*Tie versus *MPC, pin
*Tie versus *MPC, pin
(OP)
Hello,
for connecting two parts with a matching mesh at the interface I currently use the "*tie" command, however, it seems that this does not rigidly tie these nodes together as if they were identical.
All node positions are hand-written and therefore identical. Is there a better way to pin these matching nodes together?
"*MPC pin" would require me to do that for every individual pair of nodes (requiring hundreds of lines), but seems to come close to what I want.
What is the best way to connect all degrees of freedom for corresponding nodes on two matching surfaces?
Any help is greatly appreciated!
Kind regards
Marco
for connecting two parts with a matching mesh at the interface I currently use the "*tie" command, however, it seems that this does not rigidly tie these nodes together as if they were identical.
All node positions are hand-written and therefore identical. Is there a better way to pin these matching nodes together?
"*MPC pin" would require me to do that for every individual pair of nodes (requiring hundreds of lines), but seems to come close to what I want.
What is the best way to connect all degrees of freedom for corresponding nodes on two matching surfaces?
Any help is greatly appreciated!
Kind regards
Marco





RE: *Tie versus *MPC, pin
And I think that a Tie creates valid results, even with no direct one-to-one connection.
But if you like, you can use the MPC pin or beam, or Connectors, or Couplings, or Equations, ...
RE: *Tie versus *MPC, pin
2nd, you can also first create a part and then partition, the interface then behaves like a tied bond.
RE: *Tie versus *MPC, pin
Thanks, Campbell