Connector mating representation

[mvalleeEZGDE]

Hi,

I'm asking help regarding representation of connector mating.

I want to represent both receptacles and plugs in my drawings to have their part number in my final BOM.

In the picture attached I show what I want to achieve. Is it possible that AutoCAD Electrical know that P1 is mating with J5?

I am creating an overview of our system and I want to be able to "surf" from P1 to J5 if I need to.

Keep in mind that Box1 would be in a drawing called Overview and the inside would be in another drawing.

Also, I would like the report to show the mating, that J1 is connected to P5 for example.

Is there a way to achieve that with AutoCAD Electrical 2023.

Thank you for your time!

[rhesusminus · Accepted solution]

No, you can't do this with AcadE when you have two different parts for the male/female end of the plug.

Competing software will of course see that they are connected:

[jjohnstonEYR26]

One approach is to designate one symbol as the parent and the other as the child. Then, assign a primary part number and a multiple catalog part number to the parent symbol so they both appear on the bill of materials. This relationship allows for easy navigation between the two symbols.

To streamline creation, you could insert a connector and then another connector child. Explode both symbols and use the attributes to manipulate and assign to the parent and child custom symbols of your choice.

If this approach isn't feasible, I have another suggestion.

[mvalleeEZGDE]

If you dont mind I would like to know your other suggestion

[jjohnstonEYR26]

Keep in mind that these methods are not the most conventional, but they serve as workarounds to achieve your goal.

In Image 01, I've shown a past approach used in situations involving 3-prong male-female plugs. The red symbols represent the parent/child relationship for the primary part, while cyan is used for the J5 symbol representing the secondary part number.

In Image 02, I've adjusted the appearance to align more closely with what you're presenting, while maintaining the same parent/child relationship. The child symbol could simply be a single line or a small box with all attributes turned off except for the XREF attribute. Cyan would represent the J5 symbol with all the usual attributes.

Image 03 depicts another possible approach, my preference, which may be preferable depending on individual preferences and requirements.

[rhesusminus]

Not sure how a report will show that these are connected.

[jjohnstonEYR26]

Here's another cray workaround solution, although I must admit it's a bit more unconventional then I would like.

In (Photo 001), you'll see the concept illustrated. Essentially, you draw as many wires as needed connecting between connection points P1 and J5, whether it's just 1 connection or 10.

• For each connection, draw a wire from each connection point on each component.
• Then, draw a fan-in source/destination connection between the appropriate connection points, like 123/P1 to 123/J5. (Photo 001). In the example I am showing wire number only for clarity but what I want you to draw are wires without wire numbers.
• The file names shown in the photo indicate the drawings needed for the source/destination fan connections.
• The dimensions in the photo indicate the default width, typically 0.0625 inches.

This is just an example idea.

To create a new set to achieve your goal, follow these steps:

• Create a new custom set, such as "HA1S1_INLINE5.dwg" for source and "HA1D3_INLINE5.dwg" for destination. (Photo 002)
• Scale down the width from 0.0625 to, say, 0.0005, and hide all attributes. (Photo 002 & 003)
• Adjust the wire length from each connection to 0.0005 and use a wire that does not receive wire numbers. (Photo 002)
• After creating the wires and adding the new symbols, they'll be so small that they'll appear as dots and almost blend into the main symbol body lines, making them nearly invisible when printed. (Photo 003)
• In (Photo 004) I am zoomed out and selected the wire and source connection. They are the blue grid point on the right. (Photo 005) shows same area but unselected. They  are virtual invisible and technically a wire connection from this device to another location / device.

If you do not want to do all that work you can just draw them normal size but put the wire and S/D connection on a custom wire layer the is visible to you but does not print and receives no wire numbers.

If needed frequently, consider making a circuit out of this to expedite the process.

If this doesn’t work either I am out of ideas for now.

I'm aware that none of this would be necessary if we were using a more efficient, counter intuitive, and of course superior in every way a program like E-plan, but let's work with what we have. This is the Autodesk AutoCAD Electrical forum after all.

