Hi,

I think the issue here is the way you are trying to connect the PMs. As I understand one child PM (22954) cannot have two parents. You should be able to set 22954( navigate to connections from this PM) as parent and put 22957 and 22956 as two child PMs(add this two in list).  But having them as children will not avoid the WO generation. connecting them together will create a WO structure. So I am not sure this is the functionality you looking for.

Though I am not clear on why you cannot go for replacements. Can’t you replace both 22957,22956 by 22954?

Best Regards,

Dilani

Hi,

Can this be achieved using PM Group Functionality along with Replacement?  (without using Connections)

Example: 

All 5 PMs (10,11,12,20,21) are connected to PM Group ID “A”

Replacements set up for PM 10,11,12

> PM 12 replaces PM 10 & 11

>PM 11 replaces PM 10

With this set up I expect

> when 4K Hours condition is hit, PM 11 will group with PM 20 and create a WO (10 will be replaced by 11) - This WO will contain Tasks for Compress 02 and Inst01

> When 8K Hours condition is hit, PM 12 will group with PM 20 and 21 to create a WO (10 & 11 will be replaced by 12) - This WO will contain tasks for Compress 02, Inst01 and Inst 02

@pekase?

Hi,

There can be a possibility to solve things by using the Replacements and PM Group ID functionality and not have any PM connections.

But there are some things to consider if you want to run it like this.

When using replacements you need to do the planning of the PMs in a way that for example the part of the PM to be replaced (PM10) need to be added as a part of the replacing PM (PM11).

This mean if PM10 contain of work ‘A’ and you sometimes want to replace PM10 with PM11, the work for PM11 will be planned as ‘A’+’B’ where ‘A’ is from the replaced PM10 and ‘B’ is the additional work.

Replacement in one level:

Scen 1 – PM11 replacing PM10

• PM10 - Small job  - (A)
• PM11 - Medium job - (A+B)

*X = PM generated

**(X) = PM replaced and not generated

If wanted you can also define replacements in more levels. This can either be done as in Scen2 or Scen 3:

Scen 2 – PM12 is replacing PM10 + PM12 is replacing PM11

• PM10 - Small job  - (A)
• PM11 - Medium job - (B)
• PM12 - Large job - (A+B+C)

*X = PM generated

**(X) = PM replaced and not generated

Scen 3 – PM12 is replacing PM11 + PM11 is replacing PM10

• PM10 - Small job  - (A)
• PM11 - Medium job - (A+B)
• PM12 - Large job - (A+B+C)

*X = PM generated

**(X) = PM replaced and not generated

For the second part with PM20 and PM21 and to get them generated as part of the other PMs (PM10, PM11, PM12) this can be solved by using same PM Group ID into all 5 PMs (PM10, PM11, PM12, PM20, PM21).

This will work automatically if you use same condition defined on all 5 PMs (PM10, PM11, PM12, PM20, PM21).

• When doing a condition generation for this condition, all PMs with a generation value (and that not have been replaced) will be generated into same WO.
• This WO will get Work Task lines created with information from all included PMs.

If you not use same condition defined on all 5 PMs, it will require that all PMs will get generated at same time to get them grouped into same WO.

Regards

Pelle

Hi @Dilini Arandara , @Dilani , @Mathias Dahl and @pekase .

Tks for the attention and instructions given!

I’ll do some tests this week and give you guys a feedback.

Br.

Lopes

Hi @Dilini Arandara , @Dilani , @Mathias Dahl and @pekase .

Did some tests and the replacement scenario worked fine for the compress.

But even gropuing the instruments and using the same condition, no Wo has been generated for them, just for the compress.

One thing I’ve noticed is that even inserting condition for PM action 20 (instument), there is no updated maintenance lines since the mesurements are registered just for the compress.

Am I doing something wrong?

Tks a lot for help!

Please see a 4k example:

4k compress PM

INSTRUMENT PM 4K

WO generated by “Condition Generation”

Hi,

I'm afraid I simplified reality a bit in my answer and I'm sorry for that.

The conditions you define on your PM Actions are all linked to a parameter+test point 
which in turn was previously defined on the object for the PM Action.

To always get all this generated at the same time, all your PM Actions must then have 
the same object and the condition line (parameter+test point) must be set up the same 
on these PM Actions.

This is unfortunately not the case in your example as you have different objects on the 
PM Actions for Comp and Inst.

However this could possibly be solved by inheriting measured values ​​from the object you 
have on the COMP side to the object you have on the INST side and thus make the measured 
values ​​follow each other and thus get generation of them at the same time.

Unfortunately the functionality for inheriting measured values ​​from one object to another 
is not part of the standard functionality in APP10.
Currently this functionality is only available as part of the Oil & Gas extension that is 
available for APP10 and is also planned to be added into STD for the upcoming release.

However, it could possibly be solved with a Custom Event to make this inheritance from one 
object to another object. Unfortunately, I do not have the details how to do this in best 
way.

Regards

Pelle

Hi @pekase and everyone, tks for attention and feedback.

I’ll try do this with custom event or ask for help in community or IFS support in case of need.

Br.

Lopes