-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 62
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
apf::makeMdsBox #366
Comments
Here is a sketch based on my guess (lacking coordinates) of the model but, as noted above, it seems odd that edges don't form a loop based on these coordinate definitions (or is that not a requirement and not satisfied??) |
So, if the order of the listed edges is not important and the extra numbers do not need to accurately reflect direction/usage then the attached file might work for a hole defined by two new half cyldinder faces which introduce 6 new edges (I assume trying to do that with two new periodic edges that have no defining vertices is a bad idea) and 4 new vertices. I will also upload a sketch of the new model to show my assumed numbering. |
Specifically, will the following line from phBC.cc work to load my "hand made" dmg? 133 if (gmi_has_ext(modelfile, "dmg")) |
UPDATE. I just tried the above and it worked which probably does not surprise the more experienced folks. Moving on to making a branch of the code that can interpret a classification file that makes use of those new model entities and obviously writing the mesh generator that generates the mesh on that shape with matching classification. Obviously it will not work if I don't give it an acceptable dmg model so if any folks reading this know dmg's construction syntax well enough to review my outModel_hole.txt file and/or answer questions about what those extra columns are, whether they are really needed in this case (@cwsmith knows better what the code really needs from this model but it might be only a consistent set of tagged model entities??) |
@KennethEJansen I don't have much experience setting up the geometric models from scratch. Is there a reason that you can't use a model that's been derived from CAD/Simmetrix? |
That is our normal route but, when the meshes approach a billion elements that workflow breaks down on integer overflows (which you helped me resolve last year). In this particular case, we are taking a Simmetrix mesh of the airfoil made in SimModeler from CAD but then we extract the 2D mesh and rebuild our own extrusion from that with as many extrusion layers as we like. Note, Simmetrix extrusion only works in serial and we hit lots of snags before getting this approach to work effectively. We have been doing this for box geometries for a couple of years now and I am just trying to extend that to the next most interesting topological case (which covers airfoils). |
For the record, @KennethEJansen and I discussed the hand-coded dmg approach, and a workflow using |
outModel.txt
I am trying to extend this capability or find a comparable way to introduce slightly more complicated geometric models. As I am not a strong C++ coder, I am starting with the output (outModel.dmg) I get from a case that IS a box and trying to understand the file contents to see what the most feasible route from the following three options: Before listing let me state what I want. I want to be able to handle a box with a hole that extends completely through the box such that it is a a 2D box with a hole extruded into the third dimension. Here are options I am considering:
If yes, then I could use some help filing in a few questions that I have in the attached file.
OK now back to one Attached is a the outModel.dmg where I have added comments to reflect my understanding. Here are my questions:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: