|
[Sponsors] |
October 3, 2008, 10:00 |
Problem meshing with Gambit
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi guys Im working with cars and I have a problem meshing with Gambit what happend is that when I mesh the wheel of the car appear cell with high skew >0.97 because there is a wedge between the wheel and the ground and I have bad cell in that zone Can anybody help with how to solve that kind of problem? I would like to thank you to you all greetings Adrian
|
|
October 3, 2008, 10:57 |
Re: Problem meshing with Gambit
|
#2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
well that means the mesh at the region is not sufficinetly enough fine or even the strategy for meshing that area is not appropriate. you can check both reasons. but I guess is is better to simplify the geometry somehow. also, you can decompose the domain more in the bad quality region.
|
|
October 3, 2008, 22:06 |
Thank you doki but...
|
#3 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Thank you so much doki for help me ..I would tell you that I tryed to mesh that wedge area I mean between the wheel and floor of the car so what I did was first with a very little cell and the problem increase second I tryed to increase the cell in that zone and I realise that the bad cells > .97 decrease but the cell are big so Iīm confuse I donīt use any size function y that zone neither size function curvatura
|
|
October 5, 2008, 06:12 |
Re: Thank you doki but...
|
#4 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
use triprimtive mesh topoly
|
|
October 6, 2008, 02:46 |
THANK U DHOKI WHENU SAY MORE CELL/ DECOMPOSE FURTH
|
#5 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
I am also facing similar problem. sir , i am dealing with similar problrm with complex volume where face changes from circular to semi circular and then rectagular. ^though i created faces but some faces are showing skewness > .97. Is it advisable to continue or increse number of cell. further when doing volume meshing, can we continue for skewness > .97.
what is the best way to decompose the geometry |
|
October 6, 2008, 11:57 |
Problem meshing with Gambit
|
#6 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
well regarding your questions, firstly I can not get the exact problem you mention. But as a general rule, finer meshes can sustain boundary integrity. But this may led to some problems, e.g. the number of mesh. I think the problem might occur when meshing an extremely narrow area; which is more experienced in complex cases. and to avoid this problem, you should either increase the near-surface meshes or simplify the geometry (if possible). there is no general rule about the decomposition of domain. that is a highly case-sensitive procedure.
|
|
October 6, 2008, 12:36 |
Re: Thank you Doki again...
|
#7 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Thank you Doki for help me I will try to mesh increasing tha cell in that area I will see what happend and I will tell later Thank matey Adrian
|
|
October 7, 2008, 08:47 |
Re: Thank you Doki again...
|
#8 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Thanks Mr Doki, but what about skewness greater than .97, can I continue or refine/decompose it.
a volume has two lateral faces , one with circular and another with rectangle. how to mesh, kindly advise |
|
October 7, 2008, 09:39 |
Re: Thank you Doki again...
|
#9 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
refining the mesh can even worsen the situation. that is not a case to be clearly resolved! geometry complexity is an initiator for the mesh poor quality. the more zones you have, the better quality meshes you can get.
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Meshing problem in gambit | abhishek mukherjee | FLUENT | 1 | July 22, 2008 05:23 |
Gambit meshing problem | David Banks | Main CFD Forum | 0 | July 19, 2007 12:48 |
3D-gambit meshing problem | prem | FLUENT | 3 | February 28, 2006 03:42 |
GAMBIT meshing problem | George | FLUENT | 2 | October 30, 2003 09:50 |
meshing problem with gambit. | jx | FLUENT | 2 | June 30, 2003 05:05 |