Skip to main content

regions - ElementMesh from Tetrahedron subdivision


I would like to create a nice "structured" ElementMesh made of TetrahedronElement by dividing one larger Tetrahedron. One example of such procedure (see below) is given in documentation for Tetrahedron. It recursively splits the original tetrahedron and therefore the number of elements per edge is a power of 2.



(* From documentation page on Tetrahedron *)
SymmetricSubdivision[Tetrahedron[pl_], k_] /; 0 <= k < 2^Length[pl]:=Module[
{n = Length[pl] - 1, i0, bl, pos},
i0 = DigitCount[k, 2, 1];
bl = IntegerDigits[k, 2, n];
pos = FoldList[If[#2 == 0, #1 + {0, 1}, #1 + {1, 0}] &, {0, i0},Reverse[bl]];
Tetrahedron@Map[Mean, Extract[pl, #] & /@ Map[{#} &, pos + 1, {2}]]
]

NestedSymmetricSubdivision[Tetrahedron[pl_],level_Integer]/;level==0:= Tetrahedron[pl]

NestedSymmetricSubdivision[Tetrahedron[pl_],level_Integer]/;level>0:= Flatten[
NestedSymmetricSubdivision[SymmetricSubdivision[Tetrahedron[pl], #],level - 1] & /@ Range[0, 7]
]

Graphics3D[
NestedSymmetricSubdivision[Tetrahedron[{{0,0,0},{1,0,0},{1,1,0},{1,1,1}}],3],
BaseStyle -> Opacity[0.5]
]

tetrahedraGraphics3D



This is nice, but I would like to split the tetrahedron in such way that it has arbitrary number of elements per edge (not only 2, 4, 8, etc) and generate ElementMesh object from them.




For completeness, this is my function for creating ElementMesh for subdivision procedure from Tetrahedron documentation.


(* Helper function to determine TetrahedronElement orientation *)
reorientQ[{a_, b_, c_, d_}] := Positive@Det[{a - d, b - d, c - d}]

tetrahedronSubMesh[pts_, n_Integer] := Module[
{f, allCrds, nodes, connectivity},
f = If[reorientQ[#], #[[{1, 2, 4, 3}]], #] &;
allCrds =f /@ (Join @@ List @@@ NestedSymmetricSubdivision[Tetrahedron[pts], n]);

nodes = DeleteDuplicates@Flatten[allCrds, 1];
connectivity = With[
{rules = Thread[nodes -> Range@Length[nodes]]},
Replace[allCrds, rules, {2}]
];

ToElementMesh[
"Coordinates" -> nodes,
"MeshElements" -> {TetrahedronElement[connectivity]}
]

]

Answer



I came up with slightly convoluted solution that uses various transformations on ElementMesh object with help of MeshTools package (at least version 0.5.0).


First we create uniform structured mesh on unit cube (Cuboid[]) with n elements per edge.


Get["MeshTools`"]
n = 3;
unitCubeMesh = CuboidMesh[{0, 0, 0}, {1, 1, 1}, {n, n, n}];

Then split the hexahedral mesh to tetrahedra (HexToTetrahedronMesh), taking care that element edges coincide, and select only elements below body diagonal plane of unit cube. We already get unit tetrahedron with n elements per edge.


unitTetMesh = SelectElements[

HexToTetrahedronMesh[unitCubeMesh],
#1 + #2 + #3 <= 1 &
]

unitTetMesh["Wireframe"[
Axes -> True,
"MeshElementStyle" -> FaceForm@LightBlue
]]

UnitTetMesh



To extend this procedure we calculate TransformationFunction between corners of arbitrary tetrahedron and unit tetrahedron and apply this transformation to ElementMesh.


SeedRandom[42]
corners = RandomInteger[{0, 10}, {4, 3}]

tf = Last@FindGeometricTransform[
corners,
{{0, 0, 0}, {1, 0, 0}, {0, 1, 0}, {0, 0, 1}},
Method -> "Linear"
]


mesh = TransformMesh[unitTetMesh, tf]

Show[
mesh["Wireframe"[
Axes -> True,
"MeshElementStyle" -> FaceForm@LightBlue
]],
Graphics3D[{Red, PointSize[Large], Point[corners]}]
]


RandomTetMesh


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

mathematical optimization - Minimizing using indices, error: Part::pkspec1: The expression cannot be used as a part specification

I want to use Minimize where the variables to minimize are indices pointing into an array. Here a MWE that hopefully shows what my problem is. vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@ { Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; Minimize[{Total@((vec1[[#]] - vec2[[u[#]]])^2 & /@ Range[1, 3]), cons}, vars, Integers] The error I get: Part::pkspec1: The expression u[1] cannot be used as a part specification. >> Answer Ok, it seems that one can get around Mathematica trying to evaluate vec2[[u[1]]] too early by using the function Indexed[vec2,u[1]] . The working MWE would then look like the following: vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@{ Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; NMinimize[ {Total@((vec1[[#]] - Indexed[vec2, u[#]])^2 & /@ R...

functions - Get leading series expansion term?

Given a function f[x] , I would like to have a function leadingSeries that returns just the leading term in the series around x=0 . For example: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x)] x and leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x^3)/4)/(4 + x)] -(1/(16 x^3)) Is there such a function in Mathematica? Or maybe one can implement it efficiently? EDIT I finally went with the following implementation, based on Carl Woll 's answer: lds[ex_,x_]:=( (ex/.x->(x+O[x]^2))/.SeriesData[U_,Z_,L_List,Mi_,Ma_,De_]:>SeriesData[U,Z,{L[[1]]},Mi,Mi+1,De]//Quiet//Normal) The advantage is, that this one also properly works with functions whose leading term is a constant: lds[Exp[x],x] 1 Answer Update 1 Updated to eliminate SeriesData and to not return additional terms Perhaps you could use: leadingSeries[expr_, x_] := Normal[expr /. x->(x+O[x]^2) /. a_List :> Take[a, 1]] Then for your examples: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x), x] leadingSeries[Exp[x], x] leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x...

What is and isn't a valid variable specification for Manipulate?

I have an expression whose terms have arguments (representing subscripts), like this: myExpr = A[0] + V[1,T] I would like to put it inside a Manipulate to see its value as I move around the parameters. (The goal is eventually to plot it wrt one of the variables inside.) However, Mathematica complains when I set V[1,T] as a manipulated variable: Manipulate[Evaluate[myExpr], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, T], 0, 1}] (*Manipulate::vsform: Manipulate argument {V[1,T],0,1} does not have the correct form for a variable specification. >> *) As a workaround, if I get rid of the symbol T inside the argument, it works fine: Manipulate[ Evaluate[myExpr /. T -> 15], {A[0], 0, 1}, {V[1, 15], 0, 1}] Why this behavior? Can anyone point me to the documentation that says what counts as a valid variable? And is there a way to get Manpiulate to accept an expression with a symbolic argument as a variable? Investigations I've done so far: I tried using variableQ from this answer , but it says V[1...