looptimum

Simulation-mesh optimization

A 21-trial search found a smaller mesh, then a separate solver pass checked flow and pressure against the fine reference.

Validated campaign results

72.9%

Fewer mesh cells

658,647 to 178,473

91.0%

Lower solver wall clock

1.806M s to 162,928 s

11.1x

Solver speedup

Validated coarse candidate

<1%

Outlet-flow drift

All major outlets

<0.5

MAP / PP drift (mmHg)

Aggregate pressure parity

Engineering objective

The fine mesh produced reliable pressure and flow results but took weeks to solve. The aim was to find a smaller, stable mesh that preserved those results at a lower computational cost.

Search method

Looptimum proposed mesh-control settings and recorded the outcomes. Existing meshing and checkMesh workflows evaluated each trial; the solver and mesh-independence checks established final acceptance.

Read the public evidence

Engineering campaign figures

Bar chart comparing solver wall clock for the fine reference and validated coarse mesh

Solver wall-clock comparison

The selected coarse case reduced solver wall clock by 91.0%.

Bar chart comparing the cell counts of the fine reference and selected coarse mesh

Mesh cell-count comparison

The selected coarse mesh contained 72.9% fewer cells than the fine reference.

Line and point chart showing objective loss across the engineering campaign

Objective progression

The campaign explored fewer than 10% of the bounded search space and identified a repeatable low-loss basin.

Chart showing outlet-flow drift for the selected coarse mesh against the fine reference

Outlet-flow validation

All major outlet flows remained within the stated 1% validation threshold.

Chart showing aggregate pressure drift for the selected coarse mesh against the fine reference

Aggregate pressure validation

Aggregate MAP and pulse-pressure drift remained within the 0.5 mmHg acceptance band.

Search record

  • 8 random starts, then 13 surrogate-guided suggestions
  • Selected candidate's archived objective loss: 9.0
  • One failed checkMesh outcome retained in the record
  • Final acceptance based on solver and mesh-independence checks

Acceptance checks

  • All major outlet flows within 1%
  • Aggregate MAP within 0.5 mmHg
  • Aggregate PP within 0.5 mmHg
  • Solver reached 4.999946 s against a 5.0 s target

Limits of this result

  • The selected mesh passed this campaign's checks; global optimality was not established.
  • Savings are measured against the archived fine reference, geometry, and workflow.
  • Searching fewer than 10% of this space does not guarantee similar efficiency elsewhere.
  • Acceptance required a separate solver pass and mesh-independence checks.
  • Other geometries, solver settings, or acceptance thresholds need their own validation.

Simulation pilot assessment

A project review covers your evaluator, computational budget, and the validation checks required for an acceptable result.

Discuss a pilot