> On 3 Apr 2019, at 18:23, Gavin Ridley <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I would just like to note something to the developers regarding a perhaps
> unnecessary skipping of surfaces in the code.
>
> I recently have had to convert a STEP file with fairly complicated geometry
> to a GEO.
Don't do that. By design, Gmsh never translates from one CAD format to another.
The "unrolled GEO" feature is there for unrolling complex GEO scripts. It can
indeed export a limited subset of geometrical entities created by other CAD
kernels, but it's there only for debugging.
If you want to modify a STEP model, set
SetFactory("OpenCASCADE");
at the beginning of your script. Since we import STEP models with OpenCASCADE,
this will allow you to modify the file directly with OpenCASCADE. See
https://gitlab.onelab.info/gmsh/gmsh/blob/master/demos/boolean/import.geo for
an example.
Christophe
> This is done so that I can split one of the surfaces in the STEP file to set
> different BCs on different parts of the surface. At the moment, it appears
> that gmsh will skip several surfaces in the conversion from STEP to
> geo_unrolled unnecessarily: surfaces were left out from the gmsh file. A
> warning message comes with this.
>
> It seems, however, that the skipped surfaces work fine if you just go back in
> and add surfaces manually. Gmsh now reads the geo file correctly.
>
> So, why are these surfaces being skipped? Is there some ambiguity about their
> interpretation from STEP? It would be nice to not have to manually go in and
> add the surfaces.
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Gavin Ridley
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
gmsh mailing list
[email protected]
http://onelab.info/mailman/listinfo/gmsh
