Existence of positive solutions to a non-positive elastic beam equation with both ends fixed

Haixia Lu; Li Sun; Jingxian Sun

doi:10.1186/1687-2770-2012-56

Research

Open Access

Existence of positive solutions to a non-positive elastic beam equation with both ends fixed

Haixia Lu¹,
Li Sun^{2, 3}Email author and
Jingxian Sun²

Boundary Value Problems20122012:56

https://doi.org/10.1186/1687-2770-2012-56

Received: 30 November 2011

Accepted: 14 May 2012

Published: 14 May 2012

Abstract

This article is concerned with the existence of nontrivial solutions for a non-positive fourth-order two-point boundary value problem (BVP) and the existence of positive solutions for a semipositive fourth-order two-point BVP. In mechanics, the problem describes the deflection of an elastic beam rigidly fixed at both ends. The method to show our main results is the topological degree and fixed point theory of nonlinear operator on lattice.

Mathematics Subject Classification 2010: 34B18; 34B16; 34B15.

Keywords

latticetopological degreefixed pointnontrivial solutions and positive solutionselastic beam equations

1 Introduction

The purpose of this article is to investigate the existence of nontrivial solutions and positive solutions of the following nonlinear fourth-order two-point boundary value problem (for short, BVP)

\{\begin{matrix} u^{(4)} (t) = λ f (t, u (t)), 0 \leq t \leq 1, \\ u (0) = u (1) = u^{'} (0) = u^{'} (1) = 0, \end{matrix}

(P)

where λ is a positive parameter, f : [0,1] × R¹ → R¹ is continuous.

Fourth-order two-point BVPs are useful for material mechanics because the problems usually characterize the deflection of an elastic beam. The problem (P) describes the deflection of an elastic beam with both ends rigidly fixed. The existence and multiplicity of positive solutions for the elastic beam equations has been studied extensively when the non-linear term f : [0,1] × [0, +∞) → [0, +∞) is continuous, see for example [1–10] and references therein. Agarwal and Chow [1] investigated problem (P) by using of contraction mapping and iterative methods. Bai [3] applied upper and lower solution method and Yao [9] used Guo-Krasnosel'skii fixed point theorem of cone expansion-compression type. However, there are only a few articles concerned with the nonpositive or semipositive elastic beam equations. Yao [11] considered the existence of positive solutions of semipositive elastic beam equations by constructing control functions and a special cone and using fixed point theorem of cone expansion-compression type. In this article, we assume that f : [0,1] × R¹ → R¹, which implies the problem (P) is nonpositive (or semipositive particularly). By the topological degree and fixed point theory of superlinear operator on lattice (the definition of lattice will be given in Section 2), we obtain the existence of nontrivial solutions for the non-positive BVP (P) and the existence of positive solutions for the semipositive BVP (P).

2 Preliminaries

Let E be an ordered Banach space in which the partial ordering ≤ is induced by a cone P ⊂ E, θ denote the zero element of E. P is called solid if int P ≠ ∅, i.e., P has nonempty interior. P is called a generating cone if E = P - P . For the concepts and properties about the cones we refer to [12–14].

We call E a lattice in the partial ordering ≤, if for arbitrary x, y ∈ E, sup{x, y} and inf{x, y} exist. For x ∈ E, let

x^{+} = sup{x, θ}, x^{-} = sup{ {x, θ},

which are called the positive and the negative part of x, respectively. Take |x| = x⁺ + x^- , then |x| ∈ P , and |x| is called the module of x. One can see [15] for the definition and the properties about the lattice.

For convenience, we use the following notations:

x_{+} = x^{+}, x_{-} = - x^{-},

(2.1)

then

x_{+} \in P, x_{-} \in (- P), x = x_{+} + x_{-} .

Remark 2.1 If E is a lattice, then P is a generating cone.

