Updated Nov 5, 2026
3 min readSame component. Different context.
The digital thread starts with knowing which object, revision and occurrence you are looking at. A diagnostic approach before changing a BOM.
PLM Nexus technical team
- Item Revision AShared component definition
- Occurrence 1Assembly path X · quantity 1
- Occurrence 2Assembly path Y · quantity 2
Process diagram
Two views show the same component with a different quantity, position or revision. It is tempting to correct the value immediately. First establish whether both views describe the same occurrence in the same configuration. An item identifier alone does not answer that question.
Separate identity from use
An item revision identifies a version of the component. An occurrence describes its use in a structure. A configured BOM view also depends on selection rules and context. Reusing a component does not mean that every use must have the same position or quantity.
Capture the context before changing data
Record the top assembly, path to the component, selected revision, revision rule and any applicable effectivity or variant settings. Then compare the property at the component and occurrence levels. This turns “the values are different” into a precise, reproducible question.
Our occurrence notes also record a possible difference between an interactive edit and an API-driven change. That observation is a reason to reproduce both paths in the target environment, not a universal rule about every Teamcenter version or property.
Verify the intended change and its boundaries
Use a small test structure with the same component in two places. Change only the intended occurrence, reopen the structure and check both paths. Include a second context and the relevant lifecycle state. An automated correction should stop when the target context is ambiguous, rather than guess which value is authoritative.
These are proposed acceptance checks, not completed tests or customer results. Set the expected behavior with the process owner, record the environment and version, then fill in the observed result and evidence. Blank cells are not passes.
| Scenario | Expected result | Evidence to retain |
|---|---|---|
| Baseline | Assembly X → component A: quantity 1. Assembly Y → component A: quantity 2. Same revision, different use. | Both paths, revision rule and effectivity. |
| Targeted occurrence edit | Change X quantity to 3; Y remains 2 and the component revision stays unchanged. | Reopen both paths; compare persisted values. |
| Ambiguous target | An automation stops when the path or configuration is missing. | Rejected request and unchanged structure. |
Next step
If this pattern is showing up in your Teamcenter environment, explore the relevant service or discuss the change you need.