Hi, I would appreciate some advice on the correct order of workflow when creating schematic drawings? We have been using ACADE for over 2 years now and, mainly thanks to this forum, have figured out most of the tricks and workarounds required to get drawings working.
We produce IEC schematics varying from 5 to 60 pages, pretty standard controls design stuff. I am finding that I can spend more time fixing than drawing and I'm wondering if it's something that I 'm doing wrong.
Main culprits are source/destination arrows, getting terminals correct - we draw every terminal separately and link on wire layer jumper for common potentials, duplicated wire numbers, and cable conductor child parts losing association with parent. We routinely project update/retag, drawing audit and delete project database with project closed; all this sometimes more than once! Is this normal?
I have a very small ego so please feel free to state the obvious, I am hopping for some revelations to take me from semi- auto to fully autocad! This stuff just works on EPlan so I know it can be done.
Hi Again
I am looking forward to responses to the above question. I find I have a lot of rework from ACE2012 not engineering changes.
Cheers john Q
We cover this in my 5-day workflow-based admin training course. In general, start with the schematic and stay away from plain AutoCAD commands. Work from a well-though-out template that drives the rules-based automation and also standardize on wire types by adding them to your template. Be sue to run Drawing Audit project wide, the Drawing Audit on the Reports menu tab, not a plain AutoCAD Audit. Also run Electrical Audit and solve for discrepancies. It errs on the side of caution so some items in the list may not be a problem but you should check them anyway.
Thanks for answering Doug. We had not previously used AutoCad so we have not carried over any bad habits and only use the ACADE menus for schematics. We have a company border set up and also wire layer/numbering to our internal standard. We have also written a custom DLL to store projects in a PDM vault to keep us in line with our mechanical engineers.
It appears that we are already doing all that you suggest, I am guessing that there may be a more fundamental answer regarding the order of operations that, if not followed, requires the fixing. Otherwise the implication is that the fix routine is a way of life with this software. Are you able to go through in one sweep, job done?
The drawings produced by ACADE are totally acceptable and look suitably professional, it's just getting there that's the problem for us; it's a matter of productivity.
By all accounts ACADE gets better each year, I believe what's missing is possibly the software guys working with electrical designers. Autodesk, why not commission a real world engineer, (Doug?), to create a large project using only standard ACADE and have him feedback every negative encountered during the process; and then fix and repeat? I find managing large projects with multiple panels awkward in terms of them having a common title block for example. And as for terminals! The TSE require too much user input in my opinion.
Even better for users would be a third party ACADE book, (Doug 😉 ?), surely this would sell like hot cakes! I guess the answer to that will be to book a training course.
I imagine most users are reasonably intelligent engineers who will figure this stuff out in the end, surely though it would be reasonable to expect to have this information available in the beginning?
Understanding the individual functions of the software is well documented, understanding the order of workflow or even that it matters is not.
To answer your question, I do my projects without much trouble. I have worked with customers who manage projects of 1500 pages. It is normal to refresh/rebuild the database from time to time, since AutoCAD Electrical is drawing-driven. Having worked with database-driven programs, my preference is drawing-driven. About the only way I can lose drawing data is if I delete it myself, because the database is only a reflection of the drawings.
It is a bit of smoke and mirrors how the database-driven programs seem like they are faster. The fact is that they "table" or delay updates to other drawings until they are opened again, while AutoCAD Electrical offers the option to make the updates in real time. If the database becomes corrupted or crashes before the affacted drawings are opened again, the changes can be lost. AutoCAD Electrical also allows us to delay the update if we want, by clicking to Add to Task List. The next time we go for more coffee or lunch we can execute the task list. But I prefer to update immediately in most cases, so my drawings are always up to date. Hint: If you notice a green check in the menu of the Project Manager, thus indicates that someone has added updates to the Task List. Right-click over the project and click Task List and you will see a list of pending updates. Select All if applicable and execute.
I have lost project data and had to recreate drawings while working with database-driven programs. A hybrid approach, blending the drawing-driven approach with a database-driven approach is an acceptable compromise, since much of the data is stored in the drawings, with a smaller amount of drawing/project data stored in the databases. It is the best of both worlds, but is still not 100% when it comes to data integrity.
The reason AutoCAD Electrical is so stable in terms of data loss is because component data is stored inside attributes (a common AutoCAD function) and lines are wires because of their layer name. Layers are another common part of the core AutoCAD engine. The database is only used to expedite internal functions of the software. I find it helpful to Rebuild/Freshen the database from time to time just to be sure it stays in sychronization with the drawings. Sadly Autodesk removed this icon from the ribbon, but you can add it back using the CUI editor. YOu can also type AEREBUILDDB at the command line. However, exiting AutoCAD Electrical and deleting the project database from the C:\Users\Doug McAlexander\AppData\Roaming\Autodesk\AutoCAD Electrical 2012\R18.2\enu\Support\User sub-folder is even better than Rebuild/Freshen. This approach forces AutoCAD Electrical to create a brand new project scratch database by reading the drawings. This is a small trade-off for gaining the rock-solid data integrity offered by AutoCAD Electrical.
I did not like the terminal strip editor in AutoCAD when it was first released in version 2006 but as it evolved it became my favorite tool. I can't wait to get to the Terminal Strip Editor portion of my training course each week because it is so much fun. I do not have the class attendees assign part numbers to terminals in the schematic. I have them wait until we are using the TSE to insert the terminal strips into the panel layout. We convert some of our terminals to 3-level terminals simply by changing their part number assignment. We renumber terminal strips, we assign which side of the terminal is for external wires and which is for internal wires. We add end plates and end stops. We insert spare terminals and more. After we insert the strips, AutoCAD Electrical back annotates the schematic terminals with their part number, level information, numbering scheme, etc. The Terminal Strip Editor is an extremely powerful utility but I think most people are not properly trained in how to use it most effectively.
Thanks, Doug, for your insight to ACE.
Like Istari I use the icons about 98% of the time. I also share his/her thoughts and they are put musg more clearly than I could. We do not number earth wires so this is one of the few areas I use a line not a wire.
I would very much like to do Doug's admin course as I am positive it would be enlightening but it is a matter of a 14hour plane ride across a coulple of oceans just to get to the US west coast.
WHen I am doing straight drawing ACE is very quick, it seems from previous contributions and thinking about my problems, for example: ACE gets lost when I am learning a new feature like a Bill of Materials.
Now that I am set up and fluid in adding parts to the data base a BOM works. It seems so simple now.
Next time I have a problem I will look at the PATH from Dougs response.
Thanks all John Q
Hello Fellow,
I wondered the same thing.
Some General Rules I follow
* Connections to schematic terminal blocks represent connections to real individual terminal blocks. (2 connections per 1 level is better than 1 connection per 2 levels, if you want flexibility in assigning internal and external connections.)
* JUMPER layer and WIRE layer may be mixed interchangeably to balance terminial block connections to terminals. ***Uncheck "Apply to all wire(s) in the network" when executing AEWIRETYPE***...or WC as I alias.
*Source connections should always be made to WIRES
*Destination connections can be made to JUMPER or WIRES.
* Plan the internal and external connections when creating schematic.
Cheers!
Kelly
With hindsight I never developed a conscious change in my order of workflow, I never really found something that I was clearly doing wrong!
I would still get the odd problem with terminals, but generally I am fairly happy with ACADE.
Our company has now moved over to Eplan, so we are in the process of phasing out ACADE. I look at ACADE like an ex-girlfriend who you still like and get on with. I wish her all the best.