New thickness to chord constraint implementation

[A-CGray]

Purpose

The current thickness to chord constraint implementations has a few limitations:

1. You could only compute thickness to chord along a 1D line.
2. The constraint didn't actually compute an accurate chord length, it just used two points spaced slightly apart in the chordwise direction. This meant you could only use the thickness to chord constraint in the scaled sense (relative to the baseline).

This PR adds a completely new implementation of t/c constraints in DVConstraints. The new implementation basically uses two sets of thickness constraints, one to compute the thicknesses and another to compute the chord lengths.

This new implementation has the following advantages:

1. You can compute thickness to chord over a 1D line or a 2D grid
2. The constraints use leading and trailing edge points to actually compute an accurate chord length and therefore accurate (non-scaled) t/c values
3. The 2D version can compute the max t/c value for each chordwise section using KS aggregation

Technically these changes are backward incompatible because defining the 1D thickness to chord constraints now requires a set of leading and trailing edge coordinates instead of a projection direction and a chord direction. I don't think this is a big issue because these constraints weren't used by many people.

Expected time until merged

Type of change

• Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (non-backwards-compatible fix or feature)
• Code style update (formatting, renaming)
• Refactoring (no functional changes, no API changes)
• Documentation update
• Maintenance update
• Other (please describe)

Testing

I've expanded the existing thickness to chord constraint test to test the new capabilities (2D, section max)

Checklist

• I have run ruff check and ruff format to make sure the Python code adheres to PEP-8 and is consistently formatted
• I have formatted the Fortran code with fprettify or C/C++ code with clang-format as applicable
• I have run unit and regression tests which pass locally with my changes
• I have added new tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• I have added necessary documentation

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 91.73554% with 20 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 71.78%. Comparing base (c889e1c) to head (4359c9f).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
pygeo/constraints/DVCon.py	89.36%	15 Missing ⚠️
pygeo/mphys/mphys_dvgeo.py	33.33%	4 Missing ⚠️
pygeo/constraints/thicknessConstraint.py	98.93%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #280      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   69.82%   71.78%   +1.95%     
==========================================
  Files          48       48              
  Lines       12383    12487     +104     
==========================================
+ Hits         8647     8964     +317     
+ Misses       3736     3523     -213     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 6 out of 7 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

---

_{Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.}

[A-CGray]

@marcomangano do you have some time to give this a look over? If not I can also ask Hannah

[marcomangano]

@marcomangano do you have some time to give this a look over? If not I can also ask Hannah

I can take a look by Mon/Tue the latest!