CGAL users discussion list

[Michael Bieri <>]

Ok, I will try that.

But what I don't get: Why does it need so tiny elements to approximate the 1D features in some areas of the mesh, while it is perfectly fine with pretty large elements around 1D features in other areas?

On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Laurent Rineau (CGAL/GeometryFactory) <> wrote:

Le Thursday, October 5, 2017 11:46:16 AM CEST Michael Bieri a écrit :

> I just uploaded the files to the Dropbox folder:

> https://www.dropbox.com/sh/lz8xmwhr3fg23qu/AAAZEpWnKzJyrjhNB006_-fVa?dl=0

>

> I further simplified it a bit, there's now just one region wit the

> ellipses. But the effect remains the same.

>

> There are the following files:

> - 01 - 04.png: The old images

> - dist.png, region.png: 2D view of the distance field and region supplied

> to the meser

> - img_elem_size.inr, img_regions.inr: 3D images for CGAL mesher

> - mesh: The mesh

> - Screenshot***: A screenshot of the mesh.

> - Furthermore, the source code. It's a bit of a mess because it was written

> and edited very quickly...

 

There is nothing unexpected in the result you got.

 

I propose a tiny patch, that uses a non-documented feature... Can `make_mesh_3` that way:

 

CGAL::parameters::internal::Mesh_3_options options;

options.nonlinear_growth_of_balls = true;

C3t3 c3t3 = CGAL::make_mesh_3<C3t3>(domain, criteria, options);

 

Then the 1D-meshing of curves will be dense were it is supposed to be.

 

--

Laurent Rineau, PhD

R&D Engineer at GeometryFactory http://www.geometryfactory.com/

Release Manager of the CGAL Project http://www.cgal.org/