Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

Node associativity for contact problem 2

Status
Not open for further replies.

LeonardoBer

Aerospace
Oct 22, 2020
19
0
0
US
Hello femap users, I am trying to associate some nodes that belong to 3D tet elements, to a surface. I am doing this to establish a region for a contact problem. I used these same elements to create the surface, so it should be right on. However for some reason femap keeps telling me, "0 Node(s) Attached to Geometry. Others were either wrong type or already attached." I am using Modify/Associativity/Node and attach to surface for this operation. I have done this before for other models, and I dont know why it doesnt work for this particular model - Any ideas? I have also attached other nodes to other surfaces in this same model, but they are shell element nodes and they associate just fine.
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

Leonardo,

Don't try not using the 'Surfaces' option in the definition of the Connection Region.

Instead, select 'Elements' and manually add your elements to the Region Option.
This way the Connection Region depend only on the elements you have, and not on the geometry or element/geometry associativity.
 
Dear Leonardo,
As told perfectly by FSB1 not need to create geometry to define surface-to-surface contact regions, now FEMAP has powerful capabilities of face selection, then regions can be defined by element faces.
Simply click in ADD MULTIPLE and using the Face Selection feature you will be able to define the contact region with success using the solid faces, OK?:

contact-regions-by-face_pafqyx.png


The following picture is the resultant displacements animation of surface-to-surface contact between components, no geometry, only TET10 mesh:

Fanpost-ures-animated_ocxibo.gif


Best regards,
Blas.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Blas Molero Hidalgo
Ingeniero Industrial
Director

IBERISA
48004 BILBAO (SPAIN)
WEB: Blog de FEMAP & NX Nastran:
 
Thanks guys, skipping the geometry and going straight to elements worked out really well as you can see below. Im sorry I did not respond sooner abt this topic.

del_oforx4.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top