Implementing PDMW

Discussion in 'SolidWorks' started by DT, Sep 21, 2005.

  1. DT

    DT Guest

    I asked this on the Solidworks discussion board and haven't had any
    replies, so I'll ask it here:

    I'm going to be implementing PDMW and have some questions. The funds
    aren't available for installation/support from our VAR. We use a
    sequential part numbering system and don't use project folders. Our
    folders are setup like so:
    D02-04K includes drawing numbers from 2001 - 4000
    D04-06K includes drawing numbers from 4001 - 6000

    -Since we don't use project folders would the above folders (D02-04K)
    be our "Project" folders in PDMW?

    -Do I create all these folders in PDMW and bulk check-in all the files
    in each folder?

    -In our system, if a title is changed on an assembly drawing, it should
    get bumped a revision. Do we check-out all the files in the assembly
    just to change the title?

    -Do we include our parts library (feature palette/design library) in
    PDMW?

    Thanks in advance,
    Derek
     
    DT, Sep 21, 2005
    #1
  2. DT

    matt Guest

    I do PDMW implementation professionally, so I guess it's bad business
    for me to be here giving away the farm. Anyway, there is no point in
    setting up folders to hold ranges of part numbers. PDMWorks 2006 has a
    feature that handles this automatically if you want (called "ranges"),
    but there is no basic need that style of organization addresses unless
    it is possibly a performance issue (displaying too many docs at a single
    level). The "we always did this in Windows Explorer" reason is not a
    reason to keep doing it.

    The valid reasons for creating a structure of folders (projects) in PDMW
    are to allow permissions, and to make things browsable.

    The name "project" is kind of unfortunate, since it really doesn't
    reflect the valid ways some companies use them. Think of them as just
    folders.
    Yes, you could, but why? You could just bulk check them all into the
    top level and allow PDMW 2006 to handle them with "ranges".
    You could, but there is no reason to do it that way. In fact, if you
    have a decent grasp of basic SW-only file management, you could do it by
    only checking out the drawing and not even getting copies of the models.
    Entirely possible. That's what I usually recommend. It makes things
    easier to deal with, and you can pull things out of the vault and drop
    them into an assembly as easily as from the Design Library, the only
    difference is that there is no thumbnail in the vault.
    If you are not using PDMW 2006, you should at least look at it. It's
    almost a brainless upgrade if you already have 2005 installed, with a
    couple of exceptions, and if you're planning on using Lifecycle, you
    really shouldn't use anything prior to 2006. Also, you can use PDMW
    2006 with SW 2005 (there are minor licensing issues which can be worked
    around easily).

    Good luck.

    Matt Lombard
    www.Dezignstuff.com
     
    matt, Sep 21, 2005
    #2
  3. DT

    DT Guest

    Matt,
    Thanks for the info...

    Project folders:
    Bulk Check-in all of our parts/drawing into one project folder, is this
    correct? With 40,000 files, would this be too much for PDMW?

    You mentioned something about letting PDMW handle them with "ranges". A
    you talking about revisions?

    Updating an Assembly:
    The Drawing title is updated from the custom props of the assembly.
    Because of this we would have to check-out the whole assembly, correct?

    PDMW 2006
    We have PDMW 2005 but I haven't installed it. I decided to wait and
    roll out PDMW with 2006.

    Thanks again,
    Derek
     
    DT, Sep 21, 2005
    #3
  4. DT

    DT Guest

    Matt,
    Thanks for the info...

    Project folders:
    Bulk Check-in all of our parts/drawing into one project folder, is this

    correct? With 40,000 files, would this be too much for PDMW?

    Updating an Assembly:
    The Drawing title is updated from the custom props of the assembly.
    Because of this we would have to check-out the whole assembly, correct?


    PDMW 2006
    We have PDMW 2005 but I haven't installed it. I decided to wait and
    roll out PDMW with 2006.

