[waseeqsiddiqui]

Regarding prism meshing around sharp trailing edges in ICEM, I have searched everywhere, tried every possible setting combination. Every related discussion in CFD forums ends up into hexa meshing. Please could someone help me with this problem. The quality and angles/ aspect ratio of volume tetras from the last prism layer in TEs are pretty bad almost everytime. Please help.

[Gert-Jan]

- which method did you use in ICEM? Octree? Fluent Meshing? Delauney?
- is your initial surface mesh ok everywhere around your trailling edge?
- did you read the help in Global Mesh Setup/Prism Meshing Parameters/Global Prisms Settings? Did you use Max Prism Angle = 180° and Prism Height Limit Factor = 0.5
- which CFD-solver will you use eventually?

[waseeqsiddiqui]

Thankyou for responding. Octree.
Yes. I had defined thin cuts so it captured the surface completely and contains very good quality surface tris.

Yes i have been reading the prism help manual and I have tried 180 and 0.5. I have tried many other combos like allowing only pyramids at sharp edges by setting 160 and max height over base. Still no luck.
Ansys Fluent.

[Gert-Jan]

- How does you trailing edge look like? Can you decrease the element size?
- Who says your mesh is not ok? Your supervisor? Fluent? ICEM?

- Did you you try the Pre-inflation (fluent) method?- Did you try to smooth the mesh in Fluent?
- Fluent and Tetra-mesh do not provide the best solutions. Maybe convert it to Polyhedra mesh?
- Maybe try CFX? CFX is much nore foregiven than Fluent when it comes to bad elements............

[waseeqsiddiqui]

Mesh diverges in Fluent.
Only the first tetra elements after the last prism layer at the sharp bend of TE are having good skewness but poor quality and angles.
I tried edges and surface meshing. No luck.

[waseeqsiddiqui]

Nope didn't Fluent Pre-inflation method? I tried smoothing the mesh in fluent though.
Not supervisors, its Ansys Fluent.
Will try CFX

[Gert-Jan]

CFX is a lifesaver in this respect. Unless you have negative elements.

[kad]

In case of tetra/prism meshing for e.g. naca airfoil you can use something like auxiliary surface for prism generation. I made a little drawing of that idea. The auxiliary surface (yellow) leads the prism layer all the way out of the domain and avoids critical angles in the mesh. The auxiliary surface has to be defined as interior in your solver then.

[waseeqsiddiqui]

Originally Posted by kad

In case of tetra/prism meshing for e.g. naca airfoil you can use something like auxiliary surface for prism generation. I made a little drawing of that idea. The auxiliary surface (yellow) leads the prism layer all the way out of the domain and avoids critical angles in the mesh. The auxiliary surface has to be defined as interior in your solver then.

Good idea! So my guess is that ICEM calls this auxilary surface as internal wall! This won't cause any error in results right?

[Far]

Originally Posted by kad

In case of tetra/prism meshing for e.g. naca airfoil you can use something like auxiliary surface for prism generation. I made a little drawing of that idea. The auxiliary surface (yellow) leads the prism layer all the way out of the domain and avoids critical angles in the mesh. The auxiliary surface has to be defined as interior in your solver then.

What happens at the end of auxiliary surface?

[kad]

It extends through the whole rest of the domain so it spans a "nice" 90 degree angle at e.g. outlet. Okay, it is not an very elegant solution but it is one possible way to avoid bad prism elements.

[kad]

Originally Posted by waseeqsiddiqui

Good idea! So my guess is that ICEM calls this auxilary surface as internal wall! This won't cause any error in results right?

Usually the elements must be defined as internal in the solver, too. This won't give you any error because these faces are then treated like any other internal face.

[waseeqsiddiqui]

Interesting

[lgn_aero]

Originally Posted by kad

Usually the elements must be defined as internal in the solver, too. This won't give you any error because these faces are then treated like any other internal face.

Otherwise, after meshing (prism) completion change the association (remove) so that this internal sarface will be no more so no additional setting in solver tooooo.

[waseeqsiddiqui]

Originally Posted by kad

In case of tetra/prism meshing for e.g. naca airfoil you can use something like auxiliary surface for prism generation. I made a little drawing of that idea. The auxiliary surface (yellow) leads the prism layer all the way out of the domain and avoids critical angles in the mesh. The auxiliary surface has to be defined as interior in your solver then.

Dear Kad,
I am uploading the snaps for my experiment of thin baffle on a wing with sharp trailing edge. The surfaces of upper and lower wing are named WING UPPER and WING LOWER. Thin Cuts are defined to ensure the surfaces are captured accurately at edge criterion 0.2. Points of Trailing Edge are copied and translated out of the domain. Single baffle surface is created by connecting these four points and setting the part as internal wall using mesh by parts setup.(Figure 3). Prism settings are kept as default; stair stepping enabled, 180° max prism angle, min prism quality was set once to 0.01 and once as 1e-06. Changes are made in fillet ratio.


Observation: Quality elements are even worse with the internal surface, mainly on each of the edges of the thin surface just like the way they get worse at a sharp trailing edge (high aspect ratio). All my attempts of changing prism settings shows the same behaviour. Even Stair Stepping is enabled and disabled as stated by Mr. Simon. Furthermore, the prisms, once they end at sharp TE and begin at internal surface; they converges into an undesirable height.

What am I doing wrong? Help needed.
Thanks.

[waseeqsiddiqui]

Originally Posted by waseeqsiddiqui

Dear Kad,
I am uploading the snaps for my experiment of thin baffle on a wing with sharp trailing edge. The surfaces of upper and lower wing are named WING UPPER and WING LOWER. Thin Cuts are defined to ensure the surfaces are captured accurately at edge criterion 0.2. Points of Trailing Edge are copied and translated out of the domain. Single baffle surface is created by connecting these four points and setting the part as internal wall using mesh by parts setup.(Figure 5). Prism settings are kept as default; stair stepping enabled, 180° max prism angle, min prism quality was set once to 0.01 and once as 1e-06. Changes are made in fillet ratio.


Observation: Quality elements are even worse with the internal surface, mainly on each of the edges of the thin surface just like the way they get worse at a sharp trailing edge (high aspect ratio). All my attempts of changing prism settings shows the same behaviour. Even Stair Stepping is enabled and disabled as stated by Mr. Simon. Furthermore, the prisms, once they end at sharp TE and begin at internal surface; they converges into an undesirable height.

What am I doing wrong? Help needed.
Thanks.

Few more snaps added