 Research
 Open access
 Published:
First order periodic problem at resonance with nonlinear impulses
Boundary Value Problems volume 2014, Article number: 186 (2014)
Abstract
We consider the nonlinear first order periodic problem with nonlinear impulses. We apply the Schaeffer fixed point theorem and prove the existence results under LandesmanLazer type sufficient conditions. We formulate also necessary conditions in some special cases. The impulses can be viewed as a control which compensates the influence of external forces and vice versa.
MSC: 34A37, 34B37, 34F15, 47H11.
1 Introduction
In this paper we deal with a nonlinear boundary value problem of the first order,
At prescribed points in the interval (0,T) the solution is subject to the impulses which depend on an actual value of the solution. These impulses can be interpreted as a control of the external forces represented by f in order to get existence or nonexistence a periodic solution of (1). Vice versa, the external forces can be interpreted as a control of given impulses.
Impulsive problems have attracted the attention of mathematicians for several decades. Let us mention the classical books [1]–[4]. The first order boundary value problems with impulses were studied recently in many research articles such as [5]–[12]. Optimal control of space trajectories with applications to maneuvers of spacecraft or satellite constellation are considered in papers [13]–[16].
According to the best of our knowledge, this paper is the first one to treat the periodic first order problem at resonance with external forces and impulses satisfying the LandesmanLazer type conditions (see (3)(7) below and compare with conditions in [17]). Similar conditions for Dirichlet problems at resonance, but for second order semilinear and quasilinear equations (involving the pLaplacian), are formulated in the authors’ papers [18] and [19], respectively. The authors apply the topological methods in [18] and variational methods in [19] to prove the existence results. In this paper we rely on the Schaeffer fixed point theorem, which is based on the topological degree argument.
In order to formulate the main results precisely, we need some notation.
Let T>0, J=[0,T], 0={t}_{0}<{t}_{1}<{t}_{2}<\cdots <{t}_{p}<{t}_{p+1}=T and set {J}^{\prime}=J\setminus \{{t}_{1},{t}_{2},\dots ,{t}_{p}\}. We denote by BC({J}^{\prime}) the Banach space of all bounded and continuous functions defined on {J}^{\prime} equipped with the usual supremum norm on {J}^{\prime}. We also let
equipped with the norm
Then (X,\parallel \cdot \parallel ) is a Banach space.
We assume that a\in X, f\in C({J}^{\prime}\times \mathbb{R}) is such that \mathrm{\forall}s\in \mathbb{R}, \mathrm{\forall}j=1,2,\dots ,p the limits
exist.
Let {I}_{j}:\mathbb{R}\to \mathbb{R}, {I}_{j}\in C(\mathbb{R}), j=1,2,\dots ,p. We consider the following nonlinear impulse conditions:
By a solution of (1), (2) we understand a function u\in X such that {u}^{\prime}\in X and (1), (2) hold true.
Our main results concern the resonance case:
We also assume that f is bounded on J\times \mathbb{R} and for t\in J the limits
exist. We admit {I}_{j}(\mathrm{\infty})=\mathrm{\infty} and {I}_{j}(+\mathrm{\infty})=+\mathrm{\infty} but we require {I}_{j} to be sublinear at ±∞, that is, we assume
In the following theorem the mutual connection among {f}_{\pm}(t) and {I}_{j}(\pm \mathrm{\infty}) plays the key role.
Theorem 1
Let the following two inequalities hold:
or, alternatively,
Then the nonlinear impulsive problem (1), (2) has at least one solution.
In particular, for the linear equation we have the following necessary and sufficient condition.
Corollary 1
Letf(t,s)=f(t)\in Xfor alls\in \mathbb{R}, and
Then the impulsive problem (1), (2) has at least one solution. Moreover, if for alls\in \mathbb{R}, j=1,2,\dots ,p, we have
then (7) is also a necessary condition for the existence of a solution. A similar assertion holds true if we switch{I}_{j}(\mathrm{\infty})and{I}_{j}(+\mathrm{\infty})in the above inequalities.
We give the following simple examples, which illustrate our main results.
Example 1
Let us consider the linear periodic problem
It is well known that (9) has a solution if and only if
The impulse condition
corresponds to {t}_{1}=\pi, {I}_{1}(s)=arctans and
It follows from Corollary 1 that the linear problem (9) with nonlinear impulse (11) has a solution if and only if
Comparison of (10) and (12) shows that the problem with impulses has a solution for a wider class of external forces f than the original problem without impulses.
Similarly, applying Corollary 1, we obtain an existence result for the linear problem (9) with impulse condition
if and only if
Comparison of (10) and (14) shows that the sets of external forces f for which the problem with impulse (13) and the problem without impulse (13) have a solution have an empty intersection.
Example 2
Let us consider the nonlinear periodic problem
with impulses (2). In this case, we have {f}_{\pm}(t)=\pm \frac{\pi}{2}cost and
It follows from Theorem 1 that the nonlinear impulse problem (15), (2) has at least one solution, provided that
Example 3
Let us consider the nonlinear periodic problem (1) with impulses (2). Assume {I}_{j}(+\mathrm{\infty})=+\mathrm{\infty} for at least one j\in \{1,\dots ,p\}, {I}_{j}(+\mathrm{\infty})<\mathrm{\infty} otherwise and, similarly, {I}_{k}(\mathrm{\infty})=\mathrm{\infty} for at least one k\in \{1,\dots ,p\} and {I}_{k}(\mathrm{\infty})<\mathrm{\infty} otherwise. Then the impulse problem (1), (2) has at least one solution.
The above examples illustrate that suitably chosen impulses may control the forcing term in order to get existence or nonexistence of periodic solutions.
2 Some elementary facts
For the reader’s convenience we provide a survey of wellknown facts about the linear periodic problem and constant impulses:

(i)
(Nonresonance case) Periodic problem
\begin{array}{r}{u}^{\prime}(t)+a(t)u(t)=f(t),\phantom{\rule{1em}{0ex}}t\in J,\\ u(0)=u(T),\end{array}(16)
has a unique solution for all f if and only if {\int}_{0}^{T}a(\tau )\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}\mathrm{d}\tau \ne 0.
This solution is expressed in the following form:
where
In particular, {\int}_{0}^{T}a(\tau )\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}\mathrm{d}\tau >0 implies {g}_{a}(t,s)>0\mathrm{\forall}t,s\in J.

(ii)
(Nonresonance case with impulses) If {\int}_{0}^{T}a(\tau )\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}\mathrm{d}\tau \ne 0, the solution of (16) on {J}^{\prime} with constant impulses
u\left({{t}_{j}}^{+}\right)=u({t}_{j})+{\theta}_{j},\phantom{\rule{1em}{0ex}}j=1,2,\dots ,p,(17)
is given by

(iii)
(Resonance case) If {\int}_{0}^{T}a(\tau )\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}\mathrm{d}\tau =0, then (16) has a solution if and only if
{\int}_{0}^{T}f(t){e}^{{\int}_{0}^{t}a(\tau )\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}\mathrm{d}\tau}\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}\mathrm{d}t=0.
The solution (if it exists) is then not unique. It is given by
where c\in \mathbb{R} is arbitrary.

(iv)
(Resonance case with impulses) If {\int}_{0}^{T}a(\tau )\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}\mathrm{d}\tau =0, then (16) on {J}^{\prime} with impulses (17) has a solution if and only if
{\int}_{0}^{T}f(t){e}^{{\int}_{0}^{t}a(\tau )\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}\mathrm{d}\tau}\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}\mathrm{d}t+\sum _{i=1}^{p}{e}^{{\int}_{0}^{{t}_{j}}a(\tau )\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}\mathrm{d}\tau}{\theta}_{j}=0.
The solution (if it exists) is not unique. It is given by
where c\in \mathbb{R} is arbitrary.
The properties (i)(iv) follow from the variation of constants formula.
