pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.20646 · v1 · pith:VFEXSUUXnew · submitted 2026-06-06 · ⚛️ physics.comp-ph · physics.flu-dyn

Total-Lagrangian vectorial lattice Boltzmann method for finite-strain hyperelasticity with curved boundaries

Jingsen Feng , Xu Chu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 18:35 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.comp-ph physics.flu-dyn
keywords lattice Boltzmann methodfinite-strain hyperelasticitycurved boundariestotal-Lagrangian formulationvectorial populationsembedded domainscompatibility projection
0
0 comments X

The pith

A total-Lagrangian vectorial lattice Boltzmann method simulates finite-strain hyperelasticity on curved embedded domains.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Finite-strain hyperelasticity on curved embedded domains creates a geometric mismatch for lattice Boltzmann methods because streaming leaves missing populations where lattice directions, surface normals, and tangential deformation directions do not coincide. The paper develops a total-Lagrangian vectorial scheme that writes the continuum equations as a conservative first-order system for material velocity and deformation gradient, then selects vector-valued populations whose moments recover the state and the material-coordinate Piola fluxes. Curved boundaries are embedded by a level set and closed link by link through opposite-population moment identities, cut-link interpolation, and local geometric information at the boundary point. The reconstruction is coupled to a compatibility projection that keeps the recovered displacement aligned with the evolved deformation gradient on embedded active-node graphs, producing D2Q4×6 and D3Q6×12 schemes that retain explicit collide-stream updates on Cartesian grids.

Core claim

The central claim is that writing the continuum equations as a conservative first-order system for material velocity and deformation gradient, then choosing vector-valued populations whose moments recover the state and the material-coordinate Piola fluxes, produces D2Q4×6 and D3Q6×12 schemes that can be closed on curved boundaries through cut-link interpolation and a compatibility projection while extending the previous grid-aligned two-dimensional formulation to curved domains and three-dimensional lattices.

What carries the argument

Vector-valued populations whose moments recover material velocity and deformation gradient, closed by cut-link interpolation and a compatibility projection that aligns recovered displacement with the evolved deformation gradient on embedded active-node graphs.

If this is right

  • The method resolves the geometric mismatch for two- and three-dimensional hyperelastic dynamics on curved domains.
  • Explicit collide-stream updates are retained on Cartesian grids.
  • Benchmarks show agreement with exact finite-strain fields, nonlinear radial boundary-value problems, and finite-element references.
  • The formulation extends the previous grid-aligned two-dimensional work to arbitrary boundaries and three dimensions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The level-set embedding and projection may support direct coupling to fluid solvers on the same Cartesian grid for fluid-structure problems.
  • The same population structure could be tested on other constitutive models that admit a first-order conservative form.
  • Long-time runs with large rotations could reveal whether the projection step introduces or suppresses drift in the deformation gradient.

Load-bearing premise

The reconstruction of missing populations at cut links, when combined with the compatibility projection, keeps the recovered displacement aligned with the evolved deformation gradient.

