Hi @TaoLiu, The issue might be related to the object priority settings — Duke should have a higher priority in the voxel setup compared to the electrodes in your current configuration. From what I can tell, it looks like you’re running an LF Electro Ohmic Quasi-Static simulation (please correct me if that’s not the case, and let us know which solver you’re using). In this setup, it’s generally best to assign the electrodes as boundary conditions rather than as PEC materials, since an object cannot be defined simultaneously as both a material and a boundary condition. You may also find it helpful to review the “SAM Head with Electrodes” tutorial in the LF section of the manual (Section 3.2.12).

The tutorials are, unfortunately, not automatically synchronized to the cloud version yet. We can make the new ones available soon, though. Sorry for the inconvenience. If you send me an email (lloyd @ zmt.swiss), I can forward the notebook to you. Cheers, Bryn

@bryn ahh, I see. Thank you so much!

I ended up creating my Duke model in a separate script, where I first cloned him as static. Then I removed part of the body not relevant to me by boolean subtraction (entity by entity) and finally export the remain static model to a sab file, which I load in my main script instead of the entire Duke. It has been this confusion about entities and groups and what not disturbing the flow. Thanks for your suggestions bryn

That's helpful. Thank you for the detailed steps @bryn.

To measure the shortest distance between two entities, you can use the Python API: import XCoreModeling as xcm shell = xcm.GetActiveModel().SelectedEntities[0] coil = xcm.GetActiveModel().SelectedEntities[1] res = xcm.GetEntityEntityDistance(shell, coil) print(f"Shortest distance shell-coil: {res[0].Distance}") p1 = xcm.CreatePoint(res[0].ClosestPosition) p1.Name = "Point on Shell" p2 = xcm.CreatePoint(res[1].ClosestPosition) p2.Name = "Point on Coil" # This line is just to visualize where the measured distance was taken line = xcm.CreatePolyLine([res[0].ClosestPosition, res[1].ClosestPosition]) This would create something like this: [image: 1747752108672-c17b7bff-2d64-408c-88a7-fd83a4dadfdb-image.png] Some other snippets are shared here: https://forum.zmt.swiss/topic/565/geometry-modeling-snapping-to-endpoints-in-python-api/3?_=1747746585465

I would add that in the first approach you might change the tissue property of the original bladder to something else, e.g. fat, to get the desired effect of shrinking or stretching the bladder without creating air holes. Btw, you can measure the volume of a tissue surface in the modeler using the measure tool.

Okay, I will take those considerations into account. Thanks for the fast reply!

@bryn Is the 6.8 displayed on the color bar the actual maximum field strength value? I exported the values and found that the maximum is around 5.9 instead. [image: 1735124755536-42fb974e-d830-42c2-8373-84c85ee63339-image.png]

@bryn Thank you again for your reply and the posture file!

Thank you for the detailed answer!

Hi Bryn, I would like to ask a question regarding posing. My aim is to detect the variation in bone position from the skin in different poses (hypothesis being: as the soft tissues deform, the bone wont always be at the same position wrt the skin). I currently have 8 antennas placed around the skin which are supposed to mimic wearable antennas and I would like to move these antennas along with the pose. But if I link these antennas to the bone using "link-parent tool", the bone is always at the same location wrt to the bone irrespective of the pose. But I cannot link the antennas wrt to the skin as the antennas dont move with the pose. How can I do this? I would like the antennas which are placed around the skin to similar to the skin rather than the bone? Based on the first video in this chain, triangular meshes can be posed similar to the body. If I convert the antennas to meshes and then pose it, will I be getting the same issue i.e the bone is always at the same location wrt to the antennas? Thanks

Thank You, It really works.

Thank you! That helps a lot.

You can drag the entire group onto the simulation. The surfaces are tagged, and will be assigned to the correct material properties automatically. The reason for the locks is to prevent users from deleting individual surfaces, or editing them in some way. This would break the poser functionality. If you are bothered by this, or don't need to change the posture of the model, you can always select the bone mesh system and run "Clone As Static" in the context menu. https://youtu.be/CYI6rBPZw7E