National CAD Standards & ACADE

[rochestersignal]

Anyone using National CAD Standard V5 laying scheme with ACADE?  How are you dealing with ACADE and automatic layer naming of wires and components within the NCS? 

[dougmcalexander]

AutoCAD Electrical is supplied with symbol sets for JIC, NFPA, IEC, AS (Australia), GB (China), and more.  The wires are defined in a special list, via something called the Create/Wire Type utility.  This happens to result in an AutoCAD layer designating that particular wire type.  You can even set the layer color, so the wire appears as red, blue, or whatever color the wire is.  Components are inserted by default onto layer SYMS, which is a layer created by the software.  You can adjust the color of this layer.  You can rename the layer if you wish, though I recommend keep the layer names as is, in case you need support.  Support personal cannot always guess what changes you might have made to the software that affect the troubleshooting path.  The software does a great job when used as designed.  Most problems are a result of users who are not properly trained in how to use it and/or who desire to "redesign" it.

[rochestersignal]

Thx dougmcalexander. I'm familiar with how ACADE auto names the layers and naming using the create/edit wire tool. I'm just concerned with the need to rename layers to comply with NCS std and current project guidelines.

Sent from my iPhone

[dougmcalexander · Accepted solution]

AutoCAD Electrical is a tool for designing industrial control systems, ride and show engineering, and similar systems, especially involving programmabe logic controllers as the central "brain" of the system.  NCS V5 pertains to buildings. I think you should be looking at Revit.  

But to answer your question, you can designate any layer assignments you wish.  If you want AutoCAD Electrical to work with these layers, they must be mapped, so to speak.  Create a wire and name it anything you wish.  That becomes the wire layer name.  Click on the Drawing Properties>Drawing Format>Define Layers to force the software to rename the other layers it uses for components, component tags, description text, pin assignments, wire numbers, etc.

[rochestersignal]

Doug I'm going to give that a try.

A little background on all this too.  The drawings I'm working on are a combination of industrial controls (PLCs), panel layouts and line circuits used in the railroad and transit biz.  I looked into several of the ACAD products and went with ACADE based on our need for several of the reports ACADE generates ("Wire to From" was a big one) and the ability to create "smart" electrical drawings.  Not sure if Revit would have fit the bill and I did look into it a while back but I've been using ACADE since around 2009/2010 now and it still seems to do what I need. 

Regarding the smart side of ACADE have you ever used it as a simulator of anykind to see if the circuit your designing really works?

[dougmcalexander]

AutoCAD Electrical is for design and documentation. There is no simulation function. There is error checking.

I have a customer who purchased AutoCAD Electrical for use in documenting rail systems. Their tagging scheme is their own standard so they cannot use autotagging for components or wires. I told them that they would be taking the software offroading in a sense. But they needed the reporting capabilities as well, and were willing to manually tag components and wires.

It is better than using plain AutoCAD but they don't get to realize the full benefits of what AutoCAD Electrical has to offer. The strange thing is that their own standard is so old it predates PCs. It's a shame that they cannot update their standards to match modern industrial standards. Then the automation in AutoCAD Electrical could save them tons of time and human error.

[sonny3g]

Sounds like the stuff I had to work with at Harsco Track ten years ago.  They, however, used DDSC in dos, PromisE, CATIA 4.2 in dos and SolidEdge as well as occasionally using plain AutoCAD.  Yes, it was a bit of a challenge.

[rochestersignal]

Doug thx for your help! Checked out your website too I will be back.
I've spent quite a while working on RR/CAD work. It is old school for sure and usually the challenge is figuring how to do things the old way with new high tech tools. It is a challenge and like nothing else I've done.
Thx again
JS

Sent from my iPhone

[dougmcalexander]

Glad to help.  I feel your pain.  I have had several customers who cannot fully benefit from the automation of AutoCAD Electrical because they are forced to use tagging methods that were developed in the days of the drafting board, when tags were loosely assigned; pretty much made up on the fly.  The tag indicated circuit function so they didn't have to write in function text. They included a legend sheet that cross-references the tag letters.  

Now you have software like AutoCAD Electrical that can auto-fill function text, and you can benefit from the line reference or zone based tagging that AutoCAD Electrical can do automatically, which provides valuable cross-referencing helpful for troubleshooting.  But some employers or customers insist on ignoring the function text field (Description text) and force their designers to type in unique tags that indicate circuit function but provide no real cross-reference information. Of course the increased possibility of human error is introduced because auto-tagging actually gets over-ruled by the human. And it takes longer when you can’t use the automation. 

The same is true of item numbers.  AutoCAD Electrical can automatically assign item numbers to panel footprints, but I have customers who insist on typing in item numbers because they have an old system where the item numbers are assigned in a certain order, according to where they are located in the panel.

Somewhere up the corporate ladder there is someone who cares about profit and time to market.  I always try to conduct a demo for this person.  He/she can over-rule antique workflow and force everyone to embrace the increased efficiency, cost savings, and reduced human error that is made possible by allowing rules-based software to do its job.