\documentclass[reqno]{amsart}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{hyperref}

\AtBeginDocument{{\noindent\small
\emph{Electronic Journal of Differential Equations},
Vol. 2008(2008), No. 59, pp. 1--13.\newline
ISSN: 1072-6691. URL: http://ejde.math.txstate.edu or http://ejde.math.unt.edu
\newline ftp ejde.math.txstate.edu  (login: ftp)}
\thanks{\copyright 2008 Texas State University - San Marcos.}
\vspace{9mm}}

\begin{document}
\title[\hfilneg EJDE-2008/59\hfil Elliptic problems with small coefficients]
{Asymptotic behavior of elliptic boundary-value problems
with  some small coefficients}

\author[S. Guesmia\hfil EJDE-2008/59\hfilneg]
{Senoussi Guesmia}

\address{Senoussi Guesmia \newline
Service de M\'{e}trologie Nucleaire\\
Universit\'{e} Libre de Bruxelles \\
C. P. 165, 50, Av. F. D. Roosevelt, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium
\newline
Laboratoire Math\'{e}matiques, Informatique et Applications (MIA)\\
4, rue des Fr\`{e}res Lumi\`{e}re 68093 Mulhouse CEDEX France}
\email{senoussi.guesmia@uha.fr, sguesmia@ulb.ac.be}

\thanks{Submitted November 16, 2007. Published April 18, 2008.}
\subjclass[2000]{35B25, 35B40, 35J25}
\keywords{Elliptic problem; singular perturbations; asymptotic behavior}

\begin{abstract}
 The aim of this paper is to analyze the asymptotic behavior of the
 solutions to elliptic boundary-value problems where some
 coefficients become negligible on a cylindrical part of the
 domain. We show that the dimension of the space can be reduced
 and find estimates of the rate of convergence. Some applications to
 elliptic boundary-value problems on domains becoming unbounded are
 also considered.
\end{abstract}

\maketitle
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
\newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}
\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
\newtheorem{remark}[theorem]{Remark}
\newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}
\allowdisplaybreaks

\section{Introduction}

We study the asymptotic behavior of the solutions of elliptic
boundary-value problems, posed on bounded domains of
$\mathbb{R}^{n}=\mathbb{R}^{p}\times\mathbb{R}^{n-p}$ with
cylindrical part, where the coefficients and the domains depend on a
parameter $\theta $. We show under certain conditions on the
coefficients that the solution of such problems converges towards a
solution of another elliptic problem in $\mathbb{R}^{n-p}$, faster
than any power of $\theta $ on the cylindrical part. More
specifically, we are interested in problems invariant by
translations (cylindrical symmetry) arbitrary in $p$ directions, and
we compare the solution of our problem with that of an ideal problem
independent of the coordinates associated with these $p$ directions.
This study was inspired to us, on one hand by the theory of
"Singular Perturbation" of boundary problem, which is the framework
of this paper, and on the other hand by the ideas and the tools
given in some works of Chipot and Rougirel (see \cite{ch},
\cite{rougirel}) where another study of the asymptotic behavior of
elliptic boundary-value problems on domains becoming unbounded is
given. We would like to note that is difficult to locate similar
studies in the literature, except some examples studied in
\cite{LION 3} and recently some cases have been considered in
\cite{sen1} and \cite{guesmia}.

The paper is organized as follows: In the second section, we give
some useful lemmas which will be used in the following sections.
We show the main theorem in the third section where we investigate
the rate of convergence estimates. Next, in the fourth section, we
apply this result to the asymptotic behavior of the solutions of
elliptic problems on domains becoming unbounded in one or several
directions and we extend some results of \cite{ch} and
\cite{rougirel} for more general domains. In the last section, we
give the rate of convergence according to the size of the domain
in all directions.

Let $( \Omega _{\theta }) _{\theta >0}$ be a family of bounded
Lipschitz domains of $\mathbb{R}^{n}$, satisfying
\begin{equation}
\Delta \times \omega \subset \Omega _{\theta },\quad
\Delta \times \partial \omega \subset \partial \Omega _{\theta },\quad
P_{X_{2}}\Omega _{\theta }\subset \omega _{0},
\label{fe01}
\end{equation}
where $\omega _{0}$ and $\omega $ are two bounded Lipschitz domains of
$\mathbb{R}^{n-p}$, $\Delta $ is a bounded Lipschitz domain of
$\mathbb{R}^{p}$, $n$ and $p$ two positive integers with $n>$ $p\geq 1$
and $P_{X_{i}}$ the projection on the $X_{i}$ axis, such that for
 $x=(x_{1},x_{2},\dots ,x_{n})\in \mathbb{R}^{n}$, we set
 $X_{1}=(x_{1},\dots ,x_{p})$ and $X_{2}=(x_{p+1},\dots ,x_{n})$.

\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{fig1}
\end{center}
\label{fig1} \caption{The domain $\Omega _{\theta }$.}
\end{figure}

We would like to consider the following three boundary-value problems
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}-\partial _{i}(a_{ij}^{\theta }\partial
_{j}u)+a_{0}u=f \quad\text{in  }\Omega _{\theta } \\
u=0\quad \text{on }\partial \Omega _{\theta },
\end{gathered} \label{fe1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
\sum_{i,j=p+1}^{n}-\partial _{i}(a_{ij}\partial _{j}u)
+a_{0}u=f \quad \text{in  }\omega \\
u=0 \quad \text{on }\partial \omega ,
\end{gathered}  \label{fe2}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
\sum_{i,j=p+1}^{n}-\partial _{i}(a_{ij}\partial _{j}u)
+a_{0}u=h \quad \text{in }\omega _{0} \\
u=0 \quad \text{on }\partial \omega _{0}
\end{gathered} \label{fe2b}
\end{equation}
where $\theta $ is a positive parameter. Since we are interested
in $\theta $ close to $0$, we can take $\theta <1$. Assume that
\begin{equation}
f,h\in L^{2}(\omega _{0}).  \label{fe3}
\end{equation}
Consider then
\begin{equation}
a_{ij}^{\theta }\in L^{\infty }(P_{X_{1}}\Omega _{\theta }\times \omega
_{0}),  \label{fe4}
\end{equation}
for all $i,j=1,\dots,n$.

\begin{remark} \rm
We can only suppose that
\[
a_{ij}^{\theta }\in L^{\infty }(\Omega _{\theta }),
\quad \text{for }j=1,\dots,n
\]
and we extend the coefficients on $P_{X_{1}}\Omega _{\theta }\times
\omega _{0}$, keeping the assumptions below.
\end{remark}

Assume that the coefficients $a_{ij}^{\theta }$ are independent
of $X_{1}$ for $j\geq p+1$, and independent of $\theta $ for $i\geq p+1$ and
$j\geq p+1$, i.e.
\begin{gather}
a_{ij}^{\theta }(x)=a_{ij}^{\theta }(X_{2})\quad \text{for }j\geq p+1
\label{fe5} \\
a_{ij}^{\theta }(x)=a_{ij}(X_{2})\quad \text{for }i\geq p+1,\;
j\geq p+1.  \label{fe6}
\end{gather}
Furthermore, we assume the ellipticity condition; i.e., there exist a
constant $\lambda >0$, such that
\begin{equation}
\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}a_{ij}^{\theta }(x)\xi _{i}\xi _{j}\geq \lambda
\theta | \boldsymbol{\xi}^{1}| ^{2}+\lambda |
\boldsymbol{\xi}^{2}| ^{2},\quad \text{ a.e. }x\in P_{X_{1}}\Omega
_{\theta }\times \omega _{0}, \; \forall \xi \in \mathbb{R}^{n},
\label{felliptic}
\end{equation}
where $\boldsymbol{\xi}^{1}=( \xi _{1},\dots ,\xi _{p}) $ and
$\boldsymbol{\xi}^{2}=( \xi _{p+1},\dots ,\xi _{n}) $. Consequently,
\begin{equation}
\sum_{i,j=p+1}^{n}a_{ij}(x)\xi _{i}\xi _{j}\geq \lambda |
\xi | ^{2},\quad \text{a.e. }x\in \omega _{0},\;\forall \xi
\in \mathbb{R}^{n-p}.  \label{felliptic2}
\end{equation}
In addition, we suppose that there exist constants $\alpha $
$(0<\alpha \leq 1/2)$ and $C>0$, such that
\begin{gather}
| a_{ij}^{\theta }(x)| \leq C\theta ^{\frac{1}{2}
+\alpha }\quad \text{for }i\leq p,\; j\leq p  \label{fe11} \\
| a_{ij}^{\theta }(x)| \leq  C\theta ^{\alpha } \quad
\text{for }i\geq p+1,\; j\leq p\text{ or }i\leq p,\;j\geq p+1
\label{fe12}
\end{gather}
a.e. $x\in \Delta \times \omega $. The existence of the term
$a_{0}$ does not have any influence on the final result,
then we put $a_{0}=0$.

\begin{remark} \label{rmk1.2} \rm
As a model example, we consider the singularly perturbed Laplacian
problem, defined
on a cylindrical domain $\Omega _{\theta }=\Delta \times \omega $,
\begin{gather*}
-\theta \Delta _{X_{1}}u-\Delta _{X_{2}}u=f \quad
 \text{in  }\Omega _{\theta } \\
u=0\quad  \text{on }\partial \Omega _{\theta }.
\end{gather*}
\end{remark}
The variational problems corresponding to (\ref{fe1}), (\ref{fe2})
and (\ref{fe2b}) are
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
a(u,v)=\int_{\Omega _{\theta }}\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}a_{ij}^{\theta
}(x)\partial _{j}u_{\theta }\partial _{i}vdx=\int_{\Omega _{\theta
}}fvdx, \\
u,v\in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega _{\theta }),
\end{gathered}  \label{fe7}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
a_{\omega }(u,v)=\int_{\omega
}\sum_{i,j=p+1}^{n}a_{ij}(X_{2})\partial _{j}u_{\infty }\partial
_{i}vdX_{2}=\int_{\omega }fvdX_{2}, \\
u,v\in H_{0}^{1}(\omega ),
\end{gathered}  \label{fe8}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
a_{\omega _{0}}(u,v)=\int_{\omega
_{0}}\sum_{i,j=p+1}^{n}a_{ij}(X_{2})\partial _{j}u_{h}\partial
_{i}vdX_{2}=\int_{\omega _{0}}hvdX_{2},  \\
u,v\in H_{0}^{1}(\omega _{0}).
\end{gathered} \label{fe8b}
\end{equation}
According to the Lax-Milgram theorem, the existence and the uniqueness of
the solution $u_{\theta }$ in $H_{0}^{1}(\Omega _{\theta })$ of the
problem (\ref{fe7}), the solution $u_{\infty }$ in $H_{0}^{1}(\omega )$ of
the problem (\ref{fe8}) and the solution $u_{h}$ in
$H_{0}^{1}(\omega _{0})$ of the problem (\ref{fe8}) are assured.
First of all, we need to introduce some preliminary results.

\section{Some estimates}

We start with the following Lemmas which will be used frequently in
this paper.

