Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 34 references

An Efficient Implementation of Edge-Based Discretization without Forming Dual Control Volumes

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that lumped directed-area vectors and dual volumes for edge-based discretization can be computed directly from element-face data, without ever forming median dual control volumes.

desk verdict Clean write-up of a known identity, but the printed implementation formulas have an unstated sign convention that makes them fail on standard meshes; worth reviewing with a mandated revision. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.00778 v1 pith:6UTZVM7C submitted 2025-02-02 math.NA cs.NAmath.DGphysics.comp-ph

Hiroaki Nishikawa This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.NAcs.NAmath.DGphysics.comp-ph MSC 65M5065M0865N08
keywords edge-baseddiscretizationlumpeddirected-areavectorsmediandualcontrolvolumeunstructuredgridstriangulartetrahedralgridmetriccomputationspace-timeextension
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper claims that the two grid metrics needed for node-centered edge-based discretization—the lumped directed-area vector at each edge and the median dual volume at each node—can be computed on triangular and tetrahedral grids without constructing median dual control volumes at all. The directed-area vector follows from a scaled element-loop sum of the face vectors opposite each node, plus a boundary correction, and the dual volume follows either from an edge sum over those same vectors or from each element contributing one part in $D+1$ of its volume. If the claim is right, edge-based solver code becomes simpler, metric setup is faster, and the main geometric obstacle to carrying the discretization into four-dimensional space-time grids is removed. Timed tests show about 1.12x faster directed-area computation on triangular grids and 2.16x faster on tetrahedral grids.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing identity is the cancellation of side-face vectors: inside each element, the dual-face contribution to an edge is written as a multiple of the element face opposite one endpoint plus terms involving the faces opposite the other nodes, and those extra terms cancel when contributions are summed over all elements sharing the edge. This reduces the metric computation to formulas (3.31) and (3.32), with only the outward face vectors of each element and each boundary element needed. The companion device is the divergence theorem applied to $x - x_j$ over the median dual volume, which turns the volume into an exact edge sum over the lumped directed-area vectors, yielding formulas (4.6) and (4.22).

What would settle it

Construct a grid with one interior edge whose surrounding element fan does not close, for example a hanging node placed on that edge, and compute $n_{jk}$ both by the proposed formula (3.25) and by the traditional sum of explicit median-dual face directed areas. The two values will differ by uncancelled terms of the form $\frac{1}{12}(n^E_\ell + n^E_r)$, showing that the identity depends on the closed conforming fan.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For a simplex grid of dimension $D=2$ or $D=3$, every edge's lumped directed-area vector can be written as $n_{jk} = \frac{2}{D(D+1)} \sum_{E \in \{E_{jk}\}} n^E_j$, where $n^E_j$ is the outward directed-area vector of the face of element $E$ opposite node $j$, plus the boundary correction $n_{jk} \leftarrow n_{jk} + \frac{1}{D(D+1)} n_B$ for each boundary element. The median dual volume satisfies $V_j = \frac{1}{2D} \sum_{k\in\{k_j\}} (x_k - x_j)\cdot n_{jk}$, and equivalently every element contributes exactly $V_E/(D+1)$ to each of its nodes. These identities follow from canceling side-face terms in the closed ring of elements around an interior edge and from applying the divergence theorem with an exact edge-based quadrature. The paper's central claim is that these formulas, implemented in element and edge loops, reproduce the traditional dual-face metric data without forming edge midpoints, face centroids, or element centroids.

