Hi all,
We have a customer requirement related to Linear Assets in IFS Cloud and would like to understand whether anyone has implemented a functional or technical solution for a similar scenario, or if there is any official recommendation from IFS regarding this limitation.
The customer requires the capability to modify the topology of existing Linear Assets, including:
- changing the physical extension/length of the Linear Asset;
- splitting existing child elements into new elements;
- creating new Linear Assets derived from an existing one;
- preserving relationships with active Work Orders, PM Plans and historical maintenance transactions.
The business expectation is that when an existing Linear Asset is segmented into two or more new Linear Assets, all historical operational information should continue to be available and usable for future planning and maintenance execution in the newly created assets/elements.
However, based on our analysis and tests, we understand that this is not technically supported in IFS Cloud due to architectural and referential integrity constraints.
Our current understanding is:
- the Linear Asset ID is a structural and immutable key;
- all operational, maintenance and accounting transactions are historically linked to the original Linear Asset ID;
- active Work Orders, PM Actions, Measurements, failures, costs and accounting transactions cannot be safely redistributed retroactively to newly created Linear Assets;
- any attempt to replicate or reassign historical transactions would compromise auditability, accounting consistency and historical traceability;
- even via customization, there does not appear to be a technically safe approach to “split” the historical lifecycle of one Linear Asset into multiple new assets.
Therefore, our current recommendation to the customer is:
- keep the original Linear Asset as a historical record;
- create new Linear Assets with new IDs;
- start the lifecycle of the new assets from the point of physical/topological segregation onward;
- preserve lineage only through documentary or referential relationships, without direct inheritance of historical transactions.
Has anyone faced a similar requirement in utilities, transmission/distribution networks, railways, pipelines or similar industries?
Specifically:
- Was there any supported functional approach?
- Has IFS provided any official guidance regarding this scenario?
- Is there any recommended strategy for preserving planning continuity without violating historical integrity?
- Has anyone implemented a GIS-driven workaround while preserving ERP auditability?
Any technical insight or architectural recommendation would be greatly appreciated.
Kind regards,
Eduardo Mamcasz