A significant amount of time in finite element modeling of manufacturing processes is spent in mesh generation. Setting up three-dimensional meshes is a cumbersome task due to complexity of the processes and the involved geometries. Moreover, additional meshing challenges often appear due to the fact that manufacturing processes based on large plastic deformations present progressive mesh distortion (or degeneracy), potential interference between mesh and contour of the tools and possible contact of the mesh with itself. This poses the need for robust, automatic, mesh generation and regeneration (remeshing) procedures in order to ensure that complex processes are modeled from the beginning to the end with high levels of accuracy both in terms of geometry and distribution of field variables.The choice of element type has large impact on the simulations, and the typical dilemma in three dimensions arises from the selection between tetrahedral and hexahedral elements. The arguments for the tetrahedral elements are the robustness, versatility and availability of meshing algorithms. Based on Delaunay tessellation, Coupez et al.[1] opened the possibility of effectively and automatically simulating the whole forming process of complex three-dimensional parts from beginning to the end. On the other hand, the argument for the hexahedral elements is the accuracy. Furthermore, standard tetrahedral elements suffer from locking due to the incompressibility constraint in plasticity. Second-order tetrahedral elements overcome this problem but perform poorly in the tool-workpiece contact interfaces, often leading to stability problems in the contact algorithms as stated by Tekkaya and Martins [2]. As a result of this, special tetrahedral elements with interior nodes have been developed for preventing locking. These elements, however, still suffer from some of the typical drawbacks of tetrahedral elements: They are overly stiff, very sensitive to mesh orientation and frequently require up to an order of magnitude more elements to achieve the same level of accuracy as hexahedral elements. Benzley et al. [3] also noticed that meshes based on tetrahedral elements result in larger models, and therefore in larger computational requirements, than meshes based on hexahedra for the same level of accuracy. Kraft [4] observed that tetrahedral elements cause critical errors when distorted,