2006
DOI: 10.2514/1.15929
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mesh Generation Using Unstructured Computational Meshes and Elliptic Partial Differential Equation Smoothing

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…where r in e is the current value of the element insphere radius andr in is the predefined target value. The definition (28) of the fictitious volumetric straiñ * v is motivated by the outcome of numerical experiments in the works of Karman et al 26 and Yang and Mavriplis, 27 where elastic properties inversely proportional to the element volume are shown to lead to a faster convergence of sliver elements toward the desired shape, avoiding the problem of element inversion. In fact, looking at the evolution of̃ * v with r in e shown in Figure 2, one can see that element configurations with r in e <r in are highly penalized, generating a high fictitious pressure p * e = K * ̃ * v,e , tending to infinity for vanishing r in e .…”
Section: Definition Of the P-smoothing Elastic Analogy Problemmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…where r in e is the current value of the element insphere radius andr in is the predefined target value. The definition (28) of the fictitious volumetric straiñ * v is motivated by the outcome of numerical experiments in the works of Karman et al 26 and Yang and Mavriplis, 27 where elastic properties inversely proportional to the element volume are shown to lead to a faster convergence of sliver elements toward the desired shape, avoiding the problem of element inversion. In fact, looking at the evolution of̃ * v with r in e shown in Figure 2, one can see that element configurations with r in e <r in are highly penalized, generating a high fictitious pressure p * e = K * ̃ * v,e , tending to infinity for vanishing r in e .…”
Section: Definition Of the P-smoothing Elastic Analogy Problemmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The result obtained with this coarse mesh will be used as a reference for assessing the effect of the P-Smoothing on the solution accuracy. Table 1 shows a comparison of the fluid front positions at different time instants, varying the parameter a defined in Equation (26). This parameter controls the size of the smoothing domain and consequently the influence of the nodal P-Smoothing on the results of the analysis.…”
Section: Dam Breakmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian is implemented through a remap following the Lagrangian motion at every cycle. When a remap is employed here, the computational mesh is continuously relaxed at every cycle in one of two ways, either by retaining fixed Eulerian nodal positions or by solving the 3D Winslow equations [33] to iteratively smooth interior nodal points while allowing boundary points to move with a fixed velocity. The remap algorithm, itself, is an extension of a common swept-face method described previously in two dimensions [32].…”
Section: Arbitrary Lagrangian-eulerianmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to simulate the moving boundary problems, two types of grid deformation scheme prevail, which can be based on either an algebraic scheme (Liu et al, 2006;Morton, Melville, & Visbal, 1998;Sheng & Allen, 2013) or a physical-analogy technique (Blom, 2000;Clarence, 2004;Degand & Farhat, 2002;Karman, Anderson, & Sahasrabudhe, 2006;Stein, Tezduyar, & Benney, 2004;Sun, Zhang, & Ren, 2012;Zeng & Ethier, 2005;Zhou & Xu, 2010). The algebraic scheme defines the interior grid node movement as an algebraic function of the boundary node positions.…”
Section: The Grid Deformation Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, because the algebraic functions are usually geometrically based and have little physical meaning, the control of the behavior of the grid deformation process by the algebraic scheme is often relatively weak and limited. In contrast, physical-analogy techniques such as the linear elastic technique (Karman et al, 2006;Stein et al, 2004) and the spring-analogy technique (Batina, 1991;Blom, 2000;Clarence, 2004;Degand & Farhat, 2002;Zeng & Ethier, 2005) provide the user with more flexibility to control the grid deformation by adjusting the physical parameters in an element-wise or edge-wise manner. For instance, badly-shaped elements can be more stiffened than those well-shaped elements to prevent the early appearance of an element with an unacceptable level of shape quality.…”
Section: The Grid Deformation Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%