Products (Manufacturing, Products, Engineering)

Dear community,I need your help regarding the export control module as something is not clear for me.If I well understood, each part that are export-controlled needs to be identified, classified and approved in the part catalog. In addition to this, for purchased parts, the classification must also be done in the supplier for purchased part.Why is this required ? because what is troubling me is that we must maintain manually the same information on 2 different windows. And so, it can generates discrepancies if we forget to update one value on one or the other screen.Am I wrong ? or I’ve been missing out on…Thanks for your help 

Accumulated Shop Order CostAccumulated Cost: 2,682,779.78 Operation Scrap (OPFEED-SCP): 112,416.11Remaining Cost after Scrap2,570,363.67Received Value (OOREC)1,627,376.20Calculation Variance942,987.47The variance exactly matches:2,570,363.67 - 1,627,376.20 = 942,987.47Transaction AnalysisThe transaction history shows:OORECQuantity Received: 50,371 pcs Total Value: 1,627,376.20 Approximate Unit Cost: 31.36OPFEED-SCPQuantity Scrapped: 2,203 pcs Total Value: 112,416.11 Approximate Unit Cost: 51.03When reviewing the remaining shop order cost after scrap:2,570,363.67 / 50,371 = 51.03 per unitwhile the receipt appears to be valued at:1,627,376.20 / 50,371 = 31.36 per unitThis suggests that the accumulated cost remaining on the shop order after scrap differs significantly from the valuation used for the inventory receipt. The parent part of the shop order is weighted average.So, if I understand the weighted average costing logic correctly, OOREC has taken the current inventory value of the pa

Hi everyone,I have some general questions regarding how MSO handles shop order and operation statuses.As far as I understand, MSO mainly considers shop orders in Planned status. However, the Planned status only exists on the shop order header level, while MSO schedules the individual operations. This is where I am currently a bit confused, especially regarding the interaction between the shop order status and the operation status.My questions are:When material is reserved, the shop order header status changes to Reserved. How does MSO handle these shop orders? Are they still considered for scheduling/rescheduling, or are they treated differently?When material is issued, the shop order header status changes to Started. What is the expected MSO behavior in this case?Also, what happens if an operation has already been started, but material has not yet been reserved or issued? How should MSO handle such a scenario?From my understanding, operations that have already been started should not

Hi,I am trying to understand is the standard IFS process and system behavior when a material reaches its expiry date.Specifically:• Does IFS automatically block expired material from allocation to a Shop Order?• Does IFS prevent the issue of expired material to production?• Is the material required to be moved to an MRB or quarantine location?• What is the standard IFS workflow for dispositioning expired material (e.g. Scrap, Rework, Use-As-Is, Return to Supplier)?• What is considered IFS best practice for aerospace and defence manufacturers managing shelf-life controlled materials?From a Quality and AS9100 perspective, expired material should not be available for production use until an appropriate disposition decision has been made.Any inputs from Industry experts would be greatly appreciated.

Could someone clarify what I’m seeing here, please?  We appear to be stuck in some weird loop.  Inventory Part Cost Level SEEMS to indicate ‘Cost per configuration’ is a choice available in a Weighted Average environmentIf we select ‘Configurable’ we get the below message - indicating to change Valuation Method to Cost per Configuration ... … Yet when we change THAT setting we get this message…  Any clues gratefully received!  Thanks LInda

Hello,We are getting an error message about a cost bucket that we have set up, but have never really used in the past.  We have it set up on one site but the error message says we need that same cost bucket set up on another site because inventory is being transferred between the two.  When I try add cost bucket 111 (the one suddenly being used) I am getting an error ‘’Ids in the range of 0-999 for cost elements and Cost Buckets are reserved for future use’’. I am trying to figure out how to tell what is calling for cost bucket 111. Nothing on the part seems to be pulling to that cost bucket and I’m stuck in the error messages.  Does anyone happen to know where I should look to see why cost bucket 111 is suddenly being used? Thanks!

This seems like a basic request but I cannot find any way to achieve this inside IFS (Apps10).If we have a part shortage, how can we generate a list of all top level parts (manufactured units) that this part could go into?With a lot of manual work/expanding of assemblies we can get there using the Complete Where Used and Component Where Used screens, but we have to expand all of the multiple level sub-assemblies in order to find all of the top level parts that are impacted.Surely there has to be a better, quicker way to identify just a simple list of top level units (final assembly) that would require a specific part?

Hello,I tried using a by-product in the product structure together with Cost Distribution (for example, 20% of the operation cost distributed to the by-product and the remaining 80% to the main product).I then received the parts from a Production Schedule line. The system correctly received both the main product and the by-product, but the Cost Distribution setting from the product structure did not seem to be applied. The costs were still calculated according to the standard cost defined in the Estimated Material Cost for each part.Do you know whether this functionality is supposed to work when receiving parts from a Production Schedule line, or is it only supported for Shop Orders?Thanks for your help.Kind regards,David Dočkal

Hi,The company I work for builds racing cars and we would like to exchange with users that have been able to manage successfully product structures with different options / configurations per customer and by product (cars in our example).We would like to be able to deal differently with the purchasing depending on the parts and the assembly order.We would like a picking stategy/order that depends on the structure.We would like to follow the missing parts to focus on the priority parts depending on assembly.We would like to have a multi-level structure per parts, assembly, full assembly and full car.Can anyone share their experience if you have been able to implement it in IFS ?Thanks and Regards,Anne-Sophie

Hello,  I am wondering whether there is a given set-up on the inventory part, main part or anywhere else, where these parametres can be set.   The point is that we want to have the structure depth: Full level And the “allow changes to DOP Structure”: ON  Without the necessity to switch it once the DOP is created.  Thank you,Best RegardsPetaKu 

25.1.7In previous versions there was a page titled Manufacturing Structures. Here it is in Apps10.I do not see this page in my 25R1 world.I recall reading in the Release Notes that a new term, Master Structure, was introduced at some point. Did a page for Master Structures get overlooked? 

We are in the process of transitioning to IFS Cloud, We are currently on IFS APPS 10 and use the IFS ScanIT Aurena 10. We have a test environment set up (On 25R1) and are wanting to begin testing WADACO (we use Android Devices) but cannot find instructions on how to log in. We have been told to use IFS Aurena ScanIt - The only thing close to that I can find on the Android Store is what we already have.I have no clue what to put in the System ID field and every time I enter our Test Environment URL, I get a server is not reachable error. 

Our site likes to use Single Level Transfers when transferring new assemblies from Engineering over. Some sister sites say to use All-Level Transfers. I know when there is a subassembly that is “changed” and we do a Single Level, most times that subassembly goes over as “BLANK” Product structure. We currently have a CO going through for a common part that is used in over 100+ assemblies. Current practice has been to go back and re-transfer all the assemblies so they no longer say “changed”. This seems… like a poor use of time. Is there some mechanism we should be doing or havent been doing that fixes this?  We dont want any blank product structures. Maybe we are doing something wrong, i wouldnt be surprised. 

Under the Overview Unit Cost tab, the column “Actual Accum Cost” is showing a value of zero for the overhead cost.basic data setup, Part cost appears to be correctly configured. Other shop orders for the same parts are working properly. However, for the specific 2 shop orders  the value is showing as zero. Can someone suggest a possible reason and solution? 

In the 25R2 release, the FAI (First Article Inspection) functionality was introduced under the Quality Management module. However, this functionality is not available in our 25R2 environment. How to enable this? Also, MRP Simulation functionality as well.

New workcenter that is a manual labor work center,  Each person is set up as a person resource.  How do I assign specific people resources to a work center???

The use case is like this.In a factory the customer has an area for assembly. The area is a Work Center and have 10 separate places wher assembly of a product can be executed. Each place is defined as a Resource in the Work Center. The Routing is set-up with multiple Opearation but use that same Work Center. The Product to be assemble, is in reality started and completed in one of the places inside the Work Center, all Opeartions are done in the place and should use one Resource only for all Opeartions done in the Work Center. The standard logic shedule the Operations to use different Resources.   How can you use the standard logic to pick available Resource for first Operation+Work Center and use same Resource for all Operations in that Shop Order per Work Center? 

