Windchill Ideas

Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. 1. What product and version are you running? Windchill 12.1.2.4 2. What is the problem? Allocating Parts to Operation on the Process Plan Browser is automatically expanding the Operation level Bad performance if many parts. Makes it hard to jump between different operations to allocate parts. Need to collaps the tree between every operation I want to allocate to.  3. Are you using a workaround? If yes, please describe it. No 4. What is the use case for your organization? Describe how your idea would work in context or how it would apply to a practical situation. Suggested New preference for expand operation or groups or not when allocation parts to operation. Saves a lot of time for user when working with large BOMs 5. What impact does this problem currently have on your organization? (Number of users affected, hours of lost productivity, etc.) 200+ manufacturing engineers waste time to collapse and scroll thru process plan to find correct operation after part allocation. Typical 30 seconds loss after each part allocation to an operation. we have around 500+ operations in our process plan. Normal day around 20 operations are worked with. 20 * 30 * 200 => 120 000 seconds per day as waste => 33 hours per day waste => 5 FTE ( Full time employee per year ) ... View more

1. Describe your environment: What is your industry? What is your role in your organization? Describe your stakeholders. Any manufacturing industry with assembly steps using tools on multiple operations and multiple workstations. 2. What version of Windchill are you currently running? 12.1.2.0 3. Describe the problem you are trying to solve. Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. In a process plan, we sometimes need to use the same tool (like a manufacturing jig for exemple) to assemble components across multiple operations and across multiple workstations. In this type of use case, the tool is mobile and translate in the shopfloor. In the process plan, we need to insert the tool in each operation and move it in the right position (using Creo View MCAD or using the viewable toolbar to capture the position) so the viewable is good in the process plan player and ready for illustration. This process is time consuming as we need to do it for each operation using the same tool.   It would be nice to have a tool to copy/paste a tool between operations including the position matrix, or to simply copy/paste the position itself. 4. What is the use case for your organization? See previous explanation 5. What business value would your suggestion represent for your organization? A lot of time savings for such use cases. ... View more

Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. 1. What version of the software are you running? 12.x Link to Case: https://www.ptc.com/appserver/cs/view/case.jsp?n=16931728 2. What is the problem? When using Creo Illustrate Illustration on Operations.  There's action to create new illustration, open existing,  or remove illustrations from Operations . But there is no (re)associate illustration action The remove action is just near the open illustration.  there's no popup window "are you sure ...?"  and we loose the Illustration ... without the ability to cancel 3. Are you using a workaround? If yes, please describe it. No ,  Impossible to re associate deleted Illustration by error 4. What is the use case for your organization? Describe how your idea would work in context or how it would apply to a practical situation. At first to avoid removing by error .   But could also be an association feature that allow to re use or duplicate "Illustration Templates" that will be therefor updated in the context of the Operation   (by adding Tools, Part allocated etc ...) 5. What impact does this problem currently have on your organization? (Number of users affected, hours of lost productivity, etc.) 50 Users: Depending of the content and complexity of the Illustration ,  work lost could be in hours per Illusration   ... View more

For MPMLink users, process plan users, the issue by steps : 1. PART 1 linked to PROCESS PLAN A.1 2. PART 2 without any PROCESS PLAN 3. USER 1 deletes PROCESS PLAN A.1 from PART 1 without check-in PROCESS PLAN A.1 (PROCESS PLAN A.1 is checked-out) 4. USER 2 adds PROCESS PLAN A.1 to PART 2 (BOM transformer or Process Plan information's page 5. USER 1 check-in its PROCESS PLAN A.1 which becomes PROCESS PLAN A.2 6. RESULT : PART 1 without PROCESS PLAN but PART 2 linked only to PROCESS PLAN A.1 and PROCESS PLAN A.2 is not present even though it is the latest version... 7. If PART 2 is revised, iterated, the new version is without a PROCESS PLAN...   IDEA 1 : Generate an error message and do not allow to add a link [part-process plan] if this process plan is checked out.   IDEA 2 : If a process plan is checked out by user 1 and a part is added by user 2, the link [part-process plan] created by user 2 is strong and maintained if the process plan evolves.   IDEA 3 : No iteration anymore if we remove a part from a process plan.   IDEA 4 : Process plan must be checked out if we want to add a new link [Part-Process Plan] ... View more

