From the (little) experience I've had, both box fields and attractors
with a threshold field, say at edges and nodes, have no problem with the
different physical volumes. The geometry I usually mesh is right at the
boundary of 2 volumes and the mesh transverses the interface just fine.
So it should work fine. Which fields you use will take some playing
around with, and depends on your particular geometries. I find the box
fields more effective for me, even a fine threshold near an edge doesn't
refine as effectively, but thats something thats geometry specific I
suspect. Good luck.
Shawn
Geordie McBain wrote:
2009/7/24 Joakim Sandström <[email protected]>:
I have become a fond user of gmsh when creating geometries for thermal
calculations. I’ve run in to trouble in these calculations when the
temperature gradient is very steep with a mesh that is to coarse. The
problem is that I do not need a fine mesh anywhere else but close to the
certain boundaries where the temperature gradient is steep. Creating a fine
mesh in the whole volume demands to much computational time. Is there a way
to separately specify the grid size within different physical groups?
I'm not sure about within different physical volumes, but I think you
should be able to achieve the effect you want using Background Fields,
in particular based on an Attractor at points near that certain
boundary where the temperature gradient is steep. See
demos/fields.geo in the source distribution directory.
_______________________________________________
gmsh mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.geuz.org/mailman/listinfo/gmsh
_______________________________________________
gmsh mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.geuz.org/mailman/listinfo/gmsh
