Mesh matching on two bonded parts w/out shared topology

  • 26 Views
  • Last Post 2 weeks ago
  • Topic Is Solved
chmaricle posted this 4 weeks ago

I'm trying to mesh two bodies in bonded contact without using shared topology (which, to my knowledge, welds them together). My professor would like the meshes to match but I haven't been able to get the contact mesh feature to work. It gives me the following error: "The faces cannot be the interface between two bodies in a generalized body." I have two questions:

1. Is there an appreciable difference between shared topology and bonded contact? If I can just use shared topology, that would make things much simpler, but my prof said he wanted them bonded, and I'm not sure I know the difference.

2. Is there a better way to mesh match than using the contact mesh feature? I tried to use the same seeds since the body edges line up exactly but I got the error above.

I'm simulating a pressure vessel with a notch defect wrapped with a composite repair. I've divided the pressure vessel and the repair such that the outer surface of the pressure vessel and the inner surface of the repair have the exact same surface area, so I thought that would make the meshes match up by default.

 

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
SandeepMedikonda posted this 4 weeks ago

Hello,

Shared Topology and Bonded contact would mean the same thing, only that bonded contact puts contact and target elements on both surfaces. See these 2 informative discussions:

Discussion 1

Discussion 2

Also, check out the Mesh Connection and Contact Match features in Mechanical.

Regards,
Sandeep

 

  • Liked by
  • peteroznewman
peteroznewman posted this 4 weeks ago

Sandeep provided some links to information in ANSYS Help. You might find the links take you to the Customer Support Portal. If you want to open the help and can't log in to the portal because Student license users don't get an account, then follow this method.

Regards,
Peter

chmaricle posted this 2 weeks ago

Thank you, Sandeep and Peter. Unfortunately, I'm using 17.2 and it appears that method doesn't work. I am going to make a new post because I have a different problem altogether now anyway. Thanks again!

Craig

Close