Load-bearing premise

Every interior edge must be surrounded by a closed ring of conforming triangles or tetrahedra, so that the side-face normal vectors cancel exactly; grids with hanging nodes, mixed element types, or non-manifold edges lie outside the method's stated scope.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Edge-based solvers on triangles and tetrahedra can be implemented without any routine that connects edge midpoints, face centroids, and element centroids to build dual faces.
  • Metric precomputation is faster: about 1.12x for triangular-grid directed-area vectors and 2.16x for tetrahedral-grid directed-area vectors in the paper's timed tests, with tetrahedral dual volumes about 1.89x faster.
  • In time-accurate simulations with deforming grids, where metrics are recomputed at every time step, the savings compound; on the paper's large tetrahedral grid, 1,000 recomputations take about 3.75 hours instead of 8 hours.
  • Because no dual-volume geometry is formed, the formulas remove the main geometric obstacle to extending edge-based discretization to four-dimensional space-time simplex grids, the stated motivation of the paper.
  • The edge-based dual-volume formula (4.6) is the faster choice on tetrahedral grids, while the element-based formula (4.22) remains competitive on triangular grids, so the preferred implementation is dimension-dependent.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Extrapolating the general form to $D=4$ would give the coefficient $2/(4\cdot 5)=1/10$ for directed-area vectors and a per-element dual-volume share of $1/5$, a pattern consistent with the paper's stated 4D goal but not derived here.
  • Because the boundary correction depends only on outward boundary-element normals, it could in principle be applied on boundary representations not derived from median dual faces, such as cut-cell or mixed-boundary treatments, as long as each boundary facet has an unambiguous outward normal.
  • An implementation that computes the lumped vectors first could reuse them in formula (4.6) within the same edge loop, producing dual volumes with nearly no extra geometric work; the paper times the two stages separately and does not combine them.
  • The non-cancellation mechanism for hanging-node grids is visible in equation (3.24): missing elements in the fan leave the side-face terms $n^E_\ell + n^E_r$ uneliminated, so a robust hanging-node version would need correction terms proportional to the imbalance rather than a modified coefficient.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes alternative element-loop algorithms for computing the lumped directed-area vectors n_jk and node-centered median dual volumes V_j required by edge-based finite-volume discretizations on triangular and tetrahedral grids, without explicitly constructing median dual control volumes. The central identities, Eqs. (3.14) and (3.25), express the lumped vector at an interior edge as a fixed multiple of the sum of element face vectors opposite the edge; boundary corrections are then added in a boundary loop. Two dual-volume algorithms are derived and compared: one based on an edge loop using Eq. (4.6), and one based on the element-volume fraction 1/(D+1) in Eq. (4.22). Complexity estimates and CPU timings are reported, showing modest speed-ups for the directed-area computation (1.12x in 2D, 2.16x in 3D), with the main motivation being simpler implementation and extension to four and higher dimensions.

Significance. If the implementation issues are resolved, the paper is a useful contribution to the practical side of edge-based discretization. The derivation is step-by-step, the formulas are parameter-free, and the paper provides a simple node-sum verification test and a divergence-theorem-based check for dual volumes. The reported speed-ups are modest, but the core value is the conceptual simplification of avoiding dual-volume construction and the implied path toward higher-dimensional simplex grids. The mathematical core appears sound; however, the manuscript as written is not reproducible because the sign/orientation convention for simplex vertices is never specified, and the printed element-update formulas produce the wrong sign under standard conventions.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.2.1–3.2.2, Eqs. (3.15)–(3.16), (3.26)–(3.27), (3.17), (3.29)] The element-update rules are not reproducible as written because the vertex-orientation convention for simplex elements is never specified. With the standard convention that triangles are stored counterclockwise and tetrahedra have positive orientation, the vector n^E_j defined by the printed coordinate formulas is inward, not outward. For the triangle j=(0,0), k=(1,0), r=(0,1), Eq. (3.15) with n^E_j=(y_k-y_r,x_r-x_k)=(-1,-1), followed by the boundary correction (3.17) with n_B=(y_j-y_k,x_k-x_j) and the volume formula (4.6), gives V_j=-1/6 instead of the true median-dual area +1/6. In three dimensions, Eq. (3.26) computes 2n^E_j=(x_r-x_k)×(x_ℓ-x_k), which for a positively oriented tetrahedron points into the tetrahedron rather than outward. Please state the vertex-ordering convention explicitly, or equivalently replace n^E_j by -n^E_j and adjust n_B and the boundary corrections, and add a simple single-triangle example as a verification.
  2. [§5, first paragraph] The paper states that the proposed implementations were verified by the node-sum test of §3.2.3 and the total-volume test of §4.3, but no verification results are shown; Table 3 contains only CPU times. Because the correctness of the formulas depends on the orientation convention (see previous comment) and a sign error would silently produce negative dual volumes, the absent verification data is load-bearing. Please include the actual verification output for the grids used in Table 3: the maximum node-sum residual after Eq. (3.34) and the sum of dual volumes compared with the exact domain volume.
  3. [§3.2.1–3.2.2, Eqs. (3.13), (3.25)] The cancellation of the intermediate face vectors n_r, n_ℓ, etc. requires every interior edge to be surrounded by a closed ring of conforming simplex elements. The paper mentions that an adjacent tetrahedron is needed for interior edges, but it does not explicitly state the conforming/manifold assumption in the introduction or in the statement of the general formula (3.31). For grids with hanging nodes, non-manifold edges, or mixed element types, formulas (3.14) and (3.25) are not valid as written and no correction or fallback is provided; please state this limitation clearly in the scope of the paper.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (3.29)] There is a typo in the sentence after Eq. (3.29): the vector nrℓ is described as belonging to the edge {k, ℓ}, but it should be the edge {r, ℓ}.
  2. [Table 1 and §3.3.2] The tetrahedral-grid complexity count for the traditional algorithm does not add up: 33 additions per edge times 6 edges gives 198, plus 9 for the element centroid gives 207, not the 205 stated in the text and table. Please check the arithmetic and correct it.
  3. [§4.3] In the sentence after the edge-based dual-volume complexity count, the expression "3Ne + Nv ≈ 2Ne + 0.2NE" for three dimensions appears to be a typo; with Ne ≈ 7/6 NE and Nv ≈ NE/6, the correct approximation is about 3.7NE, which is what the final estimate in the same paragraph reports.
  4. [§5] Report the variance or per-execution times in addition to the 10-run averages; without any measure of variability it is difficult to judge whether the small differences, such as the 1.12x speed-up in 2D, are significant.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the derived formulas are algebraic consequences of closed-surface vector identities and the divergence theorem, with no fitted inputs or load-bearing self-citations.

full rationale

The derivation of the lumped directed-area formula (3.31) begins from the zero-sum identity for outward directed-area vectors of closed polygons/polyhedra, e.g., Eqs. (3.10) and (3.23), and the cancellation of side-face terms is an algebraic reduction, not an assumed result. The dual-volume formulas (4.6) and (4.22) follow from the divergence theorem applied to x - x_j and from the same directed-area identities; no parameter is fitted and no 'prediction' is an input renamed. The one self-citation used in Section 4.2 (edge-based quadrature from Ref. [31]) is not load-bearing: the needed exactness is a standard linear-flux quadrature property, and the paper independently reduces the result to V_E/(D+1) by orthogonality relations. Boundary corrections and node-sum verification tests are likewise derived from the same identities. Two caveats are noted but they are correctness/reproducibility issues rather than circularity: Section 5 says verification tests were performed but results are not shown, and the signed update rules (3.15)-(3.16) and (3.26)-(3.27) depend on a vertex-orientation convention that is not stated in the paper. The explicit restriction to conforming simplex-element grids and interior edges is a stated assumption, not a hidden circular premise. Neither caveat involves using the conclusion as an input.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters or new entities. The paper relies on standard geometric identities and the claimed conforming simplex-grid assumption; the 'dual volume' is a pre-existing concept.

assumptions (3)
  • standard math The sum of outward directed-area vectors over any closed polygon (2D) or polyhedron (3D) is zero.
    Used in equations (3.10), (3.19), (3.23) to relate dual-face vectors to element-face vectors.
  • domain assumption Grids are conforming simplex-element grids (triangular in 2D, tetrahedral in 3D) with no hanging nodes or mixed elements.
    Required for the cancellation of intermediate face normal terms when summing over the ring of elements around an edge (Section 3.2); the paper states this scope in the introduction.
  • domain assumption The median dual control volume is defined by connecting edge midpoints, element centroids, and face centroids as described in Section 2.
    The whole derivation starts from this definition of the dual volume and its directed-area vectors.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of An Efficient Implementation of Edge-Based Discretization without Forming Dual Control Volumes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6UTZVM7C

@misc{pith2026250200778,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: An Efficient Implementation of Edge-Based Discretization without Forming Dual Control Volumes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6UTZVM7C}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.00778}
}
read the original abstract

This paper shows that lumped directed-area vectors at edges and dual control volumes required to implement the edge-based discretization can be computed without explicitly defining the dual control volume around each node for triangular and tetrahedral grids. It is a simpler implementation because there is no need to form a dual control volume by connecting edge-midpoints, face centroids, and element centroids, and also reduces the time for computing lumped directed-area vectors for a given grid, especially for tetrahedral grids. The speed-up achieved by the proposed algorithm may not be large enough to greatly impact the overall simulation time, but the proposed algorithm is expected to serve as a major stepping stone towards extending the edge-based discretization to four dimensions and beyond (e.g., space-time simulations). Efficient algorithms for computing lumped directed-area vectors and dual volumes without forming dual volumes are presented, and their implementations are described and compared with traditional algorithms in terms of complexity as well as actual computing time for a given grid.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.00778 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Median dual control volumes in two and three dimensions, constructed with edge midpoints and geometric [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Lumped directed-area vector contributions from an element [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Lumped directed-area vector contributions from two triangles to the edge [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Boundary elements in two and three dimensions. Note that the directed-area vector [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Directed-area vectors needed to compute njk oriented from j to k. where D = 2 for a triangular grid and D = 3 for a tetrahedral grid, with a boundary correction: njk = njk + 2 D(D + 1) 1 2 nB = njk + 1 D(D + 1)nB, (3.32) for all edges of a boundary element B (1 edge in…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Outward directed-area vectors at boundary elements in two and three dimensions. In both cases, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Median dual volume contributions to a node 1 within an element. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    T. J. Barth. Numerical aspects of computing viscous high Reynolds number flows on unstructured meshes. AIAA Paper 91-0721, 1991

    work page 1991

  2. [2]

