Describe differences between material formulations

[davidscn]

We provide two material formulations which correspond to different formulations of the strain energy function. For the cook membrane, IIRC the formulation 1 provides more accurate results. Here some results of the CSM benchmark from Hron & Turek for both formulations. Note that the original benchmark uses a Saint Venant–Kirchhoff material law whereas we use a neo-Hookean material law:

[Sinatj]

Here a 3D flap case is considered to compare the performance of the MF solver with the two official adapters “linear elasticity” and “nonlinear elasticity”. At the inlet, a uniform constant velocity in profile in the x-direction is imposed (0.5 m/s). The same gird resolution, basis function order, and time step size are used for the three simulations. The effect of the strain energy function on the temporal evolution of the tip displacement is investigated.

Here is a summary of the test case physical properties:

Computational domain:

Solid mesh

Fluid mesh

Displacement of point initially located at (0.51 m, 0.35m, 0 m):

[davidscn]

Thank you very much for your contribution. May I ask you to upload the watchpoint files as well so that I can generate the plots locally?

EDIT: Following our discussion: if you spot any place where I can improve the documentation regarding this, just let me know or open a PR in order to improve it.

[Sinatj]

Attached you can find the watchpoint files.

MF_form0_S1.log
MF_form1_S1.log
nonlinear_S1.log
linear_S1.log

I will do that if I spot any point of improvement.

[davidscn]

Thanks!