The reason why it is useful for me to save as unrolled is that, from my code, I have an option to allow:
1) modification (rotation and/or translation) of one part of the geometry; 2) subsequent new mesh generation and simulation run. This is done automatically, and the part of the geometry which needs to be modified can be identified for example using a bounding box. So, if I have an unrolled geometry, I can perform the modification on all points falling inside the bounding box. A. -----Messaggio originale----- Da: cgeuza...@ulg.ac.be [mailto:cgeuza...@ulg.ac.be] Inviato: mercoledì 19 aprile 2017 20:59 A: Alessandro Vicini Cc: gmsh@onelab.info Oggetto: Re: [Gmsh] Version 3 > On 19 Apr 2017, at 15:59, Alessandro Vicini <alessandro.vic...@sitael.com> > wrote: > > > > I just downloaded latest version and had a quick look at it. First of all, > thank you to all developers as the new version is really a big step forward. > I have one question: I see that if I generate a sphere using its primitive > function, and then I export the unrolled geometry, You should almost never export as unrolled: this is only for "flattening" geo files made with the built-in kernel. (The fact that it creates points and splines on OpnenCascade models is an undocumented feature that we sometimes use for debugging.) If you want to export a flat geometry with the OpenCascade kernel, use Save "file.brep"; This will save the native OpenCascade brep. Note that Gmsh never translates between CAD formats: it directly attacks the native CAD kernel APIs - there is no intermediate representation. > I find splines (and thus lots of points) inside it, instead of simple circle > arcs. Is there some specific reason for this? Is it related to the use of the > opencascade kernel? > > Alessandro > _______________________________________________ gmsh mailing list gmsh@onelab.info http://onelab.info/mailman/listinfo/gmsh