    R. T. Biedron, J.-R. Carlson, J. M. Derlaga, P. A. Gnoffo, D. P. Hammond, W. T. Jones, B. Kleb, E. M. Lee-Rausch, E. J. Nielsen, M. A. Park, C. L. Rumsey, J. L. Thomas, and W. A. Wood. FUN3D manual: 12.9. NASA-TM–2016–219012, February 2016

    work page 2016

  3. [3]

    Nakashima, N

    Y. Nakashima, N. Watanabe, and H. Nishikawa. Development of an effective implicit solver for general-purpose unstructured CFD software. In The 28th Computational Fluid Dynamics Symposium, C08-1, Tokyo, Japan, 2014

    work page 2014

  4. [4]

    Kroll, M

    N. Kroll, M. Abu-Zurayk, D. Dimitrov, T. Franz, T. F¨ uhrer, T. Gerhold, S. G¨ ortz, R. Heinrich, C. Ilic, J. Jepsen, J. J¨ agersk¨ upper, M. Kruse, A. Krumbein, S. Langer, D. Liu, R. Liepelt, L. Reimer, M. Ritter, A. Schw¨ oppe, J. Scherer, F. Spiering, R. Thormann, V. Togiti, D. Vollmer, and J.-H. Wendisch. Dlr project digital-x: Towards virtual aircraf...

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    D. J. Mavriplis and M. Long. NSU3D results for the fourth AIAA drag prediction workshop. AIAA Paper 2010-4363, 2010

    work page 2010

  6. [6]

    H. Luo, J. D. Baum, and R. L¨ ohner. High-reynolds number viscous flow computations using an unstructured- grid method. In 42nd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA Paper 2004-1103, Reno, NV, 2004

    work page 2004

  7. [7]

    Kozubskaya, I

    T. Kozubskaya, I. Abalakin, A. Dervieux, and H. Ouvrard. Accuracy improvement for finite-volume vertex- centered schemes solving aeroacoustics problems on unstructured meshes. In 16th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference, AIAA Paper 2010-3933, 2010

    work page 2010

  8. [8]

    Haselbacher and J

    A. Haselbacher and J. Blazek. Accurate and efficient discretization of Navier-Stokes equations on mixed grids. AIAA J., 38(11):2094–2102, 2000

    work page 2000

Show all 34 references
  1. [9]

    Smith, C

    T. Smith, C. Ober, and A. Lorber. SIERRA/Premo-A new general purpose compressible flow simulation code. In 32nd AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference and Exhibit, AIAA Paper 2002-3292, St. Louis, MO, 2002

    2002

  2. [10]

    Eliasson

    P. Eliasson. EDGE, a Navier-Stokes solver, for unstructured grids. Technical Report FOI-R-0298-SE, Swedish Defence Research Agency, December 2001

    2001

  3. [11]

    Fezoui and B

    L. Fezoui and B. Stouffle. A class of implicit upwind schemes for Euler simulations with unstructured meshes. J. Comput. Phys., 84:174–206, 1989

    1989

  4. [12]

    S. Gao, W. G. Habashi, M. Fossati, D. Isola, and G. S. Baruzzi. Finite-element formulation of a Jacobian-free solver for supersonic viscous flows on hybrid grids. In 55th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA Paper 2017-0085, Grapevine, Texas, 2017

    2017

  5. [13]

    Nishikawa

    H. Nishikawa. Economically high-order unstructured-grid methods: Clarification and efficient FSR schemes. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Fluids, 93:3187–3214, 2021

    2021

  6. [14]

    Katz and V

    A. Katz and V. Sankaran. Mesh quality effects on the accuracy of CFD solutions on unstructured meshes. J. Comput. Phys., 230:7670–7686, 2011

    2011

  7. [15]

    Katz and V

    A. Katz and V. Sankaran. An efficient correction method to obtain a formally third-order accurate flow solver for node-centered unstructured grids. J. Sci. Comput., 51:375–393, 2012

    2012

  8. [16]

    Diskin and J

    B. Diskin and J. L. Thomas. Effects of mesh regularity on accuracy of finite-volume schemes. In 50th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA Paper 2012-0609, Nashville, Tennessee, 2012

    2012

  9. [17]

