Skip to main content
S
17-Peridot
ScottMorris17-Peridot
17-Peridot
October 26, 2022
Question

Windchill Review Object, Anyone Using It?

  • October 26, 2022
  • 4 replies
  • 4382 views

We have recently moved up to Windchill 12.0.2 and looking at the latest updates in the Windchill Review object. I would really like to convince the Engineering team this is a good tool, but its still clunky and a bit difficult to use. Its based on Change objects.

 

I am having a difficult time finding complete documentation for the Review object. So far I have only found small topics in WHC and a few TS articles. Wish there was a comprehensive section in the WHC that described the configuration and setup along with the process of how to use it. 

 

Is anyone using the Review object and are you having any success with it? 

    4 replies

    avillanueva
    23-Emerald I
    avillanueva23-Emerald I
    23-Emerald I
    October 26, 2022

    Just came out of a meeting where we discussed it. Short answer, not here. Strange that I often here discussion that we need to have a design review but there is not the desire to have a formal object to document the results. Not everything needs a review and we are playing with CN templates to capture discipline reviews ask discrete actions on the change notice ahead of a signoff.  I think since its so similar to a change object, folks saw that as an extra layer or process.  Just not sure what is missing from it to make it more usable. 

      M
      22-Sapphire I
      MikeLockwood22-Sapphire I
      22-Sapphire I
      October 26, 2022

      It would be interesting to learn the history of how it got on the list to spend hours and $ to develop - was it requested by customer(s) or an idea internally by PTC.

       

      At first glance it seems like, yes, all companies have need for this.  May be in the details.

       

      I find similar for Packages - unbelievable number of steps and "things" need to be addressed for even the simplest Package.

        jbailey
        jbailey18-Opal
        18-Opal
        April 20, 2023

        If I recall, it was designed for the med device industry where they needed a mechanism to collect info about reviews, comments, approvals and action items for FDA.  

         

        We are starting to use it more at my place.  In fact, when we went to 11.0 M030 we specifically waited for that functionality back in the day.  The screenshots in the CS about missing roles, lifecycles etc were from my case I opened when we were validating that summer 😁.  They just blurred the hosts to protect the guilty.

        The use case here is for tracking complex lifecycle phases.  If you have the Wincom tools you can also use it as a vehicle to bulk-watermark objects (something else we worked on)

        A
        agarr10-Marble
        10-Marble
        November 11, 2022

        Yes we have been using the Review options for like 6 months and are up to about 5 versions of it. I use it primarily prior to release for collecting comments. We are a custom engineer to order company so every job is essentially treated as new product development. We currently do not have Promotion Request configured and that may change how we are using them. 

         

        We have also started using them for auditing documentation. We are very document heavy and create a new review once it is determined a document is missing information with a short workflow back to the auditor for verification.

          I
          icelynnin12-Amethyst
          12-Amethyst
          April 20, 2023

          Have you got reference to the latest updates to this type? I cannot find reference in either the v12.0.0.0 or 12.0.2 "What's new" documentation.

          S
          17-Peridot
          ScottMorris17-PeridotAuthor
          17-Peridot
          April 20, 2023

          we have a legacy windchill implementation that has been around for a while. the review object was not fully updated during our upgrades to wc11.1 and wc12.0. the core components were created, but policies and roles were not populated to containers created with our container templates, only the containers created a long time ago with the OOTB container templates.

          i found the PTC documentation to be quite short for this capability and started my own docs when PTC TS informed me there is nothing they can do to improve the documentation. it would be nice to have the full admin view of how the capability works, what components are used and more information on how people can use the functionality.

          like all things wc, this is a very functional capability, but it is not fun to drive from a user perspective. there are so many buttons to click and processes to follow to make it all work. its a tough sell to the user community due to its complexity, need for training and need for a quick reference card or learning asset for people to remember how to use it.

            jbailey
            jbailey18-Opal
            18-Opal
            April 20, 2023

            On a side note, here is the article that came about from my Review case back in 2017

            https://www.ptc.com/en/support/article/CS268893?source=search

             

            We also found that out of the box workflow and policies are overly restrictive so you may want to look at the workflow and policies anyway if you are trying to make it work for your environment 

            HelesicPetr
            22-Sapphire II
            HelesicPetr22-Sapphire II
            22-Sapphire II
            April 21, 2023

            Hello @ScottMorris 

             

            One upon time I advice to use it with own custom workflow that automates many things in the process.

            Also it is easier to edit the objects in the process if something should be rework.

            I guess it was a customer idea that they need something like PromotionRequest process but with editable options similar to change object.

             

            I see the review object like something between PromotionRequest and ChangeNotice. 

             

            PetrH.  

            Terms & ConditionsCookie settingsAccessibility statement