@Björn Hultgren Perfecto!! Thank you so much.
@Björn Hultgren : Thank you so much for your detailed information.Have a follow-up question:Earliest Receipt Date : would this apply to the date good have been received to the inventory ? (applicable only for Purchase goods and not for manufacturing)
@Björn Hultgren I have created for the same . Please vote for it to be considered. Thank you for your support.
@Edie I think it would be valuable to have an overview page of all the shop order by-products similar to the overview pages we have for shop order operations and shop order materials. Please consider requesting this from the community idea section! Certainly would, or include it in a lobby view which would be very beneficial for a manufacturing setup.
Sounds like you need to create a new page or a quick report based on the by-product tab on the shop order. the view used for this tab is called manufactured_part, but this also contains the main product manufactured on the shop order so you might want to exclude the records with line_item_no = -1 in 23R1 version this table also contain disassembly components, so there you need to filter on produced_part_type_db = 'BY_PRODUCT' Thank you , I thought the same. Wanted to verify there was no existing window which would display the requirement.
Since you can have multiple by-products for a shop order they cannot be shown on the Shop Orders page since you just have one line per shop order there. Thank you for the information Björn Hultgren, The customer requirement been one screen to view the amount of by-product received for all shop orders ? what is your suggestion ?
Final conclusion after investigation. The issue persist in RND environments as well. Hence, it seems an application in App version 8.
Hi @Edie Is there a service contract added to the Work Order? There you can also add a coordinator and this one is fetched to the work order. If the field coordinator on the service contract is empty, then the field will also be empty on the work order. That was the first thing which cam in my mind. Hope this helps, Robert Kool I did verify , its not connected to a service contract ? Any other suggestions ?
Hi @Edie, Could you please mention, this user is a employee of the company? And also please advice the ‘Reported By’ field in the Prepare Work Order is fetched or Its empty? Thanks in Advance! Best Regards, Roshan Yes it does appear. Anything known ? can be any basic data setting ?
Hi @Edie, Could you please mention that you are using IFS Apps or Cloud ? And also please mention the version of UPD or SU. Thanks in Advance! Best Regards, Roshan Thank you for your swift response the customer is in App 8.
Hi @Edie , You can use the following option. Create a MRB from the shop order materials if you have issued the entire lot/batch multiple times for the same shop order. If the part has been issued to multiple shop orders, material requisitions etc. then you can create a MRB against the purchase order receipt if it is a purchase part (Note: you need to re-open PO line and enter inspection quantity in receipt to create MRB). If you want to physically send part back to supplier, then you should bring back the stock (through un-issue) to the initial receipt location and then register inspection against the receipt after completing the MRB. Bring back the stock to one location by un-issuing and create MRB from the inventory part in stock and process MRB. If you don’t have to deal with physical inventory but need to make a decision on the issued part, then you can raise a nonconformance and connect the nonconformance to lot batch master. So, here you can have better traceability as NCR c
Hi, Matt Yes, this is a bug. I have reported this to be corrected in the next release. Have you received RND feedback confirming it is classified as an application error? Next release would be 23R1? Thanking you, With Best Regards, Edmund. I´m working for IFS R&D, so I have myself classified this to be fixed as an internal development bug 😉 And, yes, the ´next release´ is 23R1. If there is a need to have this fixed on an earlier release then an external bug has to be reported to be handled by the normal support process. Hi Pete,Thank you very much for your quick response. This is great news. It would be an essential to have the serial numbers displayed (‘View serial’) specially for type attribute to have a trace of what serials have been tested. Thanking you,With Best Regards,Edmund Wijetunge.
Hi, Matt Yes, this is a bug. I have reported this to be corrected in the next release. Have you received RND feedback confirming it is classified as an application error? Next release would be 23R1? Thanking you,With Best Regards,Edmund.
Already have an account? Login
No account yet? Create an account
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
Sorry, we're still checking this file's contents to make sure it's safe to download. Please try again in a few minutes.
Sorry, our virus scanner detected that this file isn't safe to download.
