4 Replies Latest reply on Aug 19, 2016 6:58 AM by Peter Brinkhuis

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

Dirk Ruiken Aug 18, 2016 6:44 PM

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?

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

Solid Air Aug 18, 2016 11:39 PM (in response to Dirk Ruiken)

I normally do not worry about file size; I am more concerned with the amount of memory used when the file is opened and the effect on the video card. Assemblies contain more than just references and mates. There are also bitmaps for previews, a parasolid representation of the assembly for every configuration (used if you open the assembly for view only and other things). There is also meta data for every component stored. And the list goes on and on. I do not know how much it is a factor today (because I do not pay attention to file size) but at one time just saving a file twice would cause it to double in size.
Like Show 1 Likes(1)

Actions
- Re: Assembly size seems based on all parts - shouldn't they only be referenced?
  
  Dirk Ruiken Aug 19, 2016 4:33 AM (in response to Solid Air)
  
  I have a current project where parts are first put into assemblies of small groups and then those are use again in larger assemblies. If I store these files in a versioning system, this quickly increases the size from the necessary 300MB to easily 600MB just because of one level of grouping.
  
  As I said even creating an assembly with just one subassembly inside is almost as big (same order of magnitude) as the original assembly. Is there no way to avoid this maybe at the cost of not storing those pre-computed things for visualization? Any settings that influence this?
  
  Like Show 1 Likes(1)
  
  Actions
  - Re: Assembly size seems based on all parts - shouldn't they only be referenced?
    
    John Stoltzfus Aug 19, 2016 6:36 AM (in response to Dirk Ruiken)
    
    Take a look at this post by Alin Vargatu Best Practices for Large Assembly Management in SOLIDWORKS
    
    Like Show 1 Likes(1)
    
    Actions
Re: Assembly size seems based on all parts - shouldn't they only be referenced?

Peter Brinkhuis Aug 19, 2016 6:58 AM (in response to Dirk Ruiken)

Do you have SolidWorks 2015 or 2016 already? Because it promises some impressive file reductions.

Setting the detail size will have a significant influence on the file size, as there is non-parametric model stored in the file as well. This model is built up out of triangles. You should check if you can reduce the amount of detail without losing functionality, although I still don't really know what you could lose.
Like Show 1 Likes(1)

Actions

Go to original post