Is there a good way to prevent Auto Reporting of Outside Operations by someone in the Shop Order?  We recently found out an employee had closed and received a Shop Order using the “Auto Report Operations” toggle when doing the SO receipt (we always have a few Rework Ops that have to be closed at SO closure).  They had missed that there was an Operation for an Outside Service that was still open (no Ship WIP or PO receipt).  But, by using the Auto Report Operations toggle, the system closed the PO and Outside Operation automatically too.   I see that I can turn on the Milestone Operation toggle for the Outside Op, but this would also prevent other subsequent Operational reporting in the SO until that Outside Op is reported. This isn’t operationally functional for us as it is very common to have an Outside Op for one part of the SO and subsequent Ops for other sections of the assembly which are unrelated (e.g. Op 20 is a Laser, Op 30 is a Saw, Op 40 is a Plasma, Op 50 is an Outside Op to

When an additional outside operation is added directly to a Shop Order and is not part of the standard routing, the operation cost can be recorded, but the associated overhead costs are not allocated. Overhead costs appear to be applied only to operations that are defined in the routing structure.This can occur in scenarios such as one-time rework that needs to be performed by an external supplier, where creating and maintaining a separate routing is not practical. In these cases, only the direct outside operation cost is captured, while the related overhead costs are excluded from the cost calculation.Has anyone encountered a similar requirement?Are there any recommended approaches in IFS Cloud to ensure overhead costs are also captured for additional outside operations added directly to a Shop Order? How are such "adjusted" Shop Orders typically handled to achieve accurate cost reporting?

I have lots of migration jobs that are run every night, for example, a re-schedule job to update shop order need data from MRP calculated dateThese run perfectly well and quickly in Apps 10 but run extremely slowly (I mean like they take hours instead of minutes) in Cloud 25R1.There's doesn't appear to be any reason for their slow running in Cloud. They eventually complete without errors or warnings, which is even more frustrating because if there was an error or warning that might give me a clue!Has anyone else experienced this behaviour and what steps did you take if you were able to resolve it?Grateful for any comments, advice or experiences. They are run by a service account (on a fast queue) that has access to the jobs and pretty wide ranging permissions. As I said, no errors or warnings, just e x t r e m e l y slow to complete.Thanks in advance!

During execution of the IFS Master Schedule (MS) process, we observed that past-due MS By Part records and their related Shop Order Requisitions (SORs) are automatically deleted by the system. This creates planning and supply chain risks, as the linkage between the Master Schedule and generated SORs is lost.All affected parts are configured as buildable, plannable, and MS Level 1. However, the system only allows future dates for MS By Part lines, and when “Run MS – One Part” is executed, past-due records are removed together with the dependent SORs.Although SORs can be recreated manually, this breaks the traceability between the MS record and the generated requisitions.Has anyone experienced similar behavior?Is there any recommended approach, configuration, or workaround to retain past-due Master Schedule records and prevent the related SORs from being deleted or re-planned?

Dear community,  I have a shop order with 5 components. One of them is linked to the outside operation by the procedure step in the tab materials on the shop order.  Then, I put “ship WIP to outside operation” function for each shop order created. But this does not make any sense from time-wise point of view.  However, the purchase order is then created by marking all the lines at once and this creates just one purchase order all together. I was hoping to use the functionality ship supplier material but this works only for components and not non-inventory parts. Is there any chance to do this “in general” for all the shop orders under one DOP? At least for one operation block at once? So they can use just the waddacco process to send it out?  Do you have any solution that does not involve custom-made solution?  

Hello,Is the option to duplicate a line on the Outside Operation Cost screen not available?If so, is there any way to enable this functionality?We have a user requesting this feature. I have tested using an account with full access rights, but the option still does not appear to be available. 

Hello everyone,I am currently working on a customer case where we are evaluating the use of Sales and Operations Planning (S&OP) in an environment based on Make-to-Order (MTO) and MS Level 1 parts.The customer is using Demand Planner, and the forecast is transferred directly to MS Level 1, which is then used for production and procurement planning. They do not use MS Level 0 parts in their current process, as all planning is based on real, sellable items.When analyzing S&OP, we see that it can technically work with MS Level 1 data (forecast and supply). However, setup screens such as Product Family Master still do not take an MS Level 1 part.The customer’s goal is to use S&OP mainly to compare unconstrained demand vs constrained operations plan and to support capacity evaluation (RRP), without modifying the original forecast.Could you please clarify:What is the recommended approach for using S&OP in an MTO setup based on MS Level 1? Is the MS Level 0 part still required

Problematic:In APB, we have the ability to remove the setup time for 2 consecutive shop orders of the same PART_NO.APB > Settings > Setup Optimization > Use part number only In Cloud, we now have the ability to schedule from the Shop Order Operations window. But when scheduling 2 consecutive Shop Orders of the same Part_No, IFS doesn’t allow us to do any Setup Optimization without using the Setup Matrix. Proposed Solution:Like in APB, we would like to have the ability to select a Setup Optimization option to remove setup time for consecutive shop orders of the same Part_no.