Skip to main content
S
silardi1-Visitor
1-Visitor
October 17, 2016
Question

How to prevent user from manually changing release field on drawing

  • October 17, 2016
  • 3 replies
  • 5544 views

On our standard drawing format there is a table cell that shows release level (WIP, check, release) through a relation to the life cycle parameter.  I recently had a case where a user bypassed the tool administrator by breaking the relation to the life cycle parameter and simply writing "Release" in the cell.  Is there a way to prevent a user from modifying cell contents either through password protection or permissions in CREO?

I'm using CREO Parametric 2.0


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.

3 replies

T
23-Emerald IV
TomU23-Emerald IV
23-Emerald IV
October 17, 2016

Ultimately, no.  You can slow them down though...  Some things to try:

  • Place the a note to the life cycle parameter directly on the format.  This won't be editable from a drawing (only from the format.)
  • Consider using a single cell repeat region in the drawing table.  This is not as easily overwritten.
T
TomD.inPDX17-Peridot
17-Peridot
October 18, 2016

Any pro|program tricks that can throw a user a curve ball?

I remember something like that stopping someone dead in their tracks before.

T
23-Emerald IV
TomU23-Emerald IV
23-Emerald IV
October 18, 2016

None come to mind.  Again, the issue is not the value of the parameter, it's whether or not that parameter is still being displayed on the drawing.

M
mbonka2-Explorer
2-Explorer
October 18, 2016

What about restricted parameter in combination with Modelcheck ? --- just an idea

Restricted:

- parameter is restricted to following values: WIP, check, release

Modelcheck:

- each part/assembly have to include your specific relation for "release" else it´s not possible to check-in model

Just an idea

T
23-Emerald IV
TomU23-Emerald IV
23-Emerald IV
October 18, 2016

I don't think this will help.  The issue here is not the value of the parameter but rather the removal of the parameter entirely from the table cell (overwritten with plain text.)  The original parameter did not change, it's just not visible anymore.

D
dschenken1-Visitor
1-Visitor
October 19, 2016

If you have users who are willing to falsify their work, then that's a management problem.

For example. If you made it so that the existence of the parameter could be checked for, then I could set the location off the drawing or set the text height to a tiny number or put it on a layer and blank it. After that I just add a text note with whatever I want - or, if that's looked for, by creating an IGS or DXF import of a vector representation of the note.

Whenever the problem is a user going out of their way to do the wrong thing, the correct option is to remove the user from the environment.

    T
    TomD.inPDX17-Peridot
    17-Peridot
    October 20, 2016

    I've found white e-stickers on PDF master files in PDM.

    When you contract detailing work, expect the worst!

    Could Model Check look to see if the field/annotation value is the same as the PDM value?

    In previous lives, companies have written out release routines where the PDM does the final "stamping" before everything was sealed up in the PDM.

    It would stamp the release state per the PDM on the drawing (in the CAD!)*, generate the plot(PDF), generate appropriate export formats, and save all the files to the right locations.

    *If you have PDM modify the original CAD file, realize that it has to open as it was last saved.  ref: UGNX/Teamcenter

    Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement