×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

(OP)

I would have thought this information would be easy to find, but it has been quite the ordeal. It relates to the handling of large assys in SW. We have a large assembly line with roughly 100 000 parts, about 60 000 non-fasteners and roughly 30 000 unique components. We are seriously considering SW, but have seen no proof that SW can handle assemblies of this size. I understand proper assy practices need to be used and very powerful computers are required, but I have never heard of anything close to even 30 000 components.

SW has shown close to 10 000 part assemblies in demos and claim they can do more, but there is a lot of talk about headaches people are having with large assys in SW on forums such as these. So what I’m asking is this:

1) Can you refer me to any companies that are designing very large assys with SW?
2) Is the SW engine inherently limited in handling large assys by design (i.e. will the program grind to a halt at a certain point, regardless of hardware)?
3) Isn’t managing the simplified versions of parts and sub-assys difficult and doesn’t it introduce additional potential for errors?

We are considering Catia as well, but are worried it is overkill for the machine design we’re doing. I’m very interested in hearing your experiences.

Thanks,


Mark.

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

This company has done some pretty large assemblies and has been the presenters at SolidWorks World's "Managing Large Assemblies class.  They may be able to answer many of your questions:   http://www.bwir.com/

Managing simplified configurations is only difficult if there is no planning or thought put into creating them (ie., don't suppress features needed for mating).  Creating the simplified configs as you go is easier than going back and doing it after the assembly gets too large.  Developing good modeling standards will be essential for assemblies of that size.

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

Have you tried asking SW direct?


Making the best use of this Forum.  FAQ559-716
How to get answers to your SW questions.  FAQ559-1091
Helpful SW websites every user should be aware of.  FAQ559-520

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

Managing huge assemblies also depends on your hardware.

Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP1.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

The lack of definitive answers to your question should  tell you that most users here simply don't know. There are probably very few SW users anywhere that deal with such large assemblies. Companies which do, are usually large & "automatically" go for the more expensive high-end packages.

If you want a definitive answer go to SolidWorks direct & don't give up till they give you one.


Making the best use of this Forum.  FAQ559-716
How to get answers to your SW questions.  FAQ559-1091
Helpful SW websites every user should be aware of.  FAQ559-520

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

Would they give you an honest answer?

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

SolidWorks can deal with large assemblies, but you'll need the appropriate hardware to handle that.  It's not just a function of how many components you have, but also how complicated they are.  I have seen assemblies with 10,000 simple components load fine, while assemblies with 500 complicated components crash because the computer didn't have enough RAM, swap space, etc.  Even with all the latest tweaks to Win XP, I haven't been able to go higher than about 2.5 GB of combined RAM and swap file usage with SolidWorks.

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

Try contacting Richard Doyle at http://www.ctsug.org/  then go to the links page.  He works for Halliburton, and their assemblies are several tens of thousands of parts.

Flores

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

Em1,

We've done complicated assemblies on the order of 5K-6K parts. You have to do 4 things to have SW work for you with 100K.

1). Structure your assemblies and sub-assemblies. Bring some order to the chaos. You'll need it when you want to change things. You have to be careful with the mate structure too. Also, don't use multiple part files with the same name.

2). Hardware. Spend the $$$ on ram, cpu, AND video card.

3). Simplify your parts. If you don't need the detail, don't put it in the model. (The catch is you never know when you need the accuracy and higher detail later.)

4). Break out views and detail views on multible sheets of a drawing are very slow. Opening drawings can take a while depending on the detail you put in them.

BL

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

Em1,

   I am on SW2003SP5.0.  My machine is a 3GHz Pentium IV with 2GB RAM and an NVIDIA Quadro4 580XGL video card.

   I am managing assemblies with up to 4000 parts.  The system runs slowly, probably because it is running out of RAM.  My current project has 1414 components, and everything seems to run fine.

   If you are considering SolidWorks, I strongly suggest buying your computer from the CAD Vendor.  You get the hardware they recommend, and you get hardware support from the guys who know how your CAD works.  You did not say what you are upgrading from, but I would be surprised if your current machines could run SolidWorks.

   I suspect that part of our stability problems come from badly constructed models.  We started off SolidWorks on a large, complex project.  Your initial trial and error process should be done on something small that you will not keep referring to, later.  

   As I read your message carefully, I see you refer to "a large assembly line with roughly 100,000 parts".  Is this an assembly with 100K parts, or do you need a library of 100K parts, used to create smaller assemblies?

   If it is the library you need, you have just hit on one of the big advantages of 3D CAD.

                           JHG

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

We are in the same boat.  We have large assys, but not as large as some of you and we are having a terrible time.  Working with simplified parts is fine but you have to plan ahead and it takes extra time.  

We have started to look at Solid Edge because it handles large assemblies much better.  

SolidWorks needs to get on top of this and quick!!

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

I know a lot of people may not believe me on this, but I had a customer build a fully in-contexted, automated by 3 dimensions 15,000+ part Conveyor assembly system and he said it opened in just mintues. This was when he was using SW03 with a card that at the time was not approved. I can't remember the name but it was a very generic name it was one of the known video cards. He was using the full 2GB of RAM when he opened it. They upgraded him to 3GB on his Win NT machine.

He built the assembly using my knowledge of Automation and assembly practices. See FAQ or my website for information on assemblyu practices. He posted this at comp.cad.solidworks and no one believed him. I hope he is watching and will pop in here.

