mix of top-down and bottom-up

[Dmi3U]

Hi All!

I am testing a prove of methodology... Say, planning and purchasing want to have BOM out of PLM ASAP. So, we are creating the product structure in PLM with just empty wt-parts. Than as we go we (Engineering) populate them with CAD documents and the understanding is that the CAD assembly structure will take over and reorder and recalculate the PLM product structure. So it is a mix of top-down and bottom-up methodology.

So far it is not that straight-forward. I create a list of components in PLM - al empty wt-parts.

I import an assembly into proe and save it in workspace. Make all owner-associations to the corresponding wt-parts

and check-in. As a result I am getting all duplications (listed and counted twice) in PLM BOM although CAD BOM is correct. So, I have to manually delete wt-parts that are not driven by CAD product structure.

Q: anybody else have seen this behavior? I can not believe nobody else is using the mix of top-down/bottom-up methods. What is your solution?

Any help is greatly appreciated...

Dmitry

[Dmi3U]

we are on proe wf4.0 m150 andWC m050

[ptc-810450]

Hi Dmitry,
We found the same thing. We ended up either not associating the CAD parts
(only drawings). In some instances we associated them as inactive
associations (I can't remember the name for the type of association now,
the one that isn't 'active'). Mostly this was because the BOM changed too
much when people checked in the assembly with suppress parts or added
parts to-see-how-they-compare and didn't remove them prior to checkin. It
was easier to have the PLM BOM and CAD separate until the design had
settled down and then we made the associations manually. Since we had
already created the PLM BOM there was no need to use CAD to generate it.
--
Mark von Huben

[Dmi3U]

I figured out the problem: I was testing on the test system where subsum configuration was turned off. After changing it back to on (default) it works properly.

Thank you, all.

Dmitry