TC: How does this work?

[mthomp]

Background:
NX6.0.3 / TC7 (soon). I'm trying to get a handle on how Teamcenter (TC) works, wrt attributes either on NX files, or via forms on either the Item or ItemRev. We're implementing it, for better or for worse, and I'm the nut tasked w/making it happen. We're a small company (25'ish engineer types) with 30 yrs of legacy data that will imported into TC only as/if needed. I have serveral years of TC flavored exp (ugman thru Tc Enterprise) as a user only, but that was 5+ yrs ago...
We're planning a multi-phased implementation, with the first phase involving getting TC up and running for CAD/CAM data only. Future phases will involve tying into SAP and pushing info to the shop floor thereby replacing a homegrown system. As such, I need to get this working without (hopefully) painting myself into a corner wrt future objectives. ...clear as mud?
Essentially we have two sides of our house, a forge shop and a machine shop. We only make one product, but w/infinite variations (size, contour, shape, etc). We have >15 machining cells, and of course specific fixturing for each machining cell as well as product specific tooling used in manufacturing (FS and MS) and inspection.

Question(s) / Concerns:
I'm having some trouble wrapping my mind around the best/preferred/simplist approach for setting up the custom NX Item type, and the forms (attribute input) associated w/the Item and ItemRevs. I've polled our engineering pool and gathered a wish list of attributes the users would like to be able to search on to find data. Aside from the 4 or so canned db attributes for NX parts, I'm unsure/lost as to how to set things up w/out having to create a multitude of diff item types for NX parts, with corrosponding forms depending on the applicable attributes desired (thus inviting constant errors from the users creating parts from the wrong item types).
I've almost decided that the simplist approach would be to create a custom item type (excel file for example) where the users can input the appropriate attributes under the TC Item. If I do this, can TC easily read the .xls file and pull attributes from it during a query? Are there disadvantages to this approach, and if so what are they? Is there an approach I'm not thinking of?

...Without a doctorial dissertation, what am I missing? Does it sound like I'm making this harder or more complex than it needs to be? Any suggestions for where I can go to get a 'laymans' perspective on how all this works or an approach I can pursue? Any and all help would be appreciated!

Thanks in advance...

 

[hudson888]

It is hard to answer a question that is itself comparable in length with a doctoral thesis with concision. If I were to try then I'd say two things, to get training and some consulting time probably from your local Siemens support people. As an option it may be somewhat costly, but in teamcentre you're very much looking at a database tool which can either save or if badly implemented consume a lot of operator's time.

I would pursue getting a set up which is flexible as possible and able to respond to as many of your "what if" questions as you can think of. I would aim to have it reflect your work flow but at the same time I would advise that being designed with certain kinds of purposes in mind that you will do better to adopt an implementation that is somewhat sympathetic to the software's design intent. In short you need to write up criteria or specifications and present them to a consultant who can go through the process of implementation and training with you.

I would go to the trouble of implementing teamcentre with the workflow feature from the outset. I would not encourage use of the PSE for manipulation of BOM's outside of the NX environment (at least not where NX data interfacing with it is involved), and I would probably leave SAP to one side if possible because it is just likely to make a rod for your own back that coming from a relatively unsophisticated technical environment to an all encompassing PDM system takes time to come to grips with.

Staged implementations can be good, but if you adopt a level of freedom to begin with that you later wish to curtail with further software implementations then you are faced with the task of making your legacy data conform. Better in some cases to have never had that freedom.

Best Regards

Hudson

www.jamb.com.au

Nil Desperandum illegitimi non carborundum