cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Community Tip - Did you get called away in the middle of writing a post? Don't worry you can find your unfinished post later in the Drafts section of your profile page. X

Changing "Released" CAD Data in PDMLink

ptc-680841
1-Newbie

Changing "Released" CAD Data in PDMLink

Users, Abusers and Downtown Cruisers; I have two questions forthe users that are working with Pro/E and PDMLink. I am wondering if y'all are willing to share how your company handles these two scenarios in PDMLink:Non-Solid CAD Changes After Released: The models and drawing are at a RELEASED state, but there is something that needs to be changed or added in the 3D models. For example, you need to hide a Layer, add a Datum, fix a frozen or failing component's assembly constraint, add a Simp Rep, etc. We do not want to REVISE the model to bump it back to a state where it can be Checked Out, changed and Checked In. We are changing the model only, not the drawing. How are you handling this at your company? Make Minor Changes to A Drawing (or Model) During the Approval Process: The drawing is going through the process of being reviewed/approved. After ~10 people have reviewed it and approved it (Engineering, Manufacturing, Purchasing, etc.), one of the people in the process (Quality)finds a typo, or a layer that should have been hidden, or whatever. If the drawing is rejected, the review process has to start all over once it is fixed, causing a delay. How is your company handling this?Hopefully this is not too much of an "emotionally charged" issue for a Monday afternoon. Any input is appreciated! Thanks, Andy B.
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.
35 REPLIES 35

Patrick, thank you for putting my thoughts into words much better than I
have done.



As for making sure that models, assemblies, drawings are up to standard
that are grandfathered into the PDM system, I suggest that you look to
Modelcheck. It has some very useful tools to make sure that models
being checked into PDM meet company standards.



Christopher F. Gosnell



FPD Company

124 Hidden Valley Road

McMurray, PA 15317
STEVEG
21-Topaz I
(To:ptc-680841)

I am sorry to disagree with you on one of your points Patrick.

I believe PDMLink is more strict on family table objects then Intralink was. There were models that were perfectly fine in ILINK 3.x that need to be verified in PDMLink 9.x. I think this was even the case between versions of Pro/E at one point. Was that the users fault? No. It was reported as regenerated and verified in ILINK and a previous version of Pro/E. Can someone please confirm?

As a matter of fact just this past week I had a user that was working on an assembly and noticed objects on a family table were marked as modified in their workspace. I checked out the files to a workspace and verified the family table. Then I made sure nothing was different. It was easy as it was just a plain spring. Then I checked the files in and put a note in the Description box of the check-in form.

No offence intended but I think you are being a bit naïve about this situation.

Was it the fault of the software that the user didn't hide a layer, add a datum, etc. No. But there are times that objects need to be updated without increasing the revision.

Steve G

Anecdotally, my experience is exactly the opposite of yours.


In 2009, a company I worked at migrated just over 880000 files from Intralink 3.4 to Windchill PDMLink 9.1. Within that pile of files were thousands of family tables. Post migration, not a single family table needed to be reopened and verified. I can't really confirm whether this was due to a strict internal policy concerning the verification of all family tables or if it was something in the migration process, but there were no problems with family tables.

In Reply to Steve Galayda:


I am sorry to disagree with you on one of your points Patrick.

I believe PDMLink is more strict on family table objects then Intralink was. There were models that were perfectly fine in ILINK 3.x that need to be verified in PDMLink 9.x. I think this was even the case between versions of Pro/E at one point. Was that the users fault? No. It was reported as regenerated and verified in ILINK and a previous version of Pro/E. Can someone please confirm?

As a matter of fact just this past week I had a user that was working on an assembly and noticed objects on a family table were marked as modified in their workspace. I checked out the files to a workspace and verified the family table. Then I made sure nothing was different. It was easy as it was just a plain spring. Then I checked the files in and put a note in the Description box of the check-in form.

No offence intended but I think you are being a bit naïve about this situation.

Was it the fault of the software that the user didn't hide a layer, add a datum, etc. No. But there are times that objects need to be updated without increasing the revision.

Steve G

I will respectfully disagree with you that blaming the tool is naive for the examples I provided.


The change I am trying to make on a model is not visible on any drawing, it's not related to the products form, fit or function.


If I am adding a new coordinate system for the purpose of aiding a Validation Software such as Geomagic Quality in creating a report requested by QA, I should be able to open the model and add that coordinate system. The coordinate system has nothing to do with the product and it's not tied to any downstream or upstream components.


"Can Windchill change any object in the database, if you want it too -- but do you really want it too?" For the examples I am refering too, the answer is yes. They have no baring on the product, the documentation, the drawing, etc.


Others have provided some great ideas on how to manage these situations and I will investigate which method works best for us.


Thanks



In Reply to Patrick Perry:



In most situations released data should not be changed -- there is legal ramification for this (think OSHA certification). To blame the tool is being a bit naive. The problem is users are depending on the tool and NOT checking things as well as they should (or are being pressed to get things done more quickly than humanly possible). If a datum is visible on a drawing and that drawing was pushed to release, it is not the fault of the tool. If the corporation's process is objects should not be modified when they reach a released state, that is not the fault of the tool.


