Finally I got the time to wrap up this subject and uncover this mystery. Actually none of the curves I presented was correct. Let me recap.
- I used the default mesh – option 1,
- I used a course mesh with general surface refinement – option 2
- I used a bit finer mesh with local surface refinement – option 3
I got the above graph. Next I decided to cut the solid but shared the boundary conditions so that it was a single entity just sectioned. On my target edge/surface I defined a volume mesh (more refined) and on top of that near the edge I was studying and measuring I place a volume refinement. I got just about as much elements as before but now they were concentrated on my target zone.
The final mesh had the following
And the final result:
And here you go. The yellow curve has nothing to do with the blue curve which was my starting point and eventually converged with my previous 2 attempts.
Carefull usage of meshes, it is always good practice to verify mesh sensitivity. This example applies to any thing you do in simulation, it is always good to verify if the result we have in hand are actually trustable.
Comments to the starter: When ever your boss demands results immediately it is always tempting not to do a sensitivity analysis to rush and give something. If for instance this was a professional case (which it’s not) and one feed the blue line there would be some opportunity for mistakes. It is always important to verify how accurate a result the requester desires. On some clients the blue line would be wonderful for others it would be useless.
Ultimately the simulation result needs to fit the expectations of the requester. And the simulation effort, accuracy and time should fit those expectations.