Hello
thanks again for making fTetWild available. I have a question abuot the mesh sizing function,
which as we know from the documentation, and from the examples, should be defined
through a background mesh in .msh format.
Let consider the solid in Fig. 1, and suppose that you would like to apply a sizing
on the triangles laying on the two faces F1 and F2: the two sizing values f1 and f2
could in general be different.
Fig. 1.
Now consider the two following steps:
STEP 1: extract F1 from the solid and enclose it in a bounding box; then generate
a very simple, cartesian mesh of the bounding box. The corresponding .msh mesh
file used for sizing will contain at each node the value f1. See Fig. 2
Fig. 2
STEP2: the same for F2. See Fig. 3
Fig. 3
STEP 3: "merge" the two .msh grids into one, with the "overlapping" result in Fig. 4: the union of the two grids is obvioulsy not well defined as single finite element mesh
Fig. 4
Now the question; will this work?
Thank you and regards
Giovanni
Hello thanks again for making fTetWild available. I have a question abuot the mesh sizing function, which as we know from the documentation, and from the examples, should be defined through a background mesh in .msh format. Let consider the solid in Fig. 1, and suppose that you would like to apply a sizing on the triangles laying on the two faces F1 and F2: the two sizing values f1 and f2 could in general be different.
Now consider the two following steps:
STEP 1: extract F1 from the solid and enclose it in a bounding box; then generate a very simple, cartesian mesh of the bounding box. The corresponding .msh mesh file used for sizing will contain at each node the value f1. See Fig. 2
STEP2: the same for F2. See Fig. 3
STEP 3: "merge" the two .msh grids into one, with the "overlapping" result in Fig. 4: the union of the two grids is obvioulsy not well defined as single finite element mesh
Now the question; will this work? Thank you and regards Giovanni