Skip to main content
M
MikeIbosh1-Visitor
1-Visitor
March 5, 2014
Question

Revising Change Notices/Activities

  • March 5, 2014
  • 4 replies
  • 2209 views
Good Morning all,

I have been asked to research and test the Change Notice/Activity revision capabilities in the Windchill system.
I'm currently running 10.1 M030, and have the CN/CA revisions working as expected on my test machines.

My question is: Who out there is currently using this capability in a production environment, and if you could share your business case for using it in this manner.

In my case, I'm being asked to create a single CN/CA workflow that will promote the documents on it to three different release states by revising the CN/CA for each promotion to the different release states (prototype, pre-production, production).
I'm just looking for some good reasons to structure it this way, instead of creating separate CNs for each release state change.

Thanks in advance for any insight you can share on this subject.

Mike

4 replies

M
MikeLockwood22-Sapphire I
22-Sapphire I
March 5, 2014
We have the this preference set to Yes. We've done close to 30,000 changes this way.

[cid:image001.png@01CF385B.F63CC1B0]

Primary business requirement: Clean approval report once the change has finally been edited such that all can approve (we route for approval rather than having a change admin enter what all agree in meetings). If you do not revise the change object and it needs to be edited and reapproved, there are multiple approval records for the same person on the same change.

Example

[cid:image002.png@01CF385C.4B2ADA40]

Don't understand this part at all:
In my case, I'm being asked to create a single CN/CA workflow that will promote the documents on it to three different release states by revising the CN/CA for each promotion to the different release states (prototype, pre-production, production).
I'm just looking for some good reasons to structure it this way, instead of creating separate CNs for each release state change.

H
HugoHermans12-Amethyst
12-Amethyst
March 5, 2014

Hey Mike,


We once made our change objects revisable as well, to allow people to continue on a Task they considered closed before. But it turned out to be to complex for most of the people, so we returned to the OOTB situation.


Regards, Hugo.


<< ProE WF5 - PDMLink 10.1 M040>>

P
pwilliams-313-Aquamarine
13-Aquamarine
May 3, 2016

Hi Guys,

I know this is an old thread but I have a different requirement.  Once the CN process reaches the Auditor and there is a mistake, how can he choose "Rework" or "Revise" to have the CT task restarted so the assignee can make corrections?  Currently we are using the revise process to restart both workflow but were told by PTC that this is not a best practice.  Any comments?

J
JørnAHansen1-Visitor
1-Visitor
May 5, 2016

‌Patrick,

Not sure about how feasible it is to automate restart of the CT.

But we have simply had the CA II role add yet another CT to carry doing the additional work. This way you keep full history. Another option I recently noted was to reset the lifecycle of the CT to the initial state and its workflow fires again ...

I hope one of those fits your scenario ... or at least serves as inspiration  

Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement