So my confusion is simply the terms.
Construction switch= higher level on/off in Occurrence properties (Right?)
Reference switch = what?
I will have to give the software credit. This is my first major terms/label confusion other than how they use the word "Adjustable". With Autodesk the terms are crazy.
Referance = the "Draft Reference" switch in occurance properties
Construction = the "Higher level" switch in occurance properties
This was all I was asking.
Actually in all the years I used "Next Level" or "Higher Level" I never referred to it or heard it referred to by colleagues as "Construction". Now I know.
I declare this horse officially dead. Agreed?
Sorry to be late to the party, but my question is in terms of workflow is what would the difference be in configuring an assembly by manipulating the Higher Level occurance property vs. An Insert Assembly Copy (IAC) on it to create a second assembly and excluding the parts you don't want to see.
We have been using the IAC method and am intrigued by the Less overhead comment Dan made about using the Higher Level switch.
Mitsubishi Electric Power Products Inc.
Interesting possibility. I would assume you would want to keep it linked. Then the question is how much "drag" the original linked assembly carries with it. I have no idea.
Have you compared large assembly performance using IAC vs. just inserting the assemblies themselves? I would assume it improves or you wouldn't do it, right?
IAC sounds more akin to simplified assemblies than the higher level switch. Maybe a hybrid of IAC, simplifed, and higher level occurence props or variations thereof would have practical use in certain situations. But if higher level really doesn't carry baggage that would be first for me.
This horse is proving somewhat resilient.
I haven't messed around with testing the impact of a Higher Level switch assembly vs an IAC assembly. On the surface for me is design intent. With the 2 assembly file method of a Designed Assembly and then a 2nd IAC assembly with parts excluded, you get to see exactly what you are placing in the next assembly from an end user standpoint. With the Higher Level method, I'm not quite sure what is the "reference" parts until I place it in the next assembly, unless I am missing something.
I generally use the higher level switch on an assembly which contain(s) assembly(ies) that I only want to appear at that level for reference and don't want them to appear at the next level. Usually because they're already at the next level and would then be nested if they appeared in my lower level assembly and consume processing power.
If I did want them to appear higher but not necessarily complete then I'd consider your approach if it's faster than configurations would be, or simplification.
I also use higher level for fasteners that don't need to appear higher. Fasteners tend to be numerous and present a lot more faces to process.
Definitely something I am going to look at. Quick question, do you graphically "mark" a part with the Higher Level Switch in pathfinder on in the display to keep straight what is what?