\begin{lemma}\label{restriction}
Let $v$ be an element of $H_{0}^{m}(\Omega
_{\theta })$. Then
\begin{gather}
v(X_{1},.) \in H_{0}^{m}(\omega _{0})\quad \text{a.e. }X_{1}\in
P_{X_{1}}\Omega _{\theta },  \label{fe41} \\
v(X_{1},.) \in H_{0}^{m}(\omega )\quad \text{a.e. }X_{1}\in \Delta
. \label{fe041}
\end{gather}
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
By the density of $\mathcal{D}(\Omega _{\theta }) $ in
$H_{0}^{m}(\Omega _{\theta })$, there exists a sequence $\phi _{n}$ of
$\mathcal{D}(\Omega _{\theta }) $, such that
\[
\int_{\Omega _{\theta }}\nabla (v-\phi _{n})dx
\to 0 \quad \text{as $n\to \infty$}.
\]
We extend $v$ and $\phi _{n}$ by $0$ on $P_{X_{1}}\Omega _{\theta }\times
\omega _{0}$ $( \Omega _{\theta }\subset P_{X_{1}}\Omega _{\theta
}\times \omega _{0}) $, then we have $\phi _{n}\in \mathcal{D}(
P_{X_{1}}\Omega _{\theta }\times \omega _{0})$,
$v\in H_{0}^{m}(P_{X_{1}}\Omega _{\theta }\times \omega _{0})$ and
\[
\int_{P_{X_{1}}\Omega _{\theta }}\int_{\omega _{0}}|
\nabla (v-\phi _{n})| ^{2}dx \to 0 \quad
\text{as $n\to\infty$}.
\]
We can extract a subsequence $\phi _{n_{k}}$, such that
as $k\to\infty$:
\begin{gather*}
\int_{\omega _{0}}| \nabla _{X_{2}}(v-\phi
_{n_{k}})| ^{2}dx \to 0\quad
\text{ a.e. }X_{1}\; \in P_{X_{1}}\Omega _{\theta }, \\
\int_{\omega }| \nabla _{X_{2}}(v-\phi_{n_{k}})| ^{2}dx
\to 0 \quad \text{a.e. }X_{1} \in \Delta ,
\end{gather*}
which give (\ref{fe41}) and (\ref{fe041}).
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma}\label{cas positif}
Under the preceding hypotheses, we assume that
$h=f\geq 0$ (resp. $h=f\leq 0$). Then we have
\[
0\leq u_{\theta }\leq u_{h},\quad (\text{resp. }u_{h}\leq
u_{\theta }\leq 0).
\]
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
We apply the weak maximal principle for elliptic problems
(see \cite{ordre2}) to obtain the inequalities $u_{\theta }\geq 0$
and $u_{h}\geq 0$. For the
second inequality, if we use (\ref{fe41}) we can take $v\in
H_{0}^{1}(\Omega _{\theta })$ in \eqref{fe8b} and integrate
on $P_{X_{1}}\Omega _{\theta }$, to get
\[
\int_{\Omega _{\theta
}}\sum_{i,j=p+1}^{n}a_{ij}(x)\partial _{j}u_{h}\partial
_{i}vdx=\int_{\Omega _{\theta }}fvdx,
\]
because $v$ vanishes in the exterior of $\Omega _{\theta }$. By comparison
with \eqref{fe7}, we deduce
\[
\int_{\Omega _{\theta }}\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}a_{ij}^{\theta
}(x)\partial _{j}u_{\theta }\partial _{i}vdx=\int_{\Omega
_{\theta }}\sum_{i,j=p+1}^{n}a_{ij}(x)\partial
_{j}u_{h}\partial _{i}vdx.
\]
Taking into account the independence of $u_{\infty }$ on $X_{1}$, we deduce
\begin{align*}
\int_{\Omega _{\theta }}\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}a_{ij}^{\theta
}(x)\partial _{j}(u_{\theta }-u_{h})\partial _{i}vdx
&= \int_{\Omega _{\theta }}\sum_{\substack{ 1\leq i\leq p  \\
p+1\leq j\leq n}}^{n}a_{ij}^{\theta }(x)\partial _{j}u_{h}\partial
_{i}vdx \\
&=\int_{\Omega _{\theta }}\sum_{\substack{ 1\leq i\leq p  \\
p+1\leq j\leq n}}^{n}\partial _{i}(a_{ij}^{\theta }(x)\partial
_{j}u_{h}v)dx\\
&=\int_{\partial \Omega _{\theta
}}\sum_{\substack{ 1\leq i\leq p  \\ p+1\leq j\leq n}}
^{n}a_{ij}^{\theta }(x)\partial _{j}u_{h}v\nu _{i}dx,
\end{align*}
because $a_{ij}^{\theta }$ is independent of $X_{1}$ for $1\leq i\leq p$ and
$p+1\leq j\leq n$. Then, since $v$ vanishes on the boundary, we deduce that
\begin{equation}
\int_{\Omega _{\theta }}\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}a_{ij}^{\theta
}(x)\partial _{j}(u_{\theta }-u_{h})\partial _{i}vdx=0,
\label{fe42}
\end{equation}
for all $v\in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega _{\theta })$. On the other hand, Theorem 2.8
in \cite{CHI} shows that
\[
\gamma [ ( u_{\theta }-u_{h}) ^{+}]
=[ \gamma ( u_{\theta }-u_{h})] ^{+}.
\]
Then since $u_{\theta }\in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega _{\theta })$ and $u_{h}\geq 0$,
we have
\[
\gamma [( u_{\theta }-u_{h}) ^{+}] =0,
\]
which allows us to take $v=( u_{\theta }-u_{h}) ^{+}\in
H_{0}^{1}(\Omega _{\theta })$ in \eqref{fe42}, then we get
\begin{align*}
&\int_{\Omega _{\theta }}\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}a_{ij}^{\theta
}(x)\partial _{j}(u_{\theta }-u_{h})\partial _{i}(
u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })^{+}vdx \\
&=\int_{u_{\theta }-u_{h}\geq 0}\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}a_{ij}^{\theta
}(x)\partial _{j}(u_{\theta }-u_{h})\partial _{i}(
u_{\theta }-u_{h})^{+}vdx=0.
\end{align*}
By the ellipticity assumption \eqref{felliptic}, it follows
that
\[
| \nabla (u_{\theta }-u_{h})^{+}|
_{L^{2}(\Omega _{\theta }) }^{2}\leq 0.
\]
Therefore, $(u_{\theta }-u_{h})^{+}=$const and
$(u_{\theta}-u_{h})^{+}\in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega _{\theta })$, then we have
$(u_{\theta }-u_{h})^{+}=0$, which gives the second inequality
$u_{\theta }\leq u_{\infty }$. For the second case when $f\leq 0$, it is
enough to take $-f$ in place of $f$ above.
\end{proof}

Let $u_{+}$ (resp. $u_{-}$) be the solution of \eqref{fe8b} replacing
$h$ by $f^{+}$ (resp. $-f^{-}$).

\begin{lemma}\label{cas gen}
Under the preceding assumptions, we have
\[
u_{-}\leq u_{\theta }\leq u_{+}.
\]
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
Let $u_{\theta ,+}$ (resp. $u_{\theta ,-}$) be the solution
of \eqref{fe7} replacing $f$ by $f^{+}$ (resp. $-f^{-}$). Let us
notice that
\[
-f^{-}\leq f\leq f^{+},\quad
f^{+}\geq 0,\quad
-f^{-}\leq 0
\]
a.e. $x\in \omega _{0}$, then applying the weak maximal principle for
elliptic problems, we get
\[
u_{\theta ,-}\leq u_{\theta }\leq u_{\theta ,+}.
\]
If we use lemma \ref{cas positif}, we obtain
$u_{-}\leq u_{\theta ,-}$, $u_{\theta ,+}\leq u_{+}$.
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}

Next, we show the convergence of $u_{\theta}$ to $u_{\infty
}$ and we estimate the rate of this convergence.

