Hi Anthony,

To answer last question why you cannot use the floating pm witch schedule Alone. From the documentation:

By design, it specifically states any other PM schedule lines will not be considered when using the Schedule alone.  To me, this means schedule line 1 should not influence the scheduling of schedule line 2 when a PM is executed on the schedule line 1 as they are treated apart.  It is always using the fixed PM dates in the ‘cycle’ for calculation so excludes floating.

They are mutually exclusive.

@Phil Seifert 

Thanks for your help. Do you have an idea  for the use case, because I can’t find a way to manage this case of  PM scheduling with multiple problem code , each different by MP schedule?
I don’t know why by design we oppose floating and alone.

Regards

 

Hi Anthony,

I can't think of a way… you can only apply a single PM schedule and the Floating PM option is defined at the header level, not the line level.  The application will only let you do floating PM if all of the lines are cyclical in nature thus you can't mix Alone with Cycle and still define PM as the Alone line will disqualify the selection during the validation.

Hi @Phil Seifert 

I understood what you said, but I don’t understand why at R&D level we have made this choice.

It’s usual to have a monthly maintenance and a semestrial or annual maintenance for a same product and for the monthly maintenance if you miss a first date, you need to modify the next date (floating). Of course the semestrial or annual maintenance will not change.
If we could add many PM Maintenance for a product, it could be a way to solve that, but we can’t. 
Some process with legal maintenance like the lift sector have these constraints.


Regards

anthony

 

Hi Anthony,

This has the been the design for a long time and to change this would require a customization outside of standard per R&D.