Skip to main content

Dear IFS Community,

We are looking for the complex solution related to bottom up traceability reflecting serial numbers in IFS9, resp. IFS10 or IFS Cloud. The closest functionality for this request is in the Lot Batch Master, tab Where Used. You can input here the part having specific LOT_BATCH_NO and obtain all parts which could be influenced by this part. Unfortunately, it has one limitation since it is the functionality for the lot batch tracking mainly, it doesn’t consider serial numbers in the connection condition as you can see in the Default Where for this tab:

COMPONENT_PART_NO = :i_hWndFrame.frmLotBatchStructureTree.sPartNo  AND COMPONENT_LOT_BATCH_NO = :i_hWndFrame.frmLotBatchStructureTree.sLotBatchNo

Let’s focus on example with 3 parts:

RM         Raw Material     lot tracking only
SF           Semi Finish         lot tracking + serial tracking
FG          Finish Good        lot tracking + serial tracking

Here is the description how the FG where built and for what result we are looking for. For tracing RM-A-* usage (first column) we should obtain FG-A-1 and FG-A-2 from the last column, that’s all.

How the part were built + expected traceability behavior description

If we use the Lot Batch Master, tab Where used, the results don’t reflect serial numbers and therefore, traceability for RM-A returns FG-A-3 and FG-A-4 as well, since there are shared lot batch numbers (SF-B and FG-B) in the production. All falsely positive records are highlighted by red.

Lot Batch Master Traceability result

Maybe we are blind, but where can we find the IFS standard functionality for this request? Something very similar to Lot Batch Master, tab Where Used, but extended by serial numbers? Ideally, the input should be generalized to PART_NO – LOT_BATCH_NO – SERIAL_NO, where for lot and serial you can use specific value, or *, or % (we don’t care).

Note:
Our Plan B is to design some report for this request based on the AS_BUILT_WHERE_USED view to gain the result, but we still believe that this is the standard part of IFS.

Thanks in advance for your advice.

Could the ‘Inventory Part Usage Tracing’ screen be of help here? I believe this might do just what you are looking for.

Could the ‘Inventory Part Usage Tracing’ screen be of help here? I believe this might do just what you are looking for.

Dear Roel,

thanks for your proposal, it is very promising. We investigated IFS10 as follows:

The screen works moreless properly (we have one minor issue only, but not important now). Moreover, there are two tabs there, first one Part Usage Structure with the tree structure and second one Part Usage where is an overview of all related records to the input parameters from the header.

 

We investigated IFS9 as well, since this version is at the customer. Unfortunately, the situation here is worse. This standard screen cannot be directly applicable due to:

  • We are able to track that our RM was issued to SF, but that’s all. The nearest level is visible only. We verified that our SF with specific lot batch and serial no was issued further to FG, so the path of the usage tracing to the next level exists, but it is not visible.
  • There is no tab in IFS9 to get the overview of all related parts according to your input. (There is only one tab in IFS9 called Part Usage corresponding to the design of tab Part Usage Structure in IFS10.)

Maybe there are some Solutions in LCS for this screen in order to get it in the good shape, we  have not checked it yet…

 

I will be appreciated for any comments, reactions.

 

Best regards,
Zdenek Bäumelt

Without going in IFS details, are you allowed to prepare a Quick Report for this. My idea is enter the starting serial number (such as FG-C-6) and work upwards to the top level. I think that the following link might be of help.

It would come down to preparing a SQL statement that uses 'connect by prior’. Using that in Google will help, I think.

In APPS10, I experienced the inventory part usage tracing window was not fully tracing from lowest level to customer shipment. When reported to IFS, they identified a defect existed and had to provide patches to resolve

What update of Apps10 are you on? We had a the same issue as Kay did at my last job and IFS supplied a patch.

Reply


Terms & ConditionsCookie settings