windchill

[D4n13l]

Hello everyone

I wanted to ask who is already using creo with plm windchill as coding details.

In the company we have to review the code coding, and the ptc softwarist told us that windchill creates an automatic progressive every vote that creates a code.
I wanted to know in other companies where to use windchill, how to handle codes.
we currently have code so format
aabbxxx
the first two initial digits identify whether it is a particular or a set and the other 2 digits identify the type of machine the xxx are a progressive number.
now they would like to make sure that coding happens by progressive code i.e. it would no longer be subdivided by folders but in a single boiler.
we would have progressive codes xxxxxx1, xxxxxx2.. etcc without being subdivided by folder, this because windchill does not generate a progressive code for each folder but a general progressive, they told us that it is possible to do it but it would cost...
the softwarista would like to create some attribites so that when we do the research of the particular I look for the first two digits and the second two to identify the particular, something that I find absurd, I think more logical than the code is "parlante" also because in the cartiglio the code of the design would be xxxxx1 without seeing the attributes, so it would have to insert a special voice with the attribute in the cartiglio to know to what machine.
If I were to look for a particular I don't know the code and not even the description I would do it by attributes, what do you think of this?
then the drawings would be put in a folder where they have access in the workshop to look for the drawings but pdf would be managed for folders subdivided for aa and subfolders bb if I do not have the attributes in the cartiglio that identify me aa and bb the code xxxxx1 I will never find it if not with a general research. . .
What do you recommend me to do?

thanks to all

 

[AndreaTerzi]

hi, the answer you ask is very articulated and should be thought throughout the business context. By reading your specifications I understand that currently (maybe before nn you used a pdm?) you are used to looking for things for folders but having a powerful search like pdmlink nn needs more. is much faster looking for "aaa*" or other than looking for folders. But as I said, we should better understand the context.
It is correct to say that the default of pdmlink is a simple progressive code and any different coding should be planned before making the installation with the customer and has a cost (nn within the merit if it is so or little).
a council would however be to keep the folders or use the items produced/free to better divide the cad objects present on the commonspace.

 

[D4n13l]

hi, the answer you ask is very articulated and should be thought throughout the business context. By reading your specifications I understand that currently (maybe before nn you used a pdm?) you are used to looking for things for folders but having a powerful search like pdmlink nn needs more. is much faster looking for "aaa*" or other than looking for folders. But as I said, we should better understand the context.
It is correct to say that the default of pdmlink is a simple progressive code and any different coding should be planned before making the installation with the customer and has a cost (nn within the merit if it is so or little).
a council would however be to keep the folders or use the items produced/free to better divide the cad objects present on the commonspace.

Bye-bye
thank you for your answer, currently you have never been used a pdm, so unfortunately there are files scattered in various folders and also double unfortunately and this problem fortunately with the pdm will disappear.
is it true that I can search for the code with attributes but if I have the code for example 001001 and its attributes are 22 05 if I look for the code I do not search it as 2205001001 but as 001001001 (design code) no longer makes sense that in the code it is already intrinsic 2205? folders agree that you can also delete but wouldn't a slaughter with all files in the same commonspace?
the problem has arisen because if I create code e.g. 2205001001 next could be the 2107001002 and so on, I don't like it much as what would remain a lot of numbering regarding that specific encoding blanks.
I used it previously documented with inventor and sincerely I see it better from the point of view of the Tags because you could create progressive codes for each folder without problems, ok it also does windchill programming it though and if you do not have programming base on windchill you do not put your hands on... I find it absurd to have to pay for something that should already be so or at least be already planned.
Are you currently using windchill?

 

[nino67]

Hello.
I personally would never let the pdm decide the encoding, then you can set up some mechanisms that can help ............ we are "lucky" because the encoding is something of the management so the problem of the code does not arise. as I said we put on mechanisms for which by assigning the file name = people code automatically both the code parameter and name and number ....... all this is done at zero or almost cost. Last thing, "program" on windchill you have to be very skillful, other thing instead "interagire" with creo to value parameters..... as I said then there are mechanisms for which these parameters can be transmitted to windchill automatically.

 

[AndreaTerzi]

Let's start from the end .. I have a company that deals with the ptc world but not do re-sale. so I have been working with pdmlink for years and have seen/made several installations or personalizations. Unfortunately (or fortunately for me) the ptc world has always been more complex to customize than inventor or solidworks (although in recent years they have improved).
I think you should share items between products and bookcases created ad hoc in the commonspace to replace your current folders. using those you can also define different access roles for different users. and then a minimum of customization you have to do.

 

[D4n13l]

Hello.
I personally would never let the pdm decide the encoding, then you can set up some mechanisms that can help ............ we are "lucky" because the encoding is something of the management so the problem of the code does not arise. as I said we put on mechanisms for which by assigning the file name = people code automatically both the code parameter and name and number ....... all this is done at zero or almost cost. Last thing, "program" on windchill you have to be very skillful, other thing instead "interagire" with creo to value parameters..... as I said then there are mechanisms for which these parameters can be transmitted to windchill automatically.

