×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Partitioning

Partitioning

Partitioning

(OP)
I am analyzing a part after importing it as a .stp file. I have created seed points along edges successfully.When I try to mesh I get a message saying that areas in magenta cannot be meshed and should be partitioned. I have tried to partition it using options such as 3 point plane and normal to edge. But the problem is that it is getting too tedious. Isn't there an easy way to mesh parts without paritioning them?
Thanks

RE: Partitioning

You can just use tet elements is you can't be bothered or if the geometry is just too difficult. It is better to try and get structured or swept regions though for more regular meshes by partitioning the part. There is an art to partitioning the part and if you can try and use the
least number of partitions. Using planes isn't always the best way to partition though.

corus

RE: Partitioning

What mesh technique are you trying to use?

RE: Partitioning

(OP)
Thanks corus the tet elements worked! Thanks brep.

RE: Partitioning

If tet meshing is ok for this application check out virtual topology.  It will replace multiple surfaces with 1 approximate surface.  This allows the mesher to use elements with better aspect ratios in some circumstances.  Also, as a rule of thumb tet10s are more accurate for the time costs associated with the additional DOFs.  Hope this helps.

Rob Stupplebeen

RE: Partitioning

+1 for Mt Stupplebeen's virtual topology suggestion. And we'll forgive for his TET10 slip, I think he meant C3D10M ;)

RE: Partitioning

(OP)
Thanks rstupplebeen and brep. And Mr.Stupplebeen will forgive brep for the "Mt" I think he meant "Mr" :)

RE: Partitioning

brep,

Point taken.  Switching between too many codes recently and talking to those not in the know.

ysg519,

You are welcome.  I think you are right since I am not a mountain of a man.

RE: Partitioning

(OP)
I have posted this question as a separate thread but didnt get any response. I was wondering if you could take a look and please give me some input. I am repeating it here for convenience.

THERMAL CONTACT PROPERTIES
I am defining contact properties for conducting surfaces. In the boxes where I am required to mention the conductance at zero clearance, what goes in there is it the thermal conductivity of the slave or the master surface. Also what goes in the clearance box for zero conductivity? In my case the surfaces are in full 100% contact with no clearance. Thanks

RE: Partitioning

If you have 100% contact with no clearance then there is no need to use contact surfaces across a non-existing gap. Just tie the two surfaces together.

corus

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources