Assets (Asset Management)

Hi All, Experimenting with the Paramater Templates and pushing these to Equipment Objects. From the Help file I can read: “The parameter template should have the same ID as the object type that the template is created for. With this logic the template will be automatically populated on the equipment objects when an Object Type is selected.” Unfortunately that does not seem to work at all.  I have a Parameter Template ID - identical to an Object Type’. So when Object Type is selected, the template should be pushed to the Equipment object. That does not seem to happen.Paramater Templety called ‘LOAD HAUL’ Serial Object with Object Type = Load HaulNo parameter template is pushed  What am I missing here? Best RegardsRoel

Background:When a return is performed from the Execute Work Task using the New Return functionality, the returned item information is not displayed under the RETURNS tab of the corresponding Work Task.  Current Situation:This is not considered a defect in the application as per the current design. According to the existing functionality, return information is not displayed under the RETURNS tab of the respective Work Task; however, the return information is displayed under the COSTS and SALES tab of the corresponding Work Task. Customer Impact:When customers return an item, especially a high-value item, they currently have no option to view the returned item information under the corresponding Work Task. The absence of this information could introduce operational risks and lead to potential business issues. Future Enhancement:After discussions with R&D, we can confirm that there are currently no plans to change the existing behaviour. However, considering the impact on customers, w

Hi Team IFS Version: IFS Applications 10Description:When searching the B2B portal by Object ID, only records under Historical Work are returned. Work Orders generated from Group-based PM Actions (using PM Group / Merge) do not carry the Object ID at the Work Order header level — the object connection instead sits at the Work Task or Work Step level depending on whether Group only or Group + Merge was used.As a result, customers cannot see all Work Orders/Work Tasks connected to their Object ID in the B2B portal, even though the records exist in the system.Questions:Is this a known limitation of the B2B portal's Object ID search logic (i.e., does it query strictly against the WO header Object ID field)? Has anyone built a custom projection/view that unions Object ID connections across WO header, Work Task, and Work Step levels for B2B visibility? Is this related to the known Object Navigator gap under PM Group + Merge (where object connection only exists at Work Step level)? If so, is t

Hi All,Does anyone know the exact logic or formula to calculate Planned Value and the Due Date for Condition based PM Actions?I have created 3 PMs as follows for an object. (Performed Value based = yes, replacement enabled, Valid From 2024/10/01)PM 1 - Starting value 250, interval 250 PM 2 - Starting value 1000, interval 1000 PM 3 - Starting value 2000, interval 2000Before creating PMs, the object has past measurements like this.Once the PM Actions are created, the Planned Value & the Due Date is update as follows with the Generation Value 7509I’m concerning how the Due Date can be 2012 for 1000 & 2000 interval PM Actions.Appreciate your help on this TIA

hi CommunityDo you know the storage size limit using File Storage option (with azur)Regards

The core issue is the failure of IFS Cloud to communicate with the Aurena Agent, resulting in errors such as "This operation requires the AurenaAgent to be enabled."  The problem appears linked to environment-specific OS or configuration differences rather than a product defect. When the customer is trying to export a document in the window below (custom page), the following error will pop up. This Aurena agent is installed on only 2 machines. One is working (though it sometimes doesn't work), and the other is completely not working. Investigations done so far.Reinstalled the aurena agent a few times. Still getting an error as below.   Checked Anti-virus software like ESET blocks this Aurena Agent installation and followed the below article: https://community.ifs.com/framework-and-experience-101/error-from-aurena-agent-security-error-reque Customer hasn’t performed an update to the SSL/TLS certificate on this environment recently. Disabled the antivirus and installed the Aurena agent

Dear All,It seems that ‘Performed Work’ field on Bundle Task page is missing. Same is available in MWo - Service App. Please correct me, if wrong.Version - Application service update: 25.1.7Framework service update: 25.1.13IFS Cloud Web version: 25.1.13.20260611111206.0IFS Client Services version: 25.1.13.20260604045716.0IFS Client Notification version: 25.1.13.20260604052620.0IFS Chat version:IFS OData provider version: 25.1.13.20260604225133.0Regards,Srinivas

We used PM Group and Merge in one site and now want to do same on another site, however as the PM Group ID is not showing in the new site, if I try to set it up, I get an error message that the PM Group already exist for the old site and cannot be used in the new site. I thought two different sites can use the same PM Group ID. I will be glad to hear from anyone who has previously experienced this type of issue.  

Hi,We have a lot of parts that needs to be sales parts, purchase parts and inventory parts, but are low cost and classified as consumables. When our internal customers order these parts, they need to register arrival into stock as any other purchase order. Then they issue it on a material requisition.Our end users experience that it is time consuming to use the material requisition page to do this; yu need to register 1 by 1 part with location and quantity, then you need to reserve them, and then issue them. The latter 2 can be done in one operation, but it is the adding of lines that are time consuming. Does anyone know of any other more effecient way to do this, or have created fex a BPA for “Bulk registration” on MR? BR,Henning

IFS Cloud 25R2, Knowledge Article(KA) which appeared in Work Task, the same work task transferred to Mobile, can we see the KA in MWO ?… 

Hi ExpertsOne of our oil and gas clients is currently working exclusively with functional objects, without any serial objects in their system. However, they’re now interested in converting some of these objects into serial objects while preserving all past transactions linked to them. I’d like your expert feedback on the approach we're considering for this request and to know if any of these options should be reconsidered. We’re looking at around 40 objects, all of which include measurement details, PM actions, and WOs, but no financial transactions. Here are my proposed options:Create manual serial objects: Reuse the same functional object ID and migrate historical transactions from functional objects via DR script. Scripted Conversion: Develop a script to directly convert functional objects to serial objects (uncertain about feasibility). Migration Script: Use a comprehensive migration script to transfer data (though I feel this could be more complex than the above options, given the

In IFS Cloud 26R1, a prospect has raised a question regarding Resource Allocation on Work Tasks.The proposed process is as follows:Work Tasks are generated from a Preventive Maintenance (PM) Action (potentially hundreds of Work Tasks). Resource Requirements are defined in the PM Action Template by Trade (e.g. Electrician, Mechanical Fitter, Instrument Technician). Named Resources for the Trade then need to be allocated to the generated Work Tasks based on the required Trade and available capacity.Assuming that PSO (Planning and Scheduling Optimization) is not included in the solutionWhich screen / function in IFS can be used to ensure that named Resources can be easily allocated to work tasks and also not be over utilised ?  (without having to drill into each Work Task.)(example : Work Tasks require an Electrician for 60 hours in this week - how can this be allocated to Mr.X who only works for 40 hours in the week - the maximum capacity of 40 hours should be visible when allocating wor

Need Inputs, once the 27R1 is introduced service related functionality are removed, functions removed like Service request can be handled in Prepare work order screen.Dispatch → which functionality to be continued in Work Management ?Appointment Booking -->which functionality to be continued in Work Management ?and also need to know when is the 27R1 is expected 

I am trying to understand the Maintenance Change Request in 25R2. Would appreciate some help in understanding the way of working. How to use the second step in the assistant? Looks to be reporting fields, are these supposed to be used on the current task or why should I add data in for example “action taken” when I create a new MCR? As a technician I would like to report that the work report and interval for the job is incorrect, how would I go about to do that? Without adding any of the toggles in the first page I am not able to create the MCR. I would only like to report duration and work descripton changes, not anything related to material, resources or object. Is this a bug? Why is the object updates limited to test points and parameters? 

Hi,I have seen some posts here mentioning APM functionality in IFS. Is this a new component in IFS Cloud? Are there any docs, ppt etc describing the functionality?B RAnders

Hi, Is it possible to modify the planned value in the Maintenance Plan even after a Work Order has been generated and completed?We updated the condition value, but the Maintenance Plan did not regenerate as expected.Do you have any suggestions on how to proceed? Thanks!   

