Products (Manufacturing, Products, Engineering)

25.1.2Using the same output type for each:I have document text connected to a product structure header. This carries through to the shop order, and it is visible on the Shop Order Report and Work Instruction Report (the standard, out-of-the-box reports). I have document text connected to a product structure component line. This carries through to the shop order, and it is visible on the Shop Order Report and Work Instruction Report. I have document text connected to a product structure alternate. This does not carry through to the shop order, it is not visible on the Shop Order Report, but it is visible on the Work Instruction Report.Why is document text on a product structure alternate not visible at the shop order or on the shop order report?

Hello all, I’ve been testing the Skip Lot on Purchasing Control Plans, and it does appear to be working, but the help is unclear about how some of the setup is applied and what the registration of some results means. I have entered three Purchase Orders of 100 each and I’m attempting to test the Attribute Skip Lot. I believe I have it setup as I’ve been attempting to enter nonconformitites and the sample qty has gone from 13 to 20 on the third PO. However, I’m unsure on the analysis result what the two mandatory fields are actually asking for. The help isn’t clear. I have the following acceptance sampling setup on the Purch Control Plan and Trigger:On the SFPP, I have not configured anything for Inspection Info, I’m assuming this is not needed:Any guidance on if my current setup is correct, or the proper way to interpret the Skip Lot setup would be greatly appreciated. 

Hello IFS community,  we are wondering (during the training of end users), how come that different people see different views on DOP Structure. What is it caused by? Here is the view of one person: And here is another one  And here another one: And yet the same DOP over and over again… ideas? 

HII have same raw material has two separate demands coming from different activities (for example, 10 units from Activity A and 12 units from Activity B). As a result, two separate purchase requisitions are created for each activity (10 and 12 respectively) by PMRP. However, when reviewing the MRP Part Information in the bottom-up view, I notice what appears to be duplicate records. When I drill down from each activity, I can see two bottom-up MRP records. At the next level under each of these records, both demands (10 and 12) are shown together. Is this behavior correct? Shouldn’t each activity node display only its respective demand instead of combining both? MRP bottom up planning records seems to be showing, the respective demand record + all the other demands coming from the other activities for the part. How can we correctly interpret and explain the business value to the customer? One Bottom up record Supply  10 pcs  Part K -  ( Activity A)+---------------------Demand 10 Pcs Par

Hi All, ​@Björn Hultgren (would greatly appreaciate your oppinion on below matter). IFS Cloud 24.2.3 We’ve noticed that after reporting scrap on a Shop Order Operation, when Increase Lot on Scrap is enabled, once the lot-batch qty is incresed, the shop order is rescheduled and Start Date is changed to match the Earliest Start Date (Forwards Scheduling).Since the SO is started, I see no point in updating the Start Date of the Shop Order. Is this a bug that should be addressed to R&D? Or is there any setup that could prevent rescheduling SO when lot-batch is increased?Before reporting scrap - Start Date - 22nd of May After scrap was reported - Start Date changed to 21st of May.  

Is it possible in IFS to lock down a specific location to a particular customer

Hi All,We have an issue where in the forecasts we see zero demands generated for the parts on weekends. This is seen on 25R1 environment but not in the PROD which is 23R1.You will see although the quantity is zero it is picking this up on weekends especially in the July months and behaving strange. Any idea regarding the demand behavior and why is it happening here?In 25R1 UAT:In Live:  

If a Sales Part exist for this Characteristic Combination it will helps during Customer Order entry. Every time to search for existing Combinations is not comfortable and faulty.

We use a setup with standard cost for manufactured parts and FIFO for purchased parts.We have two questions related to this.Is there a way to use current FIFO value for purchase components in std cost calculation for manufactured parts? Part numbers sometimes shift from purchased to manufactured and the other way around. You cannot change method unless you empty stock. Is there a way to change method without empty stock and lose original receipt date and last activity date?

