refactoring BCs

[nathanielmorgan]

Description

The BCs are now assigned to a solver. An array stores the boundary tag sets for a given physics and solver for maximum efficiency. No if checks required.

Type of change

Please select all relevant options

• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• Formatting and/or style fixes
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• This change requires a documentation update

How Has This Been Tested?

• Test A : Regression test
• Test B :

Test Configuration:

• OS version: MacOS
• Hardware: x86
• Compiler: clang

Checklist:

• My code follows the style guidelines of this project
• I have performed a self-review of my code
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• My changes generate no new warnings
• The code builds from scratch with my new changes
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
• Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules

[jacob-moore22]

I think this should stay type, or we need to make it just model, or just "reflected" for the velocity. Currently, its overprescribed.

[nathanielmorgan]

The BC's follow the material definitions in the input. We apply many models to a BC. This allows us to specify many types of models -- thermal, mechanical, etc on a BC. Multi-physics solvers, e.g., thermal-mechanical solvers, will have temperature and displacement conditions on the same boundary. The new input and coding in Fierro supports BC's for multi-physics solvers.

[nathanielmorgan]

example:
- boundary_condition:
solver_id: 0
geometry: x_plane
direction: x_dir
value: 0.0
displacement_model: fixed_displacement
temperature_model: fixed_temperature
#.... more inputs parameters here ....

[Adrian-Diaz]

It may be less development overhead later to have it work as a vector with
-model1: reflected velocity
-model2: fixed temperature

BTW, the way this works in the MPI solver now is that each FEA module lists its respective BCs. The difficulty there as mentioned is assigning them to the same node sets if we're overloading the same plane for example, but in theory that could be done by allowing references to previously declared geometry objects in previous BCs. Just something to think about.
EDIT: we could also automate checking that the supplied geometry parameters are identical to those in a previous module's BCS; which would be a cheap startup cost given the relatively small module count and geometry parameter set.

[jacob-moore22]

Minor tweaks to function interfaces, and moving of solver_id to parent class.

[jacob-moore22]

LGTM. Thanks!