Hi @dadude ,
Could you please add a screenshot or mention the window that you have noticed this button ‘Repair Order’ ?
Thanks,

Nethmini

Hi Nithmini.

Sure can do.

Thats a rather known page by the way and heavily used by customers.

Hi @dadude ,

Thanks for the screenshot.
I tested this in 21R2 SU12 and 22R1 SU6 , however, it seems the ‘New Repair Work Order’ option works fine and it directs the user to the ‘New Repair Work Order’ assistance to create the repair work order.
 

What is the expected functionality ? Could you please elaborate more on your requirement.

Thanks & Best Regards,

Nethmini

Hello Nethmini.

It seems the process finally got implemented correctly. Before

IFS Aurena framework version: 22.1.6.20220913050911.0

IFS Aurena client version: 22.1.6.20220913050911.0

IFS OData provider version: 22.1.6.20220913081851.0

the process was unable to move/book any inventory transactions due to an issue with the state of the part.

Finally it works. I will test it on the first customer environment with the same state as our internal reverence environment.

T&R

DADUDE

Hi @dadude ,

Thanks for the screenshot.
I tested this in 21R2 SU12 and 22R1 SU6 , however, it seems the ‘New Repair Work Order’ option works fine and it directs the user to the ‘New Repair Work Order’ assistance to create the repair work order.
 

What is the expected functionality ? Could you please elaborate more on your requirement.

 

Thanks & Best Regards,

Nethmini

Hi Nethimini.

I have the following issue:

Where and how do I enter this Superior Object ID please? I started the forth process for serial/non-serial part repair process.

T&R

DADUDE

Hi @dadude ,

To get this solved need to add superior object site and superior object on the material line.

This need to be defined to be able to place in facility.

Thanks for the information. I was able to issue the part in the process. 

However in my humble opionion there are mayor issues:

• Both fields are text fields. LOV’s are much better, since the object id might not be known by heart by the user. And writing errors are programmed.
• The fields can be filled with incorrect values incorrect site for the object, or incorrect object for the site → IFS Cloud doesn’t do a value validation?!?
• The fields are not shown in the standard configuration in the MRQL and not known to anyone, not in the programmer team.
• After the issue of the material, the part is not visible in the Equipmen Object Navigator nor in the Service Object 360 → due to the incorrect values in the MRQL.
• It is then possible to place in facility with the action button, but why the check for superior info, if that is not even validated?
• In this process then IFS Cloud validates data, so that the serial object can’t be placed in the structure → happy accident by CON .

Material Requistion Line:

Incorrect Site and Object combination.

Equipment Object Navigator and Service Object 360:

Aciton button:

Will these issues be addressed or will the process documentation inherit all this information, to prevent issues and errors in the process?

T&R

Thanks for the information. I was able to issue the part in the process. 

However in my humble opionion there are mayor issues:

• Both fields are text fields. LOV’s are much better, since the object id might not be known by heart by the user. And writing errors are programmed.
• The fields can be filled with incorrect values incorrect site for the object, or incorrect object for the site → IFS Cloud doesn’t do a value validation?!?
• The fields are not shown in the standard configuration in the MRQL and not known to anyone, not in the programmer team.
• After the issue of the material, the part is not visible in the Equipmen Object Navigator nor in the Service Object 360 → due to the incorrect values in the MRQL.
• It is then possible to place in facility with the action button, but why the check for superior info, if that is not even validated?
• In this process then IFS Cloud validates data, so that the serial object can’t be placed in the structure → happy accident by CON .

 

Material Requistion Line:

Incorrect Site and Object combination.

Equipment Object Navigator and Service Object 360:

 

Aciton button:

 

Will these issues be addressed or will the process documentation inherit all this information, to prevent issues and errors in the process?

T&R

The inventory part got created by me. I want to complete the process with correct data.

Hi @dadude @Nethmini Kosvinna 

I have looked into the above issues and in APP 10 IEE we have given the lovs for both filelds.

So pls send task to R&D to correct this and we need to add validations as well.

Also we will enhance the error message including MO number and liner no where the superior object is missing.

Those fields not showing on the standard configuration due to too much of columns but we can make them visible if the Place in Facility check box ticked.

Pls send a task to correct above.

Best Regards,

Shamila

Hello Shamila. I am desprately trying to find a way to report this to RnD via Assyst or SNOW and I just don’t know how . Any hint how to raise it for RnD on the LKP environment?

@Nethmini Kosvinna 

Can you pls assist on reporting the issue?

Best Regards,

Shamila