Listening to this story proves that you need to use a lot of foresight, proper mating, good technique, and automation (if required) is the secret to good assembly performance. Hardware plays a vital role in making and working with the assembly so be sure you are using the best... unless you can find that unknown good performance card that he had above... but that was 2-3 years ago.

Regards,

Scott Baugh, CSWP
3DVision Technologies

www.3dvisiontech.com
www.scottjbaugh.com
FAQ731-376
FAQ559-716 - SW Fora Users

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

Just as I have written here before, follow the FAQ's and follow users advise ... no problems.

Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP1.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

You may want to seriously consider SolidEdge for assemblies of the size you are requesting. Pricing similar to SolidWorks. SE users have a separate forum here. Some of their literature discusses assemblies exceeding 100,000 parts. We have Alibre, Inventor and SolidWorks and a demo of SolidEdge. SolidWorks is more user friendly, but large assemblies seem to be one of SolidEdge's strengths. However we don't have any assemblies approachng your size. I would suggest discussing your needs with both SW and SE VAR's and requesting case histories and references for assemblies your size. Them demo both.

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

What does SE do to handle it better? Lightweight?

Jason Capriotti
Smith & Nephew, Inc.

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

Here is the subject I found on the Large assembly I pointed out above. The video card listed is not approved by SW and according to SW is not supported. In Thread559-119375 SolidsMaster mentions this card as being "Rock solid". This and the below thread from comp.cad.solidworks has raised questions from me and I plan finding a direct answer to this, but see below on his sizes of assemblies and their speeds.

Correction: I was incorrect in saying "SW03" above he was using "SW04". Also he was running XP SP1 and not Win NT.

Dear All,

I am interested in large assembly performance and would like to know if these times are poor, fair, or good.

I'm running SW 2004 sp0

My machine is a Dell 360 w/ 2.4 GHz P4, 3.00 GB RAM, XP PRO SP1, and QUADRO NVS W/AGP8X W/64 MEG RAM


My large assemblyis:

TOTAL COMPONENTS:             15285
PARTS                         12439
ASSEMBLIES                     2846


It loads in the following times:

Lightweight                    56 SEC
Resolving from the LW load     88 SEC
To load fully resolved         3:13 MINUTES


This seems really quick to me but this is my first venture pasted 2200 parts.


Regards,

Scott Baugh, CSWP
3DVision Technologies

www.3dvisiontech.com
www.scottjbaugh.com
FAQ731-376
FAQ559-716 - SW Fora Users

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

How many "Unique" parts? A 1000 part assembly with 1000 unique part files is quite different than a 1000 part assembly with only 10 unique parts instanced to equal a 1000.

Jason Capriotti
Smith & Nephew, Inc.

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

Automation Tooling Systems: Largest assembly system was a 400,000 square-foot facility with 100,000 components.  Video:  http://files.solidworks.com/Case_Studies/videos/ats.wmv

Solidworks Site:
http://www.solidworks.com/pages/successes/viewsuccess.html?record=453

Apparently very large assemblies can be made in SW.  Something to consider are simplified configurations with only the minimum features needed in a particular sub-assembly. Also save sub-assemblies as part files when possible.  

Flores

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

afb66t9,

I have gone through the article. Thanks to your statement "Not to sure if you can believe their promotional advertising".

I am afraid ...whatever they claim about Solidworks is just not right! And whatever they claim Pro-E can do is probably right but they had to claim a few false untrue things and "lower" Solidworks in order to prove Pro-E is on the top!! Just one example---

When the article talks about BOM from SW, they say writing down with your hand is faster. In SW it doesnt take more than 3 seconds for SW to come up with a BOM. Well if you have the right templates, less than 3 seconds! How faster else would anybody want the software to work?

When you go in detail there are a lot of things where Pro-E fails and SW gains...but obviously we would not want to get into negative campaigning..

Mechanical Engineer

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

(OP)
Thanks everyone for the input. Lots of helpful information. So what I gather is that SW cannot handle the large assemblies in excess of roughly 20K parts. I was hoping to hear something different because SW is very easy to use and our design team is only 4 seats and Catia seems to be overkill in its complexity.

UG looks really good and might actually be an option. It looks as easy to use as SW and has some good large assy capabilities.

Thanks again everyone, I guess SW isn't cut out for the big stuff, despite what the resellers say.

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

It can do it, depending on your hardware. Either way you go, good luck to you.

Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP1.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

My company is testdriving solidworks right now, and we work on VERY large assemblies... and yes, I can tell you, that on the very good hardware, solidworks still lags when you are working on asbys. with many complex componets (and surfaces), if you can hang in there, I have heard that 2006, is supposed to fix some of the problems we are having, however, if what you are doing has simple geometry, get yourself a very good workstation, and get solidworks.

However, with CATIA, you'll run into it's own unique problems (as will you with any package). The benefit of getting SW, is that you can spend all that extra $$ getting better hardware.

That is, from what I can tell, the biggest help with lg. asmblys. with any program.

Thanks,
WC

RE: SW NOT PROVEN AT ALL - LARGE ASSYS

(OP)
wes616,

Our assys are VERY large and do have mostly simple prismatic components. Curiously, how big are the ones you are building?

Mark.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources