Views and View assocations

HugoHermans · ‎Apr 07, 2009

Can someone share some experience on views and view associations in Windchill?

Some questions, to explain a bit what I'm looking for :

- wtparts are created in a particular view. But what about the relation between parts, are they view dependent, or not?

- we create wtpartsto represent manufacturing tools (fixtures etc.). We create them in the manufacturing view, and the design parts are linked to them. Any comments on this approach?

- the next step are assembly tools. According the manufacturing tools, I consider to create an extra view to create the assembly tools in. And successivly, associate the proper design parts to those assembly tools. Comments?

- finally, this assembly view, I would create it a a child of the design view. Any comments?

Or am I completly wrong assigning views for manufacturing and assembly tools? I'm a little suspicious, since I never used 'new view version'. What's the business case for this?

A lot of questions, sorry if I'm a little greedy, I still have a lot to learn of the magical world of ... 🙂

Regards and TIA, Hugo.

<< ProE WF3 M190 - PDMLink 8.00 M040 >>

glen.herman1 · ‎Apr 07, 2009

In Reply to Hugo Hermans:

Can someone share some experience on views and view associations in Windchill?
Some questions, to explain a bit what I'm looking for :
- wtparts are created in a particular view. But what about the relation between parts, are they view dependent, or not?
- we create wtpartsto represent manufacturing tools (fixtures etc.). We create them in the manufacturing view, and the design parts are linked to them. Any comments on this approach?
- the next step are assembly tools. According the manufacturing tools, I consider to create an extra view to create the assembly tools in. And successivly, associate the proper design parts to those assembly tools. Comments?
- finally, this assembly view, I would create it a a child of the design view. Any comments?
Or am I completly wrong assigning views for manufacturing and assembly tools? I'm a little suspicious, since I never used 'new view version'. What's the business case for this?
A lot of questions, sorry if I'm a little greedy, I still have a lot to learn of the magical world of ... 🙂
Regards and TIA, Hugo.

<< ProE WF3 M190 - PDMLink 8.00 M040 >>

Hugo,

When I think of view versions, I think of a down-hill push. Uphill is the "Design" view, actively linked to the EpmDocuments, mirrors cad, maintained by ProE "for free". When we create a "New View Version", we push the part down one level, break the active link to epmdocuments, and have a part that can differ in structure from the "Design" view.Out of box, this view is "Manufacturing".Ifmanufacturing built exactly what was designed, I don't thinkthere would be a needfor this view of the part.

We have viewsdownhill from "Manufacturing", which we call "Plant" views which are used if a part has different structures from one facility from another (make-part one plant, purchased-part in another type thing). All our plant views are in the same level, but one step "down" from "Manufacturing" view.

Partsare view dependant and relationshipsbetween parts (and their views) is part of whatis referred to as "Configuration Specification". At least this ishow I understand it.

Regards,

Glen Herman
Sr Application Developer
Engineering And Technology
Trane Residential Systems
6200 Troup Hwy
Tyler, Texas, 75701

MikeLockwood · ‎Apr 10, 2009

Huge and important topic, needing a lot of planning. We have been preparing for a while but have not yet implemented.

The examples in the PTC write-ups and training explaing the menu picks, etc. but not the full reasons for the business needs and mechanics, and the relationships to how you decide to use CAD in our opinion.

One of the things that took us a long time to appreciate is the following:
A) Historically, many Windchill users started with no CAD files in Windchill, just using WTParts and structure and related tools. These people created product structure pretty much as they manufacture product, regardless of how they build it. If there are no major differences between mfg facilities, then a single structure can be used - and can be considered the mfg BOM.

B) In parallel with this, many companies (like us) have approached Windchill PDMLink as primarily a direct replacement for Intrailnk 3.x, then gradually starting using other functions like WTPart structures.

For Case A, many of these folks are now wrestling with how to add CAD (Pro/E files, etc.) to their existing Windchill system, and integrate with their existing WTPart structures.

For Case B, the main consideration is whether or not to create / drive the WTPart structures with Pro/E relationships.

For both cases, the difficulty seems to arise in direct proportion to how closely CAD matches the mfg BOM structure. If you use any of the advanced Pro/E techniques, generally they don't match (envelope parts, family tables assy's, simplified rep's with overloaded master rep, additional models created to show different ass'y steps or orientations, etc., etc.).

So...
- Product Structure Views primarily allow managing "inherit from" relationships between one product structure and another, but with the very confusing nomenclature of Rev A.B (which no mfg system knows what to do with).

- Product Structure Views also allow managing multiple "inherit from" relationships for multiple mfg facilities where sourced components are different and many other variations.

One thing that not clear in the documentation is exactly what "comes along" when revising the master view (Design as default). Example: Rev A Assy WTPart has a View that's currently at Rev C (A.C). In the .C sub-view, the sequence of assy is re-arranged significantly for Mfg convenience and grouping. The master view is Revised to B. What exactly comes along after the Revision is a bit fuzzy and learned only from playing with it. In general, some manual manipulation of the secondary View is needed.

MPMLink has some additional very helpful tools related to this - worth fully understanding this before starting.

Never thought about using the Mfg View for Mfg tools and fixtures - doesn't seem to be the intended usage. The Mfg View really has nothing to do with whether the part is product or mfg tool - it's much more for inheritance of structure.

Much more to say but running out of time. Hope this helps just a bit. We're wrestling with a lot of details but thoroughly exercising all Product Structure functionality and intending to fully implement (on top of existing CAD) this year. Very interested in other users' comments.