Definition 2.1 [[16], Definition 3.2, p. 929]. Let D ⊂ E and F : D → E be a nonlinear operator. F is said to be quasi-additive on lattice, if there exists y₀ ∈ E such that

F x = F x_{+} + F x_{-} + y_{0}, \forall x \in D,

(2.2)

where x₊ and x_- are defined by (2.1).

Remark 2.2 We point out that the condition (2.2) appears naturally in the applications of nonlinear differential equations and integral equations.

Let

E = C [a, b] = {x (t) | x : [a, b] \to R^{1} is continuous},

and f : [a, b] × R¹ → R¹. Consider the Nemytskii operator

(F x) (t) = f (t, x (t)) .

Set P = {x ∈ C[a, b] | x(t) ≥ 0}, then E = C[a, b] is a lattice in the partial ordering which is induced by P . For any x ∈ C[a, b], it is evident that

x_{+} (t) = max {x (t), 0}, x_{-} (t) = min {x (t), 0},

and hence |x|(t) = |x(t)|. By Remark 3.1 in [16], we know that there exists y₀ ∈ C[a, b] such that Fx = Fx₊ + Fx_- + y₀, ∀x ∈ C[a, b].

Suppose that B is a linear operator and A = BF . It follows that

A x = A x_{+} + A x_{-} + B y_{0},

which means that A is quasi-additive on lattice.

Definition 2.2 [[17], Definition, p. 261]. Let B : E → E be a linear operator. B is said to be a u₀- bounded linear operator, if there exists u₀ ∈ P\{θ}, such that for any x ∈ P\{θ}, there exist a natural number n and real numbers ζ, η > 0, such that

ζ u_{0} \leq B^{n} x \leq η u_{0} .

Lemma 2.1 [[18], Theorem 4.2.2, p. 122]. Let P be a generating cone and B a u₀- bounded completely continuous linear operator. Then the spectral radius r(B) ≠ 0 and r^-¹(B) is the only positive eigenvalue corresponding to positive eigenvectors and B has no other eigenvectors except those corresponding to r^-¹(B).

Let B : E → E be a positive completely continuous linear operator, r(B) a spectral radius of B, B* the conjugated operator of B, and P* the conjugated cone of P. Since P ⊂ E is a generating cone, according to the famous Krein-Rutman theorem (see [14]), if r(B) ≠ 0, then there exist

\bar{φ} \in P \ {θ}

, and g* ∈ P*\{θ}, such that

B \bar{φ} = r (B) \bar{φ}, B^{*} g^{*} = r (B) g^{*} .

(2.3)

Fix

\bar{φ} \in P \ {θ}

, g* ∈ P*\{θ} such that (2.3) holds. For δ > 0, let

P (g^{*}, δ) = {x \in P, g^{*} (x) \geq δ | | x | |},

then P (g*, δ) is also a cone in E.

Definition 2.3 [[19], Definition, p. 528]. Let B be a positive linear operator. B is said to satisfy H condition, if there exist $\bar{φ} \in P \ {θ}$ , g* ∈ P*\{θ} and δ > 0 such that (2.3) holds, and B maps P into P(g*, δ).

Remark 2.3 Let

B φ = \int_{a}^{b} k (x, y) φ (y) d y

, where k(x, y) ∈ C([a, b] × [a, b]), k(x, y) ≥ 0, φ ∈ C[a, b]. Suppose that (2.3) holds and there exists v(x) ∈ P\{θ} such that

k (x, y) \geq v (x) k (τ, y), \forall x, y, τ \in [a, b]

and v(x)g*(x) ≢ 0, then B satisfies H condition (see [19]).

Lemma 2.2 [[16], Theorem 3.1, p. 929]. Let P be a solid cone, A : E → E be a completely continuous operator satisfying A = BF, where F is quasi-additive on lattice, B is a positive bounded operator satisfying H condition. Suppose that

(i)

there exist a ₁ > r^- ¹(B), y ₁ ∈ P such that
$F x \geq a_{1} x - y_{1}, \forall x \in P;$

(2.4)
(ii)

there exist 0 ≤ a ₂ ≤ r^- ¹(B), y ₂ ∈ P such that
$F x \geq a_{2} x - y_{2}, \forall x \in (- P) .$

(2.5)

Then there exists R₀> 0 such that deg(I - A, T_R, θ) = 0 for any R > R₀ , where T_R = {x ∈ C[0, 1] : ||x|| < R}.

Lemma 2.3 [[16], Theorem 3.3, p. 932]. Let Ω be a bounded open subset of E, θ ∈ Ω, and

A : \bar{Ω} \to P

a completely continuous operator. Suppose that A has no fixed point on ∂Ω. If

(i)

there exists a positive bounded linear operator B such that |Ax| ≤ B|x|, for all x ∈ ∂Ω;
(ii)

r(B) ≤ 1.

Then deg(I - A, Ω, θ) = 1.

3 Existence of nontrivial solutions for the non-positive BVP (P)

In the sequel we always take E = C[0,1] with the norm ||u|| = max_0≤t≤1|u(t)| and P = {u ∈ C[0, 1] | u(t) ≥ 0, 0 ≤ t ≤ 1}. Then P is a solid cone in E and E is a lattice under the partial ordering ≤ induced by P.

A solution of BVP (P) is a fourth differentiable function u : [0,1] → R such that u satisfies (P). u is said to be a positive solution of BVP (P) if u(t) > 0, 0 < t < 1. Let G(t, s) be Green's function of homogeneous linear problem u⁽⁴⁾(t) = 0, u(0) = u(1) = u'(0) = u'(1) = 0. From Yao [11] we have

G (t, s) = \{\begin{matrix} \frac{1}{6} t^{2} {(1 - s)}^{2} [(s - t) + 2 (1 - t) s], & 0 \leq t \leq s \leq 1, \\ \frac{1}{6} s^{2} {(1 - t)}^{2} [(t - s) + 2 (1 - s) t], & 0 \leq s \leq t \leq 1, \end{matrix}

and

(G₁) G(t, s) ≥ 0, 0 ≤ t, s ≤ 1;

(G₂) G(t, s) = G(s, t);

(G₃) G(t, s) ≥ p(t)G(τ; s), 0 ≤ t, s, τ ≤ 1, where $p (t) = \frac{2}{3} min {t^{2}, {(1 - t)}^{2}}$ .

Lemma 3.1 Let

H (t) = \frac{1}{2} t^{2} {(1 - t)}^{2}

and

q (s) = \frac{2}{3} s^{2} {(1 - s)}^{2}

. Then

q (s) H (t) \leq G (t, s) \leq H (t), 0 \leq t, s \leq 1 .

(3.1)

Proof. Since G(0, s) = G(1, s) = 0, 0 ≤ s ≤ 1, H(0) = H(1) = 0, then q(s)H(t) = G(t, s) = H(t) holds for t = 0 and t = 1. If 0 < t ≤ s ≤ 1 and t < 1, then

\begin{gathered} G (t, s) = \frac{1}{6} t^{2} {(1 - s)}^{2} [3 s (1 - t) - t (1 - s)] \\ \leq \frac{1}{2} t^{2} {(1 - s)}^{2} s (1 - t) \\ \leq \frac{1}{2} t^{2} {(1 - t)}^{2} s (1 - s) \\ < \frac{1}{2} t^{2} {(1 - t)}^{2} = H (t), \end{gathered}

and

\begin{array}{l} \frac{G (t, s)}{H (t)} & = \frac{\frac{1}{6} t^{2} {(1 - s)}^{2} [3 s (1 - t) - t (1 - s)]}{\frac{1}{2} t^{2} {(1 - t)}^{2}} \\ \geq \frac{{(1 - s)}^{2} [3 s (1 - t) - t (1 - t)]}{3 {(1 - t)}^{2}} \\ = \frac{{(1 - s)}^{2} (3 s - t)}{3 (1 - t)} \geq \frac{2 s {(1 - s)}^{2}}{3 (1 - t)} \\ \geq \frac{2}{3} s^{2} {(1 - s)}^{2} = q (s) . \end{array}

Similarly, (3.1) holds for 0 ≤ s ≤ t < 1 and t > 0. The proof is complete. □

It is well known that the problem (P) is equivalent to the integral equation

u (t) = λ \int_{0}^{1} G (t, s) f (s, u (s)) d s .

Let

(A u) (t) = \int_{0}^{1} G (t, s) f (s, u (s)) d s,

(3.2)

(B u) (t) = \int_{0}^{1} G (t, s) u (s) d s .

(3.3)

Lemma 3.2 Let B be defined by (3.3). Then B is a u₀- bounded linear operator.

Proof. Let $u_{0} (t) = H (t) = \frac{1}{2} t^{2} {(1 - t)}^{2}$ , t ∈ [0,1]. For any u ∈ P\{θ}, by Lemma 3.1

we have

\int_{0}^{1} q (s) H (t) u (s) d s \leq B u (t) = \int_{0}^{1} G (t, s) u (s) d s \leq \int_{0}^{1} H (t) u (s) d s .

Take arbitrarily

0 < ε_{0} < \frac{1}{2}

, then

u_{0} (t) \int_{ε_{0}}^{1 - ε_{0}} q (s) u (s) d s \leq B u (t) \leq ∥u∥ \cdot u_{0} (t) .

Let

ζ = \int_{ε_{0}}^{1 - ε_{0}} q (s) u (s) d s > 0

, η = ||u|| > 0. Then

ζ u_{0} \leq B u \leq η u_{0} .

This indicates that B : E → E is a u₀- bounded linear operator. □

From Lemma 2.1 we have r(B) ≠ 0 and r^-¹(B) is the only eigenvalue of B. Denote λ₁ = r^-¹(B).

Now let us list the following conditions which will be used in this article:

(H₁) there exist constants α and β with α > β ≥ 0 satisfying

\underset{u \to + \infty}{lim inf} \frac{f (t, u)}{u} \geq α, \underset{u \to - \infty}{lim sup} \frac{f (t, u)}{u} \leq β, \forall t \in [0, 1] .

(3.4)

(H₂) there exists a constant γ ≥ 0 satisfying

\underset{u \to 0}{lim sup} |\frac{f (t, u)}{u}| \leq γ, \forall t \in [0, 1] .

(3.5)

(H₃) $lim_{u \to + \infty} \frac{f (t, u)}{u} = + \infty$ .

Theorem 3.1 Suppose that (H₁) and (H₂) hold. Then for any $λ \in (\frac{λ_{1}}{α}, \frac{λ_{1}}{ι})$ , BVP (P) has at least one nontrivial solution, where λ₁ = r^-¹(B) is the only eigenvalue of B, B is denoted by (3.3), ι = max{β, γ}.

Proof. Let (Fu)(t) = f(t, u(t)). Then A = BF, where A is denoted by (3.2). By Remark 2.2, F is quasi-additive on lattice. Applying the Arzela-Ascoli theorem and a standard argument, we can prove that A : E → E is a completely continuous operator.

Now we show that λA = λBF has at least one nontrivial fixed point, which is the nontrivial solution of BVP (P).

On account of (G₃) we have that

p (t) = \frac{2}{3} min {t^{2}, {(1 - t)}^{2}} \in P \ {θ}

such that

G (t, s) \geq p (t) G (τ, s), 0 \leq t, s, τ \leq 1 .

