search

meshpro / meshgen-comparison

:spider_web: A comparison of mesh generators.
GNU General Public License v3.0
40 stars 8 forks source link

Possibly add a recommendation section? #10

Open EngineerMama opened 3 years ago

EngineerMama commented 3 years ago

You mentioned being willing to add things...

The graphs are lovely, but someone who is new to FE might not be able to interpret them as to when would be a good reason to use one generator over another, which is a good multi-purpose generator (i.e. if you only learn one, this is the most useful...) You can certainly preface it with "IMHO", but a Recommendation section at the end of the ReadMe would certainly help the utility of the comparison.

nschloe commented 3 years ago

meshio is just a mesh format converter, not a generator. For the rest, it's just the good old "depends". Do you want a high-class mesh, or an easy-to-use scripting language? Do you care about angles or more about other mesh quality measures? Should the software be free or not? Etc. etc.

EngineerMama commented 3 years ago

My bad about meshio - so I fixed the comment.

"depends"

... Yes, exactly! It's the spelling out of possibilities that would be in a recommendation section, Like a table (and I couldn't fill it out because I am new and trying to figure out which one I should invest my time in learning).

Package | Free | User friendly (1easy - 5 hard)
Gmsh (via pygmsh), | Yes/no?| 1? CGAL (via pygalmesh) |? MeshPy, | ? dmsh, |? meshzoo, | ? SeismicMesh. | ?

nschloe commented 3 years ago

Yeah, why not.

krober10nd commented 3 years ago

This is an interesting suggestion. At the end of the day, it really depends on what your downstream application is as Nico points out.

If finite elements is your thing, a good review of how mesh quality impacts linear finite element methods can be found by in:

https://imr.sandia.gov/papers/imr11/shewchuk2.pdf

This knowledge can help you, in part, make the decision yourself regarding what your meshing requirements are.