I am making a twisted in wire brush. I have approximately 102 bristles that I linear pattern 20 times. I have the most ram that my xp laptop can handle (4 gigs, but can only uses 3.2). I use the flex tool to twist the 2 main stem wires that the bristles linear pattern on. When I need to edit the flex, the sketch, or anything, it takes close to five minutes just to load. Five minutes is being generous. What can I do to make this faster? I think that it is just too much for my computer to handle.
Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet
Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals
-
Congratulations waross on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
It takes 5 minutes just to edit my part 3.2 gigs of ram 1
- Thread starter LawpRelim
- Start date
CorBlimeyLimey
Mechanical
Get a x64 system with the fastest CPU you can find, and have a min of 8GB of RAM.
![[cheers]](/data/assets/smilies/cheers.gif "[cheers] [cheers]")
- Thread starter
- #3
Thanks for getting back so fast. Do you know the max ram of 64 bit windows xp? I read 16 terabytes. Is that for real? thats 16000 gigs. Hears where I read it. I think I'm understanding it correctly. That's a lot.
CorBlimeyLimey
Mechanical
16TB is the Virtual RAM (ie HDD Paging) maximum, not the physical RAM (ie. RAM sticks).
I believe the max physical RAM is 128GB for x64 systems, but you may be hard pressed to find a mobo which can use that much.
I believe the max physical RAM is 128GB for x64 systems, but you may be hard pressed to find a mobo which can use that much.
- Thread starter
- #5
beachcomber
Mechanical
Patterns of this magnitude will kill any system - if I understand you correctly you have over 2000 instances.
Why do you need to show every instance of every bristle?
Create a cone or cylinder and pattern that.
If you really need to show the bristles, then just show them at one position.
bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.
Why do you need to show every instance of every bristle?
Create a cone or cylinder and pattern that.
If you really need to show the bristles, then just show them at one position.
bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.
Have you considered using a sweep instead of flex for your main wires? Do you know about the Tools->Feature Statistics function? It help you figure out exactly which features are taking so long to generate.
-handleman, CSWP (The new, easy test)
-handleman, CSWP (The new, easy test)
DesignerGuy16
Mechanical
I'd recommend simplifying the bristles to a simple cylindrical extrude and add a texture if it bugs you. You can keep the true config, just make a simplified config so you can work.
James Spisich
Design Engineer, CSWP
James Spisich
Design Engineer, CSWP
- Thread starter
- #10
I suppose I could simplify it. But the boss is used to it. If I were to use CorBlimeyLimeys' suggestion having a 64 bit xp with the fastest CPU I can find, and having 128 gigs of ram, would that do it? Probably pricey, but if my boss will by it, then great.
The boss may be used to it, but unless your boss is very short-sighted I would suspect that if you start using simplified models he/she'll get used to you completing tasks in a fraction of the time it does now.
It's fun to try to make a model like that be as realistic as possible - once. After that everyone should step back and ask themselves what the real objective is. From my outsider's perspective, you're using way too many resources to make a pretty picture.
It's fun to try to make a model like that be as realistic as possible - once. After that everyone should step back and ask themselves what the real objective is. From my outsider's perspective, you're using way too many resources to make a pretty picture.
beachcomber
Mechanical
As an old(ish) wrinkly who can remember the 'old days' of drawing boards, you would NEVER have drawn every instance of a pattern like this. One or two just to show enough information for clarity.
Just tell your boss that you aren't doing it any more because it's costing him money !
bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.
Just tell your boss that you aren't doing it any more because it's costing him money !
bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.
Even if you get the ultimate computer and can easily and quickly make unnecessarily complicated models you'll have a problem as soon as anyone with a simple mortal's computer tries to open the file.
Use simplifed representations or pay the price.
- - -Updraft
Use simplifed representations or pay the price.
- - -Updraft
-
1
- #14
uGlay
Mechanical
- Jan 6, 2006
- 389
- 0
- 0
you can do the bristle features in a part file all by themselves. if everything is still slow save that part file as a parasolid, then open the parasolid and save as a part again. that should bring the size of the file down significantly and all the surfaces will be dumb surfaces.
