We work with ICEM-tetra at my workplace now and I'm not really satisfied with the grids it makes. I like the way SAMM uses hybrid grids as hexa grids are generally better and we only need tetra grids at certain places in our geometry. However before we want to swith I would like to ask users of SAMM whether they are satisfied with the product. We work with STAR-CD (and CFX-5), so the GUI should not be a problem (similar to PROSTAR?). Anybody with bad experiences with SAMM?

regards

Dear Bart,

samm is indeed a very powerful and flexible tool. you can choose between trimmed, tet and hexahedral meshing. The major point is the quality of the surface. If you have a tool to generate a 'perfect' triangular surface the tet- and the hybrid approach are the best. The performance (speed of cell generation) is less compared to icem or tgrid but on the other hand you have much more control on your mesh. Last but not least, the sublayer generation (prisms) works much more stable than with any other code I know. Although it sometimes can cause trouble (only sometimes). But there are always ways to solve it, what makes the difference.

pro*am is now avaible for testing. It's prostar and samm joined together in a very user-friendly environment. Try it.

Hope this helps,

Thomas