Solved

Error in moving a Serial Object

  • 4 March 2024
  • 4 replies
  • 171 views

Userlevel 1
Badge +5

Hi all, 😊

I would like to bring to your attention an issue regarding the movement of a serial object. Specifically, I am seeking clarification on whether it is feasible to relocate a serial object while in the "Observe the Service Object 360" page view, with 0 Active Requests and 0 Active Work Tasks, but with 1(1) Contract and 1(1) Recurring Program, as indicated in the attached Service Object 360 page.

Despite numerous attempts, I encountered difficulty in moving the object, with an error message stating, "Service lines connected to this Object or its structure are already used in a Work Order or a PM action and cannot be deleted."

 

To address this, I navigated to the relevant "Recurring Service Program" and adjusted the statuses of all requests to "Closed". However, despite this action, the status of the "Recurring Service Program" remained active, and I was unable to proceed with the movement.

Upon changing the status of the "Recurring Service Program" to "Obsolete", I found that the movement became possible.

I am seeking clarification on whether this behavior is inherent to the system and how the possibility of an active work task is maintained for the service line, given that all requests and tasks have been transitioned to a closed state. 

  1. Is it necessary to set the "Recurring Service Program" to "Obsolete" in order to facilitate the movement of the object?
  2. I am curious about how the error message arises, particularly when active work tasks related to service lines are seemingly invisible. 

Environment: IFS CLOUD 22.R1.SU21

Your insights and guidance on this matter would be greatly appreciated. 😊

Thank You!

icon

Best answer by Dimuthu Madhushan 4 March 2024, 11:47

View original

4 replies

Userlevel 2
Badge +3

Hi,

Below are the prerequisites that should be followed.

  • No open work orders, work tasks or work task steps for the moving Serial Object or the child objects.
  • Serial Parts of the moving serial object and child objects should exist in the new site.
  • Serial Objects with direct connections to meter invoice lines, service/request contracts, service requests or service quotations are not allowed to move. Serial objects included in a service/request contract with Use line on structure can be moved to different site or a parent provided there is no ongoing work through the service/request contract and PM actions generated through service contracts are obsoleted.
  • Scrapped Serial Objects are not allowed to move.
  • Serial Objects with current position "In Inventory" cannot be moved.
  • Cannot move the Serial Object if there is an equipment object with the same object ID exists in the new site.

Move Serial Object to a new equipment structure in same site,

  • The current position for the serial object must be In Facility.
  • Scrapped Serial Objects are not allowed to move.

I think answer is there.

Userlevel 1
Badge +5

HI @Dimuthu Madhushan,

 

Thank you very much for the prompt response. Your assistance is greatly appreciated. As you highlight in 3rd point, 

  • Serial Objects with direct connections to meter invoice lines, service/request contracts, service requests or service quotations are not allowed to move. Serial objects included in a service/request contract with Use line on structure can be moved to different site or a parent provided there is no ongoing work through the service/request contract and PM actions generated through service contracts are obsoleted.

As this point says, it is the required course of action to obsolete all works associated with the service/request contract and PM actions generated through service contracts for the movement to proceed. Additionally, I believe I have followed this action regarding the object movement here.

 

Thank you! 😊

Badge +2

Hi @Aravinda.Pr,

Ideally you do not have to set the recurring program to Obsolete in order to move a serial object. This issue was fixed in 23R2 and onwards.

Userlevel 2
Badge +3

@PubudikaW Do we have an update on document in 23R2 about that?

Reply