|
[Sponsors] |
[Technical] Why are hex meshes better than tet? |
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Super Moderator
Philip Cardiff
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,091
Rep Power: 34 ![]() ![]() |
Hi,
I have been looking around a bit for a while and I can't seem to find why hex meshes are better than tet meshes, in finite volumes. I was able to find papers for finite element, but not finite volume. Can anybody point me in the right direction to where I might read up on this, or even briefly explain why? Best Regards, Philip |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Wolfgang Heydlauff
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 136
Rep Power: 21 ![]() |
hi bigphil,
hex mesh are usually structured, so the cell-koordinates can easily be transformed into the calculation matrx (i,j,....). the tet-meshes usually are unstructured. that's why there is the need for a transformation matrx. while calculation the cpu has to read out the calculation matrx for each timestep.so calculation time is longer. furthermore a tetraeder has sharper angles than an hexaeder. in FVM the flux is calculated scalar, so sharp angles should be avoided. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Super Moderator
Philip Cardiff
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,091
Rep Power: 34 ![]() ![]() |
Wolfgang,
Thanks very much for enlightening me. So in general, hex are more accurate and take less time. Best Regards, Philip |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Gijsbert Wierink
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 383
Rep Power: 18 ![]() |
That's right. Also, a tet mesh can have very skewed cells, especially when your geometry contains different shapes (e.g. a cube in a relatively small cylinder).
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Super Moderator
Philip Cardiff
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,091
Rep Power: 34 ![]() ![]() |
Gijsbert,
Thanks for the reply. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Super Moderator
Philip Cardiff
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,091
Rep Power: 34 ![]() ![]() |
I have one more question:
How does the cell shape affect convergence of the solution? I have found that if I use quite skewed cells, then my case will not converge. Is this a general rule or how does the cell shape affect convergence? Thanks, Philip |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Senior Member
Sebastian Gatzka
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 729
Rep Power: 20 ![]() |
Skewed elements are sometimes "bad" because the fluxed over their boundaries are calculated wrong and have to be treated with "corrected" schemes.
I can give you some literature reference about that, but I have to look it up.
__________________
Schrödingers wife: "What did you do to the cat? It's half dead!" |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Super Moderator
Philip Cardiff
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,091
Rep Power: 34 ![]() ![]() |
Hi Sega,
I would love if you could give me some literature reference, that would be great! Thanks you. Philip Also, does all this apply equally to stress analysis as it does to fluid dynamics? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Senior Member
Sebastian Gatzka
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 729
Rep Power: 20 ![]() |
Hi.
Have a look at this picture ![]() It may illustrate the basic problem when dealing with skewed elements (so called non-othogonal grids). Basically when interpolating from the cell centers to the face the midpoint of the face is not matched with the connecting line between the two cell centers thus creating a erroneous flux. You can deal with it by using corrected schemes (first of all for snGrad!). The "strength" of the correction can by controlled by the entry behind nOrthogonalCorrectors. (There has been a discussion about this entry before.) The above picture is from: M. Schäfer. Computational Engineering. Springer 2008. (Chapter 4.5). And there are some lines at Ferziger. Computational Methods for Fluid Dynamics. Springer 2002 (Chapter 8.6.2 I think). Hope this helps. Have a nice day. ![]()
__________________
Schrödingers wife: "What did you do to the cat? It's half dead!" |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Super Moderator
Philip Cardiff
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 1,091
Rep Power: 34 ![]() ![]() |
Sega,
Thanks you very much, this really helps. I will have a look through Schafer and Ferziger, and I will also have a look around the forum. Kind Regards, Philip |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Member
Roberto
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 33
Rep Power: 11 ![]() |
Hello Everyone!
Sorry for posting on this quite old forum... I'm pretty new to the CFD simulation process and I'm still learning about the pros and cons of Hexes vs Tets. According to my investigation, for my CAD model it would be better to use Hexes rather than Tets, but I feel I have still no solid basis to state this, so, as I'm really new to this, I was wondering if any of you could recommend me any beginners literature on the pros and cons of Hexes and Tets and/or a guide to understand in which cases it is best to use hexes or tets or how to come up with an accurate solution to this problem. Thanks in advance for any of your helpful replies. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[blockMesh] --> FOAM FATAL ERROR: Trying to specify a boundary face | A.A. | OpenFOAM Meshing & Mesh Conversion | 41 | June 26, 2020 07:06 |
[Other] mergeMatchPairs with arcs | vainilreb | OpenFOAM Meshing & Mesh Conversion | 1 | August 5, 2013 08:11 |
Hex and Tet meshes - simplefoam comparison | danvica | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 10 | January 4, 2013 01:18 |
[blockMesh] apparently the mesh doesn't want to be created in one direction | Maxime Thomas | OpenFOAM Meshing & Mesh Conversion | 1 | August 18, 2012 06:05 |
CheckMeshbs errors | ivanyao | OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD | 2 | March 11, 2009 02:34 |