I have just enabled autonumbering for one particular product and now I need to do some renaming/renumbering to use the new numbers. Is there any way to have the drawings automatically use the model's newly assigned number? Since I can't see what the new number is until after the renaming process is finished, I have no idea how to properly rename the drawings while still keeping them matched up with their corresponding models. Any ideas?
This is what happens if I autonumber everything together (drawing doesn't match the model):
If I autonumber just the models, I won't have any idea which newly named model the drawing should be associated with (in order to rename it.):
Unfortunately I need to rename thousands of objects, and most of them are in SolidWorks. 
What I really need is something like this for each of the drawings:
We don't use WT Parts, but I wonder if "Generate document number based on related Part" could do this...
Would it work to somehow (automatically) associate both the model and the drawing to the same WT Part, rename the WT Part (autonumber), and then rename the CAD model and drawing to follow the WT Part?
Hello Tom.
Are you also creating Parts in Windchill? Does your Part have the same number?
Are you using Windchill 11.0?
In Windchill 11.0, in the Rename UI, there is an option "Generate document number based on related Part".
The control was designed such that the model and the drawing (and other deliverables related to the Part) use the Part's number as a basis for the CAD Document numbers:
Part's Identifiers:
- Number is generated: 00001234
CAD Document's Identifiers
- Number is based on Part number; but contains extensions and suffixes to make it unique
- 00001234.PRT
- 00001234_FLEX001.PRT
- 00001234.DRW
- 00001234.MFG
–File Name is same as number
Does this help?
Thanks
Jennifer
Thanks for the reply. Yes, Windchill 11.0 M030 CPS01. We are not currently using WT Parts. So far we haven't seen any benefit to doing so. (We are CAD centric, don't use BOMs, and aren't connected to an ERP system.) I'm not sure I want to start using WT Parts just for the rename capability. Seems like an awful lot of overhead and extra work just for this function.
I also recently noticed that there is an inconsistency with the "Set New Name" dialog depending on whether I'm doing a "Rename" or "Save As". "Rename" will allow me to set everything to an autogenerated number. "Save As" will not. Why? 
Unfortunately, neither "Rename" or "Save As" will allow the drawing and cad model name/number/filename to stay synchronized between them. (The drawing and model already match,except for extension, and they should continue to match after both a rename and save as.)
Hello Tom.
I understand. Each company must decide whether to use Parts or not.
You asked:
Rename" will allow me to set everything to an autogenerated number. "Save As" will not. Why?
<jlmp> So, there is a way to do it; but you are right it is not done in the same way.
<jlmp>
<jlmp>HOW TO SET NAME=NUMBER in SAVE AS UI
<jlmp>- You need to set up an OIR that sets name=number, then choose the "Autogenerate" choice. If you need a sample OIR let me know.
<jlmp>
<jlmp>WHY ARE THEY DIFFERENT?
<jlmp>Save As is really CREATING and thus OIRs are applicable. Based on requestes, we have extended OIR concepts to rename; but originally they were not designed to use OIRs. The result is that the options are slightly different where Save As is more OIR focused and Rename controls are more explicit.
<jlmp>You stated:
Unfortunately, neither "Rename" or "Save As" will allow the drawing and cad model name/number/filename to stay synchronized between them.
<jlmp> If you do not have a Part, we do not have a tool right now.
<jlmp> The only other suggestion I have is to use the OIRs to generate number; but allow it to be editable (not immutable). If you do not want to pre-generate the number, then you will need to do the rename in 2 steps.
<jlmp> If you would like some additional tools, I would start an idea and based on interest, we could add something to the software.
Thanks
Jennifer
I just tried changing the "Save As" preferences. Lots of pictures below but to summarize, the preferences do allow FileName to match Number but they don't do anything for Name. The "Save As" dialog does not allow Name to be the same as Number. (Rename has this ability, Save As does not.)
Both preferences set to "No"
Inherit FileName from Number set to "Yes"
Inherit FileName from Name set to "Yes"
@JenniferPierron wrote:
Your images of the preference settings contradict you headers.
Good catch. I just fixed them.
I had just finished creating and testing a new rule in the OIR before I saw your reply. Here is what I added and the resulting behavior:
Adding this OIR does keep Name set equal to Number, so this is good. 
I guess the only disappointing thing with this approach is that it's not obvious to the end user that this is actually what is happening. It would be great if "<Same As Number>" could appear for the "New Name" field just like it does for the "New File Name" field. This would be especially helpful when Number is manually set to something else. There is nothing to indicate that Name will actually follow number vs. some (other) server generated value.
@JenniferPierron wrote:
Lastly, I was thinking about your concern of "wasting" numbers;
I wanted to try, but haven't had time yet, to write an OIR to only provide a generated number using the number generation algorithm for CAD Documents of category CAD Part or Assembly. For other categories, I would set the generated number to equal the file name. Theoretically, this should work and you would not "waste" numbers for deliverables like drawings, manufacturing models, etc. If you have a chance to try, I am sure others would like to hear your results.
I don't think this will work due to how Creo seems to be currently integrated with Windchill. It might be better to have this discussion over here, but the problem seems to be with Creo itself, not necessarily Windchill, autonumbering, or the OIR. The root issue is that a number is pulled instantly as soon as these different actions in Creo are started (with the exception of File/New). For each save as action from Creo, a number is wasted before the file type is even selected. Since this is happening within Creo itself, everything it generates would be a CAD document anyway (subtype of EPM Document.) I think the only solution is to either prevent Creo from using autonumbers (while still keeping them enabled in Windchill) or change Creo so it behaves the consistently everywhere. Every place a filename is displayed it should just display "<auto generated name>" and not actually pull the next number until the action is completed. This is how it works for File/New, but everywhere else it consumes a number and displays the generated value instead.
@BineshKumar1, I've had to turn autonumber back off for the time being. It was super nice when it worked, but the fact that it wasted a number every time someone did a save-as, rename, or replace from Creo made it completely unusable. Especially on save-as. A number was wasted every time someone ran a mapkey to generate a PDF, DXF, IGES, STEP, etc. You can read my full post about it here: https://community.ptc.com/t5/Windchill-Questions/Autonumbering-and-Creo/m-p/478337.
I do have a couple of cases open with PTC but so far they haven't gone anywhere.
I think we finally should stop to discuss that the WTPart, the CAD Model and CAD Drawing should get the same number! We are in the 20th century and we are still discussing a solution for numbering??? Why? This is only since PTC Creo is not as flexible as it should be! PTC Creo should finally start working as part of the PDM system rather as standalone CAD-Application where the filename is "the wolrd".
Extend Creo with the function to have the "filename" shown from different attribute values. This function is available in Creo View but not in Creo.
In my concept there is just one numbering and this starts with 1 and ends with 9999...... 
Everybody knows that autonumbering is the solution, but we can't using it, while even the CAD Software from the same house isn't ready. This is just sad.
We have so many days of discussion with customers and at the end we end up always with workarounds... PTC please! provide finally a solution that works in 99% of the cases so the customer can concentrate on topics like IoT or digital twins...
