Siemens PLM TeamCenter Reviews

My main use case for Siemens PLM TeamCenter is daily usage for CAD changes, change management, change request activities, and all the details required for change management and product development with product lifecycle management.

A specific example of how I use Siemens PLM TeamCenter for a CAD change is that it is integrated with our Creo, so I check in from PLM, make changes in models, and check out again, storing data such as drawings, calculation sheets, and process documents in PLM, along with BOM tracking and product part tracking.

I sometimes create workflows which adds to my main use case and helps in organizing processes.

The best features Siemens PLM TeamCenter offers are its user-friendly interface, which I find more intuitive than other PLMs, making it quite easy to use.

The search feature stands out as very easy in PLM, along with check in and check out functions, and BOM extractions alongside the multi-level BOM creation of PLM itself, which helps in allotting tasks and actions required from some people in workflows.

One feature I love is when we upload a new design; we have to make one folder, and after that, approval from the team lead results in it being directly released to PLM, significantly reducing the time to upload separate one-to-one files.

Siemens PLM TeamCenter has positively impacted my organization by always increasing its user-friendly interface, and we have both types of PLM and received positive feedback from TeamCenter.

I have noticed some positive feedback in that people say other PLMs are a bit harder to use compared to Siemens PLM TeamCenter. One point is concerning change management, as when we search for drawings, we can access it easily from Siemens PLM TeamCenter, and the check in and check out process is very easy.

In terms of improvements, I cannot add anything more than what I have experienced. When I use it in daily life, I get all things done as of now, so there is nothing to improve in Siemens PLM TeamCenter at this moment.

There is nothing to add regarding new features as per my work, so I am not able to suggest further additions.

I have been using Siemens PLM TeamCenter for two years.

Siemens PLM TeamCenter has been stable and reliable for me most of the time.

Siemens PLM TeamCenter's scalability is good, and it can handle growth and changes in my organization easily.

The customer support for Siemens PLM TeamCenter is up to the mark, and I have received instant replies when needed.

Before Siemens PLM TeamCenter, I used Enovia, which was quite tricky to use for CAD changes, so we shifted to Siemens PLM TeamCenter because the Creo integration is the best.

I have seen a return on investment with Siemens PLM TeamCenter, and it is always up to the mark in terms of metrics such as money saved or time saved.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Siemens PLM TeamCenter has been that it is quite high compared to Aras PLM, which I found is around 20 to 25 percent of the cost of PLM.

The decision regarding which solution to choose was taken by management without me evaluating other options personally.

I would rate Siemens PLM TeamCenter as a nine out of ten.

I chose nine out of ten for Siemens PLM TeamCenter because sometimes clearing the cache causes problems and makes Siemens PLM TeamCenter slow in the browser.

My advice to others looking into using Siemens PLM TeamCenter is that it is quite good to use Siemens PLM TeamCenter instead of others, particularly due to its user-friendly interface and the demand in the automotive industry.

I have no additional thoughts about Siemens PLM TeamCenter, as it is great and I am looking forward to working with the TeamCenter team if I get the chance. My overall rating for this product is nine out of ten.

We use Siemens PLM TeamCenter for engineering and CAD design purposes, as well as on the manufacturing side and on the quality side. To visualize the information, we use integration and CAD applications.

In Siemens PLM TeamCenter, we store design data, and we create drawings for that design. We design it on the engineering side using CAD, and it processes on the manufacturing side, while we have checks on quality to validate the information.

Siemens PLM TeamCenter contains a bunch of integration applications that stand out most to me.

There are many integrations, such as with the visualization, with the CAD, with the MES, and with the ERP, and we have other applications similar to Capital.

In my current company, which was a startup at that time, Siemens PLM TeamCenter plays a vital role in maintaining all of the engineering manufacturing data, which we were manually keeping in Excel. Now we have moved it to TeamCenter, and it provides a variety of access and operations on that data, fulfilling a full set of operations.

We have a great set of validations and rules set up on Siemens PLM TeamCenter side, with workflows allowing great collaboration between engineering, manufacturing, and quality sides. The data is common, and we can track and check it using the track trace links of the objects. It is now easy to collaborate, as the same model can be used by multiple departments and teams, and it is live so everybody can work on it.

On the reporting side of Siemens PLM TeamCenter, we now have an integration with AI, which needs enhancement, along with improvements in the reporting features as well.

As AI is booming, Siemens PLM TeamCenter should come up with some AI perspective in the TeamCenter Active Workspace version.

It should come up with functionalities that make it easy to configure from the UI side regarding reporting features.

I have been using Siemens PLM TeamCenter for around ten plus years.

Siemens PLM TeamCenter is stable for a wide range of applications, but there are some integrations that are unstable, and Siemens is updating them.

Scalability-wise, Siemens PLM TeamCenter comes with a wide range of features and applications, making it easily integrable with other applications.

Customer support is great; they have good dedicated support if any issue arises with the software.

We have used a different solution due to performance issues, and due to the upgraded version, we switched to Siemens PLM TeamCenter.

I evaluated Enovia and Windchill as well, but Siemens PLM TeamCenter looks more promising in comparison to features.

In my current field, I have been working for around ten plus years.

I give Siemens PLM TeamCenter a rating of eight.

I give it an eight because there are some improvements and things that need to be more enhanced.

Time has been saved by our organization by working collaboratively on Siemens PLM TeamCenter with each individual department.

