I was wondering, is there a perfect equivalence between these 2 methods of meshing a solid?
Because I found out that meshing a solid with Hex elements can be quite difficult in case of complex geometries since I need to cut the solid in simpler pieces to be able to mesh it.
I solved the problem drawing a surface (corresponding to one of the faces of the solid) and meshing it with quad elements. Then I extruded it:
mesh --> extrude --> element
selecting the whole surface.
Solved! Go to Solution.
If you create HEX elements using command "MESH > GEOMETRY > HEXMESH SOLIDS" then both the mesh & geometry are associated, so you will be able to apply loads & BCs to the geometry and FEMAP will translate to nodes & element faces.
But in fact, you can create as well HEX mesh using MESH > EXTRUDE > ELEMENTS (or better MESH > SWEEP > ELEMENT, give it a try, is really powerful!!), the result could be apparently similar, but please note the geometry & mesh is not associated, then you will have to run command "MODIFY > ASSOCIATIVITY > AUTOMATIC" to make sure both the solid geometry & hex mesh is associated, OK?.
Take a look to my block and search for HEX mesh, you will learn how to perform HEX meshing in FEMAP with video included:
Is the associativity step mandatory or do I have to do it only if I want to apply loads to the geometry?
And also, can I still use the associativity command if I have translated the mesh but not the original solid?
Not mandatory at all, of course, is up to you, but always I suggest to have mesh & geometry associated, this way everyhing is more easy to apply loads & constraints to geometry instead to go to nodes & elements, specially when pressure loads are involved. The ASSOCIATIVITY command is really powerful and easy to use, give it a try!.