Original geometric gap lost in elastic Contact.

disladisla

Motivated by the last post from SteveMelton I have been doing some test to understand better the difference between the different contact options.
Seems that when I’m using bonded contact (ccx) elastic the original gap between the two surfaces is not respected.
¿I’m I wrong?. See attached file (fourth option from the left)

Thanks

Comments

  • VictorVictor
    edited October 2018
    That's correct. Both the elastic and *TIE options close up the gap in a strain-free way.

    EDIT: By leaving a gap, you're specifying something physically impossible so the software has some liberty in deciding what to do with it. The default option fills it with an invisible material having infinite tensile and shear stiffness but zero bending stiffness. Whereas the other two options fill it with the material of the slave surface. Neither is really right or wrong since it depends on what you intended the gap to mean.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register