Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'tied contact'.
Found 3 results
Hi all, I have a question about using contact ties to attached weld elements to a structure. In a nutshell, I've been asked to bring 2 models together with a dissimilar mesh and weld them. In the attached image on the left is a typical merged node to node approach with no contact - this would be our traditional approach. The middle contour plot is the same model but the weld is detached from the structure and is connected via a tied contact. The right contour plot is with a dissimilar mesh (similar to what I have been tasked with) and using the same contact tie set up as the middle contour. As you can see there is some variation between all three contour plots. Ideally I want to be able to use the approach in the right plot as this would cut out significant amounts of remeshing. However I do need to justify this approach. 1. Why is there such a difference between plot results? 2. Has this approach been used by others and if so why? 3. Is the contact tie approach acceptable for this application? 4. Are there any published references which can be used to support this approach? Any help is always appreciated, I don't always get a notification when people reply so apologies if there is a delay. Kindest regards Andy
Hello everyone, Greetings!! I have made seam weld elements between 2 components. Then I made tied contact (Type 2 contact) between these components by considering seam elements as master component. But when I ran the crash simulation mass of 720 kg was added in these seam elements, which made the entire mass of my crash sled 3.5 times heavier than the actual weight. I have to use tied 2 contact as I wanted to use the contact interface for spot welds. I cant omit DT/NODA/CST, otherwise my simulation time is increasing exponentially. Because of crash simulation, some elements are deforming to a very small length. Thanks in advance. Regards Nitin Jain
Hi, In figure, two 1T shells are fixed on one edge. (Gap between 2 shells is 1.1) Interface between top and bottom shells is modeled by using /INTER/TYPE2. To set no relative motion, setting in type2 is default. Concentrated load is excited at node number 7 on top shell. Load curve and scale are as follows. (The load has effect like Impact.) I think that relative displacement between node 7 and 128 is perfectly zero because I use type2 default. However, in x,y,z direction, relative displacement occurs. It looks like almost zero but I want perfectly no relative motion. How can I set that? Another question is Physically the plate is excited by impact, acceleration of plate is decayed I don't use damping, so I think acceleration of some node is decayed to steady state response. But acceleration of node 7 is like this. Response is increased. Why??? Thanks