I used “Phantom Consume” in a Product Structure. The Component with “Phantom Consume” is planned with Planning Method “A” and has no stock and no supply. If I created A Shop Order for the Top Part, the component is still in the BOM and can also not be backflushed.IF I change the component to Planning Method “P” everything works like expected. Online Help Text: A component defined as a phantom in this way behaves just as a planning method P part. If parts are available, they are backflushed; if not, the backflush process explodes to the next level in the structure.What is missing?     

Hi All,We need to add some custom fields to Control Plan Template and have those fields copied to the created Control Plans when a template is applied (either by copy or by reference).We have already added several custom fields to QmanCtrlPlanTemplate and are using a workflow with the ControlPlanPurchasingHandling API – Update QmanControlPlanPurchs to copy these values to QmanControlPlanPurch during template application. This workflow is working fine.However, we also need to add a custom field to QmanCtrlPlanTempLine.When we use the ControlPlanPurchasingHandling API – Update QmanControlPlanPurchs with the nested entity ControlPlanLine to copy this custom field, the Template ID and Template Revision No are removed from the created Control Plan.It seems this happens because, in standard behavior, any modification made to Control Plan Line causes the Template ID and Template Revision No to be cleared. Our requirement is to keep the link to the template when a Control Plan is created with

Hi All, Is there a way to directly link or associate costs with an NCR in IFS?When a non-conformance is raised, can the cost related to that NCR be captured directly against it?For example, if the NCR results in scrap, would the cost be captured only through the inventory scrap transaction or related shop order, rather than being directly tied to the NCR itself?Appreciate your guidance on this.Thanks

Community,Just borrow your mind, try to understand the APB Overload Time. See below screenshot, this WC resource actually is overload 8 Hours, why it is showing “37:12:00”? Where is the settings ? 

I’m looking to speak to anybody who based in UK who currently using IFS MES IoT Controller with Crosser or another solution who using it’s in a manufactoring area? 

Why wouldn’t the “Refresh Data” action have been granted as part of the PartCostHandling projection? I have users that get a No access error when accessing the Part Cost page.However, they can click “Close” and access the page.I beleive that this is due to not having the “RefreshData” action granted in the PartCostHandling projeciton.I am not sure why it was set up this way and before I make I change, I’m trying to determine why this would have been revoked in the first place. What are some of the reasons this action shouldn’t be granted to indivdiuals that have acess to part cost handling?Why wouldn’t this action be granted as part of the projection?

Hi all, We are trying to model parallel production within a single shop order operation in IFS Cloud, and I would like to understand whether there is a standard solution for this.Example (calculation will not be perfect, its just an example) :1 product 1 shop order operation shop order quantity = 26 pieces all 26 pieces can be produced within 1 day throughput time through the work center for 1 piece is 3 hours the work center is staffed by multiple operators, all working in parallel on the same operation currently, machine time is set to 3 hours and 1 labor resource is set to 3 hoursThe issue is that IFS calculates the operation start and finish as if the full quantity is processed sequentially, which does not reflect the real situation.I also tried increasing the work center efficiency to 1000% because there are 10 workplaces/operators available, but this did not change the operation lead time or the start/end time as expected.What I want to achieve is:one single operation multiple pi

 Hello,When working in Customer Order Lines, I encounter an issue when attempting to change the “Wanted Delivery Date.”Each time I try to modify this field, the system displays the message shown in the attached image.Additionally, if I attempt to change the date multiple times, the error only appears during the first few attempts. After that, it no longer shows, even though I am performing the same action.Could you please help clarify what might be causing this behavior? Thank you

Hi,I used workflow to call this as the screenshot, it worked in Application service update: 25.1.5 . But it doesn’t  work now in Application service update: 25.1.8It shows error like this, ignore “New Porducts” please, it is just my custom entity. I run it after inserting a row to the entity.

Subject: Material Allocation & Nesting Approach – Feedback Request IFS Version: 25R2Industry: Metal fabrication for façades (curtain walls) Business ContextLarge curtain wall manufacturing projects are initiated using architectural drawings, which do not contain finalized manufacturing details.This creates a challenge, as metal extrusions must be procured well in advance, before detailed engineering drawings are completed.However, based on architectural drawings, the customer can estimate material requirements and proceed with initial purchasing, for example:  1000AL201H-5M – Aluminum Bar (H type, powder coated, 5m) – 60 pcs 1000AL201H-6M – Aluminum Bar (H type, powder coated, 7m) – 70 pcs 1000AL201U-10M – Aluminum Bar (U type, powder coated, 10m) – 25 pcs These materials are received into inventory and allocated to a project activity.Later, once engineering is finalized (after design iterations and change orders), the final panel structures are defined. Manufacturing Requireme

Hi All, I have this scenario what I cannot figure how to set-up and support, either in core or with a CRIM.. The customer has products, planned according MTO and use DOP in IFS for 6 levels. The Top Product has a leadtime of 5 days and multiple operations.The componets are connected to operations, planned demand spread over the 5 days routing. All sub-assemblies and purchase parts are backward planned according to start date of each DOP Order Operation/Shop Order Operation. Now to the issue.I want all sub-assemblies to be planned the week before start date of the Top Shop Orders. Equal “gap” between 1st level sub-assemblies to 2nd level sub-assemblies and so on. I have multiple operations but one work center per level which means that I cannot use Queue time as the add queue time for all operations. I cannot use off-set time as the compnents are and must be connected to operations.I apprichiate any suggestions to solve this in core or by a clever CRIM. Offcourse a manual solution exist

Hello all, We have set up a Reorder Point Kanban circuit for a manufactured part in IFS Cloud.The Kanban size is equal to the MIn-Max Lot Size defined in the Inventory Part Planning Data. However, when shop orders are created from Kanban and the demand at Kanban start-up exceeds one Kanban, the resulting shop orders contain a quantity larger than the defined Max Lot Size. This behavior occurs specifically during the initial use of the Reorder Point Kanban.Questions:Is there a setting or configuration in IFS Cloud that ensures shop orders created from Kanban always respect the Min / Max / Multiple lot size settings from the Inventory Part Planning Data? Is it possible to have shop orders created by Kanban be created directly in status Released instead of Planned? Kind regards,  Willem

We are working on cleaning up our costing process and one thing we have noticed is that when a shop order is created with a standard cost, and then the standard cost is changed (due to routing changes/corrections, year end cost rolls, etc.) the standard cost on the shop order can’t be updated. Then when the shop order is ran and there are actual costs, we are seeing large variances between the original standard cost and the actuals with the new standard cost. I tried the “Calculate Order Cost” button in the Shop Order Costs screen, and that seems to update the estimated cost, but not the planned standard cost. Has anyone run into this and found a way around it?   

We have recently upgraded to Cloud version 25R1 - previously we used version 22R2… my planning colleagues say that if they manually amend the materials requirements on the shop order (to remove or replace or add a component for example), then if they subsequently change the lot size, the material components requirement revert to the effective revision structure and so undoes the previous component changes, reinstating the components before the earlier change but relative to the new lot size.  Effectively, there is a re-explosion of the effective structure based on the new lot sizeHowever, I am not convinced that this did not also prevail in the older version 22R2 - Co-pilot cannot find any reference to a change in this regard.  I cannot prove that it existed in our old version.Anyone know if this feature did exist in 22R2 and/or if it is indeed standard functionality?

When I try to re-open a closed shop order, I am receiving this error message: The orders existing reserved parent tracked structures are complete or none of the tracked components needed are reserved.Does anyone know what this means or how to fix it?Received in IFS Cloud 24R2

So I am trying to setup the system to auto calculate a Wanted Delivery Date for Saturday deliveries. I was trying to do it through a Delivery Route but I am not sure if that the right way to do it. I tried to create a new calendar that includes Saturdays as a working day and attach it (External Transport Calendar) to a Saturday delivery service Ship Via code, but I still can’t get the Wanted Delivery Date to auto calculated if I pick a Saturday Delivery Ship Via.Other than manually changing the date on the customer order, does anyone know of way to setup IFS to auto calculate a Saturday Wanted Delivery Date based on the Ship Via and Delivery Route you indicated.