Slow regeneration or loading

[Silver92b]

We had decided to migrate from Pro Engineer to Solid works and started implementing the move. We just started using Solid Works and we noticed that complicated solid models with large numbers of features (a hollow cylinder with 240 holes w/c-bores) take an unusually long time to load or regenerate compared to ProE. This is very disturbing and we are wondering if we've made a mistake by changing from ProE. Could there be some solution for this issue?

Thanks

 

[smcadman]

That cube test has been around for awhile, and depending on who is doing the test will depend on who is the best MCAD. If you went to the link posted above, there are 2 assembly cube tests:
Pro/ENGINEER Wildfire vs. SolidWorks 2003
Solidworks 2001Plus over Inventor 5.3
But if you go to the Pro E site, there testing beats SW:

http://www.ptc.com/WCMS/files/30441/en/30441en_file1.pdf

It may sound like a joke, but you might want to try and make some changes to the part at the top-level assembly and see how your system performs. Open it resolved, not lightweight, change the radius, etc. You can make a few changes to the system options, and see how it affects your performance.
If you want to try it, download a 1.1MB zip here:

http://www.mooload.com/new/file.php?file=files/050706/1152112343/Flores_Solidworks_Cube_Test.zip

Also check out Matt Lombard's site for descriptions of the options. He noted the options that can affect speed or file size with a red star:

http://mysite.verizon.net/mjlombard/

Rules of Thumb > Tools Options for SW2006

Flores
SW06 SP4.1

 

[rfus]

There are enough 'my cad is better than your cad' posts in this forum.

Bottom Line. Solidworks is a great package. They all have strengths and weaknesses.

If you want my opinion, you can get a screaming processor, a ton of ram, a high end graphics card, an x64 system, and a huge monitor for less than the price of a seat of any of the cad packages. I think you should be complaining about your computer and not that SW is slower than that other package.

RFUS

 

[Silver92b]

^^^^
This is not about which software is better or about how bad or good my computer might be. We've signed a PO for 2 seats of SW and we are now experiencing some problems or issues that makes us think we've made a mistake and we might have to absorb the price of this product as well as pay the ProE maintenance fees....

 

[J-C]

Any luck with the suggestions provided?

I would seriously give thought to some computer upgrades. Your setup may be working well with Pro/e but not Solidworks. A different graphics card may help with the graphics delay. I noticed the same thing in UG....there's a delay when creating this pattern at the end as it refreshes the graphics. The difference is in UG you can see it happening as the faces are popping up all over the place, in Solidworks it does show you that, you just wait til it's done.

A few seconds can add up.....but I would give a more in depth look at other features in Solidworks that may save you time elsewhere in your work. I never used Pro/e but from what I've heard, the Solidworks workflow is faster so that may offset any rebuild or graphics advantages that Pro/e may have.

Jason

UG NX2.02.2 on Win2000 SP3
SolidWorks 2006 SP4.0 on WinXP SP2

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

rfus ... if Silver92b upgrades his system, that will also increase the speed of WF3 ... so no net gain!
Also he isn't complaining about SW, just stating that he is disappointed with it's performance, when compared to WF3.

Silver92b ... Have you had a chance to "fine tune" the options per smcadmans suggestion? (Matt Lombards site).

Are you able to post the "offending" file (for downloading) so that we can investigate & compare times?

BTW, where are you based?


Helpful SW websites FAQ559-520
How to get answers to your SW questions FAQ559-1091

 

[rfus]

CBL..Maybe the use of the word 'complaining' was a little harsh. Sure, WF3 may rebuild a pattern feature quicker, but the point I was making was that in my realm of time I feel no difference between one second versus two seconds, but really feel the difference between 2 minutes versus 4. Gildashard touched upon my point. I work on 3.6Ghz and 4.2Ghz systems with Quadro3450s, and it drives me nuts when I try and work on on the same project on a 1.8GHz Laptop. I feel like I'm wasting my time.

Silver92b..... You did not make a mistake. I started on ProE. There are things that will drive you nuts about SW if you sit in front of it as much as a lot of us here do. But there are things you will not be able to live without once you master it. An optimally configured workstation is the key to long term success with SW. That was my only point.

RFUS

 

[smcadman]

What we did was to model the same part we had in ProE with Solidworks, then we created a drawing (this was done by the reseller's expert).

There are several "experts" here trying to help you out, and some have taken the time to model a part similar to what you are looking for, but we do not have the complete picture yet.

It has some holes patterned on each side of the tube, some shallow channels about 1.00 wide equally spaced. In each of these channels there are 40 holes eually spaced around the outside wall with counterbores. The original part had 6 channels with the holes and the modified part was made longer so it could have 10 channels with the 40 holes per channel.

If you look at the number of posts this thread has generated, you will see that many members STILL want to help you even though you haven't posted an image/screenshot that better depicts your final result, or the file itself. There is more than one way to skin a cat, and someone here might be able to recreate what you need in a different manner than the other "expert".

Flores
SW06 SP4.1

 

[Silver92b]

Thanks, we're working with the reseller's expert right now (as I write) to optimize the systems. I tried posting before but there is some problem with my internet connection. I'll try to upload the files in question ASAP.

 

[Theophilus]

Wow, this is quite a legitimate thread. I'm sorry for laughing earlier--the first posts had the dubious marks of the typical drive-by Molotov cocktail--such a tired tactic. So you certainly didn't need my mocking of the situation.

After reading the progress of this thread, I was about to suggest the upgrades to the computer system as well. Since SolidWorks is quite dependent on the graphics card for smooth performance, I would disagree with CorBlimeyLimey that an upgraded system would equally benefit the WF3 installation. It could, but I think the benefits would be much more drastically seen by the SW installation.

