Maximo Open Forum

Hi Erin,

Just on locations and ACM, we do use both. We remove assets from a hierarchy to a physical workshop location, and then cycle them through repair locations, back to a spare or workshop location. We restrict the Install asset lookup to an appropriate workshop location, ensuring parts in suitable condition are selected. I don't think out of the box the install/remove actions create records in the ASSETTRANS table - from memory we use a script to do this.

On the wider question of to ACM or not to ACM, it adds a lot of capability, but at the same time a lot of complexity. I think it comes back to defining the requirements for each context. If you were doing this for an airline, you would manage all the airplane parts in ACM, but the maintenance hangar itself might not require the same capabilities - like Technical Records, variations, PM extensions and so on. Think about what ACM gives you and how it would apply in the facility context.

Of course if you do separate them, you will end up with two asset management processes. For us, we have gotten away with this as the facilities are not managed as assets in Maximo so far.

Good luck!

Hi Steve, 

Thanks so much for your answer - that makes a lot of sense. I'm not able to reply directly to your answer for some reason so I'm "answering" my question in the hope that you'll see it. When you say "remove the asset from the hierarchy," does that hierarchy somehow indicate where the asset  is installed physically? I guess if it's installed in a moveable unit this doesn't really make sense, like an airplane, or a train car, since the moveable unit is the location. But if it's a facility that's hundreds of thousands of square feet there has to be a way to identify where the asset is in the facility, rather than just "Facility X"..? That is what I am struggling with. It seems like you either have to make the physical location the primary system and use non-ACM based asset structure, OR use ACM with both an asset and physical location incorporated into the same hierarchy, which to me seems potentially confusing for the end users. 

Hi Erin,

Not sure why, but ‘Answer’ seems to be the only response option.

There are effectively two hierarchies – core Maximo and ACM. Installing or removing assets from the ACM hierarchy does two things – it updates the ACM’s PLUSASAONOFF table that shows data on what has been or is currently installed in the hierarchy; it also updates the core Maximo parent-child and ancestor relationships. The ACM hierarchy uses the Model associated with the top-level asset to define the positions where child assets can install to.

So for example we have some Locomotive top-level assets. Say we plan to overhaul an engine, we would move the Locomotive asset to the Workshop Location where this will happen (core Maximo move). This moves all the child assets along with it. In the Assets (CM) View Tab, we would expand the ACM hierarchy to find the Engine node, which will show the current asset to be overhauled (can also do this in Work Order Tracking (CM)). Here we would use the Install/Remove action to Remove the Engine to the Workshop Location – it’s already been moved there, but now has no core Parent. We would use the same Install/Remove action to select a suitable spare Engine at that Workshop to add it to the Locomotive, so it is now both a child in the core Maximo asset hierarchy, and an asset in the ACM hierarchy. When the Locomotive moves from the Workshop, all the children move with it.

Sounds like you want to track assets at a lower level within your facility. Once removed from the ACM hierarchy, you can move it using core Move/Modify between locations. So you could have child locations of the Facility to represent different areas. Can you geo-locate your assets?

Hi Steve,

Thanks for the quick response. Your locomotive example makes sense and is a similar example to what others have told me, but it doesn't quite translate to facilities. The locomotive is normally in motion so to designate a "location" wouldn't make sense unless, as you said, it's undergoing repairs in a shop. Also, within the locomotive the function of most of the components indicates where they are; it would be clear to anyone who's familiar with locomotives that the brakes aren't on the roof, for example. The same isn't true for facilities - for example just saying 'Fan 1, Motor A' doesn't supply any information about where the fan/motor are located. I'm trying to understand if the concept you described -- using the 'install' action to put an asset into a particular physical location (the location where it normally operates; in Maximo I understand this is often created as the 'primary' location system) -- can be used with assets that are part of an ACM hierarchy/model. The benefit of this would be that the location-based hierarchy view could be used in conjunction with a more system-based view for each facility. It also saves a lot of time preparing the data for loading to not have to repeat the floor & room designations within every system in an ACM hierarchy for each facility.

The shortest way to ask the question is, if I'm looking at an asset in an ACM structure in Maximo, and assuming that asset is in its normal operating physical location (not removed to a repair or other non-operational place), how do I know where the asset is physically located?

I hope that makes sense!

Hi Erin

Sure, the context is a little different for you. Locations and ACM do not really conflict though. ACM is specifically concerned with conformity to the rules in the Model, not Locations. Irrespective of whether assets are ACM or not, your Location hierarchy is your best bet for saying where an asset is. Hierarchies can be designed as functional or geographical depending on your needs. Functional is where locations are part of a system - like an assembly plant might break down into functional parts of the process. Geographic represents a physical layout, like breaking your Facility into subsections as child locations, and then perhaps smaller areas within. So Fan 1 and Motor A might be in in the Location hierarchy at Facility 1 \ Section X \ Area 3. ACM won't help with this, but if you did use it, swapping assets in/out of an ACM hierarchy will then interact with the Location hierarchy when you Remove Motor A from Fan 1 to location REPAIR, and install Motor 2 from location SPARE - it will be moved from SPARE to Area 3 of Section X in Facility 1 (where Fan 1 is located).

I have seen sites where there is a one to one relationship between lowest level Locations and highest Assets, and then use an Asset hierarchy. That might be A/C Unit 1, which has Fans 1,2,3 and other children like Condenser 1 and 2 and so on. So all of A/C Unit 1's child assets are located at the same place. If these are ACM Assets, it will maintain that asset hierarchy for you also, but you can do that part without ACM.

So back to my earlier point - does ACM add any value in the context of the Facilities assets? You can still just create core-Maximo assets in the standard Assets app, and ACM won't know about those ones. But if it is ACM, installing an Asset onto a node on the parent ACM hierarchy inherits the parent's location.

Steve

Steve, excellent, thanks so much. That answers my question. Thanks for sticking with me through all of that - it is most appreciated!