[HannesGS]

Dear all,

I have a very simple test case here: just two structured blocks with different number of points as shown on the attached picture. I used the cyclicAMI type to define the interface.

P1
{
type cyclicAMI;
nFaces 64;
startFace 4528;
matchTolerance 0.001;
transform noOrdering;
neighbourPatch P2;
}

(analogously for the other side P2). Now, checkMesh tells me

*Number of regions: 2
The mesh has multiple regions which are not connected by any face.
<<Writing region information to "0/cellToRegion"
<<Writing region 0 with 512 cells to cellSet region0
<<Writing region 1 with 1152 cells to cellSet region1

Is this a warning I have to worry about? Is my general approach towards non-matching interfaces valid at all?

Thank you for your help!

[tomf]

Hi,

I guess this should work. You may want to check that the regions are on either side of the cyclicAMI interface in ParaView (use the cellToRegion variable). Due to the non-conformal interface there is no direct connection between the regions, which would indeed trigger this warning.

Regards,
Tom

[HannesGS]

A simple test simulation runs nicely, I just was a bit worried by the warning. Thanks for your answer and the explanation!