Generally we have problem with the meshing module in PLAXIS 3D. The only time that we get a successful meshing of the program is where the project is made of horizontal/vertical lines/surfaces. Otherwise, majority of inclined/curved/irregular surfaces/volumes ending up in a frustrating loop of failed mashing process due to surface/volume size.
Considering that some of the complex geometries cannot be simplified much and identification and fixing the issues are very time consuming, that would be great if I can have your advice on whether this is general problem within the PLAXIS 3D users and if yes, how to make this process quicker and more user-friendly.
Thanks Martin for the detailed response. Much appreciated.
In general, during my model development, I am following the suggestions made in your message. However, I had few terrible experiences with the meshing module that I couldn't fix them, even with taking into consideration the reasonable rules:
- Converting volumes into surfaces leaves some unresolved faces that create problem with intersections.
- Merging equivalent object does not work properly.
- Intersection and re-clustering leave unresolved objects.
- From time to time, the structure module does not snap points and changes manual round inputs into very small deviations.
After such a long journey with PLAXIS, I am getting to a point that I expect Bentley to take responsibility for the shortcoming of its meshing algorithm and find an effective solution to this issue. In our industry, basic operations such as meshing shall not be a barrier and we must not spend significant time on fixing meshing issues that may be fixed by further software development.