1. Describe your environment: What is your industry? Automotive What is your role in your organization? Business Analyst Describe your stakeholders. Product Owners = what we produce on the shop floor Manufacturing Owners = responsible for our production and how we produce on the shop floor   2. What version of Windchill are you currently running? 12.1.2.0 3. Describe the problem you are trying to solve. Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. Today Windchill support inline editing of attributes in Part Structure Browser as Help Center describes here: PTC Windchill Help Center Article describes here: Article - CS303657 - Which attributes can be edited in Part Structure using Inline Editing in Windchill PDMLink (ptc.com)   The idea is that Windchill also get support for inline editing of attributes for all MPMLink object types and all MPMLink browsers.   4. What is the use case for your organization? To speed up manufacturing engineering work and no need to activate usage tab. 5. What business value would your suggestion represent for your organization? To get user acceptance that Windchill is a modern PLM-solution including manufacturing data and methods and not only technology data.   Creating/developing/managing process plan/routing in Windchill should be at least as powerful and user friendly than best in class ERP system.   To have a 1 to 1 integration to ERP requires that the users see the advantage on their daily work. i.e. quicker to create and develop process plan, improve quality and accuracy of the process plan and cost roll up etc.... ... View more

1. Describe your environment: What is your industry? - Electrical and electronic equipment manufacturing   What is your role in your organization? - PLM administrator and project leader in the area of Windchill development according to the needs of internal departments using the system   Describe your stakeholders. - R&D, product industrialization department, quality control, product certification laboratory, and other departments dependent on technical management   2. What version of Windchill are you currently running? 12.0.2.6 3. Describe the problem you are trying to solve. Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. Need to be able to duplicate a process plan by changing part of the plan structure. 4. What is the use case for your organization? Increasingly, there is a growing need to be able to produce semi-finished products on different work centers, yet maintain the same process plan.   Production scheduling needs to optimize the use of work centers according to production orders resulting from sales.   So the need is to create process plan alternatives by changing only the work center on which to produce, but keeping everything else in the plan unchanged (see below image).   What has just been described should be multiplied by dozens or hundreds of process plans at a time, depending on the optimization of work center occupancy.     5. What business value would your suggestion represent for your organization? At present, it is impossible for the time and methods department to make the changes required by the production schedule within the required time.   Therefore, production scheduling is forced to manually execute these changes in the scheduling SW.   However, this mode of operation results in discrepancies between what is provided in the ERP system (in our case, Windchill is connected to SAP for sending, via Tibco and Windchill ESI, material master records, BoM, process plans, and ECNs) and what results to management control, which uses data from the production scheduler. ... View more

1. Describe your environment: What is your industry? Automotive What is your role in your organization? Business Analyst Describe your stakeholders. Product Owners = what we produce on the shop floor Manufacturing Owners = responsible for our production and how we produce on the shop floor   2. What version of Windchill are you currently running? 12.1.1.0 3. Describe the problem you are trying to solve. Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. It is not possible to create a sequence below a operation. Due to this, it is cumbersome to maintain parallelism on lower than first level of a process plan.   4. What is the use case for your organization? To be able to send correct data to downstream ERP solutions. 5. What business value would your suggestion represent for your organization? This is a GAP in Windchill, so other PLM-solution may be needed to select that has this capability.   Creating/developing/managing process plan/routing in Windchill should be at least as powerful and user friendly than best in class ERP system.   To have a 1 to 1 integration to ERP requires that the users see the advantage on their daily work. i.e. quicker to create and develop process plan, improve quality and accuracy of the process plan and cost roll up etc.... ... View more

