[Gmsh] voids adjacent to a volume edge

[David Colignon]

Hi Shawn,

can you send us your last .geo file(s) ?

Regards,

Dave

-- 
David Colignon, Ph.D.
Collaborateur Logistique du F.R.S.-FNRS
CÉCI - Consortium des Équipements de Calcul Intensif
ACE - Applied & Computational Electromagnetics
Sart-Tilman B28
Université de Liège
4000 Liège - BELGIQUE
Tél: +32 (0)4 366 37 32
Fax: +32 (0)4 366 29 10
WWW:    http://hpc.montefiore.ulg.ac.be/
Agenda: http://www.google.com/calendar/embed?src=david.colignon%40gmail.com



Shawn Fostner wrote:
> Related to this problem, I'm still trying to find a solution, is it 
> possible to use physical groups to force the mesh? If I set up certain 
> surfaces as groups it no longer crashes, but only meshes 2d, 3d still 
> doesn't work generally, or one of the 2 regions 3d meshes, but not both.
> 
> I've tried overlapping the meshes, defining holes everywhere I can think 
> of, but in the end, having a void in one region directly ajacent to the 
> other just seems to make both very unhappy.
> 
> Shawn
> 
> Shawn Fostner wrote:
>> Thanks David,
>>
>> I tried that, but now it meshes the 2d surfaces fine, but complains 
>> that "Error   : No tetrahedra in region 3" (which is what corresponds 
>> to the lower rectangle. Probably because its effectively open now, 
>> even though its still effectively bounded on the top by volume 116. 
>> The issue seems to be the overlapping boundary between volume 3 and 
>> 116, which is where surface 13 (the bottom of the void) and 18 (the 
>> top of the "surface" or volume 3) intersect. Not sure how to get 
>> around that, how do you force it to allow you to close the bottom 
>> region, but at the same time use the boundary as a void in the upper 
>> region.
>>
>> Shawn
>>
>> David Colignon wrote:
>>> Hi Shawn,
>>>
>>> I think the best solution would be to define Surface 13 as a hole in 
>>> Surface 18.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>
>>
> 
>