Mentor Graphics Integration

Another thing,

Depending which Windchill version you are on,the architecture of WVS is a workaround in previous version where the markups are stored as secondary content. Thus, everytime you require to create a markup, the EMP object (content, etc)has to be modifyable when undergoing a review. We thought this was just bad practice according to the other Windchill objects as standard WVS architecture where the markups is stored in another markup object.

We are hoping the WVS will be part of the solution for ECAD for later versions of Windchill. Another thing about ECAD integration, it doesn't behave like ProE where all the files are separate EPM. ECAD zips or packages all the files of Projects, Schematics and boards.

All I could say now is good luck,

Patrick Hi,

First of all thank you very much,

Can you please tell me what versions are you referring? (Windchill and Mentor)

If i understand you right, are you saying that OOTB Windchill cannot handle a WTPart which has simulatneously both Electronic EPMDocument (those orange triangles) and MCAD EPMDocument together attached automatically by either WGM? even if the MCAD file has its file suffix? (i.e part1.sldprt)

Regards

Saul Szulanski

One1

We used either Windchill 9.0 M050 or 9.1 F000 at the time. It is actually a Windchill foundation issue since the beginning of CAD integration at 5.0 and changed up a bit at 7.0 with Site.

For EPMDocument generation and conflicts only:

• In most cases of ECAD document numbering, the project, PCA, schematic and board layout would be numbered differently. It will also try to create a component package for your gerbers and so on.
• The issue is if the mechanical CAD EPM documents have the same numbers of the PCA and board for their 3D models. With the current functionality of Windchill, this is not allowed which is really stupid.
• Active association to the WTPart should be the schematic and the board layout, not the MCAD 3D reps. It is not an MCAD world at this point. The one up assembly which calls the PCA model sub assemblywill have the active association to the MCAD 3D assembly model.
  • Thus, the WTPart structure is governed by the PCA schematic BOM structure.
  • issues with ECAD BOMs with 0 quantities for documents listed in the BOM. They have to be programitcally removed via pre-checkin hooks. Unless you create WTParts for documents. It defeats the purpose of having WTPart to WTDocument and to EMP reference links.
• We also have other CAD tools, like Ideas, used to import and produce files for other vendors, CMs, ODMs, etc which number the files the same as our primary CAD tool ProE. Thus, there would be an issue if 12345.prt is the same for both ProE and Ideas because there is no uniqueness between CAD tools without my fix.
• We use a more refined approach to placing EPM number without extension because it is the number of the WTPart just like ECAD methodology to have the number withoutextensions. Thus EPM management is completely standardized. We use filename for the actual filename which includes the extension. After a while, the users will be used to just looking at the icon for file type, number and name. Non CAD users will just search for the number and get the whole package. Yes, you can have a search with 12345*, but you don't have to create different customizations to map number to CAD drawing based on CAD tool to remove or not the file extension. It's just a complete mess out of the box when dealing with multiple CAD. This fix reduces the customizations based on CAD tool even for ProE.

WTPart

• no longer just ProE world. At PCA level, the BOM is owned by the PCA schematic. Thus, active association of the EPM has to override the ProE default active association practice. Most MCAD guys would make the association to their PCA 3D model to the Part. The build rule of the PCA WTPart has to come from PCA schematic. Additional hooks have to check and switch if required the active association of the 3D model of the PCA to the PCA schematic. Also for the board.

I hope this helps,

Patrick

Good morning everyone,
I'm following this thread.
Does the Mentor-Windchill integration still exist? If so, can anyone tell me where I can find the details for the compatibility matrices between the various versions?

Ty,

Matteo.