What would settle it

A computed displacement or stress field in the nonlinear radial boundary-value problem that deviates from the exact finite-strain solution beyond discretization error would show that the cut-link closure or projection fails to maintain consistency.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.20646 by Jingsen Feng, Xu Chu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Affine Dirichlet annulus. Panels (a,c) show the numerical displacement components at 𝑇 = 0.2 ms on the 𝑁 = 384 grid. Panels (b,d) show the absolute component errors relative to Eq. (65). Panel (e) reports grid convergence for displacement, Cauchy stress, and 𝑭 − 𝑰. 4.3. Radial traction annulus The second benchmark activates the traction branch of the reconstruction while retaining a reference structure tha… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: compares displacement magnitude and deformation-gradient increment on the 𝑁 = 196 lattice. The LBM grid has Δ𝑥 = 1∕196, corresponding to 0.0510 cm, with 17396 active nodes and 936 cut links. The finite-element reference uses quadratic Lagrange elements on a boundary-fitted second-order annulus mesh with characteristic size ℎ = 1∕196, so the reference mesh size matches the LBM lattice spacing. The two field… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Cauchy-stress comparison for the radial traction annulus. The panels show the finite-element and LBM von Mises stress, the absolute von Mises difference, the 𝜎22 component, and its absolute difference. 4.4. Mixed-boundary superellipse shell The final two-dimensional benchmark removes the radial symmetry used in the preceding annulus case. The shell is bounded by two rotated superellipses, producing a nonun… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: compares the terminal displacement and deformation-gradient fields on the 𝑁 = 384 lattice. This grid contains 60148 active nodes and 1676 cut links. The maximum displacement magnitude is 1.0224 cm in the LBM calculation and 1.0223 cm in the finite-element reference. The relative errors are 2.88 × 10−4 for displacement, 5.99 × 10−4 for 𝑭, and 2.82 × 10−3 for 𝑭 − 𝑰. The terminal Jacobian range is 0.813 ≤ 𝐽 ≤… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Cauchy-stress comparison for the mixed-boundary superellipse shell. The panels report finite-element and LBM von Mises stress, the absolute von Mises difference, the 𝜎22 component, and its absolute difference [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Rotated ellipsoid Dirichlet benchmark. Panel (a) shows the exact deformed surface coloured by displacement magnitude, together with the initial wireframe. Panel (b) shows the near-boundary numerical displacement error on the 𝑁 = 320 grid. Panel (c) reports grid convergence for displacement and deformation gradient. 5.2. Spherical shell radial traction benchmark The spherical shell is the three-dimensional … view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Spherical shell radial traction benchmark at 𝑡 = 5 ms. The rows show displacement magnitude, radial Cauchy stress 𝜎𝑟𝑟, and von Mises stress. The columns compare the LBM solution, the exact radial BVP solution, and the absolute error on representative cut planes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Radial profiles for the spherical shell benchmark. Panel (a) compares displacement magnitude. Panel (b) compares the radial stretch 𝜆𝑟 and tangential stretch 𝜆𝜃 from Eq. (84). 5.3. Finite tube under end stretch and twist The final benchmark is designed to evaluate the algorithm in a geometry closer to finite-strain structural computation than to a manufactured solution. It combines several boundary identif… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Schematic of the finite tube benchmark. The left end is fixed, the cylindrical walls are traction-free, and the right end is loaded by prescribed axial stretch and twist. The dashed surface indicates the undeformed reference configuration. (a) (b) (c) 0 5.04 10.1 15.1 |u| [cm] 7.4 8.83 10.3 11.7 σvm [MPa] -0.428 0.708 1.84 2.98 σzθ [MPa] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Finite tube under 50% axial stretch and 45◦ twist at 𝑡 = 100 ms. The cutaway surfaces show (a) displacement magnitude, (b) Cauchy von Mises stress, and (c) the axial-hoop shear stress 𝜎𝑧𝜃 . An independent finite-element calculation [3] on a boundary-fitted hexahedral tube mesh provides the quantitative reference. The updated axial-profile comparison uses three embedded lattices, 26 × 26 × 100, 50 × 50 × 2… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Axial profile comparison for the finite tube benchmark at 𝑡 = 100 ms. The solid line is the finite-element reference, and the open markers show LBM results on 26 × 26 × 100, 50 × 50 × 200, and 76 × 76 × 300 grids. Panel (a) compares the cross-section mean axial displacement. Panel (b) compares the cross-section mean twist measure 𝑢𝜃∕𝑅 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_11.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Finite-strain hyperelasticity on curved embedded domains poses a geometric challenge for lattice Boltzmann methods. After streaming across an embedded material surface, the missing population is recovered at the physical cut-link point, where the lattice direction, surface normal, and tangential deformation directions are generally distinct. We develop a total-Lagrangian vectorial lattice Boltzmann method that resolves this geometric mismatch for two- and three-dimensional hyperelastic dynamics. The continuum equations are written as a conservative first-order system for material velocity and deformation gradient. Vector-valued populations are chosen so that their moments recover the state and the material-coordinate Piola fluxes, giving D2Q4\(\times\)6 and D3Q6\(\times\)12 schemes from one \(D\)-dimensional construction. Curved boundaries are embedded by a level set and closed link by link through opposite-population moment identities, cut-link interpolation, and local geometric information at the boundary point. The reconstruction is coupled to a compatibility projection that keeps the recovered displacement aligned with the evolved deformation gradient on embedded active-node graphs. The resulting method extends the previous grid-aligned two-dimensional formulation to curved domains and three-dimensional lattices while retaining explicit collide-stream updates on Cartesian grids. Benchmarks in two and three dimensions show agreement with exact finite-strain fields, nonlinear radial boundary-value problems, and finite-element references.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a total-Lagrangian vectorial lattice Boltzmann method for finite-strain hyperelasticity on curved embedded domains. Continuum equations are cast as a first-order conservative system in material velocity and deformation gradient; vector populations are constructed so that their moments recover the state variables and material Piola fluxes, yielding D2Q4×6 and D3Q6×12 schemes. Curved boundaries are treated via level-set embedding, closed link-by-link with opposite-population moment identities, cut-link interpolation, and a compatibility projection that enforces consistency between recovered displacement and the evolved deformation gradient on active-node graphs. The method extends a prior grid-aligned 2-D formulation to curved surfaces and 3-D lattices while preserving explicit collide-stream updates; benchmarks are reported to agree with exact finite-strain solutions, nonlinear radial problems, and finite-element references.

Significance. If the moment-recovery identities and projection closure hold under finite strain, the construction supplies an explicit Cartesian-grid LBM route to hyperelastic dynamics on non-grid-aligned boundaries without fitted parameters or body-fitted meshes. The single D-dimensional construction that produces both the 2-D and 3-D vector schemes, together with the geometric closure that avoids ad-hoc reconstruction, would constitute a technically clean advance for embedded-boundary solid-mechanics LBM.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract (description of reconstruction and projection)] The central claim rests on the compatibility projection that aligns recovered displacement with the evolved F on embedded active-node graphs. Without an explicit statement of the projection operator (its matrix form, its null-space properties, or a discrete conservation identity it preserves), it is impossible to verify that the projection does not introduce O(1) errors in the deformation gradient on curved cuts.
  2. [Abstract (moment recovery paragraph)] The moment sets for the D2Q4×6 and D3Q6×12 schemes are asserted to recover velocity, F, and Piola fluxes exactly. The manuscript must exhibit the explicit moment matrices and the inversion that yields the equilibrium populations; any rank deficiency or dependence on the local normal would undermine the parameter-free claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. Notation for the vector populations (e.g., how the six or twelve components are indexed) should be introduced once with a compact table or diagram rather than repeated in prose.
  2. The level-set representation of the curved surface and the precise definition of the cut-link interpolation point are mentioned but not illustrated; a single schematic showing lattice direction, surface normal, and tangential deformation directions would clarify the geometric mismatch being resolved.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the thorough review and valuable comments on our manuscript. We provide point-by-point responses to the major comments below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to address the concerns raised.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract (description of reconstruction and projection)] The central claim rests on the compatibility projection that aligns recovered displacement with the evolved F on embedded active-node graphs. Without an explicit statement of the projection operator (its matrix form, its null-space properties, or a discrete conservation identity it preserves), it is impossible to verify that the projection does not introduce O(1) errors in the deformation gradient on curved cuts.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit formulation of the projection operator is necessary for verification. In the revised manuscript, we will include the matrix form of the projection, analyze its null-space properties, and demonstrate the discrete conservation identity it preserves. This will confirm that the projection maintains consistency without introducing O(1) errors on curved boundaries. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract (moment recovery paragraph)] The moment sets for the D2Q4×6 and D3Q6×12 schemes are asserted to recover velocity, F, and Piola fluxes exactly. The manuscript must exhibit the explicit moment matrices and the inversion that yields the equilibrium populations; any rank deficiency or dependence on the local normal would undermine the parameter-free claim.

    Authors: The moment matrices are derived from the single D-dimensional construction detailed in the methods section. To address this, we will add the explicit moment matrices and the inversion procedure in the revised manuscript, showing that the recovery is exact, the matrices are full rank, and independent of the local normal, thereby upholding the parameter-free property. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The derivation constructs a total-Lagrangian vectorial LBM by selecting populations whose moments recover the conservative first-order system for velocity and deformation gradient, then closes curved boundaries via level-set embedding, opposite-population identities, cut-link interpolation, and a compatibility projection. These steps rest on standard moment-matching and geometric identities rather than any self-definition, fitted-input prediction, or load-bearing self-citation chain. The extension of prior grid-aligned work is mentioned but does not reduce the central curved-boundary construction to its own inputs. The method is presented as self-contained against exact solutions and FE references.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; the method rests on the domain assumption that the hyperelastic equations can be cast as a conservative first-order system whose moments are recoverable by vector populations, plus the modeling choice of level-set boundary treatment. No free parameters, new physical entities, or ad-hoc axioms are explicitly introduced in the provided text.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The continuum equations are written as a conservative first-order system for material velocity and deformation gradient.
    Stated directly in the abstract as the foundation for choosing vector-valued populations.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5767 in / 1237 out tokens · 32850 ms · 2026-06-27T18:35:11.541200+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Ogden, Non-Linear Elastic Deformations, Dover Publications, Mineola, 1997

    R.W. Ogden, Non-Linear Elastic Deformations, Dover Publications, Mineola, 1997

    1997

  2. [2]

    Holzapfel, Nonlinear Solid Mechanics: A Continuum Approach for Engineering, Wiley, Chichester, 2000

