Rigid body penetration into rigid wall
How can I set the rigid body settings in order to avoid the penetration into the rigid wall .
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
Answers
-
Hi,
I am not sure if it is possible to make contact between a rigid body and rigid wall work due to incompatible kinematic conditions (see FAQ on this topic I have already shared with you).
As a workaround, instead of a rigid wall set up a meshed plane with a rigid body on it and a type 7 contact. Check the model attached:
0 -
Hello, I could not see the model becasue I am using an ancient vertion of Hypermesh
/emoticons/default_sad.png' srcset='/emoticons/sad@2x.png 2x' title=':(' width='20' /> could you share the model using radioss or using an ancient vertion of hypermesh, please.
I followed your advice about setting a plane but now a have this problem
NEGATIVE VOLUME OF TETRA
In the model checker tab
What can I do?
0 -
Sorry about that, here you go:
NEGATIVE VOLUME OF TETRA error happens due to mesh quality. Can you share the model?
0 -
I´ve sent you the model.
0 -
I did not receive the model. Can you attach it here?
0 -
Altair Forum User said:
I did not receive the model. Can you attach it here?
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1PbYI0ZzZndKmKo73Oq5hgLAcdw8_NrCH
0 -
In the model you shared there is a problem of deep penetrations when the rigid body on impactor comes into contact with rigid body on flat plate (representing rigid wall). Due to penalty contact formulation this leads to high penalty forces and stiffness, and consequently to a drop in time step. In case CST mass scaling is used there is no timestep drop but mass increase leading to error termination. This is a known issue of rigid body impact on another rigid body or on fixed nodes or on very stiff structures:
There are possible remedies like gap increase which will allow the contact to work sooner, but this could lead to initial penetrations. Sometimes the physics of the problem involves large contact forces in which case timestep drop (or mass increase) is unavoidable. In such cases the simulation could be run in two steps, where mass scaling is used only until just before the rigid contact, and without mass scaling in the second step, allowing the timestep drop.I think the better modeling approach would be not to have a rigid body on the impactor, because it artificially stiffens the part and causes rigid to rigid contact difficulties.The following topic might help to better understand contact issues:0 -
thank you
0 -
Hello @Hyperman
Thank you for all the help.
I was trying to run this file
r
But it shows me some seconds after this message
this is the setting that I am using
Could you give me some advice, please?
0 -
Glad to help.
The warning 762 informs that /SPMD setting is overridden by -nthread or -nt command in Solver run Manager.
This can be ignored and the model should be able to run.
0 -
Hello @Hyperman
now I have this energy balance curves, I as understand when there are a lot of elements sliding and being crushed is normal to obtain high values of energy.
But is there a way to improve this energy balance?
I am using :
type 7 contact and 11
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
0 -
Upon second look into your model, I noticed you have added a mass of 2.518e+07 with M-ADV0 element. The unit system declared in the header card is g, mm, ms. This means you have 25+ tonnes impact being attenuated by a 2.8 gram structure
" data-emoticon="" src="src" />/emoticons/default_laugh.png' title='' /> This is probably a mistake that is causing all the other problems. 0 -
jajajaja thanks a lot @Hyperman in the morning i realized that a contact type 7 was setting wrong, and also i have to check the units.
Thanks a lot.
0 -
Thanks a lot, to all the hyperworks team.
0 -
Hello ftiends, i have new problems with a model , i have thisproblem, can yuo help me?
*** ERROR # 2094 ***
0
