Join our MCAD Central community forums, the largest resource for MCAD (Mechanical Computer-Aided Design) professionals, including files, forums, jobs, articles, calendar, and more.
We were going to start using TeamCenter because of a corporate directive, but They (the TeamCenter folks) wanted enough money to buy a house (per seat) to install it for use with proe. And they wanted more than half that per year for a subscription fee every year. You could hire a team of programmers to invent your own system from the ground up for that kind of money, and you wouldn't have to pay subscription fees, plus you'd get exactly what you want.
Needless to say, we didn't get TeamCenter. We have intralink but can't use it, again because of a corporate directive. So we do the old Windows file>save thing and hope we pick up the right file among the multitudes of duplicates.... I need to get my club and go kill dinner while the wife stokes the fire in the cave.
We were going to start using TeamCenter because of a corporate directive, but They (the TeamCenter folks) wanted enough money to buy a house (per seat) to install it for use with proe. And they wanted more than half that per year for a subscription fee every year. You could hire a team of programmers to invent your own system from the ground up for that kind of money, and you wouldn't have to pay subscription fees, plus you'd get exactly what you want.
Needless to say, we didn't get TeamCenter. We have intralink but can't use it, again because of a corporate directive. So we do the old Windows file>save thing and hope we pick up the right file among the multitudes of duplicates.... I need to get my club and go kill dinner while the wife stokes the fire in the cave.
I work with TeamCenter at Caterpillar. A note before I continue: they are using a 500mhz computer as the TeamCenter server for a very large number of computers. Never a good idea, and everything that one could foresee from that equation is true in Technicolor and moist in M*U_mousejockey.
PostNote: when few users are online, TeamCenter is a very powerful and very complicated management program that can do everything you need done as long as you know all 714 items it expects to be done. If you miss one, you are entirely screwed. Silently, no one is notified. Dot every i, cross every t, sacrifice a chicken, but do not expect the same results from the same input. Tripling your Prozac dosage will not take care of the problem.
Long story short: TeamCenter SUCKS. If you are paid by the hour, go get coffee and compare *'s notable attributes to **'s notable attributes from the last contract gig where you ran into Dave-whats-his-name. If you're salaried, you knew you were an idiot when you signed the paperwork. Call your shrink. Call your mother if you can remember her number. You have time. Im-measureable progress on your project, but plenty of time.
V. funny John, Nice to see things are the same wherever you work
We were taken over by a UG-TeamCenter using company who wanted us to use TC for ProE, we were told an exceptionally successful example of this was Caterpillar !
Am I right in thinking that TC still can't handle family tables correctly ?
They are looking at TC in my company and one of the strong points they say, is user friendlessness.
You know like drag and drop, intuitive and so on...
is this true?
- Performance - honestly, when they put a decent server in, it actually started doing what was promised.
- drag-and-drop - yes, it actually has this capability. Use it wisely and frugally. Never, never drag across the Mother Window.
-consistent data - are you kidding?
- family tables - ha! As my first wife was fond of saying, "I don't do that."
- traceability - our version actually handles this rather well as long as you know where to look.
- the rest - Teamcenter is very obtuse and poorly set-up for an intuitive thinker. Just like Pro/E or Access. There are tons of very powerful functions available, but users with inadequate training are horribly confused and a danger to the workflow. If your company was kind enough to provide a manual, read it. Several times. Remember that the poor schmuck who wrote it was having flash-backs to UNIX, and the resemblance to Windows 3.11 is strictly superficial. Whatever it is you wish to do in Teamcenter, create a test {document, part, relationship, etc} and try it out before you muck up anything valuable.
It sounds to me you are in a position to influence the workflow process if you are forced to use Teamcenter. If I were you I would create the simplest workflow your organization can tolerate and be very, VERY frugel from then on. The worst thing you can do to your company is force fellow employees to be more productive (based on an unrealistic "exceptionally succesful example") while tying there hands behind their back with Teamcenter.
When I was introduced to Teamcenter at Cat a couple years ago I was surprised that I was expected to become a relational database expert in order to create and release a design.
Pro/E Wildfire 2.0 and Teamcenter 3.1 is one step forward, 3 steps back, spin your I.S. support partner round and round...
if you want to have the best performance, be sure to using Teamcenter Engineering. the new Pro/e interface is called Ipem. I beleive Cat is using the old IPRO interface. totally different. correct me if I am wrong. Teamcenter 3.1 "metaphase" should not be used as cad manager.
May 2007: TCE & IPEM. Migration from Intralink was bad. we lost a month of progress after migration. lots of assy links broken and had to be fixed. especially with merged parts or designated layouts. Still admin intensive becasue of permission issues. remote servers dont sync until midnight every night (sometimes thats broken too). User interface is like reading bad Java error codes and you need 3 designated admin to answer the questions all the end users have that are not engineers during signoff processes.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
ffice