3 Proofs
Fix \delta >0 and set {a}_{\delta}(t):=a(t)+\delta. Then {a}_{\delta}\in X and {\int}_{0}^{T}{a}_{\delta}(t)\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}\mathrm{d}t=T\delta >0. The periodic problem (1) with impulses (2) can be written in an equivalent form:
We define operator F:X\to X as follows:
According to (ii), u\in X is a solution of (18) (and hence also of (1), (2)) if and only if u is a fixed point of F, i.e.,
The operator F is compact. Indeed, let M\subset X be a bounded set. Then it follows from the definition of F that the family of functions F(M) is equicontinuous in BC({J}^{\prime}) and for each t\in {J}^{\prime} the set \{u(t):u\in F(M)\} is bounded in ℝ. It follows from ArzelaAscoli’s theorem (see [20], Theorem 1.2.13]) that F(M) is relatively compact in BC({J}^{\prime}) and hence also in X. Since F is clearly continuous, compactness of F follows.
The following a priori estimate is the key to the proof of Theorem 1.
Lemma 1
There existsK>0such that for all\lambda \in [0,1]andu\in Xsatisfyingu=\lambda F(u)we have\parallel u\parallel <K.
Proof
Assume via contradiction that there exist {u}_{n}\in X, {\lambda}_{n}\in [0,1] (n\in \mathbb{N}) such that \parallel {u}_{n}\parallel \ge n and
This is equivalent to
Set {v}_{n}:=\frac{{u}_{n}}{\parallel {u}_{n}\parallel}. Then {v}_{n}\in X; \parallel {v}_{n}\parallel =1, satisfy
This is equivalent to the integral equation
Since {v}_{n}(s)\le 1, \frac{f(s,{u}_{n}(s))}{\parallel {u}_{n}\parallel}\to 0, uniformly with respect to s\in [0,T], \frac{{I}_{j}({u}_{n}({t}_{j}))}{\parallel {u}_{n}\parallel}\to 0, j=1,2,\dots ,p, by similar argument as above, the family \{{v}_{n}\} is equicontinuous in BC({J}^{\prime}) and for each t\in {J}^{\prime} the set \{{v}_{n}(t)\} is bounded. It follows from ArzelaAscoli’s theorem that \{{v}_{n}\} is relatively compact in BC({J}^{\prime}) and hence also in X.
Passing to subsequences, if necessary, we may assume that there exist v\in X and \lambda \in [0,1] such that {v}_{n}\to v in X, {\lambda}_{n}\to \lambda. Taking the limit for n\to \mathrm{\infty} in (20) we get
or equivalently
If \lambda \ne 1 then (21) has only a trivial solution (see (i)). But this contradicts \parallel v\parallel =1! Hence, \lambda =1 and v\in X solves
i.e.,
where c>0 is such that \parallel v\parallel =1.
Consider first the case v(t)=+c\cdot {e}^{{\int}_{0}^{t}a(\tau )\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}\mathrm{d}\tau}>0 in J. Since {v}_{n}\to v in X (i.e., uniformly in J) we have {u}_{n}(t)\to +\mathrm{\infty} as n\to \mathrm{\infty} uniformly in J. Multiply the equation in (19) by {e}^{{\int}_{0}^{t}a(\tau )\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}\mathrm{d}\tau}, integrate over J and perform the integration by parts in the first integral to get
Since
we arrive at
Recall that {u}_{n}(t)\to +\mathrm{\infty} uniformly in J. In particular, we have also {u}_{n}({t}_{j})\to +\mathrm{\infty}, j=1,2,\dots ,p. These facts together with (22), boundedness of f, and the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem yield
a contradiction with (3).
Similarly, if v(t)=c\cdot {e}^{{\int}_{0}^{t}a(\tau )\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}\mathrm{d}\tau}<0 in J, we arrive at a contradiction with (4). □
Compactness of F, Lemma 1 and the Schaeffer fixed point theorem (see [20], Example 5.8.4]) imply that (1), (2) has a solution provided that (3) and (4) hold true. Choosing \delta <0 at the beginning of the proof, we get the existence result provided that (5) and (6) hold.
The proof of Theorem 1 is finished.
Let f=f(t,s) be independent of s, that is, f(t,s)=f(t), t\in J, s\in \mathbb{R}. Then f(t)={f}_{+}(t)={f}_{}(t) and (3), (4) reduces to (7). Hence the linear problem (16) with nonlinear impulses (2) has a solution provided that (7) holds.