    Thanks again,
    Derek
     
    DT, Sep 21, 2005
    #4
  5. DT

    matt Guest

    There are other ways to organize your files other than just by part
    number. For example, by function, by document type, by department, by
    project, by product, by customer, etc. You don't have to limit yourself
    by the limitations of Windows Explorer. You can find things by browsing
    like you used to do, but most people wind up using the search functions,
    which are very useful, allowing searches on something other than the
    file name, such as custom properties, revisions, description, etc.

    If you want different groups to have different permissions for different
    documents, you will need to use some sort of structure, unless you're
    doing it completely with lifecycle.

    For most companies, it is best to have some sort of organization.
    Organizing by part number doesn't help in any way, except as I said with
    performance. If all of your documents are essentially the same, but you
    have 40,000 of them, then that flat scheme might be the one for you.
    No, I'm talking about ranges. This is a new function in PDMW 2006. If
    you're not familiar with this, you should install a test vault and read
    the documentation, such as it is.
    That depends on settings. There is a setting which allows you to change
    custom properties directly from the PDMW interface without checking
    anything out. When a drawing inherits something from a model, that can
    have other implications depending on how you use the software.

    Other than that, you will need to check out whatever you are changing,
    so that would be in this case the assembly file and the drawing file.
    There is no need to check out the part files unless they are all
    changing, but you will need to get copies of them.
     
    matt, Sep 22, 2005
    #5
  6. DT wrote:

    Little bit OT, is PDMW 2006 supporting configurations? If yes, how?

    --


    Markku Lehtola

    www.markkulehtola.net
     
    Markku Lehtola, Sep 22, 2005
    #6
  7. DT

    matt Guest

    You can list and search configuration names, and get BOM-type info for
    assembly configs. If what you mean by "support" is does it treat
    configurations as separate documents or does it assign rev levels to
    separate configs, the answer is still "no". I've used systems that did
    that, and never wound up using that particular function. Some people
    seem to use it as a single-issue gauge for PDM systems, which puzzles
    me.

    Matt
     
    matt, Sep 22, 2005
    #7
  8. BOM-type info? Do you mean it reads from the
    File-Properties-Configuration specific? Can it search also this info or
    just conf.names?

    If what you mean by "support" is does it treat
    Well, if we can do something in SW, why should we not able to do it with
    PDM installed as well...It's limiting the normal way of doing things.
    What is normal then...that's another story.

    --


    Markku Lehtola

    www.markkulehtola.net
     
    Markku Lehtola, Sep 22, 2005
    #8
  9. DT

    matt Guest

    You can select a config and see the config specific properties. You can
    search configuration names. You cannot search values of config specific
    properties.
    I guess I'm not understanding. What is it that you cannot do with
    PDMWorks but you can do in SW?
     
    matt, Sep 22, 2005
    #9
  10. Hi Matt,
    So you had experience with PDMW 2006? Is it ready to be put in
    production?
    I'll wait a few months before rolling out SW 2005 but if there are
    notable improvments in PDMW I'll upgrade the Vault and keep SW 2005.

    Thanks
    -Marc
     
    Marc Gibeault, Sep 22, 2005
    #10
  11. DT

    matt Guest


    If you use lifecycle, PDMW06 is the way to go. I would recommend you
    set up a test vault. So far I've only done 1 PDMW06 implementation, and
    the company chose to stay on SW05, which works. There are some minor
    interface issues, and a registration issue when using that combination,
    but the PDMW05-06 upgrade took just minutes, and seems to have worked
    well.

    Matt
     
    matt, Sep 22, 2005
    #11
  12. It seems that with 2006 there's no problem anymore, with older versions
    it was quite difficult to work with configurations...(for me,
    File-Properties is not the tool that I want to use with properties)

    --


    Markku Lehtola

    www.markkulehtola.net
     
    Markku Lehtola, Sep 23, 2005
    #12
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.