You’re absolutely right, thank you. I’d like to make a follow up question, if I may (hopefully not as stupid as the previous one):
In my model I merge several volumes using BooleanUnion. The difficulty is that after this command, the tags of the surfaces are lost. (And I need them to define physical surfaces). Is there a workaround or a way of forcing the tags to not change? What I would like in the end is to have a physical surface which is the group of all surfaces in the same plane. Is there maybe a smarter way or a built-in command in which I can achieve this without needing to make a list the list of all the surfaces by hand? Thank you so much for your support, Sabrina -- Sabrina Zacarias Institut für Kernphysik Technische Universität Darmstadt S2|14 / office 319 Schlossgartenstr. 9 64289 Darmstadt Office: +49 6151 16 23589 > On 29. Mar 2020, at 22:28, Christophe Geuzaine <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On 29 Mar 2020, at 12:24, Sabrina Zacarias <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Dear all, >> >> I am a bit confused with the output of the meshing of my model and would >> really appreciate a piece of advise: >> >> My geometry consists of an axial section of a cylinder (which plays the role >> of the air surrounding my model ) containing several (sections of) rings, >> which are electrodes, plus two (sections of ) disks, which are the cathode >> and anode. The fact that these are sections and not complete cylindrical >> pieces is to make the meshing faster. And the post processing software can >> handle it. >> >> Anyway, In the real model I need to use ~200 electrodes. So far I have not >> been able to achieve a mesh without errors. I get ‘Unable to recover the >> edge XX on curve XX (on surface XX )’, and also ’No elements in volume >> XX’. >> > > With Nel = 200 your geometry is invalid (it auto-intersects), whereas with > Nel = 20 it is correct. > > Christophe > <intersect.png> > >> What I find confusing is that when I reduce the number of electrodes x10 >> lower, without changing anything else, the meshing is correct. >> >> I am obviously missing something or not approaching the problem the right >> way. I attach the .geo files if someone could please take a look. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Sabrina >> >> <3d_main.geo> >> <f_box.geo> >> <f_electrode.geo> >> <f_plates.geo> >> >> — >> Sabrina Zacarias >> Institut für Kernphysik >> Technische Universität Darmstadt >> S2|14 / office 319 >> Schlossgartenstr. 9 >> >> 64289 Darmstadt >> >> Office: +49 6151 16 23589 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> gmsh mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[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 > <http://www.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/~geuzaine>
_______________________________________________ gmsh mailing list [email protected] http://onelab.info/mailman/listinfo/gmsh
