Philip, On Monday, July 31, 2017 at 1:54:26 PM UTC-4, phillip mobley wrote: > > 1) Based on this post, do you think that I should attempt to use dealli > internal mesh generation or would it be better to utilize gmsh source code > and intergrate it into my code? (As a side note, I am not sure yet if the > program is better off using structured or unstructured quads or both! More > details later. But, if there is a perfered option when dealing with FEA, > please let me know.) > >
> 2) In the FAQ when talking about creating the grid manually using the > Triangulation::create_triagulation. I am wondering what it means for the > geometry to be simple? Is the simple geometry mainly for 3D? Are all 2D > geomtries simple? Is there every a case when 2D geometry can be complex? > If you don't know what the mesh will look like, I would use gmsh. You can create a complex mesh with deal.II own functions but you will have to write a lot of code. I have been working on python wrappers to help generate the mesh (see https://github.com/dealii/dealii/blob/master/contrib/python-bindings/tests/triangulation_wrapper.py) but there are not complete yet. I hope to merge a lot more grid generators soon but if the mesh is totally arbitrary I would still go with gmsh. There is no definition of simple geometry but if you need to merge more than five or six triangulations, it will probably easier to use gmsh. Best, Bruno -- The deal.II project is located at http://www.dealii.org/ For mailing list/forum options, see https://groups.google.com/d/forum/dealii?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "deal.II User Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dealii+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
