Inventor General Discussion

Inventor General Discussion

Reply
Distinguished Contributor
shastu
Posts: 1,802
Registered: ‎12-10-2003
Message 1 of 8 (59 Views)

iPart Factory Size affecting performance?

59 Views, 7 Replies
11-14-2002 01:59 AM
Is there any warnings of how big you make the excel spreadsheets for iPart factories. Do you need to break them down as much as possible to keep from having performance issues? I want to include as much as possible into one iPart factory, because the benefit I see is that if you ever need to replace a part, if it is from the same ipart factory, then it keeps the constraints and everything works great. The thing I am worried about is I wonder if I am putting in too many different features turning them on and off that my excel spreadsheet is going to get too big and maybe slow things down.
*Keller, Kent
Message 2 of 8 (59 Views)

Re: iPart Factory Size affecting performance?

11-14-2002 02:17 AM in reply to: shastu
It definitely gets slower the bigger the table. A couple of releases ago I hit the limit
which was 1000 entries. Not sure if that is still the limit or not?

-
Kent
Member of the Autodesk Discussion Forum Moderator Program


"shastu" wrote in message news:f123665.-1@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Is there any warnings of how big you make the excel spreadsheets for iPart factories. Do
you need to break them down as much as possible to keep from having performance issues? I
want to include as much as possible into one iPart factory, because the benefit I see is
that if you ever need to replace a part, if it is from the same iPart factory, then it
keeps the constraints and everything works great. The thing I am worried about is I wonder
if I am putting in too many different features turning them on and off that my excel
spreadsheet is going to get too big and maybe slow things down.
*Hinterhoeller, Richard
Message 3 of 8 (59 Views)

Re: iPart Factory Size affecting performance?

11-14-2002 02:25 AM in reply to: shastu
I like to limit mine to 100 to 150. After that it takes too long to
scroll through the things when inserting.

Richard
Distinguished Contributor
shastu
Posts: 1,802
Registered: ‎12-10-2003
Message 4 of 8 (59 Views)

Re:

11-14-2002 02:34 AM in reply to: shastu
Richard, I was planning on using keys. Therefore you don't have to scroll through anything. You just fill in the three to four keys, and it puts in the correct instance.
*Dotson, Sean
Message 5 of 8 (59 Views)

Re:

11-14-2002 02:45 AM in reply to: shastu
Unless things have changed the bigger the table the
long it takes to generate the part.  That's why you'll see most screw sizes
at Charles' site are split into UNF and UNC.


--
Sean Dotson, PE

href="http://www.sdotson.com">http://www.sdotson.com

...sleep is for the
weak..
-----------------------------------------


style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
Richard,
I was planning on using keys. Therefore you don't have to scroll through
anything. You just fill in the three to four keys, and it puts in the correct
instance.
*Hinterhoeller, Richard
Message 6 of 8 (59 Views)

Re:

11-14-2002 03:02 AM in reply to: shastu
You sure as heck see a difference in the time it takes to open and close
the spreadsheet while creating the iPart.

The other concern I would have with a HUGE factory is the amount of work
that would be lost if the file became corrupt. That's the same reason I
would shy away from making a project as one idw with 80 sheets in it.

Richard

P.S. Sean, with all the work you did in R6 (pre SP1), have you changed
the meaning or PE to Power Exit ;-)

Sean Dotson wrote:
> Unless things have changed the bigger the table the long it takes to
> generate the part. That's why you'll see most screw sizes at Charles'
> site are split into UNF and UNC.
>
> --
> Sean Dotson, PE
> http://www.sdotson.com
> ...sleep is for the weak..
> -----------------------------------------
>
> "shastu" >
> wrote in message news:f123665.2@WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Richard, I was planning on using keys. Therefore you don't have to
> scroll through anything. You just fill in the three to four keys,
> and it puts in the correct instance.
>
Distinguished Contributor
shastu
Posts: 1,802
Registered: ‎12-10-2003
Message 7 of 8 (59 Views)

Re:

11-14-2002 03:10 AM in reply to: shastu
Sean, Lets be a little more specific, shall we. When you say "it takes longer to generate the part," Are you just talking about after you select the file from the open command after selecting place component? Or does it also make a difference when updating the assembly and things like that? The reason I ask is this. I ran some test with the same iPart. I renamed it three different things and then deleted rows out of the iPart factory. I took all rows out but 2 for one. The others had 250 rows and 327 rows. The file with 2 rows was definately faster. Somewhere between 1 and 2 seconds. Then I opened the one with 250 rows and it took 11 seconds. Then I opened the file with 327 rows and it still only took 11 seconds. If that is the case I might as well leave all 327 in one file, unless it is going to affect more than just how fast the "Place Standard iPart" dialog box comes up.
*Dotson, Sean
Message 8 of 8 (59 Views)

Re:

11-14-2002 03:16 AM in reply to: shastu
It is several factors.  I'm going off memory
here a bit as we did all these experiments back in R4 when they first came
out.  It will affect how long it takes to pace the part once you have
selected the keys.  It will affect how long it takes to replace an instance
with another.  It will also affect how long it takes to return to the ipart
when editing it (which shouldn't be too often).  Of course if the children
are already generated these times are reduced.

 

300ish rows isn't too bad.  I think the SHCS
iparts have that many.  Once you start getting up into the 800s then you
really need to take a step back and think about it.

 

e.g. when placing a screw you know the pitch UNC
vs. UNF before you even place the screw.  So it makes sense to split these
up in this manner...

 


--
Sean Dotson, PE

href="http://www.sdotson.com">http://www.sdotson.com

...sleep is for the
weak..
-----------------------------------------


style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
Sean,
Lets be a little more specific, shall we. When you say "it takes longer to
generate the part," Are you just talking about after you select the file from
the open command after selecting place component? Or does it also make a
difference when updating the assembly and things like that? The reason I ask
is this. I ran some test with the same iPart. I renamed it three different
things and then deleted rows out of the iPart factory. I took all rows out but
2 for one. The others had 250 rows and 327 rows. The file with 2 rows was
definately faster. Somewhere between 1 and 2 seconds. Then I opened the one
with 250 rows and it took 11 seconds. Then I opened the file with 327 rows and
it still only took 11 seconds. If that is the case I might as well leave all
327 in one file, unless it is going to affect more than just how fast the
"Place Standard iPart" dialog box comes up.
Announcements
Are you familiar with the Autodesk Expert Elites? The Expert Elite program is made up of customers that help other customers by sharing knowledge and exemplifying an engaging style of collaboration. To learn more, please visit our Expert Elite website.
Need installation help?

Start with some of our most frequented solutions or visit the Installation and Licensing Forum to get help installing your software.