This is an archive of the Maximo Yahoo Community. The content of this pages may be a sometimes obsolete so please check post dates.
Thanks to the community owner Christopher Wanko for providing the content.
Travis,
We also generate descriptions from the classification and it works well for us. As I see it, there are actually two issues causing what you are seeing. One is part of how the system functions and you can actually fix it. The other is philosophical and you will need to decide if you want to change your philosophy.
Let's start with the system based issue. We also use a hierarchical classification process, like you suggest, and had an issue with one classification that was putting the word PUMP into the description twice. It took me quite a while to figure out why since all of the rest of the classifications were working fine. Our system is set up like this. Classification 1400 is PUMP; classification 1400-01 is PUMP, CENTRIFUGAL; classification 1400-02 is PUMP, POSITIVE DISPLACEMENT; etc. Classification 1400 has no attributes and the generate description checkbox is unchecked. All of the sub-classification have attributes, and their Generate Description box is checked. So when we generate a description it starts with the sub-classifications text and builds from there. What was causing the double word of PUMP was that the top classification of PUMP had somehow gotten the Generate Description checked and it was being added in front of the sub-classification description.
So, what all of that means is, you could uncheck the upper level Generate Description boxes and they would not be added to your description.
Now let me tackle the philosophical issue. In my opinion, your descriptions should be top down. For your printer you are doing OK. ELECTRONIC \ PRINTER \ LABELMAKER means it is a piece of electronics that is a printer and is more specifically a labelmaker printer. So, again in my opinion, the description that is being generated for your tape is incorrect because it is incorrectly classified, not because of the way the system functions. In my way of thinking, since tape is not a piece of electronics, it should classified at the highest level as Tape and then sub-classed and attributes added. The description would then be something like TAPE \ PRINTER \ LABELMAKER \ RED.
Hope that helps.
Dave Teece
Reliability Analyst / CMMS Support, CMRP
Hi,
There is a classification catalog available from IHS Intermat that can be loaded into Maximo. It gives you a starting point on how to build classifications. We've been using that for about 12 years. We've modified it and added classifications.
You should always start at the top with what the item is. In the case of your printer Electronic is probably a sub-class or even just an attribute like PRINTER/LABELER or PRINTER with an attribute of TYPE.
We use a classification of LABELER with sub-classes of MANUAL, ELECTRIC and NO MODIFIER. In the attributes are the tape width and type.
For the TAPE we use TAPE/LABEL.
Dave Bone
--- In MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com, david_teece@... wrote:
>
> Travis,
> We also generate descriptions from the classification and it works well for us. As I see it, there are actually two issues causing what you are seeing. One is part of how the system functions and you can actually fix it. The other is philosophical and you will need to decide if you want to change your philosophy.
>
> Let's start with the system based issue. We also use a hierarchical classification process, like you suggest, and had an issue with one classification that was putting the word PUMP into the description twice. It took me quite a while to figure out why since all of the rest of the classifications were working fine. Our system is set up like this. Classification 1400 is PUMP; classification 1400-01 is PUMP, CENTRIFUGAL; classification 1400-02 is PUMP, POSITIVE DISPLACEMENT; etc. Classification 1400 has no attributes and the generate description checkbox is unchecked. All of the sub-classification have attributes, and their Generate Description box is checked. So when we generate a description it starts with the sub-classifications text and builds from there. What was causing the double word of PUMP was that the top classification of PUMP had somehow gotten the Generate Description checked and it was being added in front of the sub-classification description.
>
> So, what all of that means is, you could uncheck the upper level Generate Description boxes and they would not be added to your description.
>
> Now let me tackle the philosophical issue. In my opinion, your descriptions should be top down. For your printer you are doing OK. ELECTRONIC \ PRINTER \ LABELMAKER means it is a piece of electronics that is a printer and is more specifically a labelmaker printer. So, again in my opinion, the description that is being generated for your tape is incorrect because it is incorrectly classified, not because of the way the system functions. In my way of thinking, since tape is not a piece of electronics, it should classified at the highest level as Tape and then sub-classed and attributes added. The description would then be something like TAPE \ PRINTER \ LABELMAKER \ RED.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> Dave Teece
> Reliability Analyst / CMMS Support, CMRP
>
>
>
>
>
>
(Hope this doesn't double-post; looks like it didn't take the first time)
How many top-level categories does that give you? I'm guessing there's a lot.
I was thinking of it in a more retail-oriented approach. If I'm shopping for this label tape at a store, my mind immediately takes me to Electronics, near the printers (as opposed to, say, near telephones or Blu-Ray players). I was wanting to pattern this after the websites of some of my most-used vendors, Grainger and McMaster-Carr. I love their websites. (My label tape is found in Safety --> Identification Products and Office Supplies --> Label Makers, respectively.)
I don't think any store would put this label tape, drywall tape, electrical tape, and Scotch tape all in the same area. So while yes I know that's probably how to do it with what Maximo is made to do, I personally don't like it very much.
But it is interesting to me that in three responses, everyone seems in favor of how it is now.
I'm thinking about asking in an RFE for the addition of a checkbox to include or exclude parent-level Classification descriptions.
Travis Herron
--- In MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com, "in2data" <in2data@...> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> There is a classification catalog available from IHS Intermat that can be loaded into Maximo. It gives you a starting point on how to build classifications. We've been using that for about 12 years. We've modified it and added classifications.
>
> You should always start at the top with what the item is. In the case of your printer Electronic is probably a sub-class or even just an attribute like PRINTER/LABELER or PRINTER with an attribute of TYPE.
>
> We use a classification of LABELER with sub-classes of MANUAL, ELECTRIC and NO MODIFIER. In the attributes are the tape width and type.
>
> For the TAPE we use TAPE/LABEL.
>
> Dave Bone
>
> --- In MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com, david_teece@ wrote:
> >
> > Travis,
> > We also generate descriptions from the classification and it works well for us. As I see it, there are actually two issues causing what you are seeing. One is part of how the system functions and you can actually fix it. The other is philosophical and you will need to decide if you want to change your philosophy.
> >
> > Let's start with the system based issue. We also use a hierarchical classification process, like you suggest, and had an issue with one classification that was putting the word PUMP into the description twice. It took me quite a while to figure out why since all of the rest of the classifications were working fine. Our system is set up like this. Classification 1400 is PUMP; classification 1400-01 is PUMP, CENTRIFUGAL; classification 1400-02 is PUMP, POSITIVE DISPLACEMENT; etc. Classification 1400 has no attributes and the generate description checkbox is unchecked. All of the sub-classification have attributes, and their Generate Description box is checked. So when we generate a description it starts with the sub-classifications text and builds from there. What was causing the double word of PUMP was that the top classification of PUMP had somehow gotten the Generate Description checked and it was being added in front of the sub-classification description.
> >
> > So, what all of that means is, you could uncheck the upper level Generate Description boxes and they would not be added to your description.
> >
> > Now let me tackle the philosophical issue. In my opinion, your descriptions should be top down. For your printer you are doing OK. ELECTRONIC \ PRINTER \ LABELMAKER means it is a piece of electronics that is a printer and is more specifically a labelmaker printer. So, again in my opinion, the description that is being generated for your tape is incorrect because it is incorrectly classified, not because of the way the system functions. In my way of thinking, since tape is not a piece of electronics, it should classified at the highest level as Tape and then sub-classed and attributes added. The description would then be something like TAPE \ PRINTER \ LABELMAKER \ RED.
> >
> > Hope that helps.
> >
> > Dave Teece
> > Reliability Analyst / CMMS Support, CMRP
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
Hi,
There is already an option to include the level in the description. You just uncheck it to not include them.
This classification Safety > Identification Products and Office Supplies > Label Makers makes no sense for label makers. We use label makers to mark a wide variety of things and almost none of them have anything to do with safety.
When making classifications the key is to focus on what the item actually is and how end users look for that item. Not what it is used for. We had to add a few classifications and modify a few others based on how we look for items. Not a lot but we have some terminology that is specific to beverage and fruit production.
For instance a PUMP > CENTIFUGAL has no description of what it is used for because it could be used in our plants maybe in 40 or more locations. It could be the pump for the fire sprinklers or a supply pump for our cleaning system. In the attributes we add the specifics of impeller size, coupling etc..
