Hello
Do you have an idea of the constraints to be prioritized in order to save system resources?
Is the slide constraint more "greedy" in resource than two coincidence constraints (plane/plane) for example?
Is there a classification by type of constraints?
Thanks in advance
Good question teh! When you've done the test, I'm curious to have a relationship :)
During a training, the only information I had on it was that you have to block the parts as much as possible in order to avoid SW having to constantly recalculate the degrees of freedom. Like on a concentricity of a screw for example, you have to "lock the rotation".
For my part, it's more the accumulation of constraints associated with flexible assemblies that slows me down the system. We have several parts in translations, driven by rotating parts (itself configured in a subassembly). When I put a limit distance constraint in the subassembly, a limit angle constraint and a groove constraint in my assembly, it tends to struggle a bit near the limit positions.
I would be tempted to say that the more entities there are to select in the constraint, the more cumbersome it will be to calculate.
In summary, standard stresses are lighter than advanced stresses which are lighter than mechanical stresses
The question is interesting but I don't see how to evaluate the "weight" of the constraints individually.
The "Performance Evaluation" function summarizes the number of constraints but does not say more.
The "Assembly Visualization" function only manages parts regardless of their constraints.
Otherwise, a priori, I think like @stefbeno that the hierarchy of constraints is standard, advanced and then mechanical.