AnsweredAssumed Answered

Assembly size seems based on all parts - shouldn't they only be referenced?

Question asked by Dirk Ruiken on Aug 18, 2016
Latest reply on Aug 19, 2016 by Peter Brinkhuis

I see very large file sizes for assemblies that don't really make sense. Assemblies just reference the included parts and add additional mating constraints, right? But

even if I only include one part in the assembly, I get a quite a lot of data in the assembly. (150 kb with just one primitive part in it.)


Now if I have subassemblies that are larger, each time I include them anywhere, I waste a lot of space.

For example, if I create a new assembly A which contain nothing else but assembly B with size 42MB, then assembly A has a size of 28MB afterwards. I know the file sizes I am talking about here are not big, but it's not getting better with bigger files. A part has a complexity and space is needed to represent that, but multiple assemblies should be able to reference the same data without having to replicate most of it each time.


So here my question: is there a way to include parts or subassemblies in a new assembly without incurring this high cost every time?