> On 13 Sep 2018, at 15:59, Guilherme Saturnino <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Dear Christophe,
> 
> I would recommend using the default one. 
> 
> (Is the quality of the STL meshes sufficient, or do you need to remesh them?)
> We have several steps of cleaning, smoothing and and re-sampling surfaces 
> before volume meshing in GMSH. We actually want to do "curvature-weighed 
> re-sampling". That is, we want to re-sample our surfaces but keep the node 
> density higher where the mesh is more curved. Do you know of any algorithm 
> that can do that?
> Recent Gmsh versions optimize automatically. We will introduce some 
> fine-tuning in the future to change the speed/quality tradeoff ; currently a 
> good compromise is hardcoded. 
> 
> Looking forward to it! When we create our meshes, we still notice a few 
> bad-shaped elements. Is it because of the surfaces? How do the surfaces 
> constrain the volume meshing and optimization?

As the volume algorithm does not (well, tries really hard not to) modify the 
surface mesh, a bad quality triangle will automatically lead to a bad 
tetrahedron in the volume.

> The official Linux binaries are compiled on the "old-stable" Debian, in order 
> to support even quite old Linux distributions. Can you share the error you 
> get on CentOS 6 ? 
> 
> I get
> 
> gmsh-4.0.1-Linux64/bin/gmsh: /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6: version 
> `GLIBCXX_3.4.14' not found (required by gmsh-4.0.1-Linux64/bin/gmsh)
> gmsh-4.0.1-Linux64/bin/gmsh: /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6: version 
> `CXXABI_1.3.5' not found (required by gmsh-4.0.1-Linux64/bin/gmsh)
> gmsh-4.0.1-Linux64/bin/gmsh: /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6: version 
> `GLIBCXX_3.4.15' not found (required by gmsh-4.0.1-Linux64/bin/gmsh)
> CentOS 6 comes with an old glibc version, and updating it is not trivial. 
> Compiling gmsh on a CentOS 6 VM should solve this issue
> 

Can you try installing the newer glibc and libstdc++ and let us now if this 
works (you can use LD_PRELOAD to make sure you load the correct one)? If this 
works you could ship it along with your code.

Maintaining an extra linux build represents a significant amount of work: 
that's why we stick to Debian "old-stable", which ensures quite a bit of 
backward compatibility  with older distributions (such as those usually found 
on HPC clusters) - but is still recent enough to have up-to-date distributions 
(typically used on development machine) ship compatibility libraries (gfortran, 
glibc, ...) if necessary.

> Yes, that's indeed in our plans for a future revision of the MSH4 format, 
> together with even better handling of very large meshes/datasets.
> 
> Nice!
> 
> By the way, I was implementing an I/O function for version 4 binaries and I 
> believe I found a mistake in the documentation:
> 
> "numNodes" in the blocks of both $Nodes and $Elements seems to be an int, 
> unsigned long.

I think this is fixed in the latest version of the docs?

> I also found that I need to skip 4 bytes after each block header.

That's strange. Can you check with our reference implementation 
(Geo/GModelIO_MSH4.cpp) and file a issue if there is a discrepancy?

Thanks,

Christophe



> 
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Guilherme
> 
> On 09/12/2018 10:32 PM, Christophe Geuzaine wrote:
>> 
>>> On 12 Sep 2018, at 14:31, Guilherme Saturnino <[email protected]>
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Dear Gmsh developers,
>>> 
>>> I'm working on a package called SimNIBS (
>>> http://simnibs.org/
>>> ) that does FEM simulations in human head models. We use gmsh to create 
>>> tetrahedral meshes from stl surfaces of brain and other tissues. Is there 
>>> any particular meshing algorithm you would suggest for this application?
>>> 
>> I would recommend using the default one.
>> 
>> (Is the quality of the STL meshes sufficient, or do you need to remesh them?)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> What about optimization algorithms? We prefer robustness and quality over 
>>> speed.
>>> 
>> Recent Gmsh versions optimize automatically. We will introduce some 
>> fine-tuning in the future to change the speed/quality tradeoff ; currently a 
>> good compromise is hardcoded.
>> 
>> 
>>> I would also like to suggest 2 improvements for future Gmsh versions:
>>> 
>>> 1. Is it possible to provide Gmsh 4 binaries that are compatible with 
>>> CentOS 6? It is an old but still widely used Linux distribution. This has 
>>> been holding us back in adopting Gmsh 4.
>>> 
>> The official Linux binaries are compiled on the "old-stable" Debian, in 
>> order to support even quite old Linux distributions. Can you share the error 
>> you get on CentOS 6 ?
>> 
>> 
>>> 2. Would it be possible in future releases to have more flexible data types 
>>> in $NodeData and $ElementNodeData? I think it would be very useful to store 
>>> single-precision floats (to save space) or integers (to have additional 
>>> labels for elements and nodes) .
>>> 
>> Yes, that's indeed in our plans for a future revision of the MSH4 format, 
>> together with even better handling of very large meshes/datasets.
>> 
>> Thanks for the feedback,
>> 
>> Christophe
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks a lot for putting so much time and effort into making this great 
>>> piece of software.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Best Regards,
>>> 
>>> Guilherme Saturnino
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> gmsh mailing list
>>> 
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://onelab.info/mailman/listinfo/gmsh
>> — 
>> Prof. Christophe Geuzaine
>> University of Liege, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science 
>> 
>> http://www.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~geuzaine
>> 
>> 
>> Free software: 
>> http://gmsh.info | http://getdp.info | http://onelab.info
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

— 
Prof. Christophe Geuzaine
University of Liege, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science 
http://www.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~geuzaine

Free software: http://gmsh.info | http://getdp.info | http://onelab.info


_______________________________________________
gmsh mailing list
[email protected]
http://onelab.info/mailman/listinfo/gmsh

Reply via email to