Use stress-based variational forms based on 2nd Piola#91
Merged
Conversation
7a4e2ac to
b93ba65
Compare
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Instead of defining variational forms through the strain energy we now define them via the second piola stress. This means that a variational form on the form
which has been solved by performing
derivativeto get the residual, i.ewill now be computed using the second piola stress instead, i.e
using
with
This is useful since$\psi_{\text{active}}$ can depend on variables (e.g
T_a) which in electro-mechanical simulations can depend onuin which case aderivativewill trigger a chain rule operation which is not what we want, see e.g ComputationalPhysiology/simcardems#253To make this work we also rewrite all the strain energy functions ($\psi$ ) to depend on
Crather thanFso that we can useS = 2 * ufl.diff(psi, C).