Comments

• Victor

  June 3

  I don't quite understand. But I'm trying not to have node numbers exposed as much as possible.
  
  You can change the node numbering of an element in Mesh tools -> Element properties, and there's Mesh tools -> Invert to swap to one other ordering. Do either of those help? You could also write script using
  mw.nodes(element_id) to get the existing node numbers and mw.set_nodes(element_id, node_ids) to set them to something else.
• Andrea

  June 4

  Let's skip the case of free 3D mesh or automatic mesh in general.
  Below an example of a structure. Node numbering, because of the manual construction of the model is not rational. Renumbering with a rule (i.e. XYZ priority) means that the base nodes will be runumbered from 1 to 14.
  
  
  
  
• Sergio

  June 4

  There is also an issue related to the number of the nodes, if I rememeber well the size in memory of the problem depends not only in the quantity but also in max number of nodes, so if you have deleted or imported parts with no correlative nodes numbers can lead to artificial memory issues. That´s why some other programs has a "renumerate nodes" command.
• Victor

  June 6

  I see. This isn't really consistent with an original design decision to keep node numbers hidden as much as possible and only using consecutive numbers. While it's possible, the ordering would be messed up if you delete something from the middle and there isn't currently a convenient way to get solution data at numbered nodes.
  
  I realize now, that's not really convenient for some use cases, especially beam structures and I've been thinking about ways to allow gaps in the numbering but it's a fairly low priority.
  
  @Sergio, that's an issue with CCX if you number nodes by hand but doesn't affect Mecway since the node numbers it provides to CCX are the same condensed ones it uses internally.