SW2008 Office Pro SP3.1
Intel Core 2 Duo CPU
2.2GHz, 2.00GB RAM
QuadroFX 3700
SpacePilot/SpaceNavigator
SW2008 Office Pro SP3.1
Intel Core 2 Duo CPU
2.2GHz, 2.00GB RAM
QuadroFX 3700
SpacePilot/SpaceNavigator
uGlay,
Your suggestion helps somewhat, but the computation time is highly influenced by the shear number of surfaces just as it is in computing the geometry from a bunch of complex features.
I once needed to make a chem-etch screen with diamond shaped holes. The holes were simple, but patterning took forever because there were so many. So I made a quarter section of the part (taking advantage of its symmetry). Once this finally completed its generation I saved it out as a parasolid then brought it back in to make the complete part from the four-part circular partern. It was still too slow. That is when we negotiated to use the various simplification schemes mentioned above. The situation described in the OP sounds even more intensive.
Unless we needed the full geometry for a rapid prototype or to feed a CAM package we used a simplifed representation without any resistance from those using our work. On those occassions when we needed the full geometry we knew to shut everything else down on that computer and to only work with that single SWX file. In those cases we left that full geometry as a different configuration separate from the simplified rep.
- - -Updraft
Your suggestion helps somewhat, but the computation time is highly influenced by the shear number of surfaces just as it is in computing the geometry from a bunch of complex features.
I once needed to make a chem-etch screen with diamond shaped holes. The holes were simple, but patterning took forever because there were so many. So I made a quarter section of the part (taking advantage of its symmetry). Once this finally completed its generation I saved it out as a parasolid then brought it back in to make the complete part from the four-part circular partern. It was still too slow. That is when we negotiated to use the various simplification schemes mentioned above. The situation described in the OP sounds even more intensive.
Unless we needed the full geometry for a rapid prototype or to feed a CAM package we used a simplifed representation without any resistance from those using our work. On those occassions when we needed the full geometry we knew to shut everything else down on that computer and to only work with that single SWX file. In those cases we left that full geometry as a different configuration separate from the simplified rep.
- - -Updraft
bwanamukubwa
Mechanical
I had a lot of trouble with processing times and i'm using a topped out m9750 alienware with sli.. when doing patterns, select the geometry pattern option at the bottom of the menu.. what used to take me 3-4 mins now taks about 5-10 seconds.
- Thread starter
- #18
bwanamukubwa. I'm going to try that when I get to work tomorrow. But, what is it compared to the linear pattern? I'm thinking of just simplifying it if this doesn't work.
Uglay, I'm also going to try your idea about the parisolid. I'm going to have to do some research. I'm literally only three weeks into learning.
As far as someone having a hard time with the file, I'm not sure about that. I plan on saving it with an eDrawings file extension. More people that we work with have that. So I guess it just depends on how eDrawings handles it. I don't plan on letting anyone do any editing. Thanks a lot for the suggestions.
Uglay, I'm also going to try your idea about the parisolid. I'm going to have to do some research. I'm literally only three weeks into learning.
As far as someone having a hard time with the file, I'm not sure about that. I plan on saving it with an eDrawings file extension. More people that we work with have that. So I guess it just depends on how eDrawings handles it. I don't plan on letting anyone do any editing. Thanks a lot for the suggestions.
- Thread starter
- #19
Handleman.
I used to use the "Swept Boss/Base" "Twisting" and then I'd set the turns. The only problem with that is that I can't twist it with the fill material between the wires. The fill cannot touch the stem at all. Took a while to find the flex tool. But in regards to the sweep, I create the sketch, then I use the sweep. That's where the flex tool comes in handy.
I used to use the "Swept Boss/Base" "Twisting" and then I'd set the turns. The only problem with that is that I can't twist it with the fill material between the wires. The fill cannot touch the stem at all. Took a while to find the flex tool. But in regards to the sweep, I create the sketch, then I use the sweep. That's where the flex tool comes in handy.
- Status
Similar threads
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question