Advanced Considerations in Part Origins, Configurations, and Simplified Models

The efficiency of part modeling is not limited to the selection of features or symmetrical structures. Part origins, configurations, and simplified models all play a crucial role in enhancing the performance of large assemblies. These concepts can improve assembly speed and flexibility while reducing the computational load, particularly for assemblies that involve hundreds or thousands of components.

1. Optimizing Part Origins for Assembly Placement

The origin of a part can have significant consequences for how parts are integrated into larger assemblies. While most commonly the origin is placed based on the geometry and symmetry of the part, there are exceptions where specific alignment within an assembly might take precedence.

1. Geometry-Based Origin Placement: The most common best practice is to locate the origin at a logical geometric location, typically where multiple planes of symmetry meet. This simplifies mating relationships and ensures that part symmetry is automatically built into the assembly. For instance, placing the center of a beam on the origin provides multiple planes of reference that facilitate mating in an assembly with minimal manual intervention. In this approach, the mating planes are already created as a by-product of the geometry’s central positioning.
2. Layout Grid Alignment: In larger assemblies or layouts, the part origin can be aligned based on grid positioning rather than geometric symmetry. This method reduces the need for top-level mates, allowing parts to be inserted directly at their designated positions without additional mating, thus speeding up the assembly process. Although not common in smaller assemblies, this technique can have a measurable impact on performance in large-scale projects.
3. In-Context Origin Positioning: When parts are created within the context of an assembly (in-context modeling), the origin can sometimes end up far from the actual geometry of the part, creating confusion and inefficiency. By projecting the assembly origin onto the part’s reference planes, designers can avoid this misalignment. Ensuring that the part's origin is logically positioned relative to the overall assembly's origin prevents unnecessary complexity in future modifications or mating operations.

2. Managing Configurations for Performance Gains

Part configurations are a powerful tool in SolidWorks, allowing designers to manage variations of a single part without the need to create multiple separate files. However, configurations come with trade-offs, particularly in terms of file size and performance. Understanding these trade-offs and managing configurations effectively is key to maintaining efficiency in large assemblies.

1. File Size vs. Performance: While configurations can reduce the number of files to manage, they also increase the size of individual part files. Each configuration stores additional data (such as previews and body information), contributing to larger file sizes. This is particularly relevant when parts with many configurations are accessed over a network. For instance, if a part with 200 configurations is loaded into an assembly, only the active configuration's data is loaded into memory. However, if another configuration of the same part is required, additional data is loaded, slowing performance as more data is moved across the network.
2. Simplified Configurations: To mitigate the performance impact of configurations in large assemblies, simplified configurations can be used. These configurations reduce the amount of data loaded into memory by suppressing unnecessary features such as fillets, chamfers, and cosmetic details. By focusing only on mating surfaces and interference surfaces, simplified configurations ensure that assemblies perform efficiently without sacrificing accuracy in critical areas.
3. Naming and Standardization of Configurations: Consistency in naming simplified configurations across parts and assemblies is crucial. A common naming convention ensures that engineers can easily open and manage assemblies with components in their simplified configurations. Without such standards, inconsistencies can arise, leading to confusion and wasted time during assembly.

3. Utilizing the Simplify Tool for Efficient Configurations

SolidWorks’ Simplify tool provides a valuable method for creating simplified configurations by identifying and suppressing small, performance-heavy features. The tool selects features based on their relative size to the part, allowing for quick and easy suppression of non-essential details.

1. Use Case for the Simplify Tool: Simplifying parts is particularly useful when dealing with purchased components that come with unnecessary geometric detail. For example, models obtained from suppliers may include excessive features that are irrelevant to the functional design. Using the Simplify tool, these features can be suppressed, creating a derived configuration that is more performance-friendly.
2. Locating Small Features: The Simplify tool is adept at identifying features that may be difficult to manually locate, such as small fillets, chamfers, or text elements. These features can then be suppressed in bulk, rather than individually, saving time and improving performance in large assemblies.

4. Fasteners and the Toolbox: Balancing Detail and Efficiency

The SolidWorks Toolbox is an essential resource for managing fasteners and other standardized components. However, the way Toolbox parts are managed can affect assembly performance.

1. Master Parts vs. Copied Parts: In a master part setup, the Toolbox maintains a single set of master parts, generating new configurations for each size of fastener used in the assembly. While this minimizes the number of files, it increases the size of each part file as configurations accumulate. For large assemblies stored on a network, this setup can slow performance due to the need to open larger files across the network.Conversely, a copied part setup creates new files for each fastener size, reducing the file size of individual components and allowing them to be stored locally with the assembly. This approach is more suitable for large assemblies, as smaller file sizes improve load times and overall performance.
2. Thread Representation: Fasteners in assemblies generally do not require highly detailed threads. For performance gains, using simplified thread displays is recommended. In cases where thread representation is necessary for visual purposes, a cosmetic thread option should be used, as it mimics the appearance without creating additional geometry. Detailed helical threads should be avoided except when absolutely necessary due to the significant computational load they impose.

5. Level of Detail for Purchased Components

When using purchased components, excessive geometric detail can cause significant slowdowns in assembly performance. It is important to evaluate how much detail is necessary for the component to function properly in the assembly and to strip away non-essential features.

1. Avoiding Excess Detail: Features like helical threads, text engravings, and springs should be avoided unless they are functionally required. These features create large amounts of geometry that slow down assembly regeneration and add unnecessary complexity.
2. Alternatives to Detailed Modeling: Instead of modeling complex features, designers can use alternative methods such as cosmetic threads, decals for labeling, or simplified bounding shapes for springs. These alternatives provide visual clarity without sacrificing performance, ensuring that assemblies remain efficient even as they grow in complexity.

6. Fully Defining Sketches to Avoid Rebuild Errors

A final consideration in part modeling is the need to fully define sketches before using a part in an assembly. Underdetermined sketches can cause rebuild errors and unintended changes when parts are modified or used in new contexts. By fully defining sketches, designers ensure that parts behave predictably and avoid potential issues in assembly rebuilds.

Conclusion: Balancing Detail and Performance in SolidWorks Part Modeling

Efficient part modeling in SolidWorks requires balancing the need for detail with the demands of performance, particularly in large assemblies. By carefully positioning part origins, managing configurations, and simplifying parts where possible, designers can optimize the performance of their assemblies. Tools such as the Simplify tool, Performance Evaluation, and Toolbox configurations offer powerful methods for streamlining part design and assembly management.

In particular, the use of simplified configurations is critical for maintaining performance in assemblies that contain many components. By focusing on key features such as mating and interference surfaces while suppressing cosmetic details, designers can ensure that their assemblies open quickly and run smoothly. Standardizing naming conventions and simplifying purchased components further enhances the efficiency of large-scale designs, ensuring that assemblies remain manageable as they grow in size and complexity.

This thesis has demonstrated how SolidWorks users can implement these advanced techniques to improve both part modeling and assembly performance, ultimately leading to faster rebuild times, reduced errors, and more efficient designs.

References

1. SolidWorks Corporation. (n.d.). Solidworks 2024 User Guide. Retrieved from SolidWorks Official Documentation
2. Tran, D. (2022). "Mastering Configurations in Solidworks: An Advanced Guide." CAD Journal, 29(4), pp. 55-67.
3. Lombard, M. (2011). "Solidworks 2011 Assemblies Bible." Wiley Publishing, Inc.
4. Mattison, J. (2023). "Efficient Modeling Techniques in Solidworks: Best Practices for Large Assemblies." Mechanical Design Review, 45(2), pp. 89-112.
5. SolidWorks Corporation. (2021). "Performance Evaluation Tools in SolidWorks." Whitepaper, retrieved from Solidworks Blog.
6. Howard, R. (2018). "Advanced Part and Assembly Techniques in Solidworks." Engineering Design Monthly, 33(6), pp. 102-120.