Meshing Methods: Tetrahedral
The combination of robust and automated surface, inflation and tet meshing using default physics controls to ensure a high-quality mesh suitable for the defined simulation allows for push-button meshing. Local control for sizing, matching, mapping, virtual topology, pinch and other controls provides additional flexibility, if needed.
Automated CFD meshing includes inflation layers for complicated geometries, such as this drill bit model.
Automated structural meshing with well-shaped quadratic tet elements can be used for complicated geometries, such as this engine head.
- Patch-conforming mesh method:
- This method uses a bottom-up approach (creates surface mesh then volume mesh).
- Multiple triangular surface meshing algorithms are employed behind the scenes to ensure a high quality surface mesh is generated the first time.
- From the surface mesh, inflation layers can be grown using several techniques.
- The remaining volume is meshed with a Delaunay advancing front approach that combines the speed of a Delaunay approach with the smooth-transitioned mesh of an advancing front approach.
- Throughout this meshing process are advanced size functions that maintain control over the refinement, smoothness and quality of the mesh.
- Patch-independent mesh method:
- This method uses a top-down approach (creates volume mesh and extracts surface mesh from boundaries).
- Many common problems with meshing occur from bad geometry. If bad geometry is used as the basis to create the surface mesh, the mesh will often be undesireable (bad quality, connectivity, etc.).
- The patch-independent method uses the geometry only to associate the boundary faces of the mesh to the regions of interest thereby ignoring gaps, overlaps and other issues that present other meshing tools with countless problems.
- Inflation is done as a post step into the volume mesh. Since the volume mesh already exists, collisions and other common problems for inflation are known beforehand.
Note: For volume meshing, a tetrahedral mesh generally provides a more automatic solution with the ability to add mesh controls to improve the accuracy in critical regions. Conversely, a hexahedral mesh generally provides a more accurate solution but is more difficult to generate.