|
[Sponsors] |
[snappyHexMesh] snappyHexMesh surface refinement bugs |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
November 9, 2012, 14:50 |
snappyHexMesh surface refinement bugs
|
#1 |
Senior Member
Yuehan
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 142
Rep Power: 14 |
Hi everyone,
I found that something wrong with the surface refinement. I wanted to refine a surface and it got refined, but another surface very close to this surface also got refined. Details can be seen from the figure. In the figure, I only wanted to refine the surface of duct but the surface of box close to the duct also got refined. It is really strange. Anyone knows why ? Thank you in advance ! |
|
November 10, 2012, 19:22 |
|
#2 |
Senior Member
Yuehan
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 142
Rep Power: 14 |
no body takes interest?
|
|
November 10, 2012, 21:18 |
|
#3 |
Retired Super Moderator
Bruno Santos
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 10,981
Blog Entries: 45
Rep Power: 128 |
Greetings Cong and welcome to the forum!
I can only guess what the problem is - since the surfaces are too close, the one you don't want as refined as the other one is still getting caught thanks to the number of cells between each level... namely this parameter: Code:
nCellsBetweenLevels Best regards, Bruno
__________________
|
|
November 11, 2012, 10:44 |
|
#4 |
Senior Member
Yuehan
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 142
Rep Power: 14 |
Hi,
Thank you so much ! I am using default setting for nCellsBetweenLevels --- 2. According to you, I should decrease this value ? |
|
November 11, 2012, 10:46 |
|
#5 |
Senior Member
Yuehan
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 142
Rep Power: 14 |
Hi Bruno,
Could you give me some hints about how to avoid concave cells? The following attached is the output after I run checkMesh. It seems my mesh is really bad. Mesh stats points: 5640879 faces: 15861281 internal faces: 15183609 cells: 5116777 boundary patches: 15 point zones: 0 face zones: 0 cell zones: 0 Overall number of cells of each type: hexahedra: 4884773 prisms: 47139 wedges: 23 pyramids: 16 tet wedges: 987 tetrahedra: 0 polyhedra: 183839 Checking topology... Boundary definition OK. Cell to face addressing OK. Point usage OK. Upper triangular ordering OK. Face vertices OK. Number of regions: 1 (OK). Checking geometry... Overall domain bounding box (-3 -3.049999952 -0.03999999911) (3.440000057 3.049999952 2.160000095) Mesh (non-empty, non-wedge) directions (1 1 1) Mesh (non-empty) directions (1 1 1) Boundary openness (-4.370968924e-15 -3.928455669e-19 1.96277524e-15) OK. Max cell openness = 1.095394505e-15 OK. Max aspect ratio = 64.0748539 OK. Minimum face area = 1.548521309e-09. Maximum face area = 0.381110741. Face area magnitudes OK. Min volume = 4.377205473e-13. Max volume = 0.1300759831. Total volume = 74.34968174. Cell volumes OK. Mesh non-orthogonality Max: 64.98871264 average: 5.814950331 Non-orthogonality check OK. Face pyramids OK. ***Max skewness = 4.476212227, 745 highly skew faces detected which may impair the quality of the results <<Writing 745 skew faces to set skewFaces Coupled point location match (average 0) OK. ***Error in face tets: 74 faces with low quality or negative volume decomposition tets. <<Writing 70 faces with low quality or negative volume decomposition tets to set lowQualityTetFaces *Edges too small, min/max edge length = 0 0.8384450559, number too small: 4 <<Writing 4 points on short edges to set shortEdges *There are 1390 faces with concave angles between consecutive edges. Max concave angle = 53.12549247 degrees. <<Writing 1390 faces with concave angles to set concaveFaces Face flatness (1 = flat, 0 = butterfly) : average = 0.9999261207 min = 0.7680335307 *There are 8 faces with ratio between projected and actual area < 0.8 Minimum ratio (minimum flatness, maximum warpage) = 0.7680335307 <<Writing 8 warped faces to set warpedFaces Cell determinant (wellposedness) : minimum: 0 average: 6.956499987 ***Cells with small determinant found, number of cells: 4768 <<Writing 4768 under-determined cells to set underdeterminedCells ***Concave cells (using face planes) found, number of cells: 36302 <<Writing 36302 concave cells to set concaveCells Failed 4 mesh checks. End |
|
November 11, 2012, 16:41 |
|
#6 | |
Retired Super Moderator
Bruno Santos
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 10,981
Blog Entries: 45
Rep Power: 128 |
Hi Cong,
Quote:
Nonetheless, I believe that you might be able to find the solution if you read the tutorials referred to in the link I posted. Good luck! Bruno
__________________
|
||
November 11, 2012, 18:28 |
|
#7 |
Senior Member
Vieri Abolaffio
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Always on the move.
Posts: 308
Rep Power: 17 |
with so many errors, chances are that sHM have not produced a mesh witt your quality criterion before the maximum snapping phases and it gave up.
try to take a look at the sHM log to find if there have been any error messages. |
|
November 11, 2012, 22:07 |
|
#8 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 62
Rep Power: 16 |
Hi wc34071209,
From my point of view if the mesh finishes at the boundary surface and its what's going on side the mesh that is important. I think it's easy to get fixated on getting a perfect representation of the surface at the edge of the mesh but if you un-refine immediately away from the surface then the chances of getting good results about what's happening close to and then onto the surface are surely diminished? In the case of your box close to the surface, if its not going to have real effect on the flow i.e. it represents a probe or something that shouldn't have a major effect on the simulation then remove it from the model. If on the other hand it is important then you should refine around it also I would have thought? |
|
October 5, 2018, 14:27 |
|
#9 |
Member
Viraj Belekar
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 68
Rep Power: 10 |
Is there a bug in snappyHexMesh such that only for a particular combination of refinement levels in both blockMesh and snappyHexMesh, the mesh will be created where the locationInMesh point lies, otherwise outside the geometry and inside the far fields?
|
|
October 7, 2018, 07:53 |
|
#10 | |
Retired Super Moderator
Bruno Santos
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 10,981
Blog Entries: 45
Rep Power: 128 |
Quote:
__________________
|
||
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
decomposePar problem: Cell 0contains face labels out of range | vaina74 | OpenFOAM Pre-Processing | 37 | July 20, 2020 06:38 |
[snappyHexMesh] SnappyHexMesh possibilities | roman.gaspar | OpenFOAM Meshing & Mesh Conversion | 2 | October 25, 2013 08:43 |
[snappyHexMesh] SnappyHexMesh Internal Flow Example (Diesel Injector) | Irish09 | OpenFOAM Meshing & Mesh Conversion | 23 | July 15, 2013 08:45 |
[snappyHexMesh] Adding layers goes wrong with SnappyHexMesh | Elise | OpenFOAM Meshing & Mesh Conversion | 1 | April 22, 2013 03:32 |
[snappyHexMesh] snappyHexMesh aborting | Tobi | OpenFOAM Meshing & Mesh Conversion | 0 | November 10, 2010 04:23 |