[jjohnstonEYR26]

other two photos

[rhesusminus]

@jjohnstonEYR26 

I hope you see the irony that an electrical CAD package can't understand that a plug and socket belongs together 🙂

@mvalleeEZGDE what are you expecting to see in a report? 

[jjohnstonEYR26]

I'm aware that none of this would be necessary if we were using a more efficient, counter intuitive, and of course superior in every way a program like E-plan, but let's work with what we have. This is the Autodesk AutoCAD Electrical forum after all.

[ccad2509]

i do love these jealous comments

what you have to do is think about the big picture

Cofaso/Eplan/PCS schematic/See elctrical/ Wscad are all better by a country mile

and all work basically the same way

Acade which is a not even branded as a sepearte application now is the product that works  counterintuatively to the industries leaders

it basically had its day back in 2005 before autodesk bought it and run it inot the ground

[jjohnston2FBYC]

I understand and share your perspective. As professionals in the engineering field, our choice of software is often dictated by the requirements of our employers or clients, leaving us with limited autonomy. In response, I've prioritized the acquisition of proficiency in a diverse range of software applications, including AutoCAD Electrical, Mechanical, Architectural, Plant 3D, Eplan, Revit, SolidWorks Electrical, SolidWorks, Inventor, and more. This commitment to continuous learning ensures my adaptability in the ever-evolving landscape of engineering technology, thus safeguarding my employability and sustaining my income.

My frustration doesn't stem from jealousy, but rather from a sense of weariness regarding the imposition of preferences by others, particularly when irrelevant comments arise during pertinent discussions. It's analogous to attending a Ford Mustang car show and being subjected to incessant praise for the Dodge Charger from an adjacent attendee. Such comparisons detract from the focus of the conversation and serve as a needless distraction. Those with a preference for the Charger would be better suited to attend a Charger-specific event.

Let's maintain our focus on the task at hand and leverage our tools effectively. As participants in this AutoCAD Electrical forum, let's ensure that our discussions remain relevant to the topic at hand. Personal opinions regarding alternative software platforms are better suited for discussion elsewhere.

[rhesusminus]

I respectfully disagree with you @jjohnston2FBYC. This forum is also full of wishes of improvement in the product.

How can we get Autodesk to listen to its users? The ideas forums, that are being ignored for the 15th year in a row?

My take would be that the USERS tell Autodesk this. But, how can users know what they're missing out on? Well... Someone has to tell them and Autodesk that their wishes aren't rocket science to implement in a product. The competing software is doing it now and has been doing it for years.

[ccad2509]

@jjohnston2FBYC. lets open your eyes

This discussion forum is not for Autodesk it’s a place for users to rant at the inadequacies of the product.

while giving the illusion that Autodesk is caring for us all

if Autodesk was serious about issues, then they would at least pay lip service and comment on issues its now down to the few people who help this forum out of their own sense of helping the community

.

but they are slowly falling off and not commenting or helping any more.

The ideas station is little more than a joke with absolutely nothing being done.

The product has lost its identity and is bundled as a toolset.

Like SolidWorks and Bentley Autodesk has ticked the box of we have an electrical product

And doesn’t care to develop it or even correct bugs in the product.

Now while Autodesk has done nothing other products have had a load of development and quite a lot of 3rd party integration.

Like connecting bi-directionally to 3D Applications /Volt drop Software/ERP/MRP software/CNC cutting machines/Wire label printers/Terminal manufactures software

Where as ACADE !!!!!!!!!!

So, let’s look at a workflow that I do.

I draw some terminals in a schematic.

I export to Phoenix Project completed software.

Where I can see the whole terminal block allocated all the part numbers and all those pesky extra bits like numbers /endplates/jumpers

Then I import all the details back into my ECAD software where it updates all the part numbers into the project

Now try that with ACADE but wait a minute it’s not bidirectional they didn’t bother to complete the interface properly.

I also do this workflow for Wiedmuller as well not tried the Wago interface yet as we don’t use Wago terminals, but I can almost guarantee it will work like the others.

And with the click of the mouse the parts are exported from the ECAD software directley into our purchasing system

that puts ACADE at least 20 Years behind the market leaders !!!!!!