hit formatting of "electrothermal with phase field" input files

[apb13]

We will rely on the syntax checking in CIVET to test these files for continued functionality, particularly the two input files located in this file path: ~/projects/malamute/examples/sps/multiapp/electrothermal_with_phase_field/twoway_lots_of_particles_prototype.

I was not able to compare the simulation outputs for these two input files located in "twoway_lots_of_particles_prototype".

For the remaining four input files, I performed a comparison between two csv files, one that was the original and another that received hit formatting, to ensure that the results were the same. Also ensured that comments were formatted correctly in the input file.

Refs #128

[sapitts]

@apb13 there are six input files in this commit, but your message only describes two of the six input files. Please edit your PR (using the instructions @cticenhour gave you on your second PR) to describe the work done with the remaining four input files

[moosebuild]

Job Documentation on 995d992 wanted to post the following:

View the site here

This comment will be updated on new commits.

[moosebuild]

Job Coverage on 995d992 wanted to post the following:

Coverage

Coverage did not change

Full coverage report

This comment will be updated on new commits.

[sapitts]

@apb13 did you run the input files engineering_scale_electrothermal_oneway_controls.i, engineering_scale_electrothermal_twoway_prototype.i, and engineering_scale_electrothermal_twoways_lots_prototype.i for at least the first two timesteps to make sure that the removal of the extra [ThermalContact] lines did not adversely affect the simulation?

[apb13]

@sapitts Yes, I ran these three input files for at least two timesteps. Removing the extra [ThermalContact] lines did not have a negative impact on the simulation.