In this article, we provide a detailed survey of techniques for hexahedral mesh generation. We cover the whole spectrum of alternative approaches to mesh generation, as well as post-processing algorithms for connectivity editing and mesh optimization. For each technique, we highlight capabilities and limitations, also pointing out the associated unsolved challenges. Recent relaxed approaches, aiming to generate not pure-hex but hex-dominant meshes, are also discussed. The required background, pertaining to geometrical as well as combinatorial aspects, is introduced along the way.

HexMe consists of 189 tetrahedral meshes with tagged features and a workflow to generate them. The primary purpose of HexMe meshes is to enable consistent and practically meaningful evaluation of hexahedral meshing algorithms and related techniques, specifically regarding the correct meshing of specified feature points, curves, and surfaces. The tetrahedral meshes have been generated with Gmsh, starting from 63 computer-aided design (CAD) models from various databases. To highlight and label the diverse and challenging aspects of hexahedral mesh generation, the CAD models are classified into three categories: simple, nasty, and industrial. For each CAD model, we provide three kinds of tetrahedral meshes (uniform, curvature-adapted, and box-embedded). The mesh generation pipeline is defined with the help of Snakemake, a modern workflow management system, which allows us to specify a fully automated, extensible, and sustainable workflow. It is possible to download the whole dataset or select individual meshes by browsing the online catalog. The HexMe dataset is built with evolution in mind and prepared for future developments. A public GitHub repository hosts the HexMe workflow, where external contributions and future releases are possible and encouraged. We demonstrate the value of HexMe by exploring the robustness limitations of state-of-the-art frame-field-based hexahedral meshing algorithm. Only for 19 of 189 tagged tetrahedral inputs all feature entities are meshed correctly, while the average success rates are 70.9% / 48.5% / 34.6% for feature points/curves/surfaces.

International audience