Custom Voltage Tap Blocks and Wire Numbers

[Anonymous]

In short, how do I create components where some pins force wire number changes, and some do not, a la the NFPA "voltage tap" component?

A schematic I am creating requires multiple "voltage taps" - areas where a "branch wire" connects to a "circuit wire". The circuit wire and the branch wire must have unique wire numbers, and the circuit wire number must be updatable by clicking along the wire at any point. This is due to our requirements pertaining to from/to lists.

I am aware that there are a few "voltage tap" components, at least in the NFPA library. I need additional orientations of the circuit wire input-output pins and the branch wire pin.

I have tried modifying the "voltage tap" components. I've kept the X1/X2/X4/X8 terminal names correct (depending on the desired direction of connection) and have made the terminal numbers match the signal path (circuit wire pins are both 01, branch wire pin is 02). I have updated the XXPINXX and XXTERMDESCXX values using the same standard as well.

I have entered/left WDTYPE as 1-1.

I made a few components like this, and they each worked once. At some point I made an addititional component and noticed that my tricks had stopped working. I then added a component that had previously worked and noticed it too had stopped working (stopped working = all wires that intersect at the voltage tap are assigned the same wire number). Previous uses of said component still allow unique branch/circuit wire numbers.

Upon opening any components I have made/modified in the symbol builder, the WDTYPE attribute is now blank. Only when inserting it as a visible, pre-filled attribute does it persist, and this does not fix the problem.

My block names are HTP1_PH_VOLTAGETAPXX, where XX denotes a unique identifier for orientation of circuit and branch pins.

[Icemanau]

Can you post one of these faulty blocks for us to have a look at?

Regards Brad

[Anonymous]

Ht1002 is the NFPA library part that forces wire number changes through the terminal. VDVT_BT_1- is the "voltage tap" part included in the NFPA library. VOLTAGETAP10 is the component I created based on what I saw in Ht1002 and VDVT_BT_1-. VOLTAGETAP10 worked once (and is still working) but didn't work a second time (when inserted a second time in a different part of the schematic).

Thanks for the help.

[Icemanau]

Try swapping the connections about. Make the two connections that you want to transfer the wire number as 01 and the one that changes as 02.

This will also bring it into line with the block VDV1_BT_1-

The other thing to check is that there wasn't an older version of the block inserted in the dwg where the new block didn't work properly.

This can be checked by updating the block in question using the Swap/Update tool or selecting the block and checking the attributes in the properties.

The reason for this is when you insert a block, ACAD will check for existing blocks of the same name in the dwg first and if they exist, they will be used.

Even if there are no blocks visible, ACAD still retains their presence in the dwg. Such hidden blocks can be removed using the Purge command.

Regards Brad

[Anonymous · Accepted solution]

None of those suggestions solved the problem (but they did help clean up extra data/old blocks with the purge command).

In trying your suggestions, I discovered a solution.

When two traces come together to form a 'T', they are all counted as the same wire number. Dropping my custom blocks on that 'T' breaks those wires cosmetically, but they are still linked via wire number. To force the wire numbers to behave per my 'voltage tap' symbol, fresh wires must be run from the terminals of the 'voltage tap' symbol to the next component's terminals. Any remaining wire segments will perpetuate the previous (unwanted) wire number relationship.

Also to note, if the new wire accedentally crosses any existing wires (which sometimes happens when ACE adds kinks for cosmetic reasons), the new wire will become the same wire number as the crossed wire, regardless if the new wire is then scooted away from the crossed wire.

Weird quirks with this program abound.

Thanks for your help in discovering the solution.