Making precise geometric model is essential, but what is more important, and known as a skill, is meshing. Shape and size of meshes for each part has a significant effect on the results. By defining smaller size for meshing, the simulation needs more time to analyze and produce the results. The simulation must be run over many times to harvest sufficient outcomes to make a conclusion. Therefore, to have the best results with the minimum time, different meshing size is used for each part. The areas with highest gain on the results are the areas near the wafers, distinctively their edges. Hence, the smallest meshing size is defined for those areas.

1 2

Comments

I didn't understand the green parts. It seems to me that you would have to produce a thing before you analyzed it, for example.

enoonAnd the meshing can be both 2-D and 3-D for a 3-D geometric model, if you like I will explain. So it is possible to use triangle, square, and other 2-D shapes or pyramid, square, and other 3-D shapes. So we have a lot of options on our hands, and it is known as a skill. It means, the software should analyze the model and conditions and then produce results, like figures, diagrams, and tables for specific parameters. I meant, changes in those areas have more effects on the results, in this case the deposition rate. I meant to point that the area has more effect than the other areas, I used "particularly" in other areas, and I guess "specially" is not formal or technical. I don't know.

And dear enoon. I have finished the first version of my article, private message is disabled in your profile, but I opened that. I would appreciate it if you could provide me with an email address, so I can send it to you, if you like. I guess the whole article would be easier to understand. It is in Word 2007.

USFenoonI am the previous leopard boy, I changed the username. Do you remember?

USFYour piece has all sorts of problems, many of which are subtle and depend very much on the meaning intended. For instance, is meshing actually more important than making an accurate geometric model? It seems to me that if you mesh the wrong shape, it doesn't matter how well you mesh it.

enoonUSFI am sure I'm being dense, but I don't think you answered my question. I understand the basic principles in your piece, including meshing. It is similar to the tessellation I deal with in video games. But if you want to do a torus, and the geometric model you create is a cube, all the meshing in the world is not going to give good results. In your piece you say, "what is more important ... is meshing." I am not convinced that meshing is more important than the geometrics.

enoonAnd enoon, thank you for replying. I appreciate that.

USF