multiple 29" harnesses

[bbrejcha]

I have a customer who does not have a unique problem. Take for example a 29
inch cable harness that has been submitted to the database and is signed off
on. The problem is that I need to utilize that same harness in many
different locations on my assembly. I have an idea to use top down design
then simply retrieve the harness in hopes that it will update the connectors
of the harness in those multiple configurations. I was thinking of locking
the length with Fix. Using WF4.0 at the moment. Has anyone dealt with
this in Pro/CABLE and would you care to elaborate?

Bart Brejcha
*DESIGN-ENGINE|**EDUCATION*
This thread is inactive and closed by the PTC Community Management Team. If you would like to provide a reply and re-open this thread, please notify the moderator and reference the thread. You may also use "Start a topic" button to ask a new question. Please be sure to include what version of the PTC product you are using so another community member knowledgeable about your version may be able to assist.

[DanWolf]

I've floundered with this for years. Our users have quite a few occurrences of a harness being used multiple times in one assembly, or in different assemblies. We've never found a good solution and just create different harnesses for each location. Have you (or anyone) had success using top-down design methods for this, or any other good ideas?

Dan

In Reply to Bart Brejcha:

I have a customer who does not have a unique problem. Take for example a 29
inch cable harness that has been submitted to the database and is signed off
on. The problem is that I need to utilize that same harness in many
different locations on my assembly. I have an idea to use top down design
then simply retrieve the harness in hopes that it will update the connectors
of the harness in those multiple configurations. I was thinking of locking
the length with Fix. Using WF4.0 at the moment. Has anyone dealt with
this in Pro/CABLE and would you care to elaborate?

Bart Brejcha
*DESIGN-ENGINE|**EDUCATION*

[chadhelland]

I use the family table functionality inside of harness. I also use piping based naming convention for other applications. Either way works well. Both have pros and cons.

Family table allows for everything to be kept in one top level assembly, but each time you have to add a variation (instance) the top level advances revision.

Piping naming convention (wire001, 002, etc.) allows you to have an infinite number of routings, but in order to tie it back to the base harness, you need a parameter to report the harness name in BOM's otherwise you have to write relations in the BOM to get it to report properly. For example, I have harnesses that are ABC12345.asm with abc12345_wire.prt. Each variation is ABC12345_001.asm with abc12345_wire001.prt. This works really well until you come to the BOM in the drawing. You have to write a relation to the the repeat region to assign ABC12345 when it's really ABC12345_001.

I hope this helps; it can get complicated I know.

Chad

Sent from my iPad