CFX error message

M_Tidswell · April 6, 2013, 15:04

Dear All

I am a relatively new user to Ansys CFX/ICEM and am getting a repeated error message from CFX when I import the mesh from ICEM - Hexahedral element 71277 will degenerate into an invalid element.

The number changes depending on what combination of mesh geometry I have tried, it seems to occur when I try make the first boundary layer element sub 9e-6.
Is there a setting I have missed in ICEM or something I need to do in CFX to accept smaller mesh geometry?
CFX is happy to accept a mesh with the same geometry generated in Ansys Mesh, I'm sure I must be missing something.

Hopefully someone can point me in the right direct

Many thanks

Mark

ghorrocks · April 7, 2013, 07:28

Have a look at element 71277 in ICEM. You will find it has degenerated to a line or a flat thing. Then either fix it (you can move individual nodes in ICEM), remesh so it does not occur or delete the element.

M_Tidswell · April 7, 2013, 07:40

Thank you for such a swift response, may I intrude on your time once again and ask if there is a good practice that one should consider in order to avoid this error? I take it increasing the growth ratio perpendicular to the wall should address the issue as this would ensure that the element had greater depth?

Many thanks

Mark

ghorrocks · April 7, 2013, 07:44

It has been a while since I used ICEM but I seem to recall it have mesh validity checking stuff which would identify these types of problems before the mesh was written. You should run those before you write a mesh.

I also recall it was easy to smooth a mesh into oblivion with ICEM. By this I mean the smoothing increases the average quality of the elements, but a very small number of elements gets smoothed until they are either flat or inside out - which means the mesh is invalid. So be careful with mesh smoothing.

M_Tidswell · April 7, 2013, 08:09

ICEM did flag up that the aspect ratio within the boundary layer was particularly poor, I know that this must be expected to an extent but I assume it was rather worse than I thought. Are there 'golden' rules one should follow to minimise this - certain growth rates should be used for particularly small first element sizes or the such?

Sorry I promise this is the last question

Many thanks

Mark

ghorrocks · April 7, 2013, 08:39

Firstly - there is no need to apologise, and feel free to ask as many questions as you wish. As long as your questions are interesting and intelligent then you are likely to get people interested in what you are doing and get useful answers.

When it flags "poor" aspect ratio does it just mean you have a few bad quality elements (like aspect ratio 10 or something like that) or that you have aspect ratio 0 elements (ie elements which have been flattened to oblivion). Many simulations will still run with a few bad quality elements. But a mesh with a single flattened element might fail so this would have to be fixed.

M_Tidswell · April 8, 2013, 09:03

Dear Glenn

Thank you for all your assistance, I think a bit more playing with ICEM is in order. I think I still prefer it to Ansys mesh tho!

I have another interesting stumbling block regarding error quantification for SAS - SST models but I think that would better sit in a different thread.

Many Thanks

Mark

ghorrocks · April 8, 2013, 09:07

ANSYS meshing works nicely when little user intervention is required. It gets very annoying when you are trying to craft a mesh manually. ICEM has a long learning curve but is much more flexible in the hands of an experienced user. You need to play around with ICEM for a while and try lots of options before you find something which works for your setup.

April 6, 2013, 15:04	CFX error message	#1
M_Tidswell Member Mark Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: London Posts: 33 Rep Power: 13	Dear All I am a relatively new user to Ansys CFX/ICEM and am getting a repeated error message from CFX when I import the mesh from ICEM - Hexahedral element 71277 will degenerate into an invalid element. The number changes depending on what combination of mesh geometry I have tried, it seems to occur when I try make the first boundary layer element sub 9e-6. Is there a setting I have missed in ICEM or something I need to do in CFX to accept smaller mesh geometry? CFX is happy to accept a mesh with the same geometry generated in Ansys Mesh, I'm sure I must be missing something. Hopefully someone can point me in the right direct Many thanks Mark

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
CFX Treatment of Laminar and Turbulent Flows	Jade M	CFX	18	September 15, 2022 08:08
High Resolution (CFX) vs 2nd Order Upwind (Fluent)	gravis	ANSYS	3	March 24, 2011 03:43
CFX pressure in Simulations problem	nasdak	CFX	1	April 14, 2010 14:22
PhD using CFX	Rui	CFX	9	May 28, 2007 06:59
FSI using CFX and ANSYS	Bi Chang	CFX	2	May 10, 2005 05:47

April 7, 2013, 07:28		#2
ghorrocks Super Moderator Glenn Horrocks Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 17,870 Rep Power: 144	Have a look at element 71277 in ICEM. You will find it has degenerated to a line or a flat thing. Then either fix it (you can move individual nodes in ICEM), remesh so it does not occur or delete the element.

April 7, 2013, 07:40		#3
M_Tidswell Member Mark Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: London Posts: 33 Rep Power: 13	Thank you for such a swift response, may I intrude on your time once again and ask if there is a good practice that one should consider in order to avoid this error? I take it increasing the growth ratio perpendicular to the wall should address the issue as this would ensure that the element had greater depth? Many thanks Mark

April 7, 2013, 07:44		#4
ghorrocks Super Moderator Glenn Horrocks Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 17,870 Rep Power: 144	It has been a while since I used ICEM but I seem to recall it have mesh validity checking stuff which would identify these types of problems before the mesh was written. You should run those before you write a mesh. I also recall it was easy to smooth a mesh into oblivion with ICEM. By this I mean the smoothing increases the average quality of the elements, but a very small number of elements gets smoothed until they are either flat or inside out - which means the mesh is invalid. So be careful with mesh smoothing.

April 7, 2013, 08:09		#5
M_Tidswell Member Mark Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: London Posts: 33 Rep Power: 13	ICEM did flag up that the aspect ratio within the boundary layer was particularly poor, I know that this must be expected to an extent but I assume it was rather worse than I thought. Are there 'golden' rules one should follow to minimise this - certain growth rates should be used for particularly small first element sizes or the such? Sorry I promise this is the last question Many thanks Mark

April 7, 2013, 08:39		#6
ghorrocks Super Moderator Glenn Horrocks Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 17,870 Rep Power: 144	Firstly - there is no need to apologise, and feel free to ask as many questions as you wish. As long as your questions are interesting and intelligent then you are likely to get people interested in what you are doing and get useful answers. When it flags "poor" aspect ratio does it just mean you have a few bad quality elements (like aspect ratio 10 or something like that) or that you have aspect ratio 0 elements (ie elements which have been flattened to oblivion). Many simulations will still run with a few bad quality elements. But a mesh with a single flattened element might fail so this would have to be fixed.

April 8, 2013, 09:03		#7
M_Tidswell Member Mark Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: London Posts: 33 Rep Power: 13	Dear Glenn Thank you for all your assistance, I think a bit more playing with ICEM is in order. I think I still prefer it to Ansys mesh tho! I have another interesting stumbling block regarding error quantification for SAS - SST models but I think that would better sit in a different thread. Many Thanks Mark

April 8, 2013, 09:07		#8
ghorrocks Super Moderator Glenn Horrocks Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 17,870 Rep Power: 144	ANSYS meshing works nicely when little user intervention is required. It gets very annoying when you are trying to craft a mesh manually. ICEM has a long learning curve but is much more flexible in the hands of an experienced user. You need to play around with ICEM for a while and try lots of options before you find something which works for your setup.