Cable Run ID assignment

[crancourt]

I have started to play with the new features in 2017 and find the cabling tool very useful.  However I can not seem to get the information to populate from when I circuit the multi.  I have gone into circuit assign preference and made changes jumper cable so that combine cable ID and break out number is checked and place cable ID field: cable run ID.  No matter what I change these fields to every cable is labeled as A1.

[Sam Jones]

Crancourt,

I don't really understand the question, but I'll take a stab at it anyway.  Multi IDs are assigned either by typing them into the "Cable Run ID" field or by using the "Assign Multicable Run ID..." command.  The Circuit Assign Preferences are used to direct the assignment of multicable IDs to the objects they are powering.

Let me know if I totally missed the boat here.

 

Sam

 

[crancourt]

Hey Sam

 

I am having trouble having the jumpers receive information to label themselves for reporting purposes.  Ive tried using the circuit assign preference but it does not alter the jumper run ID.  As of now I can only manually give jumpers IDs.

[Sam Jones]

This is true.  You can only give Jumpers cable IDs manually.  This is probably most efficiently done in the Jumper cable worksheet.  My question is what information would the jumpers use to label themselves?

[crancourt]

Hey Sam

The jumpers from my understanding should be able to name themselves relevant to the circuit they are coming from.  For example if I have a socapex labeled A and the jumper is coming from circuit 1 the jumper should be able to self label as Cable Run ID A1

 

[Sam Jones]

I'm afraid not.  I'm planning it in a future version.  Currently, only the fixture gets the multi break out number, sorry.

 

However, should the Jumper be associated with the Fixture or the the Multi?  Ideally, both.  Essentially, what the cable objects need is to store their source and their destination.  The "source" being defined as the power or signal source.  This would not be the origin of power or signal (dimmer rack, console, amp rack, etc), but the immediate source like the multi, or distort, or snake; essentially, what does it plug into.  The destination would be what plugs into it.  Remember, that the "start" of a cable run object is where power or signal come from and the end is "end" is where or what it delivers power or signal to.  Realistically, this will be handled by unique IDs stored in the destination and source objects that straddle the cable run.  It will be a minor bookkeeping nightmare, but that is what computers are for.  This will have to be coordinated with a possible implementation of an export to LW 6.  I'm not sure that the Jumper's cable ID is what should hold the multi break out number.  It probably should, but I need to work this out with John,  even if an export to LW is problematic, Jumper naming should try to stay consistent with how LW 6 thinks about things.

 

Before all of that I need to implement a more comprehensive inventory system, so that there can be a different inventory of cable lengths for different jumper type, e.g. different lengths of SPG and Powercon.  Currently, the part lengths can be overridden, but a more sophisticated system is needed, including different whole libraries, e.g. a Christie library, a PRG library and a venue library.

 

Unfortunately (fortunately, really), it has been a unusually heavy NUT season, and I am just getting back to computer this week, and I will be interrupted again next week.  All of what I have mentioned above will be implemented in my AutoPlot version of the cable tools.  Whether or not that implementation is picked up by VW is to be determined.  Do not worry too much, VW has been very helpful to me, and has tried to provide answers to all my scripting problems.  Right now, they are working very hard on the Vision side of things. This has been a lengthy response that really is nothing more than a "Your out of luck, ...for now."   I hope to make great strides in January, and I will working over the Holidays.

 

Sam

[crancourt]

Sam,

 

I appreciate your feedback and letting me know whats going.  Lets hope we get this function up and going.  Thanks again and good luck!