Notice that $B u (t) = \int_{0}^{1} G (t, s) u (s) d s$ , where G(t, s) ≥ 0, G(t, s) ∈ C([0,1] × [0,1]). From Lemma 3.2 B is a u₀- bounded linear operator. By Lemma 2.1 we have r(B) ≠ 0 and λ₁ = r^-¹(B) is the only eigenvalue of B. Then there exist $\bar{φ} \in P \ {θ}$ and g* ∈ P*\{θ} such that (2.3) holds. Notice that λ > 0, from Remark 2.3, λB satisfies H condition.

By (3.4) and (3.5), there exist r > 0, M > 0 and

0 < ε < min {\frac{α λ - λ_{1}}{λ}, \frac{λ_{1} - β λ}{λ}, \frac{λ_{1} - γ λ}{λ}}

such that

f (t, u) \geq (α - ε) u - M, \forall t \in [0, 1], u \geq 0,

(3.6)

f (t, u) \geq (β + ε) u - M, \forall t \in [0, 1], u \leq 0,

(3.7)

| f (t, u) | \leq (γ + ε) | u |, \forall t \in [0, 1], | u | \leq r .

(3.8)

By (3.6) and (3.7), we have (2.4) and (2.5) hold, where a₁ = α - ε, a₂ = β + ε.

Let B₁ = λB. Then

r^{- 1} (B_{1}) = \frac{λ_{1}}{λ}

. Obviously, for any

λ \in (\frac{λ_{1}}{α}, \frac{λ_{1}}{ι})

, a₁> r^-¹(B₁), a₂< r^-¹(B₁). From Lemma 2.2 there exists R₀> 0 such that for any R > max{R₀, r},

deg (I - λ A, T_{R}, θ) = 0 .

(3.9)

Let B₂ = λ(γ + ε)B. From (3.8) we have |λAu| ≤ B₂|u|, also

r (B_{2}) = \frac{λ (γ + ε)}{λ_{1}} \leq 1

. Without loss of generality we assume that λA has no fixed point on ∂T_r , where T_r = {u ∈ C[0,1] | ||u|| < r}. By Lemma 2.3 we have

deg (I - λ A, T_{r}, θ) = 1,

(3.10)

It is easy to see from (3.9) and (3.10) that λA has at least one nontrivial fixed point. Thus problem (P) has at least one nontrivial solution. □

Remark 3.1 If α = +∞, β = γ = 0, then for any λ > 0 problem (P) has at least one nontrivial solution.

Theorem 3.2 Suppose that (H₁) holds. Assume f(t, 0) ≡ 0, ∀t ∈ [0,1] and

lim_{u \to 0} \frac{f (t, u)}{u} = ρ .

(3.11)

Then for any $λ \in (\frac{λ_{1}}{α}, \frac{λ_{1}}{β})$ and $λ \neq \frac{λ_{1}}{ρ}$ , BVP (P) has at least one nontrivial solution.

Proof. Since f(t, 0) ≡ 0, ∀t ∈ [0,1], then Aθ = θ. By (3.11) we have that the Frechet derivative

A_{θ}^{'}

of A at θ exists and

(A_{θ}^{'} u) (t) = \int_{0}^{1} G (t, s) ρ u (s) d s .

Notice that

λ \neq \frac{λ_{1}}{ρ}

, then 1 is not an eigenvalue of

λ A_{θ}^{'}

. By the famous Leray-Schauder theorem there exists r > 0 such that

deg (I - λ A, T_{r}, θ) = deg (I - λ A_{θ}^{'}, T_{r}, θ) = {(- 1)}^{κ} \neq 0,

(3.12)

where κ is the sum of algebraic multiplicities for all eigenvalues of $λ A_{θ}^{'}$ lying in the interval (0, 1). From the proof of Theorem 3.1 we have that (3.9) holds for any $λ \in (\frac{λ_{1}}{α}, \frac{λ_{1}}{β})$ . By (3.9) and (3.12), λA has at least one nontrivial fixed point. Thus problem (P) has at least one nontrivial solution. □

4 Existence of positive solutions for the semipositive BVP (P)

In many real problems, the positive solution is more significant. In this section we will study this kind of question.