1. Describe your environment: What is your industry? Automotive What is your role in your organization? Business Analyst Describe your stakeholders. Product Owners = what we produce on the shop floor Manufacturing Owners = responsible for our production and how we produce on the shop floor   2. What version of Windchill are you currently running? 12.1.1.0 3. Describe the problem you are trying to solve. Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. Today a sequence have the attribute “Return Operation” as mandatory. This makes it impossible to end a process plan with a sequence.  Due to this, it is cumbersome to maintain parallelism/alternate flows reflecting reality in a process plan. Using a "fictive" last operation is not an option because this does not exists in reality or in the ERP solution.   Idea is to be able to leave the attribute “Return Operation” blank meaning that it is the end of the “flow”.  This makes it possible to end a Process Plan in several different ways. See attached document. 4. What is the use case for your organization? To be able to send correct data to downstream ERP solutions. 5. What business value would your suggestion represent for your organization? This is a GAP in Windchill, so other PLM-solution may be needed to select that has this capability.   Creating/developing/managing process plan/routing in Windchill should be at least as powerful and user friendly than best in class ERP system.   To have a 1 to 1 integration to ERP requires that the users see the advantage on their daily work. i.e. quicker to create and develop process plan, improve quality and accuracy of the process plan and cost roll up etc.... ... View more

Based on a archived idea I would rise a hand to implement it old idea Copying Resources from Search or Browse and Paste in Process Plan  From advanced search it would be very usable to be able to add a resources to PP.  Also the article exists that describes this needs.  https://www.ptc.com/en/support/article/CS196520   Steps : 1. Create Process Plan 2. Create Operations 3. Assign Parts 4. Access Resource Library  5. Copy a resource from Library (This can also be achieved by searching the resources & copying the resource) 6. In Process Plan “Structure” Tab navigate to “Processing Resources” 7. Click on Paste icon to Paste the Resource ... View more

The impossibility of creating and managing production objects and production processes in the Windchill project environment.   1. Describe your environment: What is your industry? What is your role in your organization? Describe your stakeholders. General machine-building - Manufacturing Engineering / Production Preparation / Workshop 2. What version of Windchill are you currently running? Windchill 12.1.0.0 3. Describe the problem you are trying to solve. Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. No ability to manage complex projects in Windchill. The collaboration in development process is increasing however there is missing possibility to manage manufacturing process plans in Windchill Projects.  4. What is the use case for your organization? Impossibility to manage manufacturing process plans in projects decrease productivity in Windchill  5. What business value would your suggestion represent for your organization? Streamline development process across whole organization on a single platform. ... View more

Issue 324 - Process Plan - Show BOM Usage Expression for parts also in Process Plan Structure - not only in tree picker. One way is to show in the same column as Process Plan Assigned Usage Expressions or to be able to add a separate column for BOM Assigned Usage Expressions.   Much more user understanding if this information is shown in Process Plan structure. See attached picture. ... View more

I would like to import WTparts Design and Manufacturing Structure 1:1 as initial state. Article CS314633 describes that it is not part of functionality.   The api to create relevant New Downstream Branch is missing.    Please provide the api to create new Dowstream Branch or Part programmatically as it is possible in the MAPSB.   Thank you so much.   ... View more

Change Baseline and Multi-Level BOM reports to also be available for MFG Resources and not just for WTParts. Entire Report and Export functionality is missing from the Structures Tab. ... View more

PTC is doing good with MPMLink product. Every body started liking it much.. As I am working on MPMLink from past 5 years.. Process plan structure page improved very well in terms of actions against Process plan and its objects.   Please add Compare tool for comparing Process plan revisions / iterations in history table. This will help debugging on what is changed with pervious version. Better to give a report by comparing all its structure objects.   Thanks, Shyam.   ----------------------------- [Note from Community Management: We have merged 3 identical ideas into the newest one (above). The process intends merges the unique votes and sort all comments chronologically, regardless of what idea they are coming from. We hope that the conversation remains coherent. July 21, 2022] ... View more

1. Describe your environment: What is your industry? What is your role in your organization? Describe your stakeholders. Business description: Design and manufacturing of logistics systems. Mainly development of automobile production lines. Affiliation: Belongs to Manufacturing Department. Create an MBOM from an EBOM created by Engineering Department. Arrange a part by transferring MBOM information from Windchill to a production control system, which is another system. 2. What version of Windchill are you currently running? Windchill PDMLink 11.2.1.2 Windchill MPMLink 11.2.1.2 3. Describe the problem you are trying to solve. Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. This is a problem that occurs when you propagate a change (a part added in an EBOM) to an MBOM. When you select a part added in an EBOM from "Propagate Upstream Changes" in Manufacturing Associative Part Structure Browser and execute "Propagate changes to downstream", the EBOM will be copied to the MBOM side. Instead of copying the EBOM, we want to have a new downstream part created on the MBOM side.   4. What is the use case for your organization? (With the desired behavior described above,) when you add multiple parts on the EBOM side, new downstream parts can be added to the MBOM side all at once. With the current behavior, we need to take the following steps to create new downstream parts one by one, which takes a lot of time and effort: ①Search for a part added on the EBOM side. ②Search for the parent of the added part on the EBOM side --> Select the MBOM corresponding to the parent of the EBOM. ③Select the added part on the EBOM side and drag and drop it to the MBOM. ④Select "New Part" from "Options". 5. What business value would your suggestion represent for your organization? Since we are designing automobile production lines, the number of parts is large and the hierarchy is complicated, and there is a risk in the work itself of accurately propagating changes (parts added on the EBOM side to an MBOM. Currently, changes on the EBOM side are not accurately propagated to the MBOM side, and due to designers' mistakes, problems occur when propagating parts added on the EBOM side to the MBOM side, which leaves some parts not arranged. Also, for the above reason, users are showing reluctance to manage MBOMs in Windchill. By making the above improvement for the problem, it will be possible to reduce users' time and effort and the risk of leaving parts not arranged. ... View more

Today Process Plan only highlight the operation holders with inconsistencies in a process plan structure.   Product Idea is to also highlight operation if sub-operation has inconsistencies. Then user easy can see where to expand to find inconsistencies operations.   In attach picture example #90 & #120 also would be highlighted. Otherwise #90/40 & #120/75&78 would be hidden from user of only level 1 is expand in Process Plan.     ... View more

BOM configuration may have changed further from "Released" state in concurrent development process, we need to create a process plan for "As Matured" BOM configuration.   Currently in PPB, it can use "As Matured" filter for tree picker , but can't use for process plan filiter. So that allocated part to operation is show latest version.   We need "As Matured" BOM filter for process plan to solve this problem. ... View more

Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. 1. What version of the software are you running? 11.1 M020-CPS23 2. What is the problem? After setting up a WT-Part structure and publishing this to CAD (Using Publish to CAD in the WT-Part check-in window), we don't see any 3D representation for the WT-Part. We tried to build the WT-Part from CAD, but still no 3D representation is available. Checked with PTC support, according to TS this is as it should be, as our 3D-CAD also has a drawing linked and this drawing link is being calculated to the WT-Part. So during the build from 3D-CAD, Windchill recognizes the present representation of the drawing and skips the generation of a 3D.  3. Are you using a workaround? If yes, please describe it. Only workaround according to TS, is to open up the 3D-CAD object in CAD, check-out and check-in again. Then it works as expected. 4. What is the use case for your organization? Describe how your idea would work in context or how it would apply to a practical situation. For the moment this forces our non mechanical engineers to contact a mechanical engineer simply to open up a 3D-CAD file, save it and check-in. 5. What impact does this problem currently have on your organization? (Number of users affected, hours of lost productivity, etc.) Per assembly we easily loose 30 minutes of time, leaving aside, that a not invovled engineer needs to interupt his work and the non mechanical engineer needs to wait for him.     Log from the system:   wt.wvs.representation.StandardRepresentationService Administrator - setDefaultRepresentation() is blocking wt.part.WTPart:193933307 in Thread[PublisherQueueSE2.PollingThread,5,main] wt.wvs.representation.StandardRepresentationService Administrator - Allow setDefaultRepresentation() for wt.part.WTPart:193933307 wt.wvs.representation.StandardRepresentationService Administrator - enter getDefaultRepresentation wt.wvs.representation.StandardRepresentationService Administrator - currentDefaultRep=wt.viewmarkup.DerivedImage:193956360 wt.wvs.representation.StandardRepresentationService Administrator - Exit setDefaultRepresentation() - Default Already Set <-- which is the calculated link object (2D-Drawing)   My idea or wish would now be to either - ignore already existing default representations if they are on a lower hierarchy (Owner<Content<Image<Calculated). - add an option to not show representations of calculated links as WT-Part annotation.     ... View more