Also, try smcadman's suggestion of making a tweak to the upstream geometry. I find that this sort of thinking will often force a more complete rebuild of the part and sometimes change the rebuild time from that point onward (strange, but I've been with SW since 1997 and have seen lots of oddities).

Otherwise, I don't have much to say with the ProE stuff. Of course, I do a lot of plastic part design with complex geometry and have had great results by sticking to logical building practices. I also have a client who--after seeing my work and the nature of the parts I create--is going to ditch ProE for SW when he can find the time to learn the new interface (cost issues are a big factor). However, some folks can use knives better than others can use guns. It's certainly tough to find true apples in comparisons of this sort.

Jeff Mowry

http://www.industrialdesignhaus.com

Reason trumps all. And awe trumps reason.

 

[Silver92b]

Have you had a chance to "fine tune" the options per smcadmans suggestion? (Matt Lombards site).

Are you able to post the "offending" file (for downloading) so that we can investigate & compare times?

BTW, where are you based?

I looked in the links provided but have not had time to dig into them to implement changes. I'll try to upload the files ASAP. We are in the proverbial swamp ful of alligators right now.... We are located in Marietta, GA North of Atlanta.

 

[rfus]

I made the part like the picture above with 870 holes, 58 around and 15 down. I got around 30 seconds with geometry pattern, 75 seconds without. The fastest way i found to do it was by making the part as though it were one ring with a circular pattern of the 58 holes, and then doing a liner pattern on the ring as a body and then a combining them... 5 seconds.

Large patterns in sketches can cost you a lot of time. So can previews, surface fills (shut off surfaces), Offsets, In-context updates, large assembly rebuilds, and so many other things....But just think.....while your sitting there waiting you can hang out on eng-tips. This is where dual monitors is key!

RFUS

 

[Silver92b]

I uploaded the part here:

http://www.mooload.com/new/file.php?file=files/060706/1152212292/CP-Drum.SLDPRT

We are also installing new installtions of SW. My coleague's new installtion seems to work better than the previous one even though they are the same version of SW ?!?!

 

[Heckler]

I know I'm a little late on this thread. But I thought I would add my two cents worth.

I use pro/e 2001 and SWx 2006 on the same machine and often at the same time both at work and home. My home computer is configured the same as Silver's with the exception of the graphics card....Nvidia Quadro4 750 XGL. Although our graphics cards a few years old they're still top end performers. I do not notice any performance differences between my home computer and works....even though my work computer has the forced network security processes that eat away the resources.

I would look at the differences of how you're modeling the parts in Pro/e and SWx. The core modeling engine differencs could account for the calculate feature creation and rebuild times. Also, remember you're new to SWx thus do not know all the suttle ways of making SWx perform at its best. Were you using simplified reps or family tables with your pro/e models?

Hang out on this site and you will learn a lot of advanced tips and techniques.

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 5.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1400
o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

Never argue with an idiot. They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience every time.

 

[Silver92b]

Large patterns in sketches can cost you a lot of time. So can previews, surface fills (shut off surfaces), Offsets, In-context updates, large assembly rebuilds, and so many other things....But just think.....while your sitting there waiting you can hang out on eng-tips. This is where dual monitors is key!

RFUS

I love the dual monitor thing... I'm going to buy myself a new Mac Book Pro and make it a dual boot with WinXP. I'm going to run the SW in that machine too.

 

[AnnaWood]

Silver92b,

I just downloaded your part to my work computer. System specs are below.

From my local desktop, the file opens in about 1-2 seconds. After a crtl-q regen and check of feature statistics I show 5.64 seconds for a re-build. There is only a couple second lag for the hour glass to go away after the regen.

I also run my system with verification on rebuild switched to on. Which in general will slow the system down as it goes through a more thorough check for errors in the re-build process.

It was essentially the same open and reload times whether I was in my 32 bit SolidWorks or 64 bit SolidWorks.

This is vanilla SolidWorks with only a Spaceball 5000 running in the add-ins.

Regards,

Anna Wood
SW06 SP4.1 x64, WinXP x64
Dell Precision 380, Pentium D940, 4 Gigs RAM, FX3450

http://www.auerprecision.com

 

[Heckler]

Silver - I downloaded your model and did some modifications. It's a large model but it didn't impact the performance of my work machine. I also have a nice size assembly running at the same time. You might want to reload SWx or run SWxRx

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 5.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1400
o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

Never argue with an idiot. They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience every time.

 

[AnnaWood]

Silver92b,

Do you usually work in wireframe mode? I ask that because your model was saved as a wireframe. In SolidWorks, solid mode will work must faster.

I seem to remember when I used ProE back about three/four years ago that it worked better in wireframe mode.

You guys with more experience with both systems, is this a valid observation?

Regards,

Anna Wood
SW06 SP4.1 x64, WinXP x64
Dell Precision 380, Pentium D940, 4 Gigs RAM, FX3450

http://www.auerprecision.com

 

[Theophilus]

I would think so--especially from how SW deals with the display-end of things. I always marvelled at how well the solid shades were rendered in SW way back in '97.

Jeff Mowry

http://www.industrialdesignhaus.com

Reason trumps all. And awe trumps reason.

 

[Silver92b]

OK, the model itself was not too bad to regen or load. The drawing was more of an issue. I uploaded it, but I'm not sure I copied the complete URL this time...
/060706/11522

http://www.mooload.com/new/file.php?file=files20717/CP-Drum.SLDDRW

Try loading that file and working with it.
BTW, the last SW install in my coleague's machine works much better than before! I'll install the new SW in my machine tomorrow.

Thanks for your help everybody!

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

Check out SBaughs faq559-488 for "How do I do a clean uninstall & reinstall of Solidworks?" before re-installing SW.


Helpful SW websites FAQ559-520
How to get answers to your SW questions FAQ559-1091