Set mesh type default preferences?

Tried to find it but with no luck, would it be possible to set preferences for the mesh type somewhere?

I have shell elements which I like to expand to plies through keywords. I do need to have S8R elements but after meshing I always get S8 elements. Each time I need to change this manually and more often than not I forget and the simulation fails to run. I have these settings and not sure if I could change something to automatically get S8R elements:

and checked the general settings too with no luck:

Is there a way to get the S8R elements created by default?

No, there is no such setting. This is a very specific request, so there was no need to have it integrated yet. I think other software tools work in the same way. First, mesh creation and then element specification. Or am I wrong?

1 Like

Would be nice to have one in ini file, no need to have GUI.
It is very hard to use if your default is different from the program’s.

1 Like

As I’m mostly scaling my current model, I tried to outsmart the default element type issue by trying to overwrite this thorough keywords … but no luck with any combination I tried…

No, you are correct. Most pre-processors work the same way as you described. An annoyance? Yes.

1 Like

Not my best course of action but you could try changing the default for your own application:

https://gitlab.com/MatejB/PrePoMax/-/blob/master/CaeMesh/Parts/MeshPart.cs#L151

1 Like

I’m doing a little study where I ā€˜only’ scale the geometry of a panel to get some trends. I’m using different length, width, core thicknesses etc. The models run quite fast (analytical does not give the result I’m looking for). Before running each of the 18 selected models, I need to locate the Part, click and then double click Part, then locate the element, click on the selector and click on the element type I like followed by confirmation ā€œOKā€ click. I got two skins, so again once more. These are 6 clicks per skin or 12 clicks per model which I hope to avoid… or 216 for my little study… or, if you are like me and need to do everything three times because there is always something not entirely correct at first, 648 clicks and not counting the drain in concentration of locating the right settings…

This may be a good way forward but… @Matej, would it not be possible to change the element selection of below lines to an .ini text file or similar input instead of having this hardcoded as @cean suggested too? That could then be edited easily and avoids making major changes to your code (e.g. add more menus?:

if (types.Contains(typeof(ParabolicQuadrilateralElement))) _parabolicQuadType = FeElementTypeParabolicQuad.S8;

Just an idea which could come in very handy…

1 Like

I agree, I could add a default setting for each family of elements.

In the meantime, for certain repetitive actions, history commands can be used to repeat them. History commands are records of all user actions (Edit → Edit History).

There is no possibility to change the history commands (they can only be recorded). Then all unnecessary commands can be deleted (select entire row, Delete key). And then the command history can be saved to a file: in the Edit Commands window, select File → Save As. Be careful not to save the changes in the commands of the model (deleted commands) using the OK button. Exit the Edit Commands window by selecting the Cancel button.

Now you have a file that you can run using File → Run History File. There are limitations to using such recorded commands since they reference the items that existed when they were recorded. The items should exist in the model tree. Parts should have the same names… But in your specific case, to change the element type of a fixed number of parts with constant names, it should work.

You should get a handle on it before using it on a real model. Make a copy first!

There is a weird limitation that at least two commands must exist in order for PrePoMax to save the history to a file. A bug.

1 Like

Man… that is the price of free and open-source: countless clicks and your soul slowly leaving your body :joy:… I’ve been there, done that :melting_face: :brain:

Most open source software simply does not have the resources to get everything to a smooth running.. but the benefit of course is that open-sources can be updated (typically rather quickly) if the community passes on the issue they find and take time to document these. I must also say, in many instances, I find PrePoMax much more user friendly than Ansys or Abaqus. But this is just my opinion and I’m very grateful to @Matej and team to have developed this and making it an open source application.

1 Like