"Large" multibody part vs Assembly with lots of Virtual component

[zwei]

I had been working on some ECAD/PCBA file recently.
As I would like to have the PCBA file as only one single file (to ease file management), I was wondering what is the performance difference when it come to large multibody vs assembly with lots of virtual component?

Eg: Multibody part file with 500+ bodies Vs Assembly file with 500+ virtual component?

[jcapriotti]

Both have their pros and cons.

• Assembly - Longer to load, virtual components are extracted to a temp folder on your hard drive and its treated like any assembly. Typically fairly fast once loaded and you get all of the benefits of an assembly if you need it, like dynamic motion, flexible assys, etc.

• Multibody - Faster file loading as no external references to load. No long rebuilds as there are no features. Multibody performance is not as good as assembly performance when it comes to some graphics functions like hiding/showing bodies/components.

I use multibody for small static assemblies of purchased components. PCBs should fit that category but I've had big slow downs with large multibody parts in the thousands of bodies. You'll have to try it and compare.

[mattpeneguy]

Sooo, about those large assemblies with lots of virtual components...Say ya want to change something, ya make a pack 'n go of that asm...You may not get all those virtual components in the new assembly. Anyone else experience that? Have they fixed it and if they have, what release?

[jcapriotti]

If everything is virtual, why use Pack n go? Just "save as" right?

[zwei]

Sooo, about those large assemblies with lots of virtual components...Say ya want to change something, ya make a pack 'n go of that asm...You may not get all those virtual components in the new assembly. Anyone else experience that? Have they fixed it and if they have, what release?

Pack and go and Virtual Component is another can of worm, thanks for reminding, I do not have any info whether they had fix it or not but I do face the same exact issue in SWX2018...

[Glenn Schroeder]

Sooo, about those large assemblies with lots of virtual components...Say ya want to change something, ya make a pack 'n go of that asm...You may not get all those virtual components in the new assembly. Anyone else experience that? Have they fixed it and if they have, what release?

I also had trouble with virtual components getting lost in Pack and Go, so I quit using them. I don't know if it has been fixed because I haven't tried in several years.

[mattpeneguy]

If everything is virtual, why use Pack n go? Just "save as" right?

@jcapriotti,
I get ya and maybe you're right, but the OP said, "lots of virtual parts". I interpreted that as a mix of virtual and non-virtual. In that case the right tool for the job is Pack 'n Go, but it is/was broken.

If I'm wrong a word of caution here is still warranted, because the amount of lost work thinking that the software does what it should can cost you A LOT of time...As it did me...Gotta remember, even if the OP meant "all virtual components", others will read this thread.

[jcapriotti]

@mattpeneguy I get it, guess I'm used to our use cases for virtual components. They would be rarely copied along with the data set.

With that said, I did test this with 2021 sp2 on a small assembly and had no issues....all virtual components were there.

[zwei]

I am indeed using mix of virtual and non-virtual.

I dig around and there is suppose to be a few SPR open for it and I am not sure it had been solved yet,
SPR 1018568: Systems - Pack and Go: Some virtual components in Pack and Go are losing file references (suppressed).

The issue is pretty "random", sometimes it works, sometimes it won't.

I will stick with multibody part for now

Matt is right, software not doing what it suppose to is a pain.

[jcapriotti]

I dig around and there is suppose to be a few SPR open for it and I am not sure it had been solved yet,
SPR 1018568: Systems - Pack and Go: Some virtual components in Pack and Go are losing file references (suppressed).

Not that it helps, but it shows fixed in 2021 sp3 which is in EV right now.

[zwei]

I dig around and there is suppose to be a few SPR open for it and I am not sure it had been solved yet,
SPR 1018568: Systems - Pack and Go: Some virtual components in Pack and Go are losing file references (suppressed).

Not that it helps, but it shows fixed in 2021 sp3 which is in EV right now.

Glad to know that!
Too bad we wont be receiving 2021 anytime soon (maybe couple of months later).
Will definitely want to try it out on one of my assembly with virtual part which everyone else are having problem with the pack and go export except me...

[HerrTick]

I prefer multi-body for PCBs so nothing gets lost. Most of the geometry is simple enough that even large PCBs don't cause too much trouble.

I have yet to work at a place that maintained a component library well enough to make good use of PCB Exchange interoperability. (Some "heavy-hitters" on that list, I might add.)

[jcapriotti]

I prefer multi-body for PCBs so nothing gets lost. Most of the geometry is simple enough that even large PCBs don't cause too much trouble.

I have yet to work at a place that maintained a component library well enough to make good use of PCB Exchange interoperability. (Some "heavy-hitters" on that list, I might add.)

I've some fairly large PCBs with too many bodies. I still prefer it to virtual component assemblies due to load time. We need more body manipulation/selection tools to cleanup these kinds of models. Often we don't need to show the tiny components like surface mount resistors, etc.

[mattpeneguy]

I prefer multi-body for PCBs so nothing gets lost. Most of the geometry is simple enough that even large PCBs don't cause too much trouble.

I have yet to work at a place that maintained a component library well enough to make good use of PCB Exchange interoperability. (Some "heavy-hitters" on that list, I might add.)

I've some fairly large PCBs with too many bodies. I still prefer it to virtual component assemblies due to load time. We need more body manipulation/selection tools to cleanup these kinds of models. Often we don't need to show the tiny components like surface mount resistors, etc.

I was hopeful that Defeature would work for things like this...nope, didn't work for me when I tried it...

[mbiasotti]

My 2 Cents is that there would have to be a pretty good reason someone is building a 500+ body part - and I wouldn't accept it or get them to change their methodology. If it is a EE board, then my first feature in the import would an Extrude to combine all the components to either make one body or parametrically (feature) obliterate them to make the import board easier to work with.

I've recently dealt with this issue with motor controller boards coming into SW from Altium via STEP resulting in 1500 - 2000 surface bodies (corrupt non-manifold bodies). One thing I can tell you is that you want to try and keep your Surface bodies to a low number because you have to realize that being non-manifold, SW by default renders both sides of the face resulting in 2X or more the faces SW needs to render in the Scenegraph.