surface-to surface contact VS. node-to -surface
surface-to surface contact VS. node-to -surface
(OP)
I have solved a very simple contact problem using surface-to-surface contact (CONTA171/TARGET169) elements and also using node-to-surface (CONTA175/TARGET169). I compared the results, they are different--not significantly but well I am concerned. Any idea?
Thanks
Thanks





RE: surface-to surface contact VS. node-to -surface
The first one takes into account the form shapes of both contact and target surface. The second one only takes into account the form shape of the target area.
The node-to-surf contact is useful when simulating for example a beam tip contacting a surface.
Alex
RE: surface-to surface contact VS. node-to -surface
As was pointed out previously, generally surface-to-surface contact is better for large contact areas.
RE: surface-to surface contact VS. node-to -surface
Thanks for the notes. I have used identical stiffness values for both methods. I usually check strains (and then deformations and stresses) but I checked the contact penetration and pressure as you advised; I can say they are really (!) different, the strains are pretty close though (about +- 5% difference).
Thanks you guys