I was using 2D but I ran into a couple of issues. There were these non-physical oscillations present in the solution that I couldn’t explain. I asked about them here ( but to no reasonable answer. At which point I was told to switch over to PUMA since it is more robust. I also keep getting a notification that hanging node adaption for 2D will be phased out and that I should switch to PUMA 2.5D.

As for mesh quality, it’s a poor mesh and I’ve done this intentionally, to evaluate the improvement in grid + solution after adaption. Does the mesh quality affect why PUMA 2.5D doesn’t work though? This is what I get when I evaluate mesh quality:

Minimum Orthogonal Quality = 5.24949e-01 cell 69 on zone 2 (ID: 37 on partition: 19) at location (-1.86587e-02 1.40334e-01 -1.22467e-03)
Maximum Aspect Ratio = 3.12470e+04 cell 38 on zone 2 (ID: 388 on partition: 5) at location ( 5.54834e-01 7.61255e-02 -6.64337e-04)