APLOT results in the deletion of areas and area components.

[mikerife]

🤓 Before submitting the issue

• I have visited the Troubleshooting section.
• I have searched among the existing issues.
• I am using a Python virtual environment.
• I am using the latest version of PyMAPDL and its dependencies (fully updated virtual environment). You can update them using pip install --upgrade --upgrade-strategy eager ansys-mapdl-core in your activated virtual environment.

🔍 Description of the bug

An area component exists. APLOT command is issued. The area component then no longer exists. The area list changes from 1 and 2 when created to 3 and 4 after plotting. Something is copying areas and accidentally deleting the original areas. PyMAPDL version 0.68.4

🕵️ Steps To Reproduce

from ansys.mapdl.core import launch_mapdl
mapdl = launch_mapdl(loglevel="WARNING", print_com=True)
mapdl.clear()
mapdl.prep7()
mapdl.rectng(0, 1, 0, 1)
mapdl.cm('area1', 'area')
mapdl.cmsel('u', 'area1')
mapdl.rectng(2, 4, -1, 1)
mapdl.cm('area2', 'area')
mapdl.allsel()
mapdl.cmsel('all')
print(mapdl.cmlist('all'))
print(mapdl.alist())
mapdl.aplot()
mapdl.cmsel('all')
mapdl.allsel()
print(mapdl.alist())
print(mapdl.cmlist('all'))
mapdl.exit()

💻 Which Operating System are you using?

Windows

🐍 Which Python version are you using?

3.10

💾 Which MAPDL version are you using?

2024R1

📝 PyMAPDL Report

Show the Report!

# PASTE HERE THE OUTPUT OF `python -c "from ansys.mapdl import core as pymapdl; print(pymapdl.Report())"` here

📝 Installed packages

Show the installed packages!

# PASTE HERE THE OUTPUT OF `python -m pip freeze` here

📝 Logger output file

Show the logger output file.

# PASTE HERE THE CONTENT OF THE LOGGER OUTPUT FILE.

[pvargasm]

Hi all!!

I get quite the same issue, but using mapdl.geometry.get_areas() instead of mapdl.aplot(). In my case the component is not deleted, but the defined areas are increasing.

Here is my piece of code:

from ansys.mapdl.core import launch_mapdl

mapdl = launch_mapdl(loglevel="WARNING", print_com=True)

mapdl.prep7()

# Create block
mapdl.block(0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1)
print(mapdl.alist())

# Associate one block area to a component "test1"
mapdl.asel(type_="R", vmin=2, vmax=2)
mapdl.cm("test1", "AREA")
print(mapdl.alist())

# Get associated area to be plotted
poly_cm = mapdl.geometry.get_areas()
print(mapdl.alist())

# Select all areas to continue
mapdl.allsel()
print(mapdl.alist())

# Get all areas to be plotted
poly_all = mapdl.geometry.get_areas()
print(mapdl.alist())

# Select all areas to continue
mapdl.allsel()
print(mapdl.alist())

mapdl.exit()

[pvargasm]

Assumption: if line where component names are stored corresponds to the new components created internally by pymapdl to generate the new meshed areas and get the PolyData, then a filtering could solve the issue... In my simple example I use

            self.selection_sets_comps.append(
                tuple(
                    i
                    for i in self._parent().components.names
                    if i.startswith("_") and i.endswith("_")
                )
            )

And for the two examples above it works fine, but it is important to ensure that the assumption is correct.

[germa89]

i'm trying to get into this today...

I see that in @mikerife 's code, the name of the areas are changed??

Before the APLOT:

 ** WARNING: PRE-RELEASE VERSION OF MAPDL 25.1BETA
  ANSYS,INC TESTING IS NOT COMPLETE - CHECK RESULTS CAREFULLY **
 NUMBER LOOP  LINES                     AREA       ELEM SIZE    #NODES  #ELEM    MAT   REAL   TYP  ESYS   SECN
      1  1      1      2      3      4   N/A         0.000           0      0      0      0     0     0      0
      2  1      5      6      7      8   N/A         0.000           0      0      0      0     0     0      0

After

 ** WARNING: PRE-RELEASE VERSION OF MAPDL 25.1BETA
  ANSYS,INC TESTING IS NOT COMPLETE - CHECK RESULTS CAREFULLY **
 NUMBER LOOP  LINES                     AREA       ELEM SIZE    #NODES  #ELEM    MAT   REAL   TYP  ESYS   SECN
      3  1      9     10     11     12   1.000       0.000           1      4     -1     -1    -1     0     -1
      4  1     13     14     15     16   4.000       0.000           9     16     -1     -1    -1     0     -1

this is NOT acceptable.

[germa89]

@mikerife can you verify it runs well on your end?

[mikerife]

@germa89 I can verify that yes it does. Thank you!