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

Community Tip - Help us improve the PTC Community by taking this short Community Survey! X

Copied PartsLink Leafs cannot be pasted

SW_10706861
7-Bedrock

Copied PartsLink Leafs cannot be pasted

Hi Community,

 

I am using PartsLink on Windchill 12.0.2.0. 

I want to reorganize some sheets of the PartsLink classification tree. when i copy a leaf and want to place it in the new branch, nothing happens. Not when I select copy with attributes nor when I select copy without attributes.
The branch to be copied is not assigned to any part.
If I create a new sheet and copy it to a test branch, it works.
Does anyone know which attribute, setting or similar prevents copying?

Or is there any other way to move leafs within the structure?

 

many thanks upfront

BR Simon

ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions

The following error message was unfortunately not coming up in front end but in the logs it says:

The string "Outerdiameter" used in the Autonaming Rule does not match the internal name of any attribute on this node, or the string does not match the 'CSM_NODE_NAME' constant for Node's internal name.

 So the solution for me is to delete the autonaming rule, do the copy, paste and setup of autonaming rule again.

 

If I read the message it is a pitty because if the copy procedure would have another sequence, I would assume it would work without the workaround.

Perhaps this could be a bugfix?! 😉

 

cheers

View solution in original post

1 REPLY 1

The following error message was unfortunately not coming up in front end but in the logs it says:

The string "Outerdiameter" used in the Autonaming Rule does not match the internal name of any attribute on this node, or the string does not match the 'CSM_NODE_NAME' constant for Node's internal name.

 So the solution for me is to delete the autonaming rule, do the copy, paste and setup of autonaming rule again.

 

If I read the message it is a pitty because if the copy procedure would have another sequence, I would assume it would work without the workaround.

Perhaps this could be a bugfix?! 😉

 

cheers

Announcements


Top Tags