Maximo

Maximo

Come for answers, stay for best practices. All we're missing is you.

 View Only
  • 1.  Update asset cost fields (YTD & Lifetime)

    Posted Mon May 31, 2021 11:37 PM
    Edited by System Admin Wed March 22, 2023 11:48 AM
    MAM 7.6.1.2:

    A couple of questions about Asset cost fields (YTD & Lifetime):

    1. What is required to update those fields automatically?
        a. Close related WOs
        b. Run the Maintenance Cost Rollup report
        c. Other?

    2. Why would we want a report to automatically update a table? (Using a report that way seems counterintuitive to me.)
        a. Why not do this automatically after a WO is updated or closed? Or use a cron task or escalation instead?

    Thanks.
    #Maximo
    #AssetandFacilitiesManagement


  • 2.  RE: Update asset cost fields (YTD & Lifetime)

    Posted Tue June 01, 2021 09:35 AM
    So there is the "as it is" and "as it will be" to this discussion. What I mean by that is until 7.6.1.2, you are correct that it utilizes a report to execute the rollup. I believe in the Maximo Application Suite for Manage, they have transitioned this to the new process they've been working on. This functions like what you call out in 2 with some configuration options as to how you want it done (either automatically or where you manually run it, but without using a report). This might be put in a fix pack for 7.6.1 (such as 7.6.1.3), but I don't believe IBM has officially committed to doing it. 

    As for what has to happen, WOs need to be closed, in the case of labor it needs to be approved (which should occur prior to a record getting to a CLOSE status), the rollup flag should be set to 0 (which is the default, only the rollup process should set it to 1), and most importantly, the asset needs to be the asset referenced on the Work Order. MULTIASSETLOCCI records will NOT roll up costs, nor does SR/Incident/Problem records, nor does costs entered directly against an ASSET (IE during receiving of a PO that are direct issue to the asset). 

    There are some scenarios that don't work well even with these restrictions, such as the asset of the WO changing after transactions have been recorded. This is because the transactions reference the asset and will then be excluded if it doesn't match. For example, if you go from no asset to an asset on the WO or go from a higher level asset in the hierarchy (such as the wind turbine) down to a more granular asset (such as a blade on the wind turbine) on the WO that would prevent any transactions recorded when the asset was the turbine from being rolled up.

    I had some really good conversations with the Civil Infrastructure team who were actively working on the redesign for the asset rollup process. Their first focus (rightfully so) was getting away from the report, but I think it's safe to say they want to address some of the other issues and limitations over time too.

    ------------------------------
    Steven Shull
    Director of Development
    Projetech Inc
    ------------------------------