I think a picture showing what you have done would be nice. As for the footprint connector, why not define a separate connector for each pin on the device (maybe that is what you did).
As for the Pro/E question, I will forward this thread to a colleague.
pic1 is a single terminal post. There is 4 pins, one each at 0, 90, 180 and 270. The terminal post has a footprint with a different connector at each pin. The connector part number is TERM_NO_10, which has all ring terminals for a #10 size post.
pic2 is the entire terminal strip, which is a composite symbol, made up of 20 of the terminal posts.
These can be added to a design as either a single post or an entire terminal strip.
Thanks for the help
Are you using device connectors or a harness connector? Maybe we should have a quick WebEx.
I am using these as device connectors. That way, I do not have to create the harness connector and associate with a harness. Also, creating the harness connector would take up unnecessary room.
Sorry for pushing in - I just wonder if this similar thread might help?
It references an admitedly CHS methodology that sounds similar to your suggestions.
Yes, yes, yes that is exactly how I do it. I define a dummy connector for a particular size stud on a terminal, do not include the dummy connector in the BOM, and use a device footprint to determine which terminal to call out for that particular wire. It all works as planned.
The downside is that when you export the nwf file to Pro/E, none of those decisions (Cavity Component Management) have been made as you are exporting from design. All you get are the connectors, not any underlying components. Now maybe if you could export the nwf from Harness after all decisions have been made.