\section{Asymptotic behavior}

According to Lemma \ref{restriction}, testing (\ref{fe8}) with
$v\in H_{0}^{1}(\Delta\times \omega )$ and integrating on $\Delta $ yields
\[
\int_{\Omega _{\theta }}\sum_{i,j=p+1}^{n}a_{ij}^{\theta
}(x)\partial _{j}u_{\infty }\partial _{i}vdx=\int_{\Omega _{\theta }}fvdx,
\]
because $v$ vanishes in the exterior of $\Delta \times \omega $.
By \eqref{fe7}, we remark that
\[
\int_{\Omega _{\theta }}\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}a_{ij}^{\theta
}(x)\partial _{j}u_{\theta }\partial _{i}v\,dx=\int_{\Omega _{\theta
}}\sum_{i,j=p+1}^{n}a_{ij}(x)\partial _{j}u_{\infty }\partial _{i}vdx.
\]
Using the independence of $u_{\infty }$ on $X_{1}$, it comes
\begin{equation}
\int_{\Omega _{\theta }}\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}a_{ij}^{\theta
}(x)\partial _{j}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })\partial
_{i}vdx=\int_{\Omega _{\theta }}\sum_{\substack{ 1\leq i\leq p
\\ p+1\leq j\leq n}}^{n}a_{ij}^{\theta }(x)\partial _{j}u_{\infty }\partial
_{i}vdx.  \label{fe9}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, the independence of $u_{\infty }$ and of the coefficients
$a_{ij}^{\theta }$ on $X_{1}$ for $1\leq i\leq p$ and $p+1\leq j\leq n$,
gives
\begin{align*}
\int_{\Omega _{\theta }}\sum_{\substack{ 1\leq i\leq p  \\
p+1\leq j\leq n}}^{n}a_{ij}^{\theta }(x)\partial _{j}u_{\infty }\partial
_{i}vdx
&=\sum_{\substack{ 1\leq i\leq p  \\ p+1\leq j\leq n}}
^{n}\int_{\Omega _{\theta }}\partial _{i}(a_{ij}^{\theta
}(x)\partial _{j}u_{\infty }v)dx \\
&=\sum_{\substack{ 1\leq i\leq p  \\ p+1\leq j\leq n}}
^{n}\int_{\partial \Omega _{\theta }}a_{ij}^{\theta
}(x)\partial _{j}u_{\infty }v\nu _{i}dx=0,
\end{align*}
because $v$ vanishes on the boundary. Consequently, (\ref{fe9}) becomes
\begin{equation}
\int_{\Omega _{\theta }}\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}a_{ij}^{\theta
}(x)\partial _{j}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })\partial _{i}vdx=0
\quad \text{for all  }v\in H_{0}^{1}(\Delta \times \omega )).  \label{fe10}
\end{equation}
For $\epsilon >0$, we set
\[
\Delta _{\epsilon }=\{ x\in \Delta : d(\partial \Delta ,x)>\epsilon\} .
\]
Let $(\rho _{\epsilon })_{\epsilon >0}$ be a family of smooth
functions on $\mathbb{R}^{p}$, such that
\[
\mathop{\rm supp}\rho _{\epsilon }\subset \Delta _{\frac{\epsilon }{2}},
\quad (\Delta _{\epsilon }\subset \Delta _{\frac{\epsilon }{2}}),
\]
$\rho _{\epsilon }(x)=1$ for all $x$ in $\Delta_{\epsilon }$ and for all
$x$ in $\Delta $, $\rho _{\epsilon }$ satisfies
\[
0\leq \rho _{\epsilon }(x)\leq 1.
\]
If we take $v=\rho _{\epsilon }^{2}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })\in
H_{0}^{m}(\Delta \times \omega ))$ in (\ref{fe10}), we deduce that
\[
\int_{\Delta \times \omega
}\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}a_{ij}^{\theta }(x)\partial _{j}(
u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })\partial _{i}(\rho _{\epsilon
}^{2}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty }))dx=0,
\]
whence
\begin{align*}
&\int_{\Delta \times \omega }\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}\rho _{\epsilon
}^{2}a_{ij}^{\theta }(x)\partial _{j}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })
\partial _{i}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })dx\\
&= -2\int_{\Delta \times \omega }\sum_{\substack{ 1\leq i\leq p
\\ 1\leq j\leq n}}a_{ij}^{\theta }(x)\rho _{\epsilon }\partial _{j}(
u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })
\partial _{i}\rho _{\epsilon }dx.
\end{align*}
Using (\ref{felliptic}) and noting that $\rho _{\epsilon }$ vanishes in the
exterior of $\Delta _{\frac{\epsilon }{2}}$ and depends only on $X_{1}$, it
follows that
\begin{align*}
&\int_{\Delta _{\frac{\epsilon }{2}}\times \omega }\lambda \theta
\sum_{i=1}^{p}\rho _{\epsilon }^{2}(\partial _{i}(
u_{\theta }-u_{\infty }))^{2}dx+\int_{\Delta _{\frac{
\epsilon }{2}}\times \omega }\lambda '\sum_{i=p+1}^{n}\rho
_{\epsilon }^{2}(\partial _{i}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })
)^{2}dx \\
&\leq -2\int_{\Delta _{\frac{\epsilon }{2}}\times \omega }\sum
_{\substack{ 1\leq i\leq p  \\ 1\leq j\leq p}}a_{ij}^{\theta }(x)\rho
_{\epsilon }\partial _{j}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })(
u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })\partial _{i}\rho _{\epsilon }dx \\
&\quad -2\int_{\Delta _{\frac{\epsilon }{2}}\times \omega }\sum
_{\substack{ 1\leq i\leq p  \\ p+1\leq j\leq n}}a_{ij}^{\theta }(x)\rho
_{\epsilon }\partial _{j}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })(
u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })\partial _{i}\rho _{\epsilon }dx.
\end{align*}
We estimate the second member using (\ref{fe11}), (\ref{fe12}) and the fact
that the derivative of $\rho _{\epsilon }$ is bounded, we get
\begin{align*}
&\int_{\Delta _{\frac{\epsilon }{2}}\times \omega }\theta
\sum_{i=1}^{p}(\rho _{\epsilon }\partial _{i}(u_{\theta
}-u_{\infty }))^{2}dx+\int_{\Delta _{\frac{\epsilon }{2}
}\times \omega }\sum_{i=p+1}^{n}(\rho _{\epsilon }\partial
_{i}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty }))^{2}dx \\
&\leq C\theta ^{\frac{1}{2}+\alpha }\Big[ \int_{\Delta _{\frac{
\epsilon }{2}}\times \omega }\sum_{1\leq j\leq p}(\rho
