Let's say we have 3 different organizations: Apple, Banana and Cucumber.
Each organization uses a different EPMDocument type.
Apple uses the default "CAD Document" EPMDocument type.
Banana has its own type called "Banana CAD Document". This is a subtype of CAD Document.
Cucumber has its own type called "Cucumber CAD Document". This is a subtype of CAD Document.
When uploading (& checking in) CAD objects from Creo Parametric to Windchill, the correct EPM Document type shall be used when creating the Windchill object. How can I do that?
I know that you can do that with the UPLOAD_SOFT_TYPE attribute in Creo. So one easy fix would be to set up templates with this attribute. However, sometimes the engineers don't use these templates (because they forget about it). So are there other ways to ensure that the correct EPM Document type is used?
Solved! Go to Solution.
Hi @FS_9776388
You can write a validator to check if the type is correct based on the organisation
you have to just write a code and implement validator for check in operation.
Or you can add a check in any workflow process that say hey user, you use wrong CAD type, do your work better and start again. 😄
Or you can just add a code to a workflow that change the CAD type by code based on your conditions it is also possible. But there is no any check if all parameters are ok that are defined on the specific type.
Sure you could do it after check in...
PetrH
Hi @FS_9776388
You can write a validator to check if the type is correct based on the organisation
you have to just write a code and implement validator for check in operation.
Or you can add a check in any workflow process that say hey user, you use wrong CAD type, do your work better and start again. 😄
Or you can just add a code to a workflow that change the CAD type by code based on your conditions it is also possible. But there is no any check if all parameters are ok that are defined on the specific type.
Sure you could do it after check in...
PetrH
I wished there was a more "out of the box" way to do this, but I'll go down the validator route then. Thanks for your help!