As we mesh different bodies, it tends to mesh each body separately. If that happens, the mesh elements from one body wouldn't essentially coincide with the adjacent body's mesh elements at their interface. So we do not want to treat them as different bodies, but as different zones in a single body (in this case, called the part). If the mesh elements do not properly align at the interface, there will be bad mesh problems during the simulation. Also, it will be treated as flow from one region to another. We do not want that. By splitting the body into zones, we are just creating a simple structured 1-D path for the mesh to propagate without deviating. We want split body during meshing phase, but not during the solution phase. By merging them into one single part, we are importing a multizone part for mesh-er and a single body for the solver. I hope it is clear.
Can I be able to apply different mesh sizes to the distinc zones/bodies?
theoretical yes. you can. but practically that would ruin your simulation and consistency of your results.
@@Codeynamics Thanks
What happens if one does not combine all the body parts into one like you did in here 8:02?
As we mesh different bodies, it tends to mesh each body separately. If that happens, the mesh elements from one body wouldn't essentially coincide with the adjacent body's mesh elements at their interface. So we do not want to treat them as different bodies, but as different zones in a single body (in this case, called the part). If the mesh elements do not properly align at the interface, there will be bad mesh problems during the simulation. Also, it will be treated as flow from one region to another. We do not want that. By splitting the body into zones, we are just creating a simple structured 1-D path for the mesh to propagate without deviating. We want split body during meshing phase, but not during the solution phase. By merging them into one single part, we are importing a multizone part for mesh-er and a single body for the solver.
I hope it is clear.
@@Codeynamics so in short, it is all for the sake of getting a continuous structured mesh through all parts, did I get that right?
@@DarthVader-ir1bx yes. you got that right.
@@Codeynamics thanks