Parallel mesh generation: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 12:27, 19 May 2008

Revision as of 17:25, 20 May 2008

Line 6:

Generation. Chapter in Unstructured Scientific Computation on Scalable Multiprocessors. (Eds. Piyush Mehrotra and Joel Saltz), pp 31--64, MIT Press, 1990.</ref>, partially coupled<ref>H. de Cougny and M.Shephard. Parallel volume meshing using face removals and hierarchical repartitioning. Comp. Meth. Appl. Mech. Engng.,

174(3-4):275--298, 1999.</ref><ref>Andrey Chernikov and Nikos Chrisochoides. Parallel Guaranteed Quality Planar Delaunay Mesh Refinement Concurrent Point Insertion. SIAM Journal for Scientific Computing, Vol. 28, No. 5, pp 1907-1926, 2006.</ref> or even decoupled<ref>J. Galtier and P. L. George. Prepartitioning as a way to mesh

subdomains in parallel. Special Symposium on Trends in Unstructured Mesh Generation, pp 107--122. ASME/ASCE/SES, 1997.</ref><ref>Leonidas Linardakis and Nikos Chrisochoides. Delaunay Decoupling Method for Parallel Guaranteed Quality Planar Mesh GeneratiionGeneration. SIAM Journal for Scientific Computing, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp 1394-1423, 2006.</ref>. The coupling of the subproblems determines the intensity of the communication and the amount/type of synchronization required between the subproblems.

The challenges in parallel mesh generation methods are: to maintain stability of the parallel mesher (i.e., retain the quality of finite elements generated by state-of-the-art sequential codes) and at the same time achieve 100% code re-use (i.e., leverage the continuously evolving and fully functional off-the-shelf sequential meshers) without substantial deterioration of the scalability of the parallel mesher.