Skip to main content
P
patrick.chin11-Visitor
1-Visitor
October 21, 2010
Question

Complete Change Management Process in Windchill

  • October 21, 2010
  • 8 replies
  • 4159 views
I advise to follow a standard engineering change process that meets most manufacturing and supply chain requirements. Not all objects go immediately to obsolete. Some previous released still has effectivity based on specificlots, serials and so on. See attached. It is usually best practice to have engineering process sync with MFG and supply chain. Though engineering always designs to the latest release, engineering must support the sustainability and service of other past products.

If your effectivity is immediate for failures or immediate recalls, then it will automatically set the resulting objects to obsolete or superceded.

Hopefully you get to this stage. There is a whole lot more with WTPart management business process to meet to most large aerospace company standards like Boeing,EADS, Lockhead Martin, Airbus, Northrop Grumman Corp, Bombardier, BAE, Mitsubishi,etc which follow most change management processes like CMII for each functional group. This is to ensure that thereis accountability and process is clear, concise and valid. Most contractors or vendors of these companies have to comply to their change process because for large mass production, the process must be efficient to cut cost down for the entire supply chain. A fit, form and function change or not has to be common knowledgeand iron clad.

Hopefully Windchill can mature to meet the needs of this standard change process in the aerospace industry for the past 30+ years.

8 replies

L
ldutoit10-Marble
10-Marble
September 8, 2014

Hi Patrick, It seems you've dealt with the change management process in detail. I have question regarding revision tumbling of parent assemblies if only revision changed happened in child assembly. Doing revision tumbling on all higher level 'where used' Released parent assemblies if form,fit and function was not jeopordized is an adminstrative burden. For full explanation refer to my discussion on this forum (http://portal.ptcuser.org/p/fo/st/topic=16&post=127791#p127791). Any reply on possible solution will be much appreciated. Thanks

A
AL_ANDERSON12-Amethyst
12-Amethyst
September 8, 2014

You would not revise multiple next higher assemblies. Rather, you would change part numbers of next higher assemblies up to a point of interchangability based on your configuration managment rules, revise the point of interchangeability, and not change anything above taht revision at the point of interchangeability. You can then use a variety of effectivity techniques to cut in the use of the new numbers under that new revision. You would not continue to revise above the point of revision.

L
ldutoit10-Marble
10-Marble
September 9, 2014

Morning Albert,



Appreciate the reply.It makes sense to revise to the point where interchangeability occurred. Is this acceptable business practice? Because parent models iskept inReleased state it can not be opened in Creo session to regenerate the model to bring in the new revision of child. parent model properties like weight and child component vieweables will display incorrectly in parnt models. What is good industry strandard to follow working with Creo and Windchill applying CMII principles?





T
TomU23-Emerald IV
23-Emerald IV
September 9, 2014
Lourens,

I'm not sure if this would be a proper solution or not, but maybe you should consider using positioning assemblies for your published representations and then "doing business" off of this data. This means any changes to lower level components will display properly in upper level assemblies without ever needing to revise, regenerate, or republish them. Several large organizations have switched to this approach where what you see in Creo View is always the latest configuration (instead of as-stored) and matches what you see when the design is opened in Creo.

There were presentations at PTC User from JLG, John Deere, and Paccar (Kenworth) about this technique.

Tom U.
B
BrianToussaint19-Tanzanite
19-Tanzanite
September 9, 2014
I have a question on positioning assemblies and downstream users (i.e. MFG) and what they can see and when. So if MFG can only see Released items and a lower level component is at Redesign, will MFG see the Released component or the Redesign component when they open the upper level assembly?

Thank you,

Brian Toussaint
Systems Administrator

Hoshizaki America, Inc.
"A Superior Degree Of Reliability"
618 Hwy. 74 S., Peachtree City, GA 30269
T
TomU23-Emerald IV
23-Emerald IV
September 9, 2014
I've been struggling with these concepts myself. I just came across a really interesting passage in a book by Frank B. Watts called "Engineering Documentation Control Handbook":
T
TomU23-Emerald IV
23-Emerald IV
September 10, 2014
I've run this question past a couple of people who presented at PTC Live Global. There responses are below (edited slightly, highlighting added by me). Hopefully this helps.

Tom U.
D
DonSenchuk12-Amethyst
12-Amethyst
September 10, 2014
We see exactly the same situation as Jim describes. Components that are not Released simply are not available for MFG. Period. Instead they get the latest Released of that component (the revision prior to that which created the Redesign state).
Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement