×
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

Are swept meshes always better?

Are swept meshes always better?

Are swept meshes always better?

(OP)
I have a fairly simple question actually, that I'm sure will result in a not-so-simple answers for all analysis cases.
My question is the following: are swept meshes always better? In terms of analysis time, convergence and results accuracy.

A good example would be a hat stiffener beam which is being meshes with shell elements.
Does one prefer a random triangular mesh or does one prefer an ordered swept quad mesh that follows the general shape of the beam?

RE: Are swept meshes always better?

For rectangular or boxy geometry like you suggest quad and hex are almost always better.

The more difficult question arises with complex geometry like organic shapes. Here sometimes hex meshes are near impossible to achieve.

If using triangles or tets I usually run with second order. Infact Abaqus has changed this to the default.

In the end the mesh needs good aspect ratios and mesh densities where needed. I usually test several and pick the one with the best:

cost (time) vs reward (accuracy)

I hope this helps.

Rob Stupplebeen
www.optimaldevice.com
https://sites.google.com/site/robertkstupplebeen/

RE: Are swept meshes always better?

all good advice from Rob ...

use quad meshs whenever you can.
avoid TET4s as you'd avoid TRIAs

another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?

RE: Are swept meshes always better?

(OP)
I'm just suspicuous that a neatly swept quad mesh on a geometry such as a hat stiffener beam will artifically constrain the model?
In the case that the material is an isotropic one, such as steel, titanium or aluminum.

RE: Are swept meshes always better?

if you use a TRIA3 mesh you might align the inherent element stiffness that might affect some of the results, but i don't see anything major (other than pave meshing with TRIA3s).

btw, i used TRIA3 intentionally ... you wouldn't mesh a sheet metal part with TETs, would you ?

another day in paradise, or is paradise one day closer ?

RE: Are swept meshes always better?

TRIA3 and TET4 are terrible elements

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