I've asked a similar question in the NX Design forum, to get users thoughts, now I'm interested in the admin perspective. I'm curious on companies using NX and Teamcenter, that do NOT use the Teamcenter created ID number (aka DB_Part_No), or allow both.
Company history is the use of a "smart" part number, which tells the user the car type, year, and general location the part is used. Most in the company wish to maintain this ability, and our smart number will not go away, it will be used in the Part Name, at the very least.
Siemens has pushed the use of the Teamcenter created ID number, as the preferred, or best practice.
My interest is in companies that do not use the Teamcenter created ID number, or allow both auto generated and user input part numbers, and what drawbacks, or caveats they have experienced, if any?
>> My interest is in companies that do not use the Teamcenter created ID number, or allow both auto generated and user input part numbers, and what drawbacks, or caveats they have experienced, if any?
We use a "smart" numbering system which origins decades ago and is even kind of "hardcoded" in SAP at the time being.
It is being said that it will never get changed
I can not tell about any serious drawbacks or caveats.
On release ( which also causes a transfer to SAP ) we use a custom Workflow handler to check if the used item_id ( which turns to MaterialNumber in SAP later ) is a "valid" one.
However, regarding the "smart numbering" this item_id could be "wrong", but I do not experience many of such issues.
Production: NX184.108.40.206 MP4 + TC10.1.7.1
Testing: NX220.127.116.11 MP4 + TC10.1.7.1
Since we have 2 locations that use the same TC database, If we wanted to allow the option to either:
a) auto assign by TC (as it is now for one business location)
b) manually enter the smart part number (for my business location)
What would I need to tell our TC admin to change?