Out Of Memory 3

[PMcGowan]

I am an IT Tech and my engineers are getting very frustrated. They are running SW 2005 SP5, and when they check a drawing out if the PDMWorks, make one change and try to check it back in there PC crashes with an out of memory error. I have upgraded them from 2000 to XP, they have 4gigs of memory with Virtual set at 8000. Their PC's are higher end PC's and are above and beyond what the SW site states. They are losing a lot of time and I have not been able to get answers from our VAR. Any suggestions? Please help, they are at their wits end.
Any ideas will be appreciated.

 

[J-C]

PMcGowan,

In your users assembly, go to Tools, Statitics and tell us the numbers there. Also do the same in the assembly's drawing.

Sounds like this assembly and drawing is huge. On large assemblies, all CAD programs have this problem and most provide tools to work around the issue by simplifying. It takes time to setup though no matter what CAD system.

Jason

UG NX2.02.2 on Win2000 SP3
SolidWorks 2005 SP5.0 on WinXP SP2
SolidWorks 2006 SP1.0 on WinXP SP2

 

[Standing]

In the SolidWorks main menu click File, then click "Find References" copy the files off to some known temp directory. Close your assembly and open the new one you just copied. Check this one into the PDM.
I had to do this to several large assemblies our designers could not check in at all. After coping using “Find References” it checked in just fine without crashing.


Bradley

 

[PMcGowan]

Thank you Bradley, I will have them try that.

 

[wgchere]

Regarding modeling:

I have recently come across a bizarre practice in my new company. Many of the models have .005 inch chamfers or radii on all the edges. When I enquired about this I got two answers:

1) We have a "BREAK ALL SHARP EDGES .005-.015" note on all the drawings. The radii/chamfers are the breaks. This was what I suspected.

2) Another guy said it helped make it look "nice" when he rendered it as a solid! I pointed out that that was a bit silly, since we don't do photo-rendering here.

Both of these add a bit of extra data, along with modeling corner radii to a general filet radius note (ALL CORNERS SHALL BE R.02 MAX.). When you have a lot of these type parts (100's) that adds a lot of data! We instituted a modeling rule that only machined features are modeled--breaks are not machined so they are not on the model--and any features that are max dimensions are also not modeled (with exceptions if anyone comse up with a really, really good reason).

Toolbox seems to be a particular offender in over-modeling screws and making them more complicated than need be.

Regarding assemblies:

In my previous company the decision was made to insert only one fastener stack per hole pattern to conserve file size on large assemblies. The assemblies look odd at first, but it eliminates hundreds of fasteners in the assy and reduced the size of the files.

 

[jacek0841]

In my previous company the decision was made to insert only one fastener stack per hole pattern to conserve file size on large assemblies. The assemblies look odd at first, but it eliminates hundreds of fasteners in the assy and reduced the size of the files.

Very interesting - but how do you get the correct quantity of fasteners in the dwg BOM ??

 

[wgchere]

I have yet to use the BOM feature of SolidWorks. In my industry, all of the BOM's are separate Parts Lists generated by Agile, Flex, or similar programs. And, due to the difficulties and delicate nature of interactive BOM's in the early days, on those occasions where there is a BOM on the drawing it is static, and the item baloons are all "custom."

 

[J-C]

Fasteners may slow down the graphics some and increase the assembly file a little but they don't use much more memory if you already have a set inserted. Adding additional instances just amounts to location data in the assembly.

Also using component patterns that are derived from part feature pattern makes inserting these fasteners very easy and quick.

Jason

UG NX2.02.2 on Win2000 SP3
SolidWorks 2005 SP5.0 on WinXP SP2
SolidWorks 2006 SP1.0 on WinXP SP2

 

[Philrock]

Not that this would solve your problem - but it might shed a little light: Try loading one of the models you're having problems with on a computer outside your company. See if it behaves any better.

 

[jacek0841]

Also using component patterns that are derived from part feature pattern makes inserting these fasteners very easy and quick.

That's what I tought

 

[tar]

I'm having the same error ( SW cannot obtain required memory ) on some of my larger assemblies. Unfortunately PMcGowan didn't reply with assembly stats so I can't really compare his situation to mine.

In my opinion the assemblies I'm talking about aren't really that large. ~5000 parts, ~500 unique parts, ~60 Mb file size. Maximum depth 5.

These are top-level machine assemblies consisting of machine sub-section assemblies ( about a dozen or so per machine ). The sub-sections are all mated to a common skeleton file so they are oriented correctly in space and they are then inserted into the top-level machine assembly and fixed to the origin. In other words there are no top level mates in the machine assembly.

I am confident that our modeling/mating techniques are stout i.e. no underdefined sketches, minimum features, assemblies all fully mated, top level mates limited to <200 etc.

We are running Dell PWS650 machines 3GHz Xeon, 3GB, XP Pro V5.1 Sp1, NVIDIA Quadro FX 1000.

I monitor my memory usage pretty diligently and when page file size begins to approach 1.5GB the system stability is not good. Look out for unhandled errors and crashes back to desktop with no message at all and if I wait long enough without pulling the plug "SW cannot obtain required memory".

Any ideas? As I understand it the 3GB switch is a no-go for XP Pro sp1. Were stuck with sp1 due to Smartteam issues.

I'm going to run the WinDiag app to try and determine the condition of my memory.

 

[PDMAdmin]

As I understand it the 3GB switch is a no-go for XP Pro sp1.

Not true. You can use the /3GB switch with XP SP1; however, you must also apply a hotfix to avoid issues with your hard drive. This article has more info:

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;328269&Product=winxp

 

[Standing]

You merit a star for this one. We are using XP sp2, so it does not apply to us, but you finding this information goes way above the call of duty.
Thank you.


Bradley