer. Math. & Appl., 1 (1990), pp [3] Z. Shi, M. Wang, Finite Element Methods. Beijing, Scientific Publishers, 013. [33] G. Strang, G.J. Fix, An alalysis of the finite element method. Prentice-Hall, 1973.

23 [34] R. Verfürth, A review of a posteriori error estimates and adaptive mesh-refinement techniques. New York: Wiley-Teubner, [35] M. Wang, J. Xu, The Morley element for fourth order elliptic equations in any dimensions. Numer. Math., 103(006), pp [36] M. Wang, J. Xu, Minimal finite-element spaces for m-th order partial differential equations in R n. Math Camp, 8(013), pp [37] A. Weinstein, W.Z. Chien, On the vibrations of a clamped plate under tension, Quarterly of Applied Mathematics, 1(1) (1943), pp [38] O. Widlund, On best error bounds for approximation by piecewise polynomial functions. Numer. Math., 7 (1977), pp [39] Y. Yang, Z. Zhang, F. Lin, Eigenvalue approximation from below using nonforming finite elements. Sci. China Math., 53(1) (010), pp [40] Y. Yang, Q. Lin, H. Bi, Q. Li, Lower eigenvalues approximation by Morley elements. Adv. Comput. Math., 36(3) (01), pp [41] Y. Yang, J. Han, H. Bi, Y. Yu, The lower/upper bound property of the nonoconforming Crouzeix-Raviart element eigenvalues on adaptive meshes. J. Sci. Comput., 6(1) (015), pp [4] Y. Yang, A posteriori error analysis of conforming/nonconforming finite elements (in Chinese), Sci. Sin. Math., 40(9) (010), pp [43] Z. Zhang, Y. Yang, Z. Chen, Eigenvalue approximation from below by Wilson s element. Chinese J. Numer. Math. & Appl., 9(4) (007), pp