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

The PTC Community email address has changed to community-mailer@ptc.com. Learn more.

Prevent/Remove attachments from copying over in Save As functions in commonspace for EPMDocuments

Prevent/Remove attachments from copying over in Save As functions in commonspace for EPMDocuments

EPMDocument Save-As in Windchill commonspace will also bring all the attachments to the new number/name/file name EPMDocuments, how to prevent attachments from copying over to a new name/number in Save As functions in Windchill?

 

I do here by recommend PTC to add this function in Windchill, so the User can easily work with the newly copied/save-as CAD files with out wasting time in editing the CAD data to remove the attachments before proceeding for design work.

12 Comments
TomazJeras
11-Garnet

I support this idea very much.

Customer is using AfterERDLoader to copy visualization to attachments (for easy access) and visualizations are copied over when they Save As EPM Doc. Then guys, not so proficient in Windchill, pick up wrong file and send it further. They have quite a mess with that.

HJ1
14-Alexandrite
14-Alexandrite

Why is this not proceeding to an OOTB solution?

Maybe there's a requirement somewhere to copy over obsolete data during Save As and it's my limited experience to understand what such could be, but why is this not made optional? There's several product ideas already related to the same.

 

As Tomaz points out guys not so proficient pick the wrong file, but it's not only that. When using Add to Package to collect pdf-files to a zip you will get all the obsolete files as well, no matter how proficient you are. In our case, the guys creating the zip are not the ones who create the EPMDoc but they rely on the content to be valid and relevant. As there's room for human error (forget to manually remove obsolete files after Save As) it is certain that there will be obsolete files all the way through approval. You may ask why are they not checked thoroughly, but come on, there's so many things one should pay attention to.

ScottMorris
17-Peridot

We attach PDF files of the published CAD drawings to the epm.doc. Any time this epm.doc is included in a Save As operation, it always pulls the obsolete PDF file with it, giving the new object a PDF file that does not match. The publisher logic is looking for an attachment with the same name, so we are manually removing the outdated attachments as they are discovered.

It would be better to update the publishing logic, but this is a great example of why there should be an option to include or exclude attachments in the Save As process.

HJ1
14-Alexandrite
14-Alexandrite

Couldn't agree more.

So, what we'd like to see:

 

- A setting in e.g. Preferences to enable / disable forward copying of Attachments in case of Save As
- functionality in EPMDocument Actions -menu to delete selected files in Attachments. This should be possible in Commonspace without iteration to EPMDoc.

(PTC, talk to @d_graham and maybe even give him a couple of bucks, you can afford it 😉

https://community.ptc.com/t5/Windchill-Ideas/Ability-to-remove-attachments-on-CAD-object-in-Windchill/idi-p/709941)

 

and...  

- develop AfterEDRLoader to delete also files copied forward by Save As, ie. those with the object id from which the copy was made... there may be some caveats here and not really needed if the above is in place. Well, just make sure it works with the first two features above.

TV_8679981
1-Newbie

Save-as CAD files with out wasting time in editing the CAD data to remove the attachments.

This generate a lot of garbage on network and create manufacturing mistakes.

HelesicPetr
21-Topaz I

Hi,

Any news in the "new" idea from PTC implementation team ?

PetrH

HB_9365038
3-Visitor

Hi,

Any news in the idea from PTC implementation team ?

 

Haithem

JenniferPierron
14-Alexandrite
Status changed to: Under Consideration

Hello All.

 

From the thread, it seems like you would like a UI to pick and choose which attachments to copy forward or not, is that right?   

 

Do you think there is a smaller scope that might provide your users some benefit?  For example, even if PTC provides a UI, I would think the administrator would want to set up some good defaults,  Could we start there?

  • Scope 1: Preference to copy all or none of the attachments on a CAD Document
  • Scope 2: Use the Content Services preferences to let you choose what attachments are carried forward or not based on their Content Category (e.g. configure the system to copy forward the attachments of content category "Analysis Input" but not the "Print" content category attachments)
  • Scope 3: Use either Scope 1 or Scope 2 as the default behavior; but provide a UI allow the user to override the defaults and select which attachments to carry forward or not,

Could you let me know if Scope 1 or Scope 2 would solve a business problem for you or if you think we really need to go to Scope 3 directly?

Thanks

Jennifer

HJ1
14-Alexandrite
14-Alexandrite

Just discussed with purchaser who was wondering why he has two drawings in the package and the other one looks funny... surprise, an outdated attachment copied forward during Save As and deletion forgotten.

 

Scope 1, please   🤗

 

Also, note my (radical, I know) comment two years (....) back:

- functionality in EPMDocument Actions -menu to delete selected files in Attachments. This should be possible in Commonspace without iteration to EPMDoc

 

 

ScottMorris
17-Peridot

@JenniferPierron, i like your approach for this idea to be inclusive of all the functions and capabilities in Windchill Scope #1 would be the first one for me. in almost all cases, we do not want to carry the attachments forward to the copy. the attachments are typically PDF drawings and STEP models created by the CAD Publisher. sometimes we have DXF and STL files attached also, making it more difficult to manage parts with multiple attachments.

 

the impact of the outdated attachments is critical for the accuracy of Windchill Packages. when old items are not removed by the users, the wrong information is sent to vendors and contract manufacturers. that creates a data integrity check for the package creators to run a report to identify items with multiple PDF or STEP attachments and update accordingly.

 

i really like @HJ1's idea of an easier way to edit attachments on parts. today it is a round trip to a workspace to remove them which is a long and click intensive process.

HelesicPetr
21-Topaz I

@ScottMorris 

This idea should have been implemented many years ago. 

I created many customization for customers where the new visualization delete old attachments that are copied from original save from object 

PetrH 

BjoernRueegg
17-Peridot

I also agree with @HelesicPetr . I created many customizings to remove the attachment or also master attributes during Save As. 

Scope 3 would be really cool, but scope 1 would be the start.

And I also support the idea from @ScottMorris  to make the function to add / remove attachments easier and possible in the common space.