Lemma 4.1 [[20], Theorem 1, p. 90]. Let D = [a, b]. Suppose

(i)

G(t, s) is a symmetric kernel. And there exist D ₀ ⊂ D, mesD ₀ ≠ 0 and δ > 0 such that
$G (t, s) \geq δ G (τ, s), \forall t \in D_{0}, s, τ \in D;$
(ii)

f(t, u) is bounded from below and $lim_{u \to + \infty} f (t, u) = + \infty$ uniformly holds for t ∈ D ₀. Then for any λ* > 0, there exists R = R(λ*) > 0 such that if 0 < λ₀ ≤ λ*, ||φ ₀|| ≥ R and φ ₀ = λ₀ Aφ ₀, then φ ₀(x) ≥ 0, where A is denoted by (3.2).

Theorem 4.1 Suppose that (H₃) holds. Then there exists λ* > 0 such that for any 0 < λ < λ* BVP (P) has at least one positive solution.

Proof. By (H₃) there exists a constant b > 0 such that

f (t, u) \geq - b, \forall t \in [0, 1], u \geq 0 .

(4.1)

Let

f_{1} (t, u) = \{\begin{matrix} f (t, u), u \geq 0, \\ f (t, - u), u < 0 . \end{matrix}

From (4.1) f₁ is bounded from below. Let

(A_{1} u) (t) = \int_{0}^{1} G (t, s) f_{1} (s, u (s)) d s .

Then A₁ : E → E is a completely continuous operator.

From the proof of Theorems 2.7.3 and 2.7.4 in Sun [18], there exists R₀> 0 such that for any R > R₀,

deg (I - λ A_{1}, T_{R}, θ) = 0, \forall λ > 0 .

(4.2)

Take 0 < r < R₀. Let m = max_{0≤t≤1,|u|<r}|f₁(t, u)|, G = max_0≤s,t≤1G(t, s),

\bar{λ} = r {(m G)}^{- 1}

. For any

0 < λ < \bar{λ}

, u ∈ ∂T_r , we have

\begin{array}{l} ∥λ A_{1} u∥ & = max_{0 \leq t \leq 1} | \int_{0}^{1} λ G (t, s) f_{1} (s, u (s)) d s | \\ < \bar{λ} G m = r = ∥u∥ . \end{array}

Thus

deg (I - λ A_{1}, T_{r}, θ) = 1, \forall 0 < λ < \bar{λ} .

(4.3)

From (4.2) and (4.3), we have that for any

0 < λ < \bar{λ}

, there exist u_λ, ∈ C[0,1], ||u_λ|| > r such that u_λ = λA₁u_λ. In order to apply Lemma 4.1 we claim that

lim_{λ \to 0^{+}, u_{λ} = λ A_{1} u_{λ}, ∥u_{λ}∥ > r} ∥u_{λ}∥ = + \infty .

(4.4)

In fact, if (4.4) doesn't hold, then there exist λ _n > 0,

u_{λ_{n}} \in C [0, 1]

such that λ _n → 0,

r < | | u_{λ_{n}} | | < c

(c > 0 is a constant) and

u_{λ_{n}} = λ_{n} A_{1} u_{λ_{n}} .

(4.5)

Since A₁ is completely continuous, then ${u_{λ_{n}}}$ has a subsequence converging to u* ∈ C[0,1]. Assume, without loss of generality, that it is ${u_{λ_{n}}}$ . Taking n → +∞ in (4.5), we have u* = θ, which is a contradiction to $| | u_{λ_{n}} | | > r > 0$ . Hence (4.4) holds.

Let D = [0,1], D₀ = [t₁, t₂] ⊂ (0, 1) ⊂ D,

δ = min_{t_{1} \leq t \leq t_{2}} p (t) > 0

. By (G₃)

G (t, s) \geq δ G (τ, s), \forall t \in D_{0}, s, τ \in D .

