In both cases each customer had assets of the same asset type, product and model but due to the longevity of the assets and obsolescence of parts, individual assets had different types of engines which required different types of maintenance activities to be carried out.
Is it possible to create a new field called "Model sub-type" for the asset record? This field should appear against the asset record and be included in the maintenance job type defaults table in order to accommodate different checklists to be maintained against the asset variants.
Comments
While working on it, it would be nice to ALSO add the construction year (text, so equals "version") as an option.
Category: Asset Management
This problem is very frequent.
The solution should be based on proper methods for engineering change management.
Starting point 1: implement version management. Once a new release of a component leads to change in the FFF (form-fit-function) then it should obtain a new item number. That part may be an asset, or a subcomponent (part of the BOM). When it is not a maintainable item (ie not represented in the asset tree) then it should be represented as a sparepart.
Starting point 2. Change of subcomponents, should lead to a new version (with change date) on the next-higher level. That would be the BOM of the asset, and the asset itself.
The solution should then consist of 3 changes:
1. Versioning on BOM's. Version number (internal numbering) with change date.
2. Change of parts in the BOM, should automatically trigger version increase.
3. Versioning on Assets. Like BOM.
Category: Asset Management
I agree with your assessment however my proposed "solution" would be to simply extend the model id field to be longer than 20 characters so you can include the subtype information inside the model id.
Category: Asset Management
Good idea
Category: Asset Management
Great idea!
Category: Asset Management