When I first started in PDM the vendor told me a two very wise statements. What is the best thing about a PDM tool, it can do whatever you want it to do. What is the worst thing about a PDM tool, it can do whatever you want it to do.


Windchill is very flexible, best practices through going to several companies has put limits on some freedoms. Can Windchill change any object in the database, if you want it you -- but do you really want it to? Can Windchill be designed to allow a group of users (other than Administrators) to change released objects -- it certainly can. My question would be in I am making several changes at released I maybe need to look at my process because certain steps are being missed. For the gentleman that need a coordinate system for verification, why not make that part of the process so that every model has that -- it no verification is required no harm. If verification requirement comes after release, then no change is required.


This discussion should not be about Windchill, Windchill is just a tool. This discussion should be about the process of getting objects to be production ready and what is the best way to insure those objects are ready for anything.







"Too many people walk around like Clark Kent, because they don't realize they can Fly like Superman"

So you expect software to be able to determine whether a change is
form-fit-function or just cosmetic? That is not going to happen anytime
soon. I've been involved in lengthy discussions where *people* could not
even agree on whether or not something was a FFF change or not. Good
luck with a computer making the decision.

Windchill provides the option of making changes without revision
changing. It is not a default option and I think everyone will agree
that this is the way it should be by design. Otherwise everyone could
make all sorts of changes after release, since the computer cannot
distinguish FFF changes from cosmetic changes.

If your process involves regular occurences where you need an admin to
change something and set the revision back to the unchanged number, then
you should re-think your process. Just keep track of why these changes
happen, and then try and formulate a change in your PDM process that
will prevent it from happening. I'm convinced that 80% of the occurences
can easily be avoided. For the other 20% you'll have to decide if the
costs for fixing are worth the gain, or if you should just live with it
and do the admin thing every so often.

Just my €0,02

Patrick Asselman

On Fri, 3 Feb 2012 07:19:44 -0700 (MST), Damian Castillo wrote:
> I will respectfully disagree with you that blaming the tool is naive
> for the examples I provided.
>
> The change I am trying to make on a model is not visible on any
> drawing, it's not related to the products form, fit or function.
>
> If I am adding a new coordinate system for the purpose of aiding a
> Validation report requested by QA, I should be able to open the model
> and add that coordinate system. The coordinate system has nothing to
> do with the product and it's not tied to any downstream or upstream
> components.
>
> "Can Windchill change any object in the database, if you want it too
> -- but do you really want it too?" For the examples I am refering
> too,
> the answer is yes. They have no baring on the product, the
> documentation, the drawing, etc.
>
> Others have provided some great ideas on how to manage these
> situations and I will investigate which method works best for us.
>
> Thanks
>
> In Reply to Patrick Perry:
>
>> In most situations released data should not be changed -- there is
>> legal ramification for this (think OSHA certification). To blame the
>> tool is being a bit naive. The problem is users are depending on the
>> tool and NOT checking things as well as they should (or are being
>> pressed to get things done more quickly than humanly possible). If a
>> datum is visible on a drawing and that drawing was pushed to
>> release, it is not the fault of the tool. If the corporation's
>> process is objects should not be modified when they reach a released
>> state, that is not the fault of the tool.
>>
>> When I first started in PDM the vendor told me a two very wise
>> statements. What is the best thing about a PDM tool, it can do
>> whatever you want it to do. What is the worst thing about a PDM
>> tool, it can do whatever you want it to do.
>>
>> Windchill is very flexible, best practices through going to several
>> companies has put limits on some freedoms. Can Windchill change any
>> object in the database, if you want it you -- but do you really want
>> it to? Can Windchill be designed to allow a group of users (other
>> than Administrators) to change released objects -- it certainly can.
>> My question would be in I am making several changes at released I
>> maybe need to look at my process because certain steps are being
>> missed. For the gentleman that need a coordinate system for
>> verification, why not make that part of the process so that every
>> model has that -- it no verification is required no harm. If
>> verification requirement comes after release, then no change is
>> required.
>>
>> This discussion should not be about Windchill, Windchill is just a
>> tool. This discussion should be about the process of getting objects
>> to be production ready and what is the best way to insure those
>> objects are ready for anything.
>
BenLoosli
23-Emerald II
(To:ptc-680841)

One of the tools that can enforce company standards on all parts before they are checked into Windchill is ModelCheck. If your company has certain things that must be in a file, put a check into ModelCheck and force ModelCheck to inspect all files at save time. There are parameters that can be established that if ModelCheck has x errors, it will not allow the check-in to be processed.

Yes, ModelCheck is not easy to set up, but it can be a tool that saves time in the end. It is just another tool in the toolbox, like Wildfire and Windchill.

Thank you,

Ben H. Loosli
USEC, INC.
Top Tags