Topic: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

Hello QET-Team,
hello users of QET!

As you may know, I created some hundrets of graphics for the
german manufacturer WAGO as symbols for schematics and front-
views for pictures of the mounting-plate. (No, they do not
pay me for doing this!)

Additional to "my" modules there are some other elements that
are duplicate parts in the meantime.
To harmonise or unify the parts of this manufacturer I would
like to remove the other graphics and move the Sub-directories
"01_schematic" and "02_front" up one level to this structure:

elements/10_electric/20_manufacturers_articles/wago/01_schematic
elements/10_electric/20_manufacturers_articles/wago/02_front

This means that we would drop some files but we will not lose
any parts, because all parts are already included in the sub-dirs!
This procedure would support Claveau Joshua's effort to clean-up
the elements-directory from duplicated parts.

In the attachment you find two parts that I modified slightly
and added to "my" sub-dirs and some examples of graphics that
would be dropped in favour of unified symbols and graphics.

Do you agree with this suggestion?

Best regards
  plc-user

Post's attachments

Attachment icon WAGO-Module ersetzen.qet 391.81 kb, 131 downloads since 2020-12-13 

2 (edited by S.DEFFAUX 2020-12-14 23:46:23)

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

Je pense qu'il faut harmoniser les éléments à l'échelle pour la mise en armoire

Post's attachments

Attachment icon WAGO-Module ersetzen.qet 500.35 kb, 143 downloads since 2020-12-14 

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

Hello everybody,

it seems that we need a little discussion about the scale we want to use for the Front-view:
The three parts S.DEFFAUX added to the folio all have different scales!

DIN-Rail TS35:   100 mm -> 200.00 px
circuit-breaker: 100 mm -> 222.22 px
IO-Module:       100 mm -> 236.00 px

(see also attached file!)

Do we have a specification for the scale of Front-Views?
What documentation did I miss to read?

If we already specified a scale:
Do we have the chance to modify the several hundrets of elements with a script or so?


Regards
  plc-user

Post's attachments

Attachment icon Scaling_of_elements.qet 73.42 kb, 104 downloads since 2020-12-16 

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

Indeed I believe that there is no documentation on the scale.
I think 1mm = 2px is a good scale

best regards

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

Hello S.DEFFAUX!

Who do you want to punish with such work?  nomicons/wink
Checking all existing QET-Elements if they show a
front-view and then scale them by hand...

In the Lazarus-/freepascal-Wiki I found the beginning
of the now existing freepascal-code to take a QET-
Element and scale the content by a factor.

You find the sources and pre-compiled versions for
Debian unstable and ReactOS at
https://github.com/plc-user/QET_ElementScaler

The code compiles/runs with Lazarus 2.0.10 and
FreePascal 3.2.0 on Debian/GNU Linux (unstable) and
ReactOS (0.4.15-dev-1196) (didn't try, but should run
on win7 or 10, too)

In combination with a small shell-script the program
edited all front-views of "my" elements (about 800)
in 1.5 seconds.


But still the main-Question is: What scaling-faktor
do we want to use for front-views of our elements.
In my opinion 100 mm -> 200 px is a good value!
That means that ${someone} has to check, if the already
existing parts use the same scaling-factor. As I wrote
in a previous message: The three examples had three
different factors and I guess there are even more in the
QET-collection ...


Best regards
  plc-user

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

Je ne suis pas développeur, je pense qu'il faut demander leur avis à Joshua et Scorpio.

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

Something like this could be a solution ? (it's just a proof of concept). I can add it to the roadmap.
https://download.tuxfamily.org/qet/forum_img/cote.mp4
https://download.tuxfamily.org/qet/forum_img/cote.mp4

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

Hello Joshua,

thanks for joining this thread!

That's a good idea: Dimension-Lines can be a real help for drawing an Element!

But before implementing that we need to define some rules for drawing elements:
- What scale (mm <-> px) should a drawing have for Front-View?
- Do we want elements for schematics AND Front-Views AND mixtures of both?
- some other definitions???

When I look at the (electrical) elements of the QET-Collection:
At the moment we have a wild mixture of all varieties!
(see examples in attached file)

A long time ago I learned that a circuit-diagram (German word: Stromlaufplan)
shows how the parts are inter-connected and is not a picture of the switching cabinet.
The whole file can contain a layout-plan (German: Aufbauplan) where one can see
how the switching-cabinet looks like, but the main purpose is to show how the
parts are connected. In a circuit-diagram two parts that are placed side-by-side
to see the function of the circuitry, may be mounted (kilo-) meters apart from
each other!

So in my opinion we should have two main-lines for (electrical) elements:
1 - Elements for circuit-diagrams which show the connections and terminals of an element.
2 - Graphics for Front-Views to use for the layout-plan of a switching-cabinet without terminals.


