Welcome to the Onshape forum! Ask questions and join in the discussions about everything Onshape.
First time visiting? Here are some places to start:- Looking for a certain topic? Check out the categories filter or use Search (upper right).
- Need support? Ask a question to our Community Support category.
- Please submit support tickets for bugs but you can request improvements in the Product Feedback category.
- Be respectful, on topic and if you see a problem, Flag it.
If you would like to contact our Community Manager personally, feel free to send a private message or an email.
Comments
This wiring feature script is amazing. I've read through the whole thread and see a couple references to features being added to create flattened drawings, including waiting on a new OnShape feature needed to insert a custom table. Does this mean there is already a possible workflow to create the flattened drawing sans BOM table? How would you go about doing that?
I'm also curious if it's possible to handle crimp terminals inserted into a multi-terminal connector. I suppose this could be handled easily by considering only the crimp terminals, but then the connector body isn't considered part of the harness.
Sorry if any of this line of questioning is missing something obvious. I actually haven't had a chance to dive in to using the feature quite yet. I'm trying to gauge if it is worth using as a new way for my company to create wire/cable/harness drawings.
Currently, the way to add terminals is in the part studio, then use the connector feature to add the terminals and connector as one item - the intention then is to extract the "BOM" for each connector/terminal collection once the drawing tables feature is added.
I would like to ask if would possible to have an advance CSV export including the Bézier curves parameters.
That would open the doors for amazing workflows, as many other calculation/processes/tool can use this to have a better idea of the wiring than a mesh itself.
⭐ Wire refs and Wire routes can now be created manually without needing to import a CSV file first
⭐ Changed the behaviour of References in the Wire data table to make it easier to see which ones have already been defined
⭐ Fixed an issue with Wire ref names being auto-populated more than once
⭐ Fixed an issue with incomplete Wire refs being able to be defined again in another feature
⭐ Fixed empty custom table displaying errors
I was just test driving this as not needing a CSV seemed it would fit our usual workflow better. I'm running into an issue though: the "Wire route" doesn't seem to go into "manual" mode when I type in a wire ID (and I can't select any from-to)...
Happy to share the doc as it's just a test run (I think I've shared it with you?)
Making progress now. I have another issue that I think is related to the units setup but my workspace is in inches and I'm using the default (i.e. didn't import variables to setup the cabling env.) and when I pick a wire gauge it seems like it's using the size in mm and interpreting it in inches or something like this as my 18Ga wire shows in the table as 1.03in OD...
I'm liking it now that I've played with it a bit more...
I do have a use case where I'm not sure what the best option would be... We use different quite a few board mounted connectors that accept wires directly like these:
Now I can definitely set them up with the correct refs but when I go to add a wire ref using the context version of these I have to pick every pin and set the strip length stub length again... Which isn't ideal.
I had the idea to create a "dummy" connector that would "plug" into these. It works (as far as getting reference pins and strip length etc), but then I'm left with this "dummy" part in my harness that I'm not sure what to do with...
Not sure what the best way to handle this would be, I'm guessing you can't "retrieve" that info from the context but maybe if the connector definition allowed using surfaces (and excluding from the harness composite) it would be cleaner.
Side note:
I'm experimenting with ways to show the harness in different "positions" as we do this quite a bit: for example when we have a door that opens we usually create a "door closed" and "door open" assembly configurations and matching configurations of our harness to make sure the routing works in both case as well as for user documentation etc...
Because the wire route selection can't be configured (and it would be too messy anyway), the process involves:
- Creating two contexts for the different positions and two configurations in the harness PS
- Setting up wire references either by creating two different refs with configured suppression for the end that moves or configuring the "inserted" dummy position.
- Create separate wire routes for the open and closed (and configuring their suppression so there's only one)
- Creating a "higher level" composite that is configured to contain either of routes composites and using this in the assembly.
- This does work reasonably and that last part is what we do when we "manually" draw a harness
- This is an opportunity to also get rid of the dummy by using a "delete part" to explode the composite and a second delete to get rid of the dummy bits but it's a bit more cumbersome than it could be...
Anyway, thought I would share where I got with testing the process! I have to say creating the wire refs and routes is pretty slick once that's all setup properly!
I think I found another issue though, I'm getting clips flipping direction (and just getting scrambled) when I add a point to a segment on certain routes:
The "use clip order" also has an impact but it still gets either way. I do wonder if this happening because the "first clip" is "behind" the starting point of the connector somehow...
Here's the other end of the same cable:
I just @mentioned you on the feature in the doc so you should be able to see it... Let me know!
Really enjoying the feature set by the way! looking forward to when we can use it generate a "straight" view for a drawing (and we are able to insert a BOM)!
One more thing: I'm sure there's a plan for showing the strip lengths for the cable jacket (guessing columns in the table), but we also would like a mechanism to see the length of a segment between two clips. One of the things we use 3d cable routes is to check what happens to a cable when our enclosure door is open vs closed so we need to match the length of the spans between the last clip on the door span and the first clip on the fixed side. These can be drawn as two separate routes and it works well enough but right now you can only measure the length of the spline when the "show wires/cables" is unchecked.
EDIT: ok, I just realized that the curve remains even when the checkbox is on, however it's hard to get to since it's invisible. It can be reached through "select other" so this might be good enough for now...
I guess a "straightened" version would also benefit from including that information so a mechanism for that would be nice...
I've also added a "bodyless" connector definition to address your terminal block repetition issue. To use this, import your terminal block into a Part Studio and define a connector feature. The trick is to NOT select a part, but go ahead and define the names, pins, pinouts, strip and insulation lengths as usual. Then in the wiring PS, insert a connector and search for the terminal block and place it on the face (insertion point reference) of the in-context terminal block - the pinouts will be added and the Wire ref feature will pick up all the data when those pins are selected.
Thanks @NeilCooke, I'll give it a go hopefully in the next few days!
I haven't had a chance to play with the "empty connector" thing but it looks like it will do exactly what I need!
I think there might be a bug with the jacket trim end conditions. In the image below the black cable is set to "to first clip" (which is on the left), but there is some stripped jacket at the other end as well. The grey wire that is set to "at first end" does show the jacket going to the end.
The other thing I noticed (probably more of a missing feature than a "bug") is that if you change the "first end" jacket end condition, it bumps the spline segments by one so any tangency and additional points that were applied end up on the wrong segments, which is less than ideal if you've setup everything and change your mind on the start condition! It would improve the user experience if this was tracked...
Other than that, this is working great. "sculpting" the different segments of a wire route is quite satisfying, like a "reward" after setting up all the clips and wire refs!
Now we just need a straightened view and a way to have a "BOM" on a drawing!
With regards to spline segment count, I have fought with this since day one and can't come up with a solution (in FeatureScript) that can track the IDs of those segments. So, for example, if you add clips then edit the segments, then remove the clips, the spline count changes and your edits may be wrong. I am literally storing the settings per spline count so if the count changes it can go a bit crazy. Even if I did come up with a way to do this, if you edited a spline both sides of a clip, then removed the clip and there is one less spline, which edits do you keep? Conundrum.
For the first part, I think it would be nice to have independent control of both ends. What I actually want in this case is a strip to first clip on one end and no strip on the other end.
Maybe instead of the one drop down, there could be two of them, one for "first end" condition and one for "second end" with just 3 choices each (not stripped, "manual" strip, stripped to first clip).
For the second part, it's unfortunate to not be able to keep track of the segments...
I'm not super clear on what you mean by storing settings per "spline count". Are you saying you don't have a way to know what order the splines are in at all? If that's the case then obviously all you can do is have the same number of "settings" as splines and "hope for the best". However it does seem to be deterministic as when you add a clip to an existing modified route, it seems like it's only the segments "after" the clip that get affected, anything before that stays put.
If the settings are stored in an array, say in the case where you switch the first end from "stripped" to "to first clip" wouldn't it be possible to insert the new spline settings in the first position of the array to that the settings for all the other ones get bumped by one "count" instead of all being applied to the spline before the one they were meant for? Presumably you are tracking in which "position" a clip is added or removed (either from "auto ordering" or manual "clip order") so it should be possible to know which spline "number(s)" is being affected?
I think your example of removing a clip between two splines, it would make sense to me if both splines were "removed" and a "new" one added instead that would have "default" settings. Any manual edits on that section would be lost but presumably if a clip was removed they probably wouldn't valid anyway.
As a side note, if the "auto ordering" of the clips is what is making this difficult, I would personally rather have it always "follow clip order" if that resulted in more predictable behavior.
Anyway, keep up the good work, I'll be following how this develops closely!
Thanks for your response. I m some issue with connector placement by using option "wire connector ". I m not able to place the connector by selecting the surface of the incontext assembly. please check below image for the option in selected.
please share your comments.