If the geometry is "simple" you can perform a structured mesh and check the grid independence of the results. If for instance you have square shapes or circular shapes that should work fine.

Regards

Vinod Belwanshi

In general, shell meshes strike a decent compromise between high accuracy and fast solve times. They are suitable for thin-walled, uniform-thickness pieces, such as the one seen above.

I think it is better to check all boundary conditions and make sure your model works correctly firstly. As I know Comsol's blog recommends using swept mapped meshes for mechanical structures. you can simply test it for your model in manual meshing. The thin layers can be meshed using this method simply even with one layer of swept mesh. you can share more detail of your model to get better consultation.

Good luck.

Luigi Candido thanks for the reply. I have checked the mesh independence for the results. I could able to mesh the geometry.

Qamar Ul Islam thanks for the reply, I have tried to take the thin geometries as a shell geometry but am unable to set the contact as bonded between the layers (for the surface body-solid body-surface body multilayer geometry).

Mostafa Shabani thanks for the reply. I have checked all the boundary conditions and it looks intact because the same boundary conditions work fine for single-layer geometry without any thin layers.

Vinod Belwanshi

That is good. in 2D models, I always define many sections in the edges of the thin films using "distribution" then I mesh it with triangular meshes. but in 3D models 1st, I mesh the adjacent layer then I sweep the meshes over the thin film too.

good luck.