Quantcast
Channel: SCN: Message List - Enterprise Asset Management (SAP EAM)
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 10043

Maintenance Scheduling Discrepancy Between Production and QAS

$
0
0

Hi all

Would anyone know what’s causing the Production system to behave different to QA system vis-à-vis maintenance plan scheduling?

 

I have a time-based strategy plan with the following packages:

Cycle

Cycle Unit

Package Desc

Package

Code

Hierarchy

Priority

1

WK

B Exam

BX

1

1

4

WK

C Exam

CX

2

2

13

WK

E Exam

EX

3

3

26

WK

F Exam

FX

4

4

52

WK

G Exam

GX

5

5

104

WK

H Exam

HX

6

6

  I assigned the strategy to the corresponding task list and maintenance plan. The cycle sequence is supposed to start with the EX cycle that follows the GX, i.e. following the 64th week CX cycle.

 

When I schedule it (IP10) in QA it all works as I expected but the production system produces a completely different scheduling list (please see attached). This is very baffling to me as the setup is 100% identical in both systems - in fact this particular QA client closely mirrors production and production is periodically copied into it. Last time such copy took place was at the end of last December.

 

I've checked the following and they're identical in both systems: factory calendar, maintenance strategy, task list, maintenance plan, and start offset (because I'm starting in a cycle).

 

Does anyone know why production isn't generating the expected list of schedules?

 

It’s not the first time I’ve had to grapple with it and last time I ended up making manual calls for the package I needed. Since I wanted the order due date to be on specific dates in the past, this wasn’t ideal because manual calls supports only current and future dates.

 

Thanks for taking the time to read my post and for any helpful suggestions.

Yinka


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 10043

Latest Images

Trending Articles



Latest Images

<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>