# Surface visualization

**URL:** <https://prepomax.discourse.group/t/surface-visualization/2472>\
**Category:** General Questions\
**Created:** [February 14, 2025, 10:54pm UTC](https://prepomax.discourse.group/t/surface-visualization/2472 "2025-02-14T22:54:54Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 5\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ainurritegui](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b5a626/32.png) [@ainurritegui](https://prepomax.discourse.group/u/ainurritegui)\
**Post date:** [February 14, 2025, 10:54pm UTC](https://prepomax.discourse.group/t/surface-visualization/2472/1 "2025-02-14T22:54:54Z")

</div>

Good evening,

Not sure if this is a bug or a problem of myself.  
I have my input file coded like this:

> \*Surface, Name=Contactsurf\_P, Type=Element  
> Contact\_P\_elem, S3  
> \*Surface, Name=Contactsurf\_G, Type=Element  
> Contact\_G\_elem, S3

This is the node numbering defined in the input file:

> \*Element, Type=CPS4, Elset=Internal\_Selection-1\_Solid\_Section-1  
> 1, 647, 648, 2, 1  
> 2, 648, 649, 3, 2  
> 3, 649, 650, 4, 3  
> 4, 650, 651, 5, 4  
> …

Why when I load the .inp file in PrePoMax I get a wrong visualization?

 ![image](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/prepomax/original/2X/a/a88ad21b402b55d2aa88c33c2a66b4ff181aa8d5.png)

However according to the node numbering and the element definition in the input file S3 should be the outer surface, right?

 ![image](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/prepomax/original/2X/7/79ca840ede360e26dc21b018fbd29ff7ada9fe05.png)

Thanks so much for your insights!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![FEAnalyst](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/free1/user_avatar/prepomax.discourse.group/feanalyst/32/688_2.png) [@FEAnalyst](https://prepomax.discourse.group/u/FEAnalyst)\
**Post date:** [February 14, 2025, 11:15pm UTC](https://prepomax.discourse.group/t/surface-visualization/2472/2 "2025-02-14T23:15:59Z")

</div>

There are some known issues with the .inp file importer (especially related to surface definitions). Try selecting that surface manually in GUI and check the generated keywords.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ainurritegui](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b5a626/32.png) [@ainurritegui](https://prepomax.discourse.group/u/ainurritegui)\
**Post date:** [February 14, 2025, 11:20pm UTC](https://prepomax.discourse.group/t/surface-visualization/2472/3 "2025-02-14T23:20:35Z")

</div>

Yeah I already checked that and the generated input code is the same as the one I am writting!  
But ok, if it is an already known issue is fine!

Thus it is normal that for the case of the definitio nof a CPS8 element, even if I define the nodes and surfaces in the same way, if I upload it to PrePoMax I obtain another surface of the element underlined in the surface??

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Matej](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a698b9/32.png) [@Matej](https://prepomax.discourse.group/u/Matej)\
**Post date:** [February 15, 2025, 9:09am UTC](https://prepomax.discourse.group/t/surface-visualization/2472/4 "2025-02-15T09:09:57Z")

</div>

> [@ainurritegui](#):
>
> Why when I load the .inp file in PrePoMax I get a wrong visualization?

Can you share the .inp file?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ainurritegui](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b5a626/32.png) [@ainurritegui](https://prepomax.discourse.group/u/ainurritegui)\
**Post date:** [February 15, 2025, 10:13am UTC](https://prepomax.discourse.group/t/surface-visualization/2472/5 "2025-02-15T10:13:22Z")

</div>

Yes of course!  
Here it is!  
[CNIM\_99\_N\_calculix\_3.inp](https://prepomax.discourse.group/uploads/short-url/tYbRRj5Ag9peASGMRe2HDS1Jg86.inp) (1.7 MB)