Configuration loading speed with sub assemblies and composite items

sales_mt_solar

I have a fairly complex assembly that has multiple layers of configurations in both parts and sub assemblies. I am at a point where I am fine-tuning the model for access using the API and repetitive drawings, and I am trying to determine which factors most affect the speed of regeneration once I change configurations. 

Background:

• Everything is currently within one document. 
• Currently all parts are created in their own part studio, and most are set up as closed composite parts. 
• Most of the composite parts have a necessary amount of configuration included
• Composite parts are combined in assembly files in any case where patterns are necessary on the final assembly. 
• The final assembly file inserts primarily sub-assemblies in patterns and configurations to create the finished product/BOM/drawings
• It appears it is not possible to pattern parts that are created by a pattern within the same assembly? This is my understanding, if wrong that would change my whole question here!

1. Is it faster to create as much of the configuration in one sub assembly as possible by inserting multiples of the same part instead of patterns and then creating patterns of multiple parts within only one layer of sub assembly?
2. Or is it faster to have the minimum number of parts in the assembly by using patterns to create multiples, but then have to create a second sub assembly to pattern the first sub-assembly. i.e. a sub of a sub assembly?

The model is a bit broken right now since I have been trying to re-build the architecture, but I can share it anyway: 

https://cad.onshape.com/documents/2d383e8782751745d72a29d4/w/4705f384fa4e614e42e6fe1d/e/c2c2b7db0a707cc0ed47ce3a?configuration=default&renderMode=0&uiState=63374196b7cdca281ea57a52

As you can tell from the main model page, I need to choose multiple different frame configurations (SD-XD), frame geometry (carport or beam), and then the module layout orientation. I had it all working flawlessly (but it loaded configurations slow) up until I tried adding the configuration change that turns the modules 90 degrees for a carport... then I broke both the model and my sanity for the last week! ;-)

Cheers,

Travis Jordan

EvanReese

This isn't an entire answer, but you might get performance improvements by replacing the assembly instances with a versioned part, instead of pulling them in from the active workspace.

sales_mt_solar

Thanks! I did get the model to now work, here is the public version (less to see/break): https://cad.onshape.com/documents/f74fd5aeb2532583a41b065c/w/47ebc08a5f1a40fcd4f22f71/e/a9d0670b91d0364f9180bf80

I am definitely still fighting load speed, especially for the API connection if utilized by Helioz. The load/export speed makes the entire process of involving customers real-time with the model effectively not work. 2 minutes to generate a drawing based off of just a configuration change.

I will look into the version options for parts, I have never played with that. 

Ideally I could just embed the Onshape viewer in our website, check a box to leave it always showing perspective view, and just let the customers configure it themselves and who cares if it is just a little slow. Oh well, I guess we will have to keep waiting for that feature. 

Cheers,

Travis J.

eric_pesty

That's a cool model!
My only thought as far as performance improvements would be to investigate if using some "replicates" for the hardware might be faster as I see a lot of single instances in the "Top H assembly", same thing with the "kits" as composite parts, not sure if that is faster than having them as a sub-assembly (guess you wouldn't want to do replicates if you want these show as a "single line" in your BOM...
Then again maybe you tried and it that's faster.

The 3D model is reasonably quick to update when changing config. Are you updating an actual drawing using the API (updating drawing views is generally pretty slow so I could see this being an issue). Would exporting a couple static images be faster or is what you are talking about?