From (H₃) and the definition of f₁, we have

lim_{u \to + \infty} f_{1} (t, u) = lim_{u \to + \infty} f (t, u) = + \infty .

By Lemma 4.1 there exists

R = R (\bar{λ}) > 0

such that if

0 < λ \leq \bar{λ}

, ||u_λ|| ≥ R and u_λ = λA₁u_λ, then u_λ(t) ≥ 0. By (4.4), there exists

λ^{*} < \bar{λ}

such that if 0 < λ ≤ λ*, ||u_λ|| ≥ r and u_λ = λA₁u_λ, then ||u_λ|| ≥ R. Thus u_λ(t) ≥ 0. By the definitions of A₁ and f₁ we have

u_{λ} (t) = λ A_{1} u_{λ} (t) = λ \int_{0}^{1} G (t, s) f_{1} (s, u (s)) d s = λ \int_{0}^{1} G (t, s) f (s, u (s)) d s = λ A u_{λ} (t) .

And so u_λ (t) is a positive solution of problem (P). □

Remark 4.1 In Theorem 4.1, without assuming that f(t, u) ≥ 0 when u ≥ 0, we obtain the existence of positive solutions for the semipositive BVP (P).

Remark 4.2 Noticing that, in this article, we only study the existence of positive solutions for BVP (P), which is irrelevant to the value of f(t, u) when u ≤ 0, we only need to suppose that f(t, u) is bounded from below when u ≥ 0. In fact, f(t, u) may be unbounded from below when u ≤ 0.

5 Two examples

In order to illustrate possible applications of Theorems 3.2 and 4.1, we give two examples.

Example 5.1 Consider the fourth-order BVP

\{\begin{gathered} u^{(4)} (t) = λ [sin u (t) + u (t) arctan u (t) + π u (t)], 0 \leq t \leq 1, \\ u (0) = u (1) = u^{'} (0) = u^{'} (1) = 0 . \end{gathered}

(P1)

In this example, f(t, u) = sinu + u arctanu + πu, then

\underset{u \to + \infty}{lim inf} \frac{f (t, u)}{u} = \frac{3 π}{2}, \underset{u \to - \infty}{lim inf} \frac{f (t, u)}{u} = \frac{π}{2},

(5.1)

lim_{u \to 0} \frac{f (t, u)}{u} = 1 + π .

(5.2)

Take α = 3π/2, β = π/2, ρ = π +1. Then (5.1), (5.2) indicate (H₁), (3.11) hold, repectively. Notice that α > ρ > β > 0 and f(t, 0) ≡ 0, ∀t ∈ [0,1], by Theorem 3.2 for any $λ \in (\frac{λ_{1}}{α}, \frac{λ_{1}}{β})$ and $λ \neq \frac{λ_{1}}{ρ}$ , BVP (P₁) has at least one nontrivial solution.

Example 5.2 Consider the fourth-order BVP

\{\begin{gathered} u^{(4)} (t) = λ [(\sqrt{t} + 1) u^{2} - \sqrt[3]{u}], 0 \leq t \leq 1, \\ u (0) = u (1) = u^{'} (0) = u^{'} (1) = 0 . \end{gathered}

(P2)

In this example,

f (t, u) = (\sqrt{t} + 1) u^{2} - \sqrt[3]{u}

, then

lim_{u \to + \infty} \frac{f (t, u)}{u} = lim_{u \to + \infty} [(\sqrt{t} + 1) u - \frac{1}{\sqrt[3]{u^{2}}}] = + \infty .

(5.3)

(5.3) means (H₃) holds. By Theorem 4.1 there exists λ* > 0 such that for any 0 < λ < λ* BVP (P₂) has at least one positive solution.

