Welcome to the Onshape forum! Ask questions and join in the discussions about everything Onshape.

First time visiting? Here are some places to start:
  1. Looking for a certain topic? Check out the categories filter or use Search (upper right).
  2. Need support? Ask a question to our Community Support category.
  3. Please submit support tickets for bugs but you can request improvements in the Product Feedback category.
  4. 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.

Custom Feature: Cable/Wire Routing

1…4567810»

Comments

  • eric_pesty
    eric_pesty Member, pcbaevp Posts: 2,900 PRO
    https://forum.onshape.com/discussion/comment/133980#Comment_133980

    I can confirm the clip direction works again, thanks for that!
    However it also looks like multiple routes created by the same feature are now lumped into a single composite, which is different from the previous behavior… Was that intentional?

  • NeilCooke
    NeilCooke Moderator, Onshape Employees Posts: 6,111 image
    https://forum.onshape.com/discussion/comment/133983#Comment_133983

    Not necessarily intentional but it’s something I would suspect is right that if you add multiple wires to the same feature they should be grouped? Send me a DM with an example (or support ticket).

    Senior Director, Technical Services, EMEA
  • eric_pesty
    eric_pesty Member, pcbaevp Posts: 2,900 PRO

    I have used a single feature to create "related" routes (just like you can use a single feature to create a bunch of wire refs or even insert multiple connectors) but looking back that's probably not "best practice". The single composite makes sense from a physical positioning/grouping of the routes but if the routes are meant to represent different part numbers it does mess up the BOM.

    It comes down a bit to the intended BOM/release management side of things, I am not super clear on the "vision" for this feature set (in terms of linking the "shaped" harness in the assembly, the straightened route/drawing and the harness BOM)…

    I don't have a good reason to say it shouldn't group them in a single composite other than "I've used the feature in a way that generates multiple part numbers so this update breaks my workflow". That said, just because I've done it that way a number times doesn't mean it's the "right" way to do it. If the intent is to use a separate feature for each part number, I will do this going forward and there is no need to force the feature to behave that way!
    I was just asking if the change in behavior was intentional in case it was a "bug"…

  • NeilCooke
    NeilCooke Moderator, Onshape Employees Posts: 6,111 image

    I did change it in anticipation of the next release, which required some clever grouping of connectors and harnesses, but I can look to change it back. To be honest, I didn't give the change much consideration.

    Senior Director, Technical Services, EMEA
  • S1mon
    S1mon Member Posts: 4,551 PRO

    I'm curious how people manage the wiring features to model cables running through drag chains. As much as it would be amazing to have something that fully articulates, we're ok with just modeling it statically at one extreme of the motion.

    Do you model a dummy drag chain with a sketch that is used as a dummy clip path? Any special tricks?

    Simon Gatrall | Product Development, Engineering, Design, Onshape | Ex- IDEO, PCH, Unagi, Carbon | LinkedIn

  • wille_j
    wille_j Member Posts: 135 ✭✭✭

    What we do:

    1. Model the drag chain or import COTS model.
    2. Sketch a guide curve, and convert to wire body. Or use routing curve, or any other wire-creation tools.
    3. Pattern the wire body to whatever cables/wires are needed in the drag chain.
    4. Make the drag chain and wire bodies a closed composite. And insert in assembly.

    And this means the wire bodies of the composite are accessible to use as “clips/channels/bundles” entries from in-context in the wire routing feature.

  • Ron_van_Dijk
    Ron_van_Dijk Member Posts: 17 PRO

    Hi Niel,

    I would like to ask when the "Flatten Cable Assembly" feature will be available.

    This would be so handy in producing the harness. See example of a layout scheme at…

    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/MK6scdS4Mqw

    I am in the process of getting a new company I visited recently to consider Onshape. That is part of my reasoning for the question.

    Cheers, Ron van Dijk

  • wille_j
    wille_j Member Posts: 135 ✭✭✭

    @Ron_van_Dijk flatten came in 1.217

  • NeilCooke
    NeilCooke Moderator, Onshape Employees Posts: 6,111 image

    Changelog for 1.221.1

    ⭐️ Multi-wire features are once again treated as separate wires or cables (Route name must be empty for this to work) @eric_pesty
    ⭐️ Fixed an issue with Wire data table showing unconnected pins as connected
    ⭐️ Added extra error checking for when a wire is trying to be added to a reference that does not exist
    ⭐️ Fixed an issue with multi-wire bundles clearing the wire list when "Create bundle" is unchecked

    Senior Director, Technical Services, EMEA
  • wille_j
    wille_j Member Posts: 135 ✭✭✭

    Wow, nice Neil!

  • EvanReese
    EvanReese Member, Mentor Posts: 3,079 PRO

    Honestly this thread is a masterclass in how to manage, update, and roll out top quality custom features.

    Evan Reese
    The Onsherpa | Reach peak Onshape productivity
    www.theonsherpa.com
  • NeilCooke
    NeilCooke Moderator, Onshape Employees Posts: 6,111 image
    https://forum.onshape.com/discussion/comment/134046#Comment_134046

    Thanks, Evan, that's high praise coming from you.

    Senior Director, Technical Services, EMEA

Categories