Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
This paper presents an adaptive approach to sweeping one-to-one and many-to-one geometry. The automatic decomposition of many-to-one geometry into one-to-one “blocks” and the selection of an appropriate node projection scheme are vital steps in the efficient generation of high-quality swept meshes. This paper identifies two node projection schemes which are used in tandem to robustly sweep each block of a one-to-one geometry. Methods are also presented for the characterization of one-to-one geometry and the automatic assignment of the most appropriate node projection scheme. These capabilities allow the sweeper to adapt to the requirements of the sweep block being processed. The identification of the two node projection schemes was made after an extensive analysis of existing schemes was completed. One of the node projection schemes implemented in this work, BoundaryError, was selected from traditional node placement algorithms. The second node projection scheme, SmartAffine, is an extension of simple affine transformations and is capable of efficiently sweeping geometry with source and/or target curvature while approximating the speed of a simple transform. These two schemes, when used in this adaptive setting, optimize mesh quality and the speed that swept meshes can be generated while minimizing required user interaction. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2010 | 10.1007/s00366-009-0160-3 | Eng. Comput. (Lond.) |
Keywords | DocType | Volume |
automatic assignment,traditional node placement algorithm,sweeping one-to-one,adaptive approach,one-to-one geometry,decompositionhexahedra � mesh generationnode projectionsmoothing � sweepingautomatic,appropriate node projection scheme,adaptive sweeping technique,sweeping geometry,node projection scheme,adaptive setting,many-to-one geometry,mesh generation,affine transformation | Journal | 26 |
Issue | ISSN | Citations |
3 | 1435-5663 | 7 |
PageRank | References | Authors |
0.79 | 5 | 4 |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| michael a scott | 1 | 61 | 4.69 |
| matthew n earp | 2 | 15 | 1.70 |
| steven e benzley | 3 | 107 | 12.72 |
| michael b stephenson | 4 | 7 | 0.79 |