Dear All,I came across something that I never noticed before. On the Work Task Template - Work List. For each Work task that we define we have 4 tabs where we can add lines. The 4 tabs being:Work Task Steps Resources Materials PlanningBut I seem to be missing the ‘Return’ tab. After all - with certain Preventive Maintenance it might be logical that a component is always returned to stock for repair. So it would be useful for a return line to be automatically present on the Work Task after creation through a PM action/from the Work Task Template. Is there any specific reason why it is not there?Could this be a permission set issue?How did other people solve this problem?  Best RegardsRoel 

Hi community,I am currently preparing FMECA, and an error occurs when trying to generate MTBF within the failure mode screen using AI generation.Error Message: "No available work tasks found in the class and process class."Could you please advise how I can register or save the work tasks into the class and process class data so that the MTBF generation works properly?

Dear All, I was working with Work Orders, Permits and Isolation orders. The whole idea was to create Work Task Templates and Pm actions involving Permits and Isolation orders so that 1 Work Order would suffice. I want to create 1 Work Order where 2 Work Tasks need to be done (with a dependency Start after Finish).The 1st Work Task involves welding so the machine has to be 100% electrically isolated - and will be performed by a Welder. The 2nd Work Task is a calibaration mode, so the machine must have power, but still be isolated from the normal production. Conveyor belts (that are powered separately) are not allowed to be running. So different kind of permitThe thing is, apparently to be able to start the 1st Work Task, both permits need to be released. Despite the fact that the Work Task are 2 completely separate things that are performed after each other, by different people, maybe even with a day in between due to scheduling conflicts.  So this does not seem to making sense to me. I

Hi everyone. Just wondering whether it is possible to use a *.csv file with the relevant information in to bulk upload Business Activities into IFS cloud, rather than have to enter each one individually. Thanks 

According to the customer scenario, I created 3 PM Actions with the same starting value and intervals for 3 different objects, and then grouped them using a PM Group.After that, measurements were entered for all 3 objects.For PM 1 and PM 2, the entered measurements exceeded the threshold value. However, for PM 3, the measurement was below the Planned Value.After running the condition generation job:For PM 1 and PM 2, the same Work Request was created due to the PM Grouping. For PM 3, no Work Request was created since the valid measurement was not met, which seems correct.However, my concern is that since all 3 PM Actions are grouped together, is this the expected standard behavior? Should the system also create the same Work Request for the 3rd PM Action because it belongs to the same PM Group?Could someone please clarify the standard system behavior in this scenario?Thanks.   

Has anybody configured Maintenance Technician Portals to use scanning? For example, to select the object by scanning a barcode or qr?IFS Cloud

https://community.ifs.com/ifs-cloud-26r1-updates-ea-employees-partners-only-508/ifs-cloud-26r1-deprecation-log-66886?tid=66886&fid=508With related to Depreciation post above Customers are no longer possible to schedule resources for for Work Order connected work task using dispatch console. In previous releases it also depreciation Allocate resource Gantt. Now customers only have Assigned work to plan resources. For customers with considerable amount of maintenance staff it’s difficult to plan without visible support of technicians schedule. ​​​​​​For Resource planning and assignments in maintenance will there be coming a new solution for this?

Hello,We have a requirement to create two separate permission sets in IFS Cloud 25R1 for Functional Objects.One permission set should allow users to create and modify Functional Objects without delete access, while another permission set should allow users to view and modify existing Functional Objects without create or delete access.During our analysis, we observed that in Entity Action Grants, the CRUD permissions appear to be bundled together (Create, Update, Delete). Because of this, it seems that Create/Delete and Update/Delete access cannot be separated individually.Could you please suggest if there is any recommended approach or best practice to achieve this requirement?

Hi Team,We are looking for clarification regarding the PM Calendar Generation process and the WO Generation Lead Time field.The field description for WO Generation Lead Time indicates that it is included during Work Order generation. We would like to understand whether this lead time is also considered when calculating or evaluating the PM Due Date used by the PM Calendar Generation database task (SYSDATE). For example, if a PM has: - Due Date: 6-Jun-2026- WO Generation Lead Time: 3 days    Will the database task effectively consider the PM as due from 3-Jun-2026 (Due Date minus Lead Time), or is the Due Date calculation unaffected and the lead time only used during Work Order generation? Could you please clarify the expected behavior? Thank you.