Hello excuse but the codes how do you create them? do you do them by hand every time from the management that then interfaces with the windchill pdm or the management automatically creates them progressively based on each family?
we with our management can't do it, and a pdm serves exactly according to me to speed up the creation of codes without having to look for the free one immediately after the last.

 

[D4n13l]

Let's start from the end .. I have a company that deals with the ptc world but not do re-sale. so I have been working with pdmlink for years and have seen/made several installations or personalizations. Unfortunately (or fortunately for me) the ptc world has always been more complex to customize than inventor or solidworks (although in recent years they have improved).
I think you should share items between products and bookcases created ad hoc in the commonspace to replace your current folders. using those you can also define different access roles for different users. and then a minimum of customization you have to do.

the idea was to keep the existing "commercial" codes as they are and whenever you create a hand code in the management automatically this shoots it inside the pdm and not vice versa. .
so we will create folders for commercial components and there will be laughing with existing family tables...
for the folders to be customized instead you wanted to create the code directly from winchill (which I did already with document that then interfaced with the management) but we still do not know how to do if a single progressive for all or for each folder a progressive single but here must intervene the programmer and has a cost, which I think is worth it because otherwise we will find many holes in the various codes if we will continue to use the system of the folders.
What do you think?

 

[nino67]

Hello excuse but the codes how do you create them? you do them by hand every time from the management. ....

the codes are generated by the management, each code is generated respecting internal rules, typology, material etc. etc. affect the root of the code.

I personally did some application that writes on the windchill management but not vice versa, I do not see the usefulness of writing on windchill.

 

[320i S]

I think you should share items between products and bookcases created ad hoc in the commonspace to replace your current folders. using those you can also define different access roles for different users. and then a minimum of customization you have to do.

I absolutely agree, when you switch to a pdm management, the reasoning on the speaking code, loses much of your sense of being maintained at all costs, begin to enter into play attributes and parameters much more useful, the various bonds "where used" and "bom", historian much more solid with revisions etc.

 

[320i S]

where I work now, the coding goes totally from the pdm, the management only receives the data and reserves only the parameters of production management, but the fundamental ones such as description, code (with rules of type speaking only as guide to obtain the final code), who created it, unit of measure of use, are of "ownership" of the pdm, in this way the number of people coding is limited and you do not risk "the anarchy of coding".
with these assumptions, the bom we pass through pdm and no longer hand-written, so with undoubted advantages in terms of speed and accuracy.

 

[D4n13l]

where I work now, the coding goes totally from the pdm, the management only receives the data and reserves only the parameters of production management, but the fundamental ones such as description, code (with rules of type speaking only as guide to obtain the final code), who created it, unit of measure of use, are of "ownership" of the pdm, in this way the number of people coding is limited and you do not risk "the anarchy of coding".
with these assumptions, the bom we pass through pdm and no longer hand-written, so with undoubted advantages in terms of speed and accuracy.

I know that the pdm serves precisely for these things where I was before I have always used it, but now on the new company where I stand are now starting to implement it and they will have to start by force of things with a new corporate encoding.
What I'm asking is if you think the codes and better that they end up inside a specific folder and that they are recognized through a "parlating" encoding or do not serve the folders and do you make a single cauldron? I find it absurd even if there are all the tools to search for the code but I will know where it is mounted only once I have imported all the existing machines with the old windchill codes otherwise with the cabbage that I know where the code is used!
pdfs that are created with drawings once approved as you handle them?
where I was first documented it was intrinsically managed within the code and a fly that the code entered in change the pdf erased automatically and was created only after having approved the code again what seems to me to understand that windchill does not do right?

 

[marcok625]

hi, first of all I can tell you that if you want to keep the encoding that you already have is not complicated in windchill, you are free to create the various encoding branches and sequentials will be implemented only on that type of encoding, just create an oir for every "family" code you want.
we in the company have a semi-speaking encoding, that is, it was initially thought as a speaker, but then immediately lost meaning, because today by code you can not even understand whether a component is a commercial or a design component. because they are both encoded as pm000000 (pm stands for mechanical part)
said this you can easily recreate your usual windchill encoding.
according to my opinion however little sense and share what other users have recommended. I recommend not to take this thing superficially but to make us beautiful thoughts.
when you say that in the workshop they have a folder with all pdfs of your designs and they will struggle to look for them if encoded as sequential codes you are perfectly right, when you adopt windchill, you should put a pc with windchill even in the workshop, and give a user (because the licenses are nominative) the task to see pdf, it doesn't make sense once you manage it with windchill then save pdf in an external folder. It would be necessary to equip itself with an editor who automatically creates neutral formats and inserts them into windchill as representations. In this way you will always have the opportunity to see your pdf and other formats and even from the windchill interface you will have a viewer for the 3d that saves after they will be published in pvz.

