Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'power planning'.
-
Hi everyone, In the Auto Numbering preferences (see screenshot below), we can configure the Cable ID to automatically include the source and destination names. This works well when creating the cables. However, if I rename a destination after the cables have already been drawn, the Cable IDs do not update automatically to reflect the new destination name. My question: 👉 Is there a way to regenerate or refresh all Cable IDs so they update according to the new source/destination names? I’m looking for something similar to a “Recalculate Cable IDs” or “Update numbering based on current settings” function — if it exists. Thanks in advance! Ben
- 2 replies
-
- cable tool
- power planning
-
(and 2 more)
Tagged with:
-
Hi everyone, I’m having an issue with the Cable Path tool while connecting my truss, distro box, and breakouts. I’ve drawn all the cable paths correctly, and I’m trying to route a cable from the truss to a distro box and then to a breakout. When I select the input for one breakout, the cable starts following the correct cable path, but then it suddenly jumps off the path and snaps to another cable path that is physically closer — instead of following the entire intended path and the truss structure. So in short: The cable starts on the correct cable path Then it exits and connects to a different cable path nearby It does not follow the full intended route along the truss Has anyone experienced this behavior or knows what might be causing it? Is there a setting or workflow I’m missing to force the cable to stay on a specific cable path? Thanks in advance! Ben
- 5 replies
-
- power planning
- cable
-
(and 3 more)
Tagged with:
-
I was looking into the power schematics and had a few thing i couldnt quite figure out. First i would like to customise the device to have the output on the right side of the symbol. I have figured out how to edit a singular device but is there a way to apply this customisation into the lighting instrument so it defaults to this new layout on every new document? I have also created a distributor objects that converts HAN16-8ch to 8x schuko. Is there a way to have the distributor device show the load per socket? By default it only shows the combined load across all 3 phases and the load per phase. I would also like to incorperate dmx data flows as a seperate diagram. Is there a way to create 2 different power schematics. With 1 just showing the power cabeling and the other showing the data diagram? My company owns a lot of multicore cables that both have DMX and powerCON true1 connectors at the end. Is there a way to draw these and have them show up in both the DMX and Power drawing? Considering that jumper cables are still used in the system to bridge data flows when the power socket is full.
-
Bit of a niche one but I'm sure it applies elsewhere: Currently, if I attach a jumper between a breakout and a lighting instrument, it fills the lighting instruments 'circuit number' field in the OIP with the output name on the breakout, something like "output-1". Even less helpful, if there is a twofer between the breakout and lighting instrument, that circuit number field is filled with the twofers output name, not output name of the breakout. Conversely, the breakout doesn't reference the fixture with a twofer in the way, so when I attach a data tag to the breakout, I have to manually fill data for any fixtures that are twofered. My desired behavior would be for the 'circuit number' field to get filled with just the circuit number as an integer. Then the 'circuit name' field should fill with <breakout-ID>/<circuit#>. The information should be linked between the fixture and the breakout, not the twofer. A twofer splits a single circuit, it doesn't create two new ones. so for example: If I connect fixture 211 and 212 to a twofer, which is then connected to circuit 4 on breakout LX3-1, the circuit numbers for fixture 211 and 212 should fill as "4" and the circuit names should be "LX3-1/4". Additionally, the breakout should reference fixtures 211 and 212 under its output-4 instead of the twofer. I think the best way to make this work for everyone, would be to have user-definable rules for how these fields fill, like an excel sheet. I want to be able to tell a cell in the OIP to fill with xx info from here and yy info from there.