_{\epsilon }\partial _{j}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty }))^{2}dx
\Big] ^{1/2}\Big[ \int_{\Delta _{\frac{\epsilon }{2}}\times \omega
}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })^{2}dx\Big] ^{1/2} \\
&\quad +C\theta ^{\alpha }\Big[ \int_{\Delta _{\frac{\epsilon }{2}}\times
\omega }\sum_{1\leq j\leq p}(\rho _{\epsilon }\partial
_{j}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty }))^{2}dx\Big] ^{1/2}\Big[
\int_{\Delta _{\frac{\epsilon }{2}}\times \omega }(u_{\theta
}-u_{\infty })^{2}dx\Big] ^{1/2}.
\end{align*}
According to the Young inequality
$ab\leq \varepsilon a^{2}+\frac{b^{2}}{\varepsilon }$ with
$\varepsilon =\frac{1}{2C} \theta ^{\frac{1}{2}-\alpha }$ in the
first term of the right hand side, and
$\varepsilon =\frac{1}{2C}\theta ^{-\alpha }$ in the second term of
the right hind side,
we deduce
\begin{equation} \label{fe13}
\begin{aligned}
&\frac{1}{2}\int_{\Delta _{\frac{\epsilon }{2}}\times \omega }\theta
\sum_{i=1}^{p}(\rho _{\epsilon }\partial _{i}(u_{\theta
}-u_{\infty }))^{2}dx+\frac{1}{2}\int_{\Delta _{\frac{
\epsilon }{2}}\times \omega }\sum_{i=p+1}^{n}(\rho _{\epsilon
}\partial _{i}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty }))^{2}dx\\
&\leq C\theta ^{2\alpha }\int_{\Delta _{\frac{\epsilon }{2}}\times \omega
}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })^{2}dx.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Using Poincar\'{e}'s inequality and since $u_{\theta }-u_{\infty }$ vanishes
on $\partial \omega $ for a.e. $X_{1}$,
\[
\frac{1}{| \omega | ^{2}}\int_{\omega }(
u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })^{2}dX_{2}\leq \frac{1}{2}\int_{\omega
}\sum_{p+1\leq i\leq n}(\partial _{i}(u_{\theta
}-u_{\infty }))^{2}dX_{2}\text{ a.e. }X_{1}\text{ in }\Delta _{
\frac{\epsilon }{2}},
\]
where $| \omega | $ is the diameter of $\omega $, then (\ref{fe13}) becomes
\begin{align*}
&\frac{1}{| \omega | ^{2}}\int_{\Delta _{\frac{
\epsilon }{2}}\times \omega }(\rho _{\epsilon }(u_{\theta
}-u_{\infty }))^{2}dx+\int_{\Delta _{\frac{\epsilon }{2}
}\times \omega }\theta \sum_{i=1}^{p}(\rho _{\epsilon }\partial
_{i}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty }))^{2}dx\\
&+ \int_{\Delta _{\frac{\epsilon }{2}}\times \omega
}\sum_{i=p+1}^{n}(\rho _{\epsilon }\partial _{i}(
u_{\theta }-u_{\infty }))^{2}dx\\
&\leq C\theta ^{2\alpha }\int_{\Delta _{\frac{\epsilon }{2}}\times
 \omega }(u_{\theta}-u_{\infty })^{2}dx.
\end{align*}
According to the definition of $\rho _{\epsilon }$, we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{fe14}
\begin{aligned}
&\frac{1}{| \omega | ^{2}}\int_{\Delta _{\epsilon
}\times \omega }(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })
^{2}dx+\int_{\Delta _{\epsilon }\times \omega }\theta
\sum_{i=1}^{p}(\partial _{i}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty
}))^{2}dx   \\
&\quad + \int_{\Delta _{\epsilon }\times \omega }\sum_{i=p+1}^{n}(
\partial _{i}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty }))^{2}dx\\
&\leq C\theta ^{2\alpha }\int_{\Delta _{\frac{\epsilon }{2}}\times
\omega }(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })^{2}dx,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
in particular
\begin{equation}
\int_{\Delta _{\epsilon }\times \omega }(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty
})^{2}dx\leq C(\theta ^{\alpha }| \omega |
)^{2}\int_{\Delta _{\frac{\epsilon }{2}}\times \omega }(
u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })^{2}dx.  \label{fe14b}
\end{equation}
Choosing $\epsilon =\frac{\varepsilon }{2^{k}}$ for $k=0,\dots,\tau -1$ and
$\varepsilon >0$, we get
\[
\int_{\Delta _{\frac{\varepsilon }{2^{k}}}\times \omega }(
u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })^{2}dx\leq C(\theta ^{\alpha
}| \omega | )^{2}\int_{\Delta _{\frac{
\varepsilon }{2^{k+1}}}\times \omega }(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })
^{2}dx.
\]
Iterating the above formula, leads to
\[
\int_{\Delta _{\frac{\varepsilon }{2}}\times \omega }(u_{\theta
}-u_{\infty })^{2}dx\leq C(\theta ^{\alpha }| \omega
| )^{2(\tau -1)}\int_{\Delta _{\frac{
\varepsilon }{2^{\tau }}}\times \omega }(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty
})^{2}dx.
\]
Applying Lemma \ref{cas gen}, we obtain
\[
\int_{\Delta _{\frac{\varepsilon }{2}}\times \omega }(u_{\theta
}-u_{\infty })^{2}dx\leq C(\theta ^{\alpha }| \omega
| )^{2(\tau -1)}\int_{\omega }(
| u_{+}| +| u_{-}| +|
u_{\infty }| )^{2}dx,
\]
whence
\[
\int_{\Delta _{\frac{\varepsilon }{2}}\times \omega }(u_{\theta
}-u_{\infty })^{2}dx\leq C_{\omega }\theta ^{2\alpha (\tau
-1)},
\]
with
\begin{equation}
C_{\omega }=C| \omega | ^{2(\tau -1)
}\int_{\omega }(| u_{+}| +|
u_{-}| +| u_{\infty }| )^{2}dx.
\label{fe46}
\end{equation}
Using (\ref{fe14}) with $\epsilon =\varepsilon $, we get the estimates
\begin{gather}
\int_{\Delta _{\varepsilon }\times \omega
}\sum_{i=1}^{p}(\partial _{i}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty
}))^{2}dx \leq C_{\omega }\theta ^{2\alpha \tau -1},
\label{fe18} \\
\int_{\Delta _{\varepsilon }\times \omega
}\sum_{i=p+1}^{n}(\partial _{i}(u\theta -u_{\infty
}))^{2}dx \leq C_{\omega }\theta ^{2\alpha \tau }.
\label{fe19}
\end{gather}
Finally, for any constant $r>0$, choosing $\tau $ such that
$\tau \alpha >r$. Hence, we can state the following theorem.