Declarations

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the referees for carefully reading this article and making valuable comments and suggestions. This work is supported by the Foundation items: NSFC (10971179, 11026203), NSF (BK2011202) of the Jiangsu Province, NSF (09XLR04) of the Xuzhou Normal University and NSF (2010KY07) of the Suqian College.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)

Department of Teachers Education, Suqian College, Suqian, P. R. China

(2)

Department of Mathematics, Jiangsu Normal University, Xuzhou, P. R. China

(3)

School of Mechanics and Civil Engineering, China University of Mining & Technology, Xuzhou, P. R. China

References

Agarwal RP, Chow YM: Iterative method for fourth order boundary value problem. J Comput App Math 1984, 10: 203-217. 10.1016/0377-0427(84)90058-XMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Bai Z, Wang H: On positive solutions of some nonlinear four-order beam equations. J Math Anal Appl 2002, 270: 357-368. 10.1016/S0022-247X(02)00071-9MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Bai Z: The upper and lower solution method for some fourth-order boundary value problems. Nonlinear Anal 2007, 67: 1704-1709. 10.1016/j.na.2006.08.009MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Dalmasso R: Uniqueness of positive solutions for some nonlinear four-order operators. J Math Anal Appl 1996, 201: 152-168. 10.1006/jmaa.1996.0247MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Gupta CP: Existence and uniqueness results for the bending of an elastic beam equation. Appl Anal 1988, 26: 289-304. 10.1080/00036818808839715MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Graef R, Yang B: Positive solutions of a nonlinear fourth order boundary value problem. Commun Appl Nonl Anal 2007, 14: 61-73.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
Korman P: Uniqueness and exact multiplicity of solutions for a class of fourth-order semilinear problems. Proc R Soc Edinburg Sect A 2004, 134: 179-190. 10.1017/S0308210500003140MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Lou B: Positive solutions for nonlinear elastic beam models. Int J Math Sci 2001, 27: 365-375. 10.1155/S0161171201004203View ArticleGoogle Scholar
Yao Q: Existence of n solutions and/or positive solutions to a semipositive elastic beam equation. Nonlinear Anal 2007, 66: 138-150. 10.1016/j.na.2005.11.016MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Zhang X: Existence and iteration of monotone positive solutions for an elastic beam equation with a corner. Nonlinear Anal 2009, 10: 2097-2103. 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2008.03.017View ArticleGoogle Scholar
Yao Q: Positive solutions for eigenvalue problems of four-order elastic beam equations. Appl Math Lett 2004, 17: 237-243. 10.1016/S0893-9659(04)90037-7MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Amann H: Fixed point equations and nonlinear eigenvalue problems in ordered Banach spaces. SIAM Rev 1976, 18: 620-709. 10.1137/1018114MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Guo D, Lakshmikanthan V: Nonlinear Problems in Abstract Cones. Academic press, San Diego; 1988.Google Scholar
Krein MG, Rutman MA: Linear operators leaving invariant a cone in a Banach space. Am Math Soc Transl 1962, 10: 199-325.Google Scholar
Lucxemburg WAJ, Zaanen AC: Riesz Space, vol I. North-Holland Publishing Company, London; 1971.Google Scholar
Sun J, Liu X: Computation of topological degree in ordered Banach spaces with lattice structure and its application to superlinear differential equations. J Math Anal Appl 2008, 348: 927-937. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2008.05.023MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
Krasnosel'skii MA: Topological methods in the theory of nonlinear integral equations. Pergamon Press, Oxford; 1964.Google Scholar
Sun J: Nonlinear Functional Analysis and its Applications. Science Press, Beijing; 2007. in ChineseGoogle Scholar
Sun J: Nontrivial solutions of superlinear Hammerstein integral equations and its applications. Chinese Ann Math Ser A 7 1986, 528-535.Google Scholar
Sun J: Existence of positive solutions of nonlinear Hammerstein integral equations and its applications. Chinese Ann Math Ser A 1988, 9: 90-96. in ChineseMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.