Skip to main content
R
rmcboaty1-Visitor
1-Visitor
December 20, 2016
Solved

Assembly/ Part regeneration statistics

  • December 20, 2016
  • 1 reply
  • 3359 views

Does Creo (we will very soon upgrade to 4.0) provide regeneration statistics for an assembly or part regenerate like Solidworks does?

feature-stat21.jpg

the reason i am asking this is:

we have a rather complex-ish assm with regards to regeneration (lots of general patterns, equations). nothing serious, but it still takes 20-30s (or more) for a relatively simple model to regen.

i would like to access regen stats, so that i can optimize certain features, if i can (standard hole instead of sketched, which we had to use in WF, because it has no drill hole profile, etc.) to cut down the regen time.

(although the entire asm regens a lot longer then parts or subasm's, probably because it has a lot of equations)

thanks.


This thread is inactive and closed by the PTC Community Management Team. If you would like to provide a reply and re-open this thread, please notify the moderator and reference the thread. You may also use "Start a topic" button to ask a new question. Please be sure to include what version of the PTC product you are using so another community member knowledgeable about your version may be able to assist.
Best answer by TomD.inPDX

If I could just my SW guys to do work instead of tweaking a nanosecond from their hole feature...

Seriously, do we even want this?

I know when my regenerations are on steroids because the counter just looks at me feeding me lies.

Typically I also know why; merge operations in Creo are top dog.

They have to rewrite the surface geometry on one new merge feature at a time.

It is tedious!

But, for the most part, you will know where you are sucking up CPU cycles.

I've put Creo and SW back to back.

Not much difference in how you treat features in regeneration time.

Pretty much all the same techniques are available in Creo, and more.

1 reply

T
TomD.inPDX17-PeridotAnswer
17-Peridot
December 20, 2016

If I could just my SW guys to do work instead of tweaking a nanosecond from their hole feature...

Seriously, do we even want this?

I know when my regenerations are on steroids because the counter just looks at me feeding me lies.

Typically I also know why; merge operations in Creo are top dog.

They have to rewrite the surface geometry on one new merge feature at a time.

It is tedious!

But, for the most part, you will know where you are sucking up CPU cycles.

I've put Creo and SW back to back.

Not much difference in how you treat features in regeneration time.

Pretty much all the same techniques are available in Creo, and more.

R
rmcboaty1-VisitorAuthor
1-Visitor
December 20, 2016

the funny thing is that if i save as copy and use the "delete user pro/program", the regen time drops to a second or so.

the regen is big only when i read the text file containing parameters though. subsequent one is usually down to a couple (or 10) seconds.

i still would like to know if i gain anything by going to standard holes for example (since they are patterned).

D
dschenken1-Visitor
1-Visitor
December 20, 2016

I doubt that there is any difference in time between hole features and creating by protrusion. The same number of surfaces need to be evaluated, so there isn't a lot there to be tossed. This is different, for example, than identical vs general patterns. In that case, even though the geometry -can- be the same and would seem to take similar times, the Identical option skips self-intersection checks and others; it is the additional checks are what chews up regen time.

It sounds more like there is a network lag for opening the text file, plus the need for Creo to load the portion of the software to evaluate the Program.

A software execution trace ability is one that I've pushed for for a long time. The PTC position is they will produce software that is so good there isn't any need to profile it's execution, but that's never going to be the case. Creating a CAD model is interactive software development; it doesn't matter if it puts a picture on the screen at the end, it should have the same tools as other professional software development. Look at 'The Old New Thing' and you can see that experts in Microsoft often examine the assembler and machine language generated by their own tools to uncover problems. If those guys need it, so do we.

Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement