BOM for 2 different sites

• Jul 25, 2025

• #2

ctopher

Mechanical

Jan 9, 2003

17,527

USA, CA

At the top level, can you add -F (fab) for one and -P (purchased) for the other?

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Jul 25, 2025

• #3

CWB1

Mechanical

May 21, 2013

2,165

US

Trash the multiple C/E/M BOMs and smack whoever proposed that nonsense.
Normal practice is to use levels/layers and p/ns as needed for inspection in a single BOM. Your example would look something like:

Non-saleable engineering "buck" contains all variants of product
^
Saleable product is assembled to p/n3
^
Plant2 finishes part per print p/n2, which is a make-from referencing p/n1
^
Plant1 roughs part per print p/n1

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Jul 26, 2025

• #4

drawoh

Mechanical

Oct 1, 2002

8,994

CA

linnu said:

In a multi-plant manufacturing setup using Teamcenter, the same part (e.g., Bracket123) is fabricated in Plant USA1 and purchased in Plant USA2. The organization wants to avoid duplicating part numbers while managing plant-specific BOM structures.

Currently, we are preparing the C (CAD), E (Engineering), and M (Manufacturing) BOMs.

How can we manage the data for each site for E and M BOM's, and how can we generate the top-level assembly BOM based on the specific site in Teamcenter?



we need to manage with same number for both the sites.



Thankyou!

Click to expand...

I don't think this is a software problem; it is a wetware problem. You have to talk to each other.

Everybody has to use the same BOM format. You have to agree on part numbers, and you must have access to each other's databases. Each site can have its own drawing/part numbering scheme. Probably, it will be easier to assign numbers. The number will tell you which site the part originated from. If your drawing/part numbers are centralized, the source would be a field in your database, which is a good idea. I actually do not like intelligent numbering systems.

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Jul 27, 2025

• #5

CWB1

Mechanical

May 21, 2013

2,165

US

Smart part numbering has to be one of the dumbest, most-hated things that some companies do. A simple 5-6 digit alphanumeric is easy to remember and distinguish from others. Smart p/ns are usually ungodly long, difficult to remember when you're on a ladder pulling parts or underneath a machine, easily mistaken for similar p/ns, and ultimately cause a ton of ordering/procurement mistakes. The opposing argument is always "if you have a decoder ring".....then I'd just use the parts system or print on my phone/laptop/etc like everybody else - equal effort but more data.

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Jul 27, 2025

• #6

3DDave

Aerospace

May 23, 2013

11,544

US

Is Team Center an ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) system and not a PDM (Product Data Management) system?

What is asked for seems to be managing enterprise resources, not product data, to direct purchases of material.

Trying to graft enough junk onto a PDM system to try to simulate some part of an ERP system will make no one happy. It's going to be a huge amount of external manual effort to maintain the various relationships outside of the PDM. And it will go wrong and soak up far more time and effort than just letting each facility run its own BOM on index note cards.

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Jul 28, 2025

• #7

Doug Hunter

Automotive

Jul 24, 2023

186

US

Linnu,

Can you please explain the functional differences between your C, E and M BOMs? I've always tried to keep them identical. We always worked with our Manufacturing Engineering upfront to ensure that 1 BOM worked for PE and ME and aligned with the manufacturing process.

Are all of your manufacturing sites accessing the same TeamCenter database? If not, they really ought to be.

While waiting for your answer, I'll offer that TeamCenter is designed to manage exactly your situation efficiently. You could consult your software sales rep to get advice. Your organization is right to avoid part number duplication. New part numbers would ideally be added only when a further manufacturing operation is performed, not for simple handling/shipping. I am largely aligned with CWB1's thinking on this (without the workplace violence).

 

Upvote 0 Downvote