Same net with different labeling.

12 posts / 0 new
Last post
#1 Same net with different labeling.

Hi there,

 

I need help getting the automatic numbering set up so that on this screenshot we have L1, 0204L1, 0204.1L1, and 0204.2L1 running across rung number 0204. I set up two connection types here with different numbering formats assigned. But I think they still conflict on the Net even though I am trying to leave the Net across this entire rung as "L1" and simply change the labeling of each segment to include the rung number. Is this possible?

 

Thanks!

Yes and no...

Thanks for posting on the forum.

The numbering sequence you are asking for is very difficult to obtain in a simple manner.  It requires to identify the 'flow' of connection sequence, which very difficult to reliably establish from a SkyCAD point of view.  

SkyCAD cannot reliably identify through what port a signal is going 'out' after is gets 'in', thus it is not possible to increment the seqence number in an orderly manner (1L1, 2L1, 3L1, etc...)

The only way to obtain something close to that would be by defining a connection type for each phase (each with its own numbering format), but even then you'd need to force the first 'L1, L2, L3' manually, and you wouldn't be able to use the multi-phase connection drawing tools.

Let us know if that option is acceptable for you and we'll guide you achieving it.

Thank you for the speedy

Thank you for the speedy reply. We are reviewing our options here and will let you know what we decide on.

Rando thought: 

Rando thought:
 

Could this be a possible use case for "Functions" When/if that feature is eventually added?

It would require the user manually assign all of the wires to each function.

I've never used "Functions" in ECAD before but couldn't you use them that way?

I am finding myself wanting to do the same thing, except for my plumbing diagrams.

 

 

Hmmm....

Our conslusions when evaluating ways to provide this (as it's not the first time it has been required) were that whatever ways used to define the 'connection sequence number' manually, it ends up being unmanageable.

In my case, I simply want to

In my case, I simply want to prefix the Net with a rung number on each segment. The existing rung numbering logic would be good here too as it would append .1, .2, etc to each segment. What prevents us from applying a separate label to each segment and leaving the Net the same? Is there a workaround possible using net branches/wires (not that I really want any wires added back to this project since I took them out, but may consider it if it accomplishes this task).

Still not entirely sure what we want to do here, just wanted to add to the discussion.

 

Thanks!

What prevents us from

What prevents us from applying a separate label to each segment and leaving the Net the same?

Do you mean like L1, L35, and L41 on your drawing you are calling a net?
 

That isn't a Net though, that is 3 separate Nets. This is how all electrical design software works, not just sky cad. A Net is another name for "potential" 1 or more wires that are hard-wired together and are never switched. Each one of those wires is a Net Branch
 

this is a screenshot of the Spec Sheet I am working on to explain my drawings to my Panel Builders in the Shop.

Note this has my own VERY custom wire labeling.

 

If you want to do what you are proposing the best way to do it (Alain correct me if I am wrong), would be to enable Net Branches and assign each number to the net branch by hand.

This is pure speculation as a user but:

If a "Functions" feature was added you could probably do it that way. (minus the sequence numbers I was talking about.) A Function is basically a glorified "Group" of components with a name assigned to it. So you could just add all of the Wires in each "Sequence" to their own Function, and those functions could be numbers automatically, BUT that feature is available yet.

it would also be a lot of manual work.

 

Thanks for the in-depth view

Thanks for the in-depth view here, Colonel! This would probably work for us, but so far we are trying to avoid using wires and are creating a schematic while allowing the electrician some freedom in point-to-point wiring. We are used to doing point-to-point wiring diagrams, so this is a shift. We have not defined any terminal strips either so far with the goal of allowing the electrician to make those decisions. We will most likely be refining our approach more as we try this out.

 

In this case, I would activate flow through on all these components' port groups so that L1, L35, and L41 would all just be a single net, L1, across this rung. Then would label each segment 0204L1, 0204.1L1, and 0204.2L1 respectively. But I cannot get the labeling to work out. I think you may be right, in that net branches/wires would be the best way to accomplish this. I don't want to manually enter the rung number, however.

 

Extra question: Are net branches and wires equivalent so far?

We've contacted you by email.

Please take note we've contacted you by email with regards to this.

Sorry, I guess I missed the

Sorry, I guess I missed the part about enabling Flow-Through on all of your symbol connection ports. I think that is possible. If you were to do that then yes you could use Net/Net Branches together, your net branches would carry the row number I would think..

Please report back on what you worked out with SkyCad, I am happy with how my wire Labels work,, but am just curious.

 

Extra question: Are net branches and wires equivalent so far?
Ummm Alain please correct me if I am wrong because I am guessing here, but a Net Branch is a SkyCad "meta" class and a Wire would be a catalog class right? the Wire would carry a Part Number for the Catalog.

 

Sub-class...

Extra question: Are net branches and wires equivalent so far?
Ummm Alain please correct me if I am wrong because I am guessing here, but a Net Branch is a SkyCad "meta" class and a Wire would be a catalog class right? the Wire would carry a Part Number for the Catalog.

You're not wrong, but mor precisely the Single wire class is a sub-class of the 'Net branch' class.  So a wire is a specialised Net branch.  

Thank you for the info here!

Thank you for the info here! I will circle back with what I attempt in the future. We have just hidden these connections for the time being since they are so self-evident across the motor rung.