We prove that condition (7) is also necessary under assumption (8). Indeed, let u be a solution of (16), (2). Multiply the equation in (16) by {e}^{{\int}_{0}^{t}a(\tau )\phantom{\rule{0.2em}{0ex}}\mathrm{d}\tau} and integrate over J with respect to t:
Integrating by parts the first integral we get
Evaluating the sum on the lefthand side as above, we arrive at
Inequality (7) follows immediately from (23) provided that (8) holds true. The proof of Corollary 1 is finished.
References
Lakshmikantham V, Bainov DD, Simeonov PS: Theory of Impulsive Differential Equations. World Scientific, Cambridge; 1989.
Bainov DD, Simeonov PS: Impulsive Differential Equations: Periodic Solutions and Applications. Longman, Harlow; 1993.
Samoilenko AM, Perestyuk NA: Impulsive Differential Equations. World Scientific, Singapore; 1995.
Boichuk AA, Samoilenko AM: Generalized Inverse Operators and Fredholm BoundaryValue Problems. VSP, Utrecht; 2004.
Agarwal RP, Franco D, O’Regan D: Singular boundary value problems for first and second order impulsive differential equations. Aequ. Math. 2005, 69: 8396. 10.1007/s0001000427359
Qian D, Li X: Periodic solutions for ordinary differential equations with sublinear impulsive effects. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2005, 303: 288303. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2004.08.034
Cai G, Du Z, Ge W: Periodic boundary value problem for first order impulsive differential equation at resonance. Rocky Mt. J. Math. 2007, 37(1):6777. 10.1216/rmjm/1181069320
Franco D, Nieto JJ: Firstorder impulsive ordinary differential equations with antiperiodic and nonlinear boundary conditions. Nonlinear Anal. 2000, 42: 163173. 10.1016/S0362546X(98)00337X
Nieto JJ: Impulsive resonance periodic problems of first order. Appl. Math. Lett. 2002, 15: 489493. 10.1016/S08939659(01)00163X
Nieto JJ: Periodic boundary value problems for firstorder impulsive ordinary differential equations. Nonlinear Anal. 2002, 51: 12231232. 10.1016/S0362546X(01)008896
Li J, Nieto JJ, Shen J: Impulsive periodic boundary value problems of firstorder differential equations. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2007, 325(1):226236. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2005.04.005
Chu J, Nieto JJ: Impulsive periodic solutions of firstorder singular differential equations. Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 2008, 40(1):143150. 10.1112/blms/bdm110
Carter TE: Optimal impulsive space trajectories based on linear equations. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 1991, 70: 277297. 10.1007/BF00940627
Carter TE: Necessary and sufficient conditions for optimal impulsive rendezvous with linear equations of motion. Dyn. Control 2000, 10: 219227. 10.1023/A:1008376427023
Liu X, Willms AR: Impulsive controllability of linear dynamical systems with applications to maneuvers of spacecraft. Math. Probl. Eng. 1996, 2: 277299. 10.1155/S1024123X9600035X
Prado AFBA: Biimpulsive control to build a satellite constellation. Nonlinear Dyn. Syst. Theory 2005, 5: 169175.
Landesman EM, Lazer AC: Nonlinear perturbations of linear elliptic boundary value problems at resonance. J. Math. Mech. 1970, 19: 609623.
Drábek P, Langerová M: Quasilinear boundary value problem with impulses: variational approach to resonance problem. Bound. Value Probl. 2014., 2014: 10.1186/16872770201464
Drábek, P, Langerová, M: On the second order equations with nonlinear impulses  Fredholm alternative type results. Topol. Methods Nonlinear Anal. (in press)
Drábek P, Milota J: Methods of Nonlinear Analysis: Applications to Differential Equations. Springer, Basel; 2013.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the Grant 1300863S of the Grant Agency of Czech Republic and by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), project ‘NTIS  New Technologies for the Information Society’, European Centre of Excellence, CZ.1.05/1.1.00/02.0090.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Authors’ contributions
Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Authors’ original submitted files for images
Below are the links to the authors’ original submitted files for images.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits use, duplication, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Drábek, P., Langerová, M. First order periodic problem at resonance with nonlinear impulses. Bound Value Probl 2014, 186 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1186/s1366101401863
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s1366101401863