Kevin Krautle

I am talking about actual elevation layers outside of ConnectCad Rack Elevation layer. As my vectorworks documents contain both types of drawings Horizontal/Vertical design layers CAD, and connectcad signal layers.

Yeah its a workflow thing I am confused by how it could work, having both a symbol on a Design Layer for elevations, and on the ConnectCad Signal Flow Design Layer. I guess I can exclude the Design layers for elevations from the master reports. would need to see it in action.

@CHA @Conrad Preen I do the same thing for any slots or SFP type devices in equipment. Where I have symbols for each SFP connector SFP or PCI Capture card. For for QSC Qsys or Biamp for each card. Then there is a link between the slot called SFP and card, which we ignore cable numbering on as its set to a signal as SPCL (my custom name using the SignalTypes.txt and the XXX connector using the ConnectorTypes.txt for customizations)

The way I device setups are very similar. All of my devices are uniquely named using DNS as IP Addresses are mostly DHCP on designs I work on/use a seperate sheet for ip address assignment. The other cool thing you can do is add a picture of device after creating the block. It really helps with the ease of identifying components with not much real estate. As for saving 2D for front and back rack elevation (or JPG/png in the proper dimensions) it would be nice for the build team in build racks, however I will not be using it for full cad for elevations. I would rather keep that in a separate symbol as there always is a seperate Design layer for Horizontal/Vertical Views, and Signal layers. And dragging in a symbol into that will mess/duplicate for the global reports for total device counts (i know i can exclude the layers on the worksheet, but keeping signal flows separate is a good thing.)

That really does not make sense, it confused me soo much. As right now there are a global reports which pulls from the global templates and it makes sense as it correctly assumes it looks at all layers. However for design layers, the process makes more sense the way it was implemented in 2019 as it will update the current layer report if it already exists, or creates a new current layer report based on the template. The usability of duplicating a worksheet and then updating the database field would be very confusing to the uninitiated. Anyone else in the forum have an opinion?

I don't think you can currently set that size right now. You can change the font by creating a text style, and assigning it to the Sys-Equip-Front Class which might help your cause.

@ Vectorworks Dev Team I have seen this both in Vectorworks 2019 and 2020 on my mac. In 2020 if i open up a fresh blank document and create two devices, connect them, then copy all of it between the readme design layer and the schematic design, the links look like they follow but the lines never update properly ever again. So if I move the signal block, the lines stay static. This happens about 95% of the time. Once in a blue moon it actually copies properly and the lines update properly when the block is moved. I have seen other times were some circuits work but not all. If I click reroute circuits It looks like the lines are still connected but never update their drawing properly ever again.

@ Vectorworks team Another Question/Bug - Right now in CC 2020 from what I see when I create a new Current Layer Report, does not matter if its device or cable, It does Not duplicate the template and prefix with the worksheet name automatically when you went to the ConnectCad Menu like it did in cc2019. Is this a known issue? This is a big usability issue in training other people. I am working around it for now. But it was nice feature in 2019. I have reproduced this in a blank default document FYI. Attached is what happens in CC2019 when you create a current layer report.

... (moved to a new thread, plz ignore)

.. (Moved to new thread)

Thanks -Kevin

Vectorworks/CC team, In converting my old documents to CC 2020, I noticed the displaying of my Circuit Numbering was not working even though the numbers themselves came over properly. I was able to reproduce this issue with the default connectcad file as well in a blank document. Basically the issue is that if i assign any custom style to the CircuitNumbers Class the label disappears. Note the label disappears once you run the Number Cable CC function again. Note I have not tested this with other CC Classes. Please see screenshots

OK thanks i will check it out. No. 'dev_rec' has one purpose in life - to take values from Device fields and make them visible in the device title symbol as linked text. Are you looking for a way to set the default value of user device fields. YES! for a newly created device from device builder or using new device. We have considered this. Device Builder is already a huge dialog and I do wonder where we would fit all this. To the right where it was before. It's better than it was - previously you had to re-create your custom fields with every upgrade. Now you just have to copy the CustomParams.txt file to your new installation and your done. You can change the display name of custom fields to suit your wishes. Only the universal names are user1, user2 etc. OK, as long as it does not change again. I do understand why you did it, as we can no longer edit the plugin. But this major change should not happen again soon please!

@Conrad Preen Just diving into CC 2020 and I love how its working better that 2018. Much faster to use! 1. Are you working on an easier way to add custom fields by default in the reports? Maybe a flag in CustomParams.txt? As adding 5 columns every time I build a report is getting annoying. (it could be something we can turn on in settings) 2. It does not look like if i set a default a default value in dev_rec for the user values it auto populates when I create a new device. 3. +Vote to add the ability to show custom fields the device builder as well it makes life easier as its all on one screen. More important is #2 4. +Vote for Naming Custom fields, I am migrating the custom fields now to user1,user2,user3. But it has taken a ton of time to do. As we heavily use custom fields.

@Conrad P Do you have a full list of changes posted somewhere for the 2019 -> 2020 Migration? I just need to know I won't break something by migrating to the new release. Thanks! -Kevin