The file size of the part is big for a very small length. When I'm trying to cover the path with the wire rope, the size of the part is increasing exponentially, causing a system failure.
The file size of the part is big for a very small length. When I'm trying to cover the path with the wire rope, the size of the part is increasing exponentially, causing a system failure.
Why do you need such detail? This part would consist of multiple helical sweeps and now you want it to also follow a path. You are asking for trouble and SWX is all too happy to oblige! Unless this is for a detailed view you should just model the wire rope as a single uniform diameter. At most you could apply an appearance to the surface to simulate how it would look. If you really must have the correct detail for a close-up view then you will be much better off making that a separate item and ONLY the minimum parts should be shown. NEVER include more detail than is necessary. It is a total waste of your modeling time and computer resources and it does not add anything except clutter.
Do yourself a favor and look at Tools ==> Evaluate ==> Performance Evaluation for your wire rope. It will show the helical sweep dominates the rebuild time. Making this follow a rope path is almost an exponential increase and more likely to fail than to succeed, as you've already encountered.
Step 1 is always determining if you need that amount of detail as has been mentioned.
Step 2 If you do need detail, make good use of the freeze bar.
I used an expanded metal detail in a part assembly. As you can imagine, the rebuild time for the pattern used for the cutouts took a minute or more just for a 20 in x 20 in piece with a simple diamond cutout with no radii. But, once I was done modelling my base sheet, I used the freeze bar to tell SW it doesn't need to rebuild that feature every time. I used two pieces of that expanded metal with appropriate cutouts and the final assembly rebuilds in seconds. Its not a miracle cure, but another tool to use when you DO need more detail than typical.
Cosmetic appearance.
I agree with the others. I never model that type of wire roped unless it's for to show someone something in detail. But, it's only a small portion. The final model is cosmetic as J. Mather indicated.
If it's two wires twisting in an assy, the software can handle it.
The rope is to be used for lifting purposes.
The selection of the rope is done on that basis, to analyze the stress/shear on the rope while loading.
Hello Prakash Prashant ,.. definitely simplify it as much as possible!,.. such as changing the Image Quality to the lowest setting and maybe adding a B/W section Decal... (image)
Thanks to everyone for your response
Hi Prakash Prashant ,
I sometimes want to do something similar as you.
In that case I create an asembly of the part, because assemblies have shorter rebuild times.
I have added an example of a fiber 1x3 with sweep-twist along an exenctric path. This create a lot of edges.
I pattern it in the assembly;
It has over 12 million triangles
But rebuilding is rather fast.
I'm not sure if this method is suitable for similation.
Solidworks will bog down if you have too many features; especially if your computer is marginally suited for the software. I suspect you've modeled in all the detail for the cable. Unless you need all that detail I'd suggest modeling the cable as a simple cylinder. You should see a big improvement in performance. I use cable in my Assemblies occasionally and that's the method I use.