\begin{theorem}
\label{feh1convergence}Under  conditions
\eqref{fe3}--\eqref{felliptic}, \eqref{fe11} and \eqref{fe12}, for
any open subset $\Phi $ of $\Delta \times \omega $ with boundary
disjoint of
$\partial \Delta \times \omega $, it holds that
\[
u_{\theta }\to u_{\infty }\text{ \ in }H^{1}(\Phi
),
\]
and for any $r>0$,
\begin{gather}
\int_{\Phi }| \nabla _{X_{1}}u_{\theta }|
^{2}dx
\leq C_{\omega }\theta ^{2r-1},  \label{fe15} \\
\int_{\Phi }| \nabla _{X_{2}}(u_{\theta
}-u_{\infty })| ^{2}dx \leq C_{\omega }\theta
^{2r},  \label{fe16}
\end{gather}
where $C_{\omega }$ is a constant given above and independent of
$\theta $.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
It is sufficient to take $\varepsilon =d(\partial \Delta ,P_{X_{1}}\Phi )$.
\end{proof}

\begin{remark} \rm
We can take $f\in H^{-1}(\omega _{0})$ to show the same
results. In this case we can consider $f$ as an element of
$H^{-1}(\Omega _{\theta }) $ by
\[
<\widetilde{f}(t),v>_{H^{-1}(\Omega _{\theta })
}=\int_{P_{X_{1}}\Omega _{\theta }}<f(t),\widetilde{v}(X_{1},.)>_{H^{-1}
(\omega _{0})}dX_{1},\text{ \ }v\in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega _{\theta }) ,
\]
where $\widetilde{v}$ is the extension of $v$ by $0$ on
$P_{X_{1}}\Omega _{\theta }\times \omega _{0}$.
\end{remark}

\section{Application to the case of large size domains \label{feappliquation
elliptique}}

We will see in this paragraph that the asymptotic behavior of the solution
of linear elliptic problems of order two on domain $\overline{\Omega }_{\ell
}$ satisfied for $\ell '\geq \ell $
\begin{equation}
\overline{\Omega }_{\ell }=(-\ell ,\ell )^{p}\times \omega \text{ or }(-\ell
,\ell )^{p}\times \omega \subset \overline{\Omega }_{\ell }\subset (-\ell
',\ell ')^{p}\times \omega  \label{fe38}
\end{equation}
which is studied in the book of Chipot \cite[Chapter 2 and 3]{ch},
can be casted in the preceding study without supposing any
assumption on $\ell '$ (considering domains more general than
(\ref{fe38})), by giving a particular form to the coefficients
$a_{ij}^{\theta }$. Indeed, Let $( \overline{\Omega }_{\ell })_{\ell
>0}$ be a family of bounded Lipschitz domains of
$\mathbb{R}^{p}\times \omega _{0}$ (see Figures 2 and 3), such that
for any $\ell >0$, $\overline{\Omega }_{\ell }$ contains the
cylinder $(-\ell ,\ell )^{p}\times \omega $ and $(-\ell ,\ell
)^{p}\times
\partial
\omega $ is a part of the boundary of $\overline{\Omega }_{\ell }$,
where $\omega _{0}$ and $\omega $ are defined in the first section.

