9 Replies Latest reply on Jul 18, 2008 8:26 PM by Jeff Sweeney

    What is wrong with the BOM functions!!!!!

    Mike Sveda
      I have tried using the exported BOM of an assembly for our manufacturing processes. I am getting quantity errors. I am thinking PDMWE doesn't recognize patterned parts. Quantities only seem to be shown for non-patterened items. IS this common???? If so, it is a bad bug.

      We developed a macro for excel to generate a BOM based on the .csv file from PDM and now I cannot trust the data coming from PDMWE!!!!!!!!!!
        • What is wrong with the BOM functions!!!!!
          Heather Nelson
          We too have seen quantity issues but it doesn't appear to be related to patterned items. Also, some of our part numbers are displaying the @ config part number instead of the part number of the configuration used. Seems to running about 50% correct part numbers in any BOM.
            • What is wrong with the BOM functions!!!!!
              Mike Sveda
              I can't believe that a PDM software can't count parts used in an assembly correctly!!!!!! This is nuts!!!!!!!!

              We were sold this product and believed that it could do simple things indented BOM's with accurate part counts.
                • What is wrong with the BOM functions!!!!!
                  Spencer Smith
                  True Bill of Material functionality is new to PDMWE as of v2008 ('contains' tab isn't a BOM), and as such is still missing critical functionality with regard to automation or ERP integration.

                  v2009 should improve on this, but it will be a couple more major releases of PDMWE before we can blindly trust the BOM info coming out of PDMWE.

                  We are implementing SAP as our MRP/ERP system of choice (wish us luck), and given the gaps in PDMWE BOM functionality, we will be inputting/modifying BOMs manually, using the exported .csv files as a starting point. I'll take the minimal extra work and the low risk of manual input errors over what I have seen come out of PDMWE BOMs.

                  IMHO, the PDMWE development guys didn't do quite enough benchmarking in this area, as other PDM systems seem to have this one down.

                  Spencer
                    • What is wrong with the BOM functions!!!!!
                      Erik Balle
                      I can not trust PDM Enterprise BOM, you have to Ctrl-Q every configuration in every subassembly to get the custom properties to show up in the top level correctly; indented BOM or parts only BOM. I think using the ERP for the BOM is the way to go. We looked at Intuitive Manufacturing ERP and they have a interface to SolidWorks assemblies, and you can link SolidWorks assembly parts to ERP parts, you don't link to the bad PDM BOM's but the SolidWorks assemblies. The ERP will have the complete BOM that includes non SolidWorks parts like wire, electrical connectors, grease and then link to the SolidWorks models custom properties. I think Epicor Vista has a SolidWorks link also.
                      • What is wrong with the BOM functions!!!!!
                        Thomas Mül
                        Spencer,

                        attached there is a link with a demo how to transfer BOM to SAP from PDMWE.

                        http://xplm.com/pdmwe_sap.html

                        Thomas
                          • What is wrong with the BOM functions!!!!!
                            Spencer Smith
                            Thanks for the integration suggstions - however, in our case we will simply use the ERP export functionality of PDMWE to create/revise Material Master Data in SAP. We do not have a need for bi-directional integration at this time, as the added expense is not justified. Our only external cost will be the SAP developer's time to write a script to import the XML data that is exported by PDMWE - I have to believe that will cost less than the purchase and implementation of a third-party integration package! If anyone can prove otherwise, I'll be happy to entertain the idea...here at a small company the overriding factor is almost always going to be cost (although they do listen to engineers sometimes!).

                            I do realize that there are solutions out there to transfer BOM data as well from PDMWE (it is even built into the ERP export feature), but until PDMWE BOMs are proven to be 100% accurate, we are not interested at all.

                            Spencer
                              • What is wrong with the BOM functions!!!!!
                                Spencer Smith
                                One additional thing...it looks like most of the inaccurate BOM complaints are in regard to quantities, but no one has mentioned configurations.

                                Since records for each configuration have the same filename (serialized or otherwise) and aside from the internally assigned 'pdmweid' variable there is no unique identifier available that an ERP/MRP system could use to populate the item #/material # field. For us, that means that anything we want to pass to the ERP system has to have all configs stripped off and separate part files created for each config. Defeats the purpose of having the power and functionality of configurations.

                                Does anyone else have experience with a workaround for this issue (other than simply not using configurations)?

                                Thanks,
                                Spencer
                      • What is wrong with the BOM functions!!!!!
                        Jeff Sweeney
                        Are you running an older service pack? SP4 has two fixes that I think addresses this issue. The issue had something to do with parts in flexible subassemblies showing parts in the @ configuration regardless of what configuration they actually were in.

                        Could this be what you were seeing or is it something else?