    Liu and H

    Y. Liu and H. Nishikawa. Third-order inviscid and second-order hyperbolic Navier-Stokes solvers for three- dimensional inviscid and viscous flows. In 46th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference, AIAA Paper 2016-3969, Washington, D.C., 2016. 17

    2016

  10. [18]

    Nishikawa and Y

    H. Nishikawa and Y. Liu. Hyperbolic Navier-Stokes method for high-Reynolds-number boundary-layer flows. In 55th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, AIAA Paper 2017-0081, Grapevine, Texas, 2017

    2017

  11. [20]

    Nishikawa and Y

    H. Nishikawa and Y. Liu. Accuracy-preserving source term quadrature for third-order edge-based discretization. J. Comput. Phys., 344:595–622, 2017

    2017

  12. [21]

    W. L. Kleb, M. A. Park, W. A. Wood, K. L. Bibb, K. B. Thompson, and R. J. Gomez. Sketch-to-solution: An exploration of viscous CFD with automatic grids. In 24th AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, AIAA Paper 2019-2948, Dallas, TX, 2019

    2019

  13. [22]

    K. B. Thompson, H. Nishikawa, and E. Padway. Economical third-order methods for accurate surface heating predictions on simplex element meshes. In AIAA SciTech 2023 Forum, AIAA Paper 2023-2629, National Harbor, MD & Online, 2023

    2023

  14. [23]

    M. Behr. Simplex space-time meshes in finite element simulations. Int. J. Numer. Meth. Fluids, 57:1421–1434, 2008

    2008

  15. [24]

    Corrigan, A

    A. Corrigan, A. Kercher, and D. Kessler. The moving discontinuous Galerkin method with interface condition enforcement for unsteady three-dimensional flows. In AIAA Scitech 2019 Forum, AIAA Paper 2019-0642, San Diego, CA, 2019

    2019

  16. [25]

    P. C. Caplan, R. Haimes, D. L. Darmofal, and M. C. Galbraith. Four-dimensional anisotropic mesh adaptation. Computer-Aided Design, 129, 2020

    2020

  17. [26]

    V Frontin, G

    C. V Frontin, G. S. Walters, F. D Witherden, C. W Lee, D. M. Williams, and D. L. Darmofal. Foundations of space-time finite element methods: Polytopes, interpolation, and integrations. Appl. Numer. Math., 166:92– 113, 2021

    2021

  18. [27]

    McCaughtry, R

    T. McCaughtry, R. Watson, M. Gerun, and S. in Kim. A space-time flux reconstruction approach for unsteady 3D parabolic equations with enhanced convergence acceleration. In AIAA Aviation 2022 Forum, AIAA Paper 2022-4157, Chicago, IL, 2022

    2022

  19. [28]

    C. O. E. Burg. Higher order variable extrapolation for unstructured finite volume RANS flow solvers. In 17th AIAA Computational Fluid Dynaamics Conference, AIAA Paper 2005-4999, Orlando, FL, 2005

    2005

  20. [29]

    Padway and H

    E. Padway and H. Nishikawa. Resolving confusion over third-order accuracy of U-MUSCL. AIAA J., 60(3):1415–1439, March 2022

    2022

  21. [30]

    Debiez and A

    C. Debiez and A. Dervieux. Mixed-element-volume MUSCL methods with weak viscosity for steady and unsteady flow calculations. Comput. Fluids, 29:89–118, 2000

    2000

  22. [31]

    Nishikawa

    H. Nishikawa. Beyond interface gradient: A general principle for constructing diffusion schemes. In 40th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference and Exhibit, AIAA Paper 2010-5093, Chicago, IL, 2010

    2010

  23. [32]

    Nishikawa

    H. Nishikawa. Accuracy-preserving boundary flux quadrature for finite-volume discretization on unstructured grids. J. Comput. Phys., 281:518–555, 2015

    2015

  24. [33]

    Diskin and J

    B. Diskin and J. L. Thomas. Accuracy analysis for mixed-element finite-volume discretization schemes. NIA Report No. 2007-08, 2007

    2007

  25. [34]

    Nishikawa

    H. Nishikawa. A flux correction for finite-volume discretizations: Achieving second-order accuracy on arbitrary polyhedral grids. J. Comput. Phys., 468:111481, 2022

    2022

  26. [35]

    Nishikawa

    H. Nishikawa. A face-area-weighted centroid formula for reducing grid skewness and improving convergence of edge-based solver on highly-skewed simplex grids. In AIAA Scitech 2020 Forum, AIAA Paper 2020-1786, Orlando, FL, 2020. 18

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.