These explanations and examples may make clear what I mean, when I say:
We need some rules and definitions on how to draw, scale and name our elements.

And when we have defined some rules we have to think about the already available
elements in the collection: Do we re-work all elements? My Pascal-Program can
help on doing this but it is still a great amount of work to do, looking at the
elements to see, if it is for schematic or for front-view, what scale is necessary,
is it a doublette, etc. etc. ...


Besides:
I tried to scale some other elements of the collection but I failed, because in
earlier versions of QET the parts of an element were defined else.
Example:

text-definition in Version 0.50
  <text text="X001" y="-19" size="4" rotation="90" x="53"/>
definition of the same text in Version 0.80
  <text x="53" y="-19" font="Sans Serif,4,-1,5,50,0,0,0,0,0" text="X001" color="#000000" rotation="90"/>

It is not that the scaling fails, but QET 0.8-dev does not understand decimals
for font-size when the file-version is 0.50.
Do you see the chance to have a small tool to walk through the collection-tree
and open all elements and save them again with the actual xml-tags?


Best regards
  plc-user

Post's attachments

Attachment icon different_elements.qet 406.31 kb, 94 downloads since 2020-12-17 

9 (edited by De-Backer 2020-12-18 15:38:49)

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

plc-user wrote:

Hello Joshua,

....

So in my opinion we should have two main-lines for (electrical) elements:
1 - Elements for circuit-diagrams which show the connections and terminals of an element.
2 - Graphics for Front-Views to use for the layout-plan of a switching-cabinet without terminals.

i also think there should be 2 elements Graphics and circuit
the best thing would be that they linked
and that they are not far from each other in the collection to say side by side

circuit    Graphics
    |        
|--/        Graphic
    |       of button

edit--
this is still too limited
because you can have multiple Graphics
must be thought about

maybe if you click on an element in the circuit that you will be prompted to place a graphic
edit--

plc-user wrote:

Do you see the chance to have a small tool to walk through the collection-tree
and open all elements and save them again with the actual xml-tags?

if this isn't too hard I can do this, Joshua/plc-user
this is an opportunity to learn the file format.

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

I agree with you.
I think add a new type of element : thumbnails, but this kind of element must be strongly linked to a manufacturer reference and if there is not a thumbnail for a reference add to the properties of element symbol the size (width, height depth) to draw a simple rectangle in the thumbnail folio, so not so easy. We must to add this feature in the rodmap, this will be a big feature to write.

De-Backer wrote:

if this isn't too hard I can do this, Joshua/plc-user
this is an opportunity to learn the file format.

Of course you can, they will be very helpful in future to convert old element to new svg element.

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

Joshua wrote:
De-Backer wrote:

if this isn't too hard I can do this, Joshua/plc-user
this is an opportunity to learn the file format.

Of course you can, they will be very helpful in future to convert old element to new svg element.

I have started the work:
https://github.com/De-Backer/QElectroTe … nt_Updater
this will not be done in 123.

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

Another thought for schematic- and graphical symbols:
Do we cover the possibility that a real part can have more than one
schematic symbol?

For example:
Like the already available elements for "Johnson Controls" "DX9100",
a complex control-unit may have many digital and analog I/O and extra
communication-ports that meaningfully should be separated in extra
elements to achieve folios that show "readable" and not overloaded
schematics.
There should be the possibility to link these schematic-parts together
and additionally it should be possible to link to a graphic symbol.
This leads to a "master"-part (not a coil) and more than one
"slave"-parts that aren't contacts...

This leads to another idea for schematic symbols:
Do we have the possibility to define a predecessor and successor of a part?
Many (electronic) systems like PLCs are plugged together in a user-defined
order so it should be possible to define such a sequence.

On the other hand a generic part like a switch can contain more than
one real part (real switch, extensions, lever, etc.) that it should
be linked to for graphics and/or part-list.

And even a switch can have auxiliary contacts that can be mounted
together and that leads to slave-contacts of a contact...


Best regards and: Merry Christmas!
  plc-user

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

this reminds me of example 2
https://developers.librepcb.org/library_structure_examples.png
of course we should not compare QET with KiCAD or other
I know too little about the complete operation of an installation, the schematics
-should this work for a home installation
-should this work for an industry
-should this work for a car
-should this work for a boat
-should this work for an airplane
=>wire harness
=>wire lenghts
buses, cables
we would like the complete package, or just and share and that very good?

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

@plc-user :
This is a real use case, but qet wasn't designed for that (Because of the lack of knowledge of the needs of this kind of software, but also because qet did not have the ambition to be what it is today, at the beginning of qet).
Of course we can write code for that but we should deal with existing code and exsting project files to keep retro-compatibility.
So for the moment qet will stay as he as.
We plan in future to rewrite a big part of qet to remove all the weak points (code, feature and usability) and write a solid and versatile core code base.
When this time will happen we can discus about what you propose (and a lot lot more nomicons/smile ).
I already write some note (it's not a roadmap just a memory help) of things to rewrite, implement, improve etc....
https://qelectrotech.org/wiki_new/refon … lectrotech
I already note some new type of elements (plc, thumbnail) and also an element can be composed of several part (like a simple push button : a button, a braket, one/several contact, a light).

Edit :
Every time I explain the future of qet, I see a lot of work for several year.

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

Joshua wrote:

Something like this could be a solution ? (it's just a proof of concept). I can add it to the roadmap.
https://download.tuxfamily.org/qet/forum_img/cote.mp4
https://download.tuxfamily.org/qet/forum_img/cote.mp4

Very good !

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

Je pense qu'il serai intéressant de transférer les élements Wago Contact dans la collection constructeur pour alléger QET.

17 (edited by plc-user 2021-01-31 17:39:49)

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

@S.DEFFAUX:
I'm not sure, what you mean:
Where do you want to move or copy what elements?
All Symbols and Graphics are in the manufacturer's directory...

@Joshua:
The suggestions I made for additional features inside the elements are meant "for future use"!
I know that it is a great amount of work to implement such features!  EDIT: Especially for doing it on top of the regular work!


But still I think we need some rules for the creation of symbols and graphics:
- separate elements for symbols and graphics
- structure and language of filenames
- language of static texts inside of elements
- maximum number of terminals per schematic-symbol
- splitting of symbols with more than xx terminals
- size / scale of graphics
- (...)

Best regards
  plc-user

18 (edited by S.DEFFAUX 2021-01-31 17:13:49)

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

certain élément on été supprimé de la collection officielle et transférés dans dans une collection annexe

https://github.com/qelectrotech/qelectr … nt-contrib

https://qelectrotech.org/forum/viewtopi … 829#p13829

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

@S.DEFFAUX:
Do you mean to copy the removed elements to the other repository?
Will do that later today!

Oh boy, the online-translators "French-German" sometimes produce strange results!!! nomicons/cwy

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

@Joshua à déplacer certain éléments pour rendre QET plus rapide.
le répertoire Wago contact  représente 1272 éléments il serai peut être intéressant de les mettre dans le répertoire "constructeur" pour rendre QET plus rapide.

@plc user: Tu as fait un bon travail

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

S.DEFFAUX wrote:

@Joshua à déplacer certain éléments pour rendre QET plus rapide.
le répertoire Wago contact  représente 1272 éléments il serai peut être intéressant de les mettre dans le répertoire "constructeur" pour rendre QET plus rapide.

This leads to another question:
Did you think about the possibility for the user to select which sub-directories he wants to use and which not?
Some sort of a "blacklist" in the user-settings:
Like in my case I do not use many of the electric manufacturer-articles and the pneumatic and hydraulic-parts.
I think it would help, if I could choose that QET does not load them.

S.DEFFAUX wrote:

@plc user: Tu as fait un bon travail

nomicons/smile just created the pull-request!


Best regards
  plc-user

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

With the Windows installer of QET users can select or deselect categories don't want to use.
https://download.tuxfamily.org/qet/forum_img/nsis_qet1.png
For ReadyToUse is easy to move folders with other location and improve fast launching of QET.

BTW, try QET under Linux and time launching 30 seconds go to be less than 3 seconds... or WSL2 on Windows 10 ..

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

My mainly used computer runs Debian unstable and it loads QET in less than 3s. nomicons/smile
So it is not the loading-time that I wanted to mention, but the long list of manufacturers one has to scroll through to find the one you want.
And the list is getting longer "day-by-day"...  nomicons/wink

A user-configurable list inside QET-settings would be a comfortable way to keep the list short.
Otherwise it is always necessary to copy only the folders you want to use or delete the others, when a new version of QET is available.

At work I have to use "ReadyToUse"-Versions that I want to keep up-to-date so every now and then the same "work" to choose the folders has to be done.
Aren't we all a little lazy, too?!? nomicons/wink

Best regards
  plc-user

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

If you wish, we can move manufacturers' directoy to https://github.com/qelectrotech/qelectr … nt-contrib
What do you think about?
But new users may not know ..


Best regards,
Laurent

Re: re-organize wago-sub-directory?

Hmmm ... as I understood until now, "qelectrotech-element-contrib" is the place for elements that were sorted out from the main-catalogue for some reason. That is why I created a pull-request there for the elements I removed from the now unified parts in the WAGO-directory.
... and that would not make the list of directories inside the QET-catalogue any shorter.

So, I would say: No, keep the current manufacturer-elements where they are.