    G.A. Holzapfel, Nonlinear Solid Mechanics: A Continuum Approach for Engineering, Wiley, Chichester, 2000

    2000

  3. [3]

    Bonet, R.D

    J. Bonet, R.D. Wood, Nonlinear Continuum Mechanics for Finite Element Analysis, second ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008

    2008

  4. [4]

    Belytschko, W.K

    T. Belytschko, W.K. Liu, B. Moran, K.I. Elkhodary, Nonlinear Finite Elements for Continua and Structures, second ed., Wiley, Chichester, 2014

    2014

  5. [5]

    Humphrey, Review paper: Continuum biomechanics of soft biological tissues, Proc

    J.D. Humphrey, Review paper: Continuum biomechanics of soft biological tissues, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 459 (2029) (2003) 3–46

    2029

  6. [6]

    Z. Jia, Y. Yu, S. Hou, L. Wang, Biomimetic architected materials with improved dynamic performance, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 125 (2019) 178–197

    2019

  7. [7]

    Lengiewicz, M

    J. Lengiewicz, M. de Souza, M.A. Lahmar, C. Courbon, D. Dalmas, S. Stupkiewicz, J. Scheibert, Finite deformations govern the anisotropic shear-induced area reduction of soft elastic contacts, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 143 (2020) 104056

    2020

  8. [8]

    Methods Appl

    J.-S.Chen,C.Pan,C.-T.Wu,W.K.Liu,Reproducingkernelparticlemethodsforlargedeformationanalysisofnon-linearstructures,Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 139 (1–4) (1996) 195–227

    1996

  9. [9]

    Więckowski, The material point method in large strain engineering problems, Comput

    Z. Więckowski, The material point method in large strain engineering problems, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 193 (39–41) (2004) 4417–4438

    2004

  10. [10]

    Peskin, The immersed boundary method, Acta Numer

    C.S. Peskin, The immersed boundary method, Acta Numer. 11 (2002) 479–517

    2002

  11. [11]

    Boffi, L

    D. Boffi, L. Gastaldi, L. Heltai, C.S. Peskin, On the hyper-elastic formulation of the immersed boundary method, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 197 (25–28) (2008) 2210–2231

    2008

  12. [12]

    Vadala-Roth, S

    B. Vadala-Roth, S. Acharya, N.A. Patankar, S. Rossi, B.E. Griffith, Stabilization approaches for the hyperelastic immersed boundary method for problems of large-deformation incompressible elasticity, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 365 (2020) 112978

    2020

  13. [13]

    Burman, S

    E. Burman, S. Claus, P. Hansbo, M.G. Larson, A. Massing, CutFEM: Discretizing geometry and partial differential equations, Internat. J. Numer. Methods Engrg. 104 (7) (2015) 472–501

    2015

  14. [14]

    McNamara, G

    G.R. McNamara, G. Zanetti, Use of the Boltzmann equation to simulate lattice-gas automata, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61 (20) (1988) 2332–2335

    1988

  15. [15]

    Y.H. Qian, D. d’Humières, P. Lallemand, Lattice BGK models for Navier–Stokes equation, Europhys. Lett. 17 (6) (1992) 479–484

    1992

  16. [16]

    Chen, G.D

    S. Chen, G.D. Doolen, Lattice Boltzmann method for fluid flows, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 30 (1998) 329–364

    1998

  17. [17]

    Succi, The Lattice Boltzmann Equation for Fluid Dynamics and Beyond, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 2001

    S. Succi, The Lattice Boltzmann Equation for Fluid Dynamics and Beyond, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 2001

    2001

  18. [18]

    T.Krüger,H.Kusumaatmaja,A.Kuzmin,O.Shardt,G.Silva,E.M.Viggen,TheLatticeBoltzmannMethod:PrinciplesandPractice,Springer, Cham, 2017

    2017

  19. [19]

    J.A. Sethian, Level Set Methods and Fast Marching Methods: Evolving Interfaces in Computational Geometry, Fluid Mechanics, Computer Vision, and Materials Science, second ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999

    1999

  20. [20]

    J. Feng, C. Wang, Y. Guo, Y. Liu, J. Min, M. Wang, K. Xu, Helmholtz-guided suppression of spurious currents in multicomponent pseudopotential model for high-fidelity immiscible flow in porous media, Phys. Fluids 38 (2) (2026) 026611

    2026

  21. [21]

    J. Feng, J. Leng, J. Jiang, X. Chu, Entropic lattice Boltzmann method for general anisotropic advection–diffusion, arXiv:2605.01774, 2026

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  22. [22]