 

[D4n13l]

hi, first of all I can tell you that if you want to keep the encoding that you already have is not complicated in windchill, you are free to create the various encoding branches and sequentials will be implemented only on that type of encoding, just create an oir for every "family" code you want.

the problem is exactly what the softwarista who came to the company, told us that creating a coding for each single folder is a problem because it has to go to say it (and makes us pay an additional cost to do this that I don't know how to quantify) to winchill, while the latter generates a progressive code on each folder.
You realize that we currently have 3 main folders divided into about 30 subfolders for each one, I don't see this problem though I trust the softwarista.

 

[320i S]

in windchill (who is more up-to-date than me correct me as well) there is however the possibility to create folders for bookcases and products, for the most organized storage, but believe me that this use for the search of details, will be increasingly limited with time, because you will use much more attributes.
reasoning on the benefits of a pdm, you do only "at regime", not during the migration of the database, this seems obvious to me, and this should have already been estimated by you + consultant.
Finally a pdm of today must be extended to the whole company, otherwise it is a partially wasted resource (considering the cost).

 

[marcok625]

I was writing exactly what I said from @320i s , you can also recreate the structure of the file system inside windchill with folders and libraries, but it doesn't make any sense.
When you use such a tool you have to change your mind completely, but above all find yourself a consultant who knows what he's doing, otherwise you'll end up hating the plm, a little like we did.
I suggest you buy the parts link form immediately, for the most understandable classification of all your parts. we are evaluating after a few years of inserting it seen the exponential growth of new families of products, but it is not so obvious as you could believe, I naively thought it was all easily scalable, but it is not so, now we have to review everything to let us enter the form.

 

[D4n13l]

I was writing exactly what I said from @320i s , you can also recreate the structure of the file system inside windchill with folders and libraries, but it doesn't make any sense.
When you use such a tool you have to change your mind completely, but above all find yourself a consultant who knows what he's doing, otherwise you'll end up hating the plm, a little like we did.
I suggest you buy the parts link form immediately, for the most understandable classification of all your parts. we are evaluating after a few years of inserting it seen the exponential growth of new families of products, but it is not so obvious as you could believe, I naively thought it was all easily scalable, but it is not so, now we have to review everything to let us enter the form.

this is the screen I have in windchill currently, logically it is empty because I do not subscribe yet started working on it is what you mean with the module windchill partslink?

 

[marcok625]

No, that's the research windchill page.
parts links do not have it.
This image I took from youtube, it's not our system.

Watch the video.

here you also see the classification and shows you very interesting research ways, if you are still in time to implement them, like faceted search results, (https://support.ptc.com/help/windch...ndchill_help_center/lclsrchresultsfacets.html ) are things already integrated in the base windchill, but not all install them.

 

[D4n13l]

No, that's the research windchill page.
parts links do not have it.
This image I took from youtube, it's not our system.

Watch the video.

here you also see the classification and shows you very interesting research ways, if you are still in time to implement them, like faceted search results, (https://support.ptc.com/help/windch...ndchill_help_center/lclsrchresultsfacets.html ) are things already integrated in the base windchill, but not all install them.

I have to look at it well I can't figure out what this partslink is for.

 

[marcok625]

is the best method for classifying your business parts.
all your 3ds will have a classification, and if you use basic windchills, soft type will be created for each macro component you need to classify. (however company choice how many and what families to create)
then once you create all this list, the designer who will have to codify a new part will have to choose in which family will be encoded, but without part link it will be much more complicated this step because you will have in front of many families all at the first level and once encoded in that family the component cannot be moved to another. while with parts links you have more ease of coding shows the classification made as a structure tree and in the future you can change family to the encoded component. (in stock)
then there are other advantages in research etc.
however it is worth evaluating this form in advance and not as in our case after a few years.
I hope I helped you.

to give you an idea we today have about 180 different families, including groups, machine models, commercial and design components. every time someone codifies a new component has to choose from this list and is not convenient.

 

[D4n13l]

is the best method for classifying your business parts.
all your 3ds will have a classification, and if you use basic windchills, soft type will be created for each macro component you need to classify. (however company choice how many and what families to create)
then once you create all this list, the designer who will have to codify a new part will have to choose in which family will be encoded, but without part link it will be much more complicated this step because you will have in front of many families all at the first level and once encoded in that family the component cannot be moved to another. while with parts links you have more ease of coding shows the classification made as a structure tree and in the future you can change family to the encoded component. (in stock)
then there are other advantages in research etc.
however it is worth evaluating this form in advance and not as in our case after a few years.
I hope I helped you.

to give you an idea we today have about 180 different families, including groups, machine models, commercial and design components. every time someone codifies a new component has to choose from this list and is not convenient.

do you manage them directly with windchill and in the company have a pc with installed windchill in the workshop?