DIN rail terminals with Jumper Bars

[John]

I use a lot of DIN rail terminals with jumper bars to distribute voltage rails. These are often double or triple level types.

So far I have worked around this problem by creating a special wire layer called LV_BUSBAR (for example). I use this layer for the horizontal ladder rails. Being a wire it gets numbered. I use the supplied "wire breaking" terminals as a schematic symbol to represent the rail terminals on the schematic. I have created my own rail terminal footprint symbols for the wiring diagram.

However, being a wire, the jumper layer appears as a wire on the wiring diagram. Also, on the wire to-from list I end up having a numbered wire that is not actually a wire or a number! This causes a bit of confusion for the wireman.

Actually I don't really need "ladders" as such on my schematic. I find they constrict the schematic diagram layout.

I am thinking of creating some new schematic terminal symbols that represent connections to a positive, ground or other rail and dispense with ladders altogether. These will look like commonly used schematic symbols. I will assume that all terminals with the tag "TB1-" (for example) will be physically connected and will be manually placed side by side on the wiring diagram. Could (should) these be parent and child components?

Any comments? Examples? Has anyone else got good ideas on how to tackle this problem? This is such a basic thing I'm sure it must have already been done!

I know that there is a "Terminal rail builder" but I have no idea how it works and I have not tried it. From earlier posts in this forum I believe that it only does vertical rails (terminal strips) anyway. Don't know if it does jumpers. My DIN rail are almost always horizontal.

Sorry to go on - have a nice day,

John

[Anonymous]

This may or may not help... but if you create a wire layer with the
substring "JUMPER" in the layer name, then these wire connections will
automatically be excluded from the From/To Wire report. For example, you
might create a wire layer called "14AWG-JUMPER-GREEN". These connections
should exclude from the report.


wrote in message news:4826973@discussion.autodesk.com...
> I use a lot of DIN rail terminals with jumper bars to distribute voltage
rails. These are often double or triple level types.
>
> So far I have worked around this problem by creating a special wire layer
called LV_BUSBAR (for example). I use this layer for the horizontal ladder
rails. Being a wire it gets numbered. I use the supplied "wire breaking"
terminals as a schematic symbol to represent the rail terminals on the
schematic. I have created my own rail terminal footprint symbols for the
wiring diagram.
>
> However, being a wire, the jumper layer appears as a wire on the wiring
diagram. Also, on the wire to-from list I end up having a numbered wire that
is not actually a wire or a number! This causes a bit of confusion for the
wireman.
>
> Actually I don't really need "ladders" as such on my schematic. I find
they constrict the schematic diagram layout.
>
> I am thinking of creating some new schematic terminal symbols that
represent connections to a positive, ground or other rail and dispense with
ladders altogether. These will look like commonly used schematic symbols. I
will assume that all terminals with the tag "TB1-" (for example) will be
physically connected and will be manually placed side by side on the wiring
diagram. Could (should) these be parent and child components?
>
> Any comments? Examples? Has anyone else got good ideas on how to tackle
this problem? This is such a basic thing I'm sure it must have already been
done!
>
> I know that there is a "Terminal rail builder" but I have no idea how it
works and I have not tried it. From earlier posts in this forum I believe
that it only does vertical rails (terminal strips) anyway. Don't know if it
does jumpers. My DIN rail are almost always horizontal.
>
> Sorry to go on - have a nice day,
>
> John

[John]

Could be very useful - thanks.

John

[Alpinevalley]

We create 'non-intelligent' layers for anything which will contain connection which needs to be shown but need not be reported, this has included 'jumpers' and also internal bridge links on large multi bank switches.
How have you achieved the use of multi level/way terminal blocks in your schematics? We have applied similar blocks for buss work as yourself. Maybe I am missing something but when I place a termination point (ideally one per wire) the bill generated reports each termination. Need a way to allocate the terminals from multiway or multilevel blocks (i.e Weidmuller, Phoenix etc). Should I be exploring terminal strips?

[John]

I have just got back to this. Of course, a wire layer with "JUMPER" in it still gets numbered (although it may well not get listed in the report). Not what I wanted though.

So I have followed your advice and used a non-intelligent layer. Impressed to see that it still connects-up and even created the joining dots! That's all I need.

As far as using multi-level terminals in my schematics, I generally use the standard round wire-number-changing terminals supplied. I tag them "TB1" number "1T" (1 top) for example. I join them up with the JUMPER layer as above.

I have additionally created some terminals (based on the standard) with voltage rail symbols. I have attached these if you are interested. I generally do not use ladders, using connected strings of terminals instead, closer to the real-life situation of using linked rail terminals for my supply distribution.

I work to an approximation of the IEC (very loosely) with horizontal power rails.

John