    R.Mei,L.-S.Luo,W.Shyy,AnaccuratecurvedboundarytreatmentinthelatticeBoltzmannmethod,J.Comput.Phys.155(2)(1999)307–330

    1999

  23. [23]

    M.Bouzidi,M.Firdaouss,P.Lallemand,MomentumtransferofaBoltzmann-latticefluidwithboundaries,Phys.Fluids13(11)(2001)3452– 3459

    2001

  24. [24]

    X. Yin, G. Yan, T. Li, Direct simulations of the linear elastic displacements field based on a lattice Boltzmann model, Internat. J. Numer. Methods Engrg. 107 (3) (2016) 234–251

    2016

  25. [25]

    O.Boolakee,M.Geier,L.DeLorenzis,AnewlatticeBoltzmannschemeforlinearelasticsolids:periodicproblems,Comput.MethodsAppl. Mech. Engrg. 404 (2023) 115756

    2023

  26. [26]

    Boolakee, M

    O. Boolakee, M. Geier, L. De Lorenzis, Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions for a lattice Boltzmann scheme for linear elastic solids on arbitrary domains, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 415 (2023) 116225

    2023

  27. [27]

    Marconi, B

    S. Marconi, B. Chopard, A lattice Boltzmann model for a solid body, Internat. J. Modern Phys. B 17 (1–2) (2003) 153–156

    2003

  28. [28]

    O’Brien, T

    G.S. O’Brien, T. Nissen-Meyer, C.J. Bean, A lattice Boltzmann method for elastic wave propagation in a Poisson solid, Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 102 (3) (2012) 1224–1234

    2012

  29. [29]

    Murthy, P.K

    J.S.N. Murthy, P.K. Kolluru, V. Kumaran, S. Ansumali, Lattice Boltzmann method for wave propagation in elastic solids, Commun. Comput. Phys. 23 (4) (2018) 1223–1240

    2018

  30. [30]

    Escande, P.K

    M. Escande, P.K. Kolluru, L.M. Cléon, P. Sagaut, Lattice Boltzmann method for wave propagation in elastic solids with a regular lattice: theoretical analysis and validation, arXiv:2009.06404, 2020

    arXiv 2009

  31. [31]

    Schlüter, C

    A. Schlüter, C. Kuhn, R. Müller, Lattice Boltzmann simulation of antiplane shear loading of a stationary crack, Comput. Mech. 62 (5) (2018) 1059–1069

    2018

  32. [32]

    Faust, A

    E. Faust, A. Schlüter, H. Müller, F. Steinmetz, R. Müller, Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions in a lattice Boltzmann method for elastodynamics, Comput. Mech. 73 (2) (2024) 317–339

    2024

  33. [33]

    S.Jin,Z.Xin,Therelaxationschemesforsystemsofconservationlawsinarbitraryspacedimensions,Comm.PureAppl.Math.48(3)(1995) 235–276

    1995

  34. [34]

    Graille, Approximation of mono-dimensional hyperbolic systems: A lattice Boltzmann scheme as a relaxation method, J

    B. Graille, Approximation of mono-dimensional hyperbolic systems: A lattice Boltzmann scheme as a relaxation method, J. Comput. Phys. 266 (2014) 74–88

    2014

  35. [35]

    F.Dubois,SimulationofstrongnonlinearwaveswithvectoriallatticeBoltzmannschemes,Internat.J.ModernPhys.C25(12)(2014)1441014

    2014

  36. [36]

    Zhao, W.A

    J. Zhao, W.A. Yong, Vectorial finite-difference-based lattice Boltzmann method: Consistency, boundary schemes and stability analysis, J. Comput. Appl. Math. 441 (2024) 115677

    2024

  37. [37]

    Boolakee, M

    O. Boolakee, M. Geier, L. De Lorenzis, Lattice Boltzmann for linear elastodynamics: Periodic problems and Dirichlet boundary conditions, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 433 (2025) 117469. J. Feng and X. Chu:Preprint submitted to ElsevierPage 27 of 28 Total-Lagrangian vectorial LBM for hyperelasticity with curved boundaries

    2025

  38. [38]

    Müller, E

    H. Müller, E. Faust, A. Schlüter, R. Müller, Extending the lattice Boltzmann method to non-linear elastodynamics, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg. 443 (2025) 118076

    2025

  39. [39]

    J. Feng, X. Chu, A total-Lagrangian vectorial lattice Boltzmann method for finite-strain hyperelastic dynamics, arXiv:2605.26677, 2026. J. Feng and X. Chu:Preprint submitted to ElsevierPage 28 of 28

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026