We consider the two boundary-value problems defined by
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}-\partial _{i}(a_{ij}\partial _{j}u)
+a_{0}u=f \quad  \text{in  }\overline{\Omega }_{\ell } \\
u=0\quad \text{on }\partial \overline{\Omega }_{\ell },
\end{gathered}  \label{fe28}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
\sum_{i,j=p+1}^{n}-\partial _{i}(a_{ij}\partial _{j}u)
+a_{0}u=f \quad \text{in }\omega \\
u=0 \quad \text{on }\partial \omega.
\end{gathered}  \label{fe29}
\end{equation}
We suppose that $f\in L^{2}(\omega )$,
\begin{equation}
a_{0},\; a_{ij}\in L^{\infty }(\mathbb{R}^{p}\times \omega _{0}),
\label{fe30}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
a_{0}(x)=a_{0}(X_{2})\geq 0,\quad
a_{ij}(x)=a_{ij}(X_{2})\quad\text{for }j\geq p+1.  \label{fe31}
\end{equation}
Moreover, we assume that there exists a constant $\lambda >0$, such that
\begin{equation}
\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}a_{ij}(x)\xi _{i}\xi _{j}
\geq \lambda | \boldsymbol{\xi}| ^{2},\quad
\text{a.e. }x\in \mathbb{R}^{p}\times
\omega _{0},\;\forall \xi \in \mathbb{R}^{n}.  \label{fe32}
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=6cm, height=6cm]{fig2} 
\end{center}
\label{fig2} \caption{The domain $\overline{\Omega }_{\ell }.$}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=6cm, height=6cm]{fig3} 
\end{center}
\label{fig3} \caption{The domain $\overline{\Omega }_{\ell _{1}}$
has another form for $\ell _{1}>\ell$.}
\end{figure}
Then the solutions $\overline{u}_{\ell }$ and $u_{\infty }$ of
(\ref{fe28}) and (\ref{fe29}) respectively satisfy
\begin{equation}
\int_{\overline{\Omega }_{\ell
}}\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}a_{ij}(x)\partial _{j}\overline{u}_{\ell }\partial
_{i}v+a_{0}(x)\overline{u}_{\ell }vdx=\int_{\overline{\Omega }_{\ell
}}fvdx, \quad
\text{a.e. }v\in H_{0}^{1}(\overline{\Omega }_{\ell }),  \label{fe33}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\int_{\omega }\sum_{i,j=p+1}^{n}a_{ij}(X_{2})\partial
_{j}u_{\infty }\partial _{i}v+a_{0}(X_{2})u_{\infty
}vdX_{2}=\int_{\omega }fvdX_{2},\quad \text{a.e. }v\in H_{0}^{1}(\omega ).
 \label{fe34}
\end{equation}
We take $\theta =\frac{1}{\ell ^{2}}$ and use the change of variable given
by
\begin{equation}
\psi :(X_{1},X_{2})\mapsto y=\Big(Y_{1}=\frac{X_{1}}{\ell
},Y_{2}=X_{2}\Big),  \label{fe35}
\end{equation}
in $(\ref{fe33})$, and we set $\psi (\overline{\Omega }
_{\ell })=\Omega _{\theta }$, thus we obtain
\begin{align*}
&\int_{\Omega _{\theta }}\sum_{i,j=1}^{p}\frac{1}{\ell ^{2}}
a_{ij}(\ell Y_{1},Y_{2})\partial _{j}\overline{u}_{\ell }(\ell
Y_{1},Y_{2})\partial _{i}v(\ell Y_{1},Y_{2})\ell ^{p}dy\\
&+ \int_{\Omega _{\theta }}\sum_{\substack{ 1\leq i\leq p,\text{ }
p+1\leq j\leq n  \\ or  \\ 1\leq j\leq p,\text{ }p+1\leq i\leq n}}\frac{1}{
\ell }a_{ij}(\ell Y_{1},Y_{2})\partial _{j}\overline{u}_{\ell }(\ell
Y_{1},Y_{2})\partial _{i}v(\ell Y_{1},Y_{2})\ell ^{p}dy\\
&+ \int_{\Omega _{\theta
}}\sum_{i,j=p+1}^{p}a_{ij}(Y_{2})\partial _{j}\overline{u}_{\ell
}(\ell Y_{1},Y_{2})\partial _{i}v(\ell Y_{1},Y_{2})\ell
^{p}dy\\
&=\int_{\Omega _{\theta }}f(Y_{2})v(\ell Y_{1},Y_{2})\ell ^{p}dy.
\end{align*}
Setting
\begin{gather*}
u_{\theta }(Y_{1},Y_{2})
=\overline{u}_{\ell }(\ell Y_{1},Y_{2}), \\
a_{ij}^{\theta }(Y_{1},Y_{2}) =\frac{1}{\ell ^{2}}a_{ij}(\ell Y_{1},Y_{2})
\text{ \ \ for }i,j=1,\dots,p, \\
a_{ij}^{\theta }(Y_{1},Y_{2}) =\frac{1}{\ell }a_{ij}(\ell Y_{1},Y_{2})
\text{ \ \ \ for }1\leq i\leq p<j\leq n\text{ or }1\leq j\leq p<i\leq n, \\
a_{ij}^{\theta }(Y_{2}) = a_{ij}(Y_{2})\text{ \ \ for \ }i,j=p+1,\dots,n.
\end{gather*}
In addition, it is clear that
$(Y_{1},Y_{2})\mapsto v(\ell Y_{1},Y_{2})\in
H_{0}^{1}(\Omega _{\theta })$ if and only if $(X_{1},X_{2})
\mapsto v(X_{1},X_{2})\in H_{0}^{1}(\overline{\Omega }_{\ell
}). $ Consequently, the problem $(\ref{fe33})$ is equivalent to
\begin{equation}
\int_{\Omega _{\theta }}\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}a_{ij}^{\theta
}(x)\partial _{j}u_{\theta }\partial _{i}vdx=\int_{\Omega _{\theta
}}f(X_{2})vdx,\quad
\text{for all }v\in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega _{\theta }).  \label{fe36}
\end{equation}
Therefore, $\overline{u}_{\ell }$ is a solution of \eqref{fe33}
 if and only if $u_{\theta }$ is a solution of \eqref{fe36}.
Moreover we can examine the conditions of the first paragraph on the problem
\eqref{fe36}. According to the definition of
$\overline{\Omega }_{\ell }$, the domain $\Omega _{\theta }$ satisfies the condition
\eqref{fe01} with $\Delta =(-1,1)^{p}$. The
conditions \eqref{fe4}--\eqref{fe6} are satisfied
by definition, for the condition \eqref{felliptic}, we have
\begin{align*}
\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}a_{ij}^{\theta }(y)\xi _{i}\xi _{j}
&=\sum_{i,j=1}^{p}a_{ij}(\ell Y_{1},Y_{2})(\frac{1}{\ell }
\xi _{i})(\frac{1}{\ell }\xi _{j})
+\sum_{1\leq i\leq p,\,p+1\leq j\leq n}a_{ij}(Y_{2})(\frac{
1}{\ell }\xi _{i})(\xi _{j})\\
&\quad +\sum_{\substack{
1\leq j\leq p,\; p+1\leq i\leq n}}a_{ij}(\ell Y_{1},Y_{2})(\xi
_{i})(\frac{1}{\ell }\xi _{j})
+\sum_{i,j=p+1}^{n}a_{ij}(\ell Y_{1},Y_{2})\xi _{i}\xi _{j},
\end{align*}
then using $(\ref{fe32})$, we obtain
\[
\sum_{i,j=1}^{n}a_{ij}^{\theta }(y)\xi _{i}\xi _{j}\geq \lambda
\theta | \boldsymbol{\xi}^{1}| ^{2}+\lambda |
\boldsymbol{\xi}^{2}| ^{2},
\]
a.e.\ $y\in \Omega _{\theta }$ and $\forall \xi \in \mathbb{R}^{n}$,
therefore we have \eqref{felliptic}. Finally, if we use
$(\ref{fe30})$, we get the conditions
\eqref{fe11} and \eqref{fe12} with $\alpha
=\frac{1}{2}$. Then, if we apply Theorem \ref{feh1convergence}, we
deduce for $r>0$ and for $\Phi =(-\sigma,\sigma)^{p}\times \omega $
with $0<\sigma<1$, that there exists $C>0$
independent of $\ell $, such that
\begin{gather*}
\int_{(-\sigma,\sigma)^{p}\times \omega
}| \nabla _{X_{1}}u_{\theta }| ^{2}dy \leq  C\theta ^{r+p-2}, \\
\int_{(-\sigma,\sigma)^{p}\times \omega
}| \nabla _{X_{2}}(u_{\theta }-u_{\infty })
| ^{2}dy \leq C\theta ^{r+p}.
\end{gather*}
Again, we use the change of variable \eqref{fe35} to
obtain
\[
\| \overline{u}_{\ell }-u_{\infty }\|
_{H^{1}((-\sigma\ell,\sigma\ell)^{p}\times \omega)}\leq
\frac{C}{\ell ^{r}}.
\]

\section{Estimate according to all directions}

In the applications, we say that the size of the domain is large
specifically in some directions if we take into account the size ratio
between all the directions, for instance in the domain $(0,1)\times
(0,\varepsilon)$, the size of $(0,1)$ is considered large when $\varepsilon$
become negligible. However all the estimates of
$\overline{u}_{\ell}-u_{\infty }$ given in \cite{sen}, \cite{ch}
 and \cite{rougirel}, only show
an estimate of the error of convergence with respect to $\ell $. In the
following, we investigate this estimate with respect to the size ratio
between $\ell $ and $|\omega |$. Then, we suppose in this
section that $\omega =\omega _{0}$ and a bounded domain $\overline{\Omega }
_{\ell }$ satisfies
\begin{equation}
(-\ell ,\ell )^{p}\times \omega \subset \overline{\Omega }_{\ell }\subset
\mathbb{R}^{p}\times \omega ;  \label{fe43}
\end{equation}
in addition, we assume that
\begin{equation}
f\in L^{\infty }(\omega ).  \label{fe44}
\end{equation}
First, we show the following estimate.

\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=6cm, height=4cm]{fig4} 
\end{center}
\label{fig4} \caption{The domain $\overline{\Omega } _{\ell }$.}
\end{figure}

\begin{lemma}
Let $u_{+}$ (resp. $u_{-}$) be the solution of \eqref{fe8}
replacing $h$ by $f^{+}$ (resp. $-f^{-}$). It holds that
\begin{equation}
| u_{+}| _{L^{2}(\omega )},\text{ }|
u_{-}| _{L^{2}(\omega )},\text{ }| u_{\infty
}| _{L^{2}(\omega )}\leq C\left[ \mathop{\rm meas}\omega )\right]
^{1/2}| \omega | ^{2}  \label{fe45}
\end{equation}
where $C$ is a constant independent of $\omega $ and
$\mathop{\rm meas}\omega)$ denotes the measure of $\omega $.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
We give the proof for $u_{+}$, the proof for $u_{-}$ and $u_{\infty
}$ are similar. Taking $v=u_{+}$ in $(\ref{fe8})$ and
using the
ellipticity condition $(\ref{felliptic2})$, we obtain
\[
\lambda '\int_{\omega }| \nabla u_{+}|
^{2}dX_{2}\leq | f^{+}| _{L^{2}(\omega )}|
u_{+}| _{L^{2}(\omega )}.
\]
Using \eqref{fe44} and applying Poincar\'{e}'s inequality,
then there exists a constant $C$ independent of $\omega $, such that
\[
\frac{1}{| \omega | ^{2}}| u_{+}|
_{L^{2}(\omega )}^{2}\leq C[ \mathop{\rm meas}\omega )] ^{1/2}|
u_{+}| _{L^{2}(\omega )},
\]
which gives $(\ref{fe45})$.
\end{proof}

This enables us to state the following corollary.

\begin{corollary}
Let $\overline{u}_{\ell }$ be the solution of $(
\ref{fe33})$ where $\overline{\Omega }_{\ell }$ is given by
\eqref{fe43}. If we suppose that \eqref{fe30}, \eqref{fe31},
\eqref{fe32} and \eqref{fe44} hold, then for any
$\tau >0$ and any $0<\sigma<1$ there exists a constant $C_{\sigma}>0$
independent of $\ell $ and $\omega $,
such that
\begin{equation}
| \nabla (\overline{u}_{\ell }-u_{\infty }) | _{L^{2}\left((
-\sigma\ell,\sigma\ell\right)^{p}\times \omega)} \leq C_{\sigma}\ell
^{p}\mathop{\rm meas}(\omega )| \omega | ^{2} \big(\frac{| \omega |
}{\ell }\big)^{2\tau}. \label{fe47}
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}

\begin{proof}
If we use the change of variable $(\ref{fe35})$ in $(\ref
{fe18})$ and $(\ref{fe19})$, and we apply the lemma
above to estimate the constant $C_{\omega }$ defined in \eqref{fe46},
then we deduce \eqref{fe47}.
\end{proof}

\subsection*{Acknowledgements}
We would like to thank Professor M. Kirane for his useful comments that
helped improving this article. We would also like to thank
Professor R. Beauwens for raising part of questions considered in
this work.

\begin{thebibliography}{9}

\bibitem{sen1} Brighi, B.;  Guesmia, S.;
Asymptotic behavior of solutions
of hyperbolic problems on a cylindrical domain. \textit{Discrete
Contin. Dyn. Syst. suppl. (2007), 160 - 169.}

\bibitem{sen} Brighi, B.; Guesmia, S.;
 On elliptic boundary-value problems of order 2m in cylindrical domain of large size.
\textit{Adv. Math. Sci. Appl. (2008) (to appear).}

\bibitem{ch} Chipot, M.;
\textit{$\ell $ goes to plus infinity}. Birkh\"{a}user, 2002.

\bibitem{CHI} Chipot, M.;
 \textit{Element of nonlinear analysis}. Birkh\"{a}user, 2000.

\bibitem{rougirel} Chipot, M.; Rougirel, A.;
 On the aymptotic behavior
of the solution of elliptic problems in cylindrical domains becoming
unbounded. \textit{Communication in Contemporary Mathematics, Vol 4, 1,
(2002), 15-44.}

\bibitem{ordre2} Gilbarg, D.; Trudinger, N. S.;
\textit{Elliptic partial
differential equations of second order}. Springer Verlag, 1983.

\bibitem{guesmia} Guesmia, S.;
 Etude du comportement asymptotique de
certaines \'{e}quations aux d\'{e}riv\'{e}es partielles dans des domaines
cylindriques. Th\`{e}se Universit\'{e} de Haute Alsace, December 2006.

\bibitem{LION 3} Lions, J.-L.;
 \textit{Perturbations singuli\`{e}res dans
les probl\`{e}mes aux limites et en contr\^{o}l optimal}. Sringer-Verlag,
323, 1973.

\bibitem{lions} Lions, J.-L.; Magenes, E.;
 \textit{Probl\`{e}mes aux limites non homog\`{e}nes}. Dunod, 1968.
\end{thebibliography}

\end{document}
