Patrick Lawrence's Profile
Agile Angel
3599
points

Questions
9

Answers
288

I have been using Agile PLM since 6.x as an administrator/functional expert. Leading implementations and upgrades from a functional standpoint and user experience enhancements. Offering my services to projects that need guidance on solutioning.
Title Contractor
Company Scott Safety
Agile Version 9.3.4
  • I wonder, with the advent of change approvals and strict adherence to release policies, might think about using watermarks to add the change information to the document at time of print from Agile Viewer.  This information refers back to the change order and subsequent names of approvers.  One strop shop without the overhead.  Just an idea to think through.

    • 55 views
    • 3 answers
    • 0 votes
  • This is a very interesting and unexpected question.  What is the purpose behind this question?  I ask simply because this is a core function of the Product Collaboration module and I would not expect such a question so I would like to dive deeper into your inquiry.

    • 49 views
    • 3 answers
    • 0 votes
  • Agile Angel Asked on November 1, 2018 in Webservices.

    Uncertain of the intent of this posting and would recommend it’s removal as it does not seem to pertain to the objective of crowd supporting.

    • 29 views
    • 1 answers
    • 0 votes
  • Agile Angel Asked on October 1, 2018 in Product Collaboration.

    So Malaku, as I understand you have, in this example, three source records, each likely containing different metadata and attachments.  And you want to compress all the information into a single record.  Is this a one time occurrence (or are all source systems connected to the said Agile instance)?  Do the multiple records already exist in the Agile PLM app?  Do they need to segregate the data i.e. attachment folder for PM, another for GLP and a third for PROD in the event all three have different attachments?  Please elaborate on this business process so we can understand if it is abnormal or needs to be a standard process.

    • 82 views
    • 3 answers
    • 0 votes
  • Yep, it’s going to be tough. For example, a change order changes two parts on a BoM that for all intentional purposes are ibterchangeable yet Planning and Sourcing decide they need a use up strategy and the stock doesn’t support a one time cut over so you end up with product made with an undocumented configuration. A deviant to say. Like I recommended, PLM should develop the BoM and not be directly tied to the MFG BoM. As you are experiencing it leads to problems. To overcome this your team needs to really step back and better define the process. Sounds like effectivity date management so that no change is released until your managing authority says so. That would move the problem more upstream but it will still exist. The fact of the matter is this. Eng develops…. that’s all. Mfg makes…. the two should never be tied. Eng could release rev 01, 02 and 03 while Mfg makes rev 01 and due to strategy shifts to 03 and completely bypasses rev 02. This scenario is quite common. I wish you the best of luck and hope there are some brilliant folks on here that know something I am missing that can help you out.

    • 129 views
    • 7 answers
    • 0 votes
  • Shan,

    If I understand your DMR correctly I would need to go down the path of caution.  We draw a fine line when it comes to the product definition and product manufacturing.  Agile is great at product definition, this is where Eng imagines and evolves product throughout its lifecycle without constraints we see in in ERPs.  When we talk about effectivity dates we impose these constraints.  Effectivity dates are more efficiently tied to the manufacturing BoM or in the ERP.  The ERP manages build to shipping.  That is exactly where we should be managing the effectity dates based on our inventory, customer and build constraints.  I would not recommend trying to manage this in PLM as it will drive you crazy.

    Accordingly, again, if I understand your DHF you are more concerned about what got shipped and the configuration of that product to each customer.  Again, PLM does not care as it wants to strictly manage the design and development cycles.  Your ERP is where you will be managing what went into what and who got it.

    • 129 views
    • 7 answers
    • 0 votes
  • Agile Angel Asked on August 14, 2018 in Product Lifecycle Analytics.

    Hartman,

    The number of fields you see depends on how you created the query.  In what you show we are seeing the top level changes so you are only seeing the cover page and subsequent tabs that are shared.  If you want to see page three fields you would need to specify the subclass.  Any questions?

    • 97 views
    • 2 answers
    • 0 votes
  • Agile Angel Asked on August 8, 2018 in Other APIs.

    kulbhushan333,

    Did you find the information you were looking for?  If yes, where did you get it?

    • 162 views
    • 1 answers
    • 0 votes
  • Agile Angel Asked on August 8, 2018 in Agile PLM (v9).

    Surya,

    Were you able to get the advice you needed?  Please let us know and if yes, what was the issue found.

    • 112 views
    • 1 answers
    • 0 votes
  • Agile Angel Asked on August 8, 2018 in Product Collaboration.

    Rahul,

    Were you able to get this corrected?  Please let us know and if yes, what was the issue found.

    • 163 views
    • 1 answers
    • 0 votes