Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2011 Mar 1.
Published in final edited form as: Ann Biomed Eng. 2010 Feb 4;38(3):1236–1256. doi: 10.1007/s10439-010-9905-9

FIGURE 11.

FIGURE 11

A comparison between EFD and CFD at 150 ms into diastole focusing on the influence of valve type for (a) V2 EFD with the BSM MHV, (b) V1 CFD with the BSM MHV, (c) V1 CFD with the BSM MHV wall strain rate, (d) V2 EFD with the CM MHV, (e) V1 CFD with the CM MHV, and (f) V1 CFD with the CM MHV wall strain rate.