WTParts

[mwimberly]

I don't know if this has been asked before but who out there is using or not using WTParts? I would like reasons for and against, successes and failures. Any information that you are willing to share would be greatly appreciated.

TIA

Michael Wimberly
Engineering Applications Support Specialist III
Security & Survivability

BAE Systems Land & Armaments
9113 Le Saint Drive
Fairfield, Ohio 45014 U.S.A.
(513) 881-4843 Direct
(513) 833-3565 Mobile
(513) 881-5087 Fax
-<">mailto:->
P Before printing, think about the environment.

[mreece]

Thanks... I love the slide deck, and I will use some of this content to
help sell Winchill internally!



What I struggle with is, our initial implementation will be a
replacement for Pro/INTRALINK, so the WTParts diagram will look like

[sdrzewiczewski]

It's been a while since I've done migrations from Ilink 3.x to Windchill,
but it was the general recommendation to create your WTParts after the
Migration. Although there are tools available to create the WTParts during
the migration, many customers decided to create them after the migration.

If you plan on doing auto numbering, think of the WTPart as pulling the
part number for the end user. By auto numbering CAD Docs, you find that a
lot extra numbers are pulled, when sketches are created and other things
that don't need part numbers. Not that it is a big deal to burn numbers,
but some people have a hard time with big gaps in the numbers.

Steve D.

> Thanks... I love the slide deck, and I will use some of this content to
> help sell Winchill internally!
>
>
>
> What I struggle with is, our initial implementation will be a
> replacement for Pro/INTRALINK, so the WTParts diagram will look like

[KevinAlexander]

As Steve D said already, just do the WTParts after migration. I would not turn them on until you think you are ready.

To answer your question, if you are not associating other things to the WTPart there probably isn't a tremendous amount of value in creating them, though they are the foundation for many other things like Configuration Management and to some extent Change Management (though they are not needed for this).

Also, if you ever plan on interfacing to MRP/ERP you will need them.

But I'll stress again, a lot of folks mention what you mention below: "confusion and extra baggage", but I don't think this is really the case, when I was a Windchill Admin I set a lot of preferences so that my guys never hardly saw the WTParts. You still need to sell the advantages internally as you mention, but also make sure you assure Engineering that they really aren't much extra baggage - what little extra baggage they do incur provide ENTERPRISE benefits downstream.

But if you are still on Ilink 3.x I probably wouldn't create them during the migration - that probably IS quite a bit of extra baggage.

[HugoHermans]

Even in the CAD environment, WTparts can be usefull. The images of the earlier postings disregard drawings, skeletons, flat states etc. We use WTparts to combine CADdocuments that should or could be considered together.

E.g. the ProE-assembly is coupled to it's proper WTpart together with its drawing and its skeleton.

E.g. the family table instance is coupled to it's WTpart together with its drawing and the upper generic.

Regards, Hugo.

<< ProE WF3 M190 - PDMLink 8.00 M040 >>

[mdebower]

Is there any way to use WTParts to get an accurate where used report in family table instances?

Right now, for example, we have a generic and instances of a custom rivet. The generic describes the stock rivet, and the instances describe the assembled or staked rivet. Since we use the instances in the assemblies, we can't get an accurate where used report without manually going through each instance.

Any suggestions?

-marc