Solved

Customer Order - Connected Work Order no longer visible after 'Release' of WO

  • 24 April 2024
  • 4 replies
  • 36 views

Userlevel 5
Badge +11

Hi ALl,

 

Working in 23R1 and I noticed some strange behaviour.

I created a Work Order from a Customer Order using ‘Related Pages’ > ‘Service Request’. Once the Work Order was created I could go from CO to WO by using ‘Related Pages’ > ‘Connected Work Orders’. But strangely enough, as soon as the WO goes into status ‘Released’, you can no longer navigate from the CO to the WO because the ‘Connected Work Orders’ link is no longer present. It is replaced with ‘Service Request’ again. (see printscreens below).

 

I am happy that there is a possibility to connect a second WO to my CO, but not so happy with the fact that the possibility to easily navigate from CO to Wo is now gone as soon as my WO becomes ‘Released’.

 

Is this intended behaviour or a bug? Looking forward to any feedback on this.

 

Best Regards

Roel

 

printscreens:

Customer Order S9000042 with possibility to navigate to WO through ‘Connected Work Orders’

 

List of connected Work Orders
Checking Connected Work Order ‘68’ with the appropriate Cust Order Ref value

 

Put WO ‘68’ in status ‘Released’
Went back to CO and ‘Connected Work Orders’ is no longer selectable
I was able to create a secondary WO ‘69’, as a result ‘Connected Work Orders’ was once again available and now I see the connections to WO 68 and 69

 

Application software version

 

icon

Best answer by Marcel.Ausan 24 April 2024, 15:45

View original

4 replies

Userlevel 7
Badge +17

@Timmermans Roel this is a bug and seems to have been solved in 23.1.5. Please check below post for more details:

Connected Work Orders | IFS Community

Userlevel 5
Badge +11

@Timmermans Roel this is a bug and seems to have been solved in 23.1.5. Please check below post for more details:

Connected Work Orders | IFS Community

Dear @Marcel.Ausan ,

 

Thanks for the reply. Unfortunatley, according to the account settings I am using 23.1.5 (see last printscreen of initial thread).

 

I also must indicate that the bug is not entirely the same. The link you used refers to the user not getting ANY link. I always get a link - unfortunately not always the right one.

 

  • No WO Created => “Related Pages” > “Service Request”
  • WO Created  (status lower then Released) => => “Related Pages” > “Connected Work Orders”
  • WO Created  (status = Released) => => “Related Pages” > “Service Request”

 

Best Regards

Roel

Userlevel 7
Badge +17

@Timmermans Roel  OK, I didn’t pay attention to the latest screenshot 😶. I just did a quick debugging and it appears that the function that checks if WOs are connected to CO is just looking for the statuses: FAULTREPORT | WORKREQUEST | OBSERVED | UNDERPREPARATION | PREPARED.

So, this behavior seems to be on purpose, but I’ve no idea why they would exclude other statuses like RELEASED | REPORTED | WORKDONE and so on.

Maybe something to ask IFS R&D via a support ticket?

 

Below is the PL/SQL function that evaluates if the button should be shown or not.

Active_Work_Order_Util_API.Ser_Request_Exist_For_Cust_Ord(order_no_, NULL, NULL, NULL, 'TRUE')

FUNCTION Ser_Request_Exist_For_Cust_Ord(
cust_order_no_ IN VARCHAR2,
cust_order_line_no_ IN VARCHAR2 DEFAULT NULL,
cust_order_rel_no_ IN VARCHAR2 DEFAULT NULL,
cust_order_line_item_no_ IN NUMBER DEFAULT NULL,
connected_work_orders_ IN VARCHAR2 DEFAULT 'FALSE') RETURN BOOLEAN
IS
CURSOR get_wos_ IS
SELECT 1
FROM Work_Order_table
WHERE cust_order_no = cust_order_no_
AND (connected_work_orders_ = 'TRUE'
OR connected_work_orders_ = 'FALSE'
AND(wo_status_id = 'FAULTREPORT'
OR wo_status_id = 'WORKREQUEST'
OR wo_status_id = 'OBSERVED'
OR wo_status_id = 'UNDERPREPARATION'
OR wo_status_id = 'PREPARED')
)
AND (cust_order_line_no_ IS NULL OR
(cust_order_line_no = cust_order_line_no_
AND cust_order_rel_no = cust_order_rel_no_
AND cust_order_line_item_no = cust_order_line_item_no_));

 

Userlevel 5
Badge +11

Hi @Marcel.Ausan ,

 

Thank you for that information. I agree, based on the code it looks like intended design but the reason why remains guess work :-).

I’ll check if we want to initiate a request for this.

 

Best Regards

Roel

Reply