Part Setup Workflows

[vmcdaniel]

Hey guys,

We use the promotion request for New Part(SAP material) setups. We promote the WTPart and CAD for approval, then send to another group to edit WTPart attributes, then finally to a group to take that info and create the materials.
Question is, how would I lock the CAD after the approval, but still allow a group to Edit the WTPart?

Thanks!

[alonkar-2]

Preferably attributes should be added on CAD part, which then will be passed on to WT part.
You can set the deny permission for 'EPMDocument' for 'another group' using policy administrator as per your requirements.

Best Regards,
~Amit Lonkar

[vmcdaniel]

Amit,

Thanks, I have also considered to allow Group-B edit permissions on WTParts at UNDERREVIEW, it just seems sloppy... and not preferable.

Does anyone know, can workflow enable that permission, on just the specific objects in the PR?

Be well,

Vaughn

[MikeLockwood]

So, in Windchill configuration terminology:

- Finish iterating the Part and related CAD Docs

- Cause state change for both the Part and related CAD Docs (e.g. via approved Promotion Request); possibly not to the same state

- At the state after promotion, users do not have Modify permission for CAD Docs

- At the state after promotion, some users do have Modify permission for Parts

- Possibly another state change would be needed for the Parts following edits (e.g. via another Promotion Request for just the Part)

[patrickchin2000]

I agree totally withMike,

The Promotion Request was really setup for Pro/Intralink integration (ProE CAD only). Using Change Notices and Change Activitiy Packages/Implementation Planwith Affected (From) and Resulting (To) is the key. You don't have to use individual workflows per WTPart and EPMDocument. Just have the ECN review process set the state of the entire package. You can even have the affected go to obsolete after some effectivity or immediately and the resulting go to Released State immediately.

The only issue I have is the search capabilities of finding objects when adding objects to the affected and resulting. I really hope that PTC adds the advance search, classification search or even browse function. I'm just on Windchill 10.1 M030. After you have found your object, you can then collect with the normal collectors.

The attached may look complicated. But the drivers are now ECN and not a listener for each object (Part or Document) to mature. Most companies review packages of drawings at a time and release the entire package at a time. It becomes very simple to just review the task of a simple workflow from the ECN level that drives the package.

To Mike and All, Have a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

[MikeLockwood]

Have seen several dozen diagrams now with similar intent, all constructed in novel and ingenious ways.

We make a big deal of:

- Showing Product Data (the whole point of Windchill and all the activity) at the top, in different color and font, and as the key thing to track. Focus on their Revisions and States, and show these as a grid, Revisions vertically, States horizontally. The Resulting Objects in general are created via Revise (Save As) from Affected Objects, but for just a state change, this is different.

- Showing the change objects and their progression thru states relative to product data, and laid out in time as they occur (like nested subroutines). Other than routed tasks, the primary purpose of all the change objects is to accomplish the progression thru Revisions and the final state change of the product data objects.

Challenging to make these diagrams but well worth it. Would be interesting to pool all them somewhere for discussion. At PTC/User TC in jan in Needham I volunteered to lead a round-table discussion on change management - will likely include this type of thing.

[patrickchin2000]

We should really all come up with a proposal of how to view released structure based on various criteria (release date, effectivity, ECN, etc) to drill down even to WTPart/material respective drawings. I follow the CMII approach with the document impact matrix and revision matrix.

I mentioned this to PTC of structures with more than 3 levels deep. I don't beleive they really understood what was required that you sometimes don't mass revise the entire structure all the way up. We sometimes follow a 1 level up BOM revise if a WTPart component replacement. Thus, there is no fit, form, function (3f's) change to the 2 level up WTPartBOM. This leads to BOM management which I'm very disapointed in PTC in how their architecture is focused on just a programmatic limitation ofa usage link versus business rules.

It's been like this since day one of Windchill.

[vmcdaniel]

Mike,

Close.

Below is the proposed promote to RELEASED workflow, at the Sourcing and MFG steps those people need to Edit the WTPart attributes and add Reference Documents.
The workflow is trying to convey they can Edit the WTPart at the APPROVED state.

Also, we use the iteration refresh in the PR workflow, it was a helper added to the 10.0 OOTB PR.

[patrickchin2000]

That's another issue I had with PTC WTPart Managmentwith supplier management. Adding manufacturer's part types to WTPArts to add/update or change AML and AVL should not change the material or fit, fit form and function and thus should not require a iteration or revision to the "design" WTPart. Hopefully, the person is only allowed to add a AML/AVL link but I bet you have to addd more ACLs to the other attributes so they are not able to modify.

What happens after released state, if you need to add more AML and AVL updates? Some companies (electrical) have the AML on the schematic BOM and some don't.

Since PTC is supposed to now cater to both Electrical, software, mechanical or complete product BOMs, it should have the ability to separate AML/AVL changes to WPart changes. Sourcing status is not a modification to material or fit, form, or function change. It can be a document revision like the schematic or drawing that has the AML report. The WTPart BOM should not revise if it is not part of the design BOM.

But, if it is your business your busness process, then by all means. I would try to prevent mass revising and keeping everything to its functional and business constituents.

[krichardson]

Great dicussion! Designing Change Control is next on my plate next year - we are in the prrocess of updating to WC 10.1 as I type.

Merry Christmas also to Mike & all! Kathy

[mlocascio]

A Merry Christmas to the group.



>