If others are looking for a wide range of engineering, manufacturing, and quality operations to be performed, they can use Siemens PLM TeamCenter.

It works as a partner for us regarding our business relationship with this vendor.

Siemens PLM TeamCenter is a great tool to use; they can go with it if they are working on complex applications.

TeamCenter is for a company with highly complex processes, like aerospace, defense, automotive and heavy machinery. For example, manufacturing industries must go through a design phase where they create CAD designs and a process-planning phase before they get to execution. Once the product is deployed, they need to constantly maintain and finally decommission it.

The entire product lifecycle is stored in PLM, which stores a complete set of data. You can do this with aerospace engines, fighters, or cars. Usually, the OEMs don't do car maintenance, but OEMs are often responsible for maintaining heavy machinery or aerospace equipment. 

It starts with requirements. Next, they create the CAD, engineering, and manufacturing bills of materials. Then they need to track maintenance throughout the product's life on a bill of maintenance. After the part is decommissioned, the bill of maintenance is closed. 

I like the Teamcenter Requirements Manager. It also has a structure manager where you create an engineering bill of materials and manufacturing process planning. There is something like service lifecycle management. That is where the maintenance data is stored. There are multiple modules. ALM Polarion is also a Siemens solution. It is a separate product, but it's part of the Siemens portfolio. 

This solution works, but it has many issues. Smaller companies are coming up the cloud-based PLM solutions that may replace larger PLM companies like PTC or Siemens in the future. It has some performance problems, and the maintenance is too expensive. Recently, we completed a project, and it cost almost $6 million to upgrade. 

I've been using TeamCenter for 20 year. 

TeamCenter is highly scalable. 

Setting up TeamCenter is complex. Every PLM is complex unless we're talking about cloud-based solutions, but those have fewer features. However, those are only suitable for small companies. 

The time needed to deploy depends on the expertise of the person installing it. We can do it in a couple of hours if it is an out-of-the-box installation. If customers deploy it themselves, it may take a few days. It also depends on the complexity of the system we are designing.

The amount of employees needed also depends on the size of the company and its complexity. A massive company takes an army to run the solution, but a couple of people can make it work for a small company. 

TeamCenter is primarily used for large, complex companies like aerospace, defense, and auto manufacturers. Only large enterprises can afford the fees and maintenance. Smaller companies won't see an ROI for it.

I rate PLM TeamCenter eight out of 10. I recommend it for managing complex processes. 

We use the Siemens PLM TeamCenter for global group CRM. They have R&D centers in Korea, India, and Germany, and they collaborate on all aspects of the project.

The product's most valuable features are patch and data management.

The product's web interface and setup process could be better. Also, scalability and stability need to be improved. It could be easier to customize as well.

I have been using Siemens PLM TeamCenter for over three years. 

I rate the product's stability a six out of ten.

We have around 80 Siemens PLM TeamCenter customers. They are all medium-level enterprises. I rate its scalability a seven out of ten.

The initial setup could be easier. The deployment took a few weeks to complete. I rate the process a four out of ten.

I rate Siemens PLM TeamCenter an eight on pricing. It is costly for small businesses.

I recommend small businesses to go for another product. Teamcenter is suitable for large companies. Overall, I rate it a seven out of ten.

The best part of TeamCenter in my opinion is Vis Mockup. Without using CAD I am able to open up an entire vehicle to find all components in the area of my part at any distance I specify.

The best part of TeamCenter is the ability to pull down current vehicle environment at will to guarantee I am working to the latest level. Also allowing me to communicate data directly to the customer without delay simply by checking in or enveloping data directly to a user.

The biggest issue I have is how it locks resources. I personally run two versions of TeamCenter. Using Asendbridge solutions I can have three version loaded on the machine at once, but can only run one at a time. Switching between TeamCenter versions requires killing processes after exiting the program. It is an annoying process when you have to switch back and forth. So now I have two computers, one for each install. Also Ford has regional databases. To switch from one to the other requires exiting and re-entering.

TeamCenter started in 2006 after Ford decommissioned Metaphase. GM was set up at the same time.

To communicate with Ford we run TeamCenter 9, paired with Catia V5 version 22, while communication with GM, Chrysler and Nissan is done with TeamCenter 10 with NX9.

We use Ascendbridge Solutions for our installations and upgrades for TeamCenter. They make sure everything goes flawlessly. The biggest issue we had is getting my ID from GM. It took four months and lots of nagging to push it through.

The only issues we had with TeamCenter is when something would change in our Firewall settings without our knowledge that would terminate our connection to our customers database.

No, it was not a factor for us.

Team Center support is through Ford, GM and Asendbridge and we have had excellent service, especially through Ascendbridge.

I would rate them very high.

Before Team Center was Metaphase with Ford. I guess their motivation was a new CAD system and the need for a viewer like Vis-mockup.

TeamCenter was straightforward, but only because our customers did all the setup work and we just had to get it installed and learn how to use it.

All of our TeamCenter installations and updates are performed by Ascendbridge solutions. Over the years they have inspired so much confidence in me that I feel if they can’t do it, then it can’t be done.

I would be comfortable using Siemens or Ascendbridge with help implementing this software. Try not to run multiple databases. If you are an OEM, it is fine since you will only have the one database, and if you are a supplier, you will need several PC’s as I really would not recommend running multiple installs on one machine. It is just not worth the trouble.