Then we use the spare parts lists to determine what it is used for. Of course you have your items set to add them as spare parts when issued so you automatically build spare parts lists???
You could add a field for each site to use as a where used or what used for comments field. We did so each site can make any comments they like.
You need to plan this logically and carefully. A major oil refinery that did not do this finally gave up and started over back in the 90s.
Dave Bone
--- In MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com, "Travis Herron" <therron@...> wrote:
>
> (Hope this doesn't double-post; looks like it didn't take the first time)
>
> How many top-level categories does that give you? I'm guessing there's a lot.
>
> I was thinking of it in a more retail-oriented approach. If I'm shopping for this label tape at a store, my mind immediately takes me to Electronics, near the printers (as opposed to, say, near telephones or Blu-Ray players). I was wanting to pattern this after the websites of some of my most-used vendors, Grainger and McMaster-Carr. I love their websites. (My label tape is found in Safety --> Identification Products and Office Supplies --> Label Makers, respectively.)
>
> I don't think any store would put this label tape, drywall tape, electrical tape, and Scotch tape all in the same area. So while yes I know that's probably how to do it with what Maximo is made to do, I personally don't like it very much.
>
> But it is interesting to me that in three responses, everyone seems in favor of how it is now.
>
> I'm thinking about asking in an RFE for the addition of a checkbox to include or exclude parent-level Classification descriptions.
>
> Travis Herron
>
> --- In MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com, "in2data" <in2data@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > There is a classification catalog available from IHS Intermat that can be loaded into Maximo. It gives you a starting point on how to build classifications. We've been using that for about 12 years. We've modified it and added classifications.
> >
> > You should always start at the top with what the item is. In the case of your printer Electronic is probably a sub-class or even just an attribute like PRINTER/LABELER or PRINTER with an attribute of TYPE.
> >
> > We use a classification of LABELER with sub-classes of MANUAL, ELECTRIC and NO MODIFIER. In the attributes are the tape width and type.
> >
> > For the TAPE we use TAPE/LABEL.
> >
> > Dave Bone
> >
> > --- In MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com, david_teece@ wrote:
> > >
> > > Travis,
> > > We also generate descriptions from the classification and it works well for us. As I see it, there are actually two issues causing what you are seeing. One is part of how the system functions and you can actually fix it. The other is philosophical and you will need to decide if you want to change your philosophy.
> > >
> > > Let's start with the system based issue. We also use a hierarchical classification process, like you suggest, and had an issue with one classification that was putting the word PUMP into the description twice. It took me quite a while to figure out why since all of the rest of the classifications were working fine. Our system is set up like this. Classification 1400 is PUMP; classification 1400-01 is PUMP, CENTRIFUGAL; classification 1400-02 is PUMP, POSITIVE DISPLACEMENT; etc. Classification 1400 has no attributes and the generate description checkbox is unchecked. All of the sub-classification have attributes, and their Generate Description box is checked. So when we generate a description it starts with the sub-classifications text and builds from there. What was causing the double word of PUMP was that the top classification of PUMP had somehow gotten the Generate Description checked and it was being added in front of the sub-classification description.
> > >
> > > So, what all of that means is, you could uncheck the upper level Generate Description boxes and they would not be added to your description.
> > >
> > > Now let me tackle the philosophical issue. In my opinion, your descriptions should be top down. For your printer you are doing OK. ELECTRONIC \ PRINTER \ LABELMAKER means it is a piece of electronics that is a printer and is more specifically a labelmaker printer. So, again in my opinion, the description that is being generated for your tape is incorrect because it is incorrectly classified, not because of the way the system functions. In my way of thinking, since tape is not a piece of electronics, it should classified at the highest level as Tape and then sub-classed and attributes added. The description would then be something like TAPE \ PRINTER \ LABELMAKER \ RED.
> > >
> > > Hope that helps.
> > >
> > > Dave Teece
> > > Reliability Analyst / CMMS Support, CMRP
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Hi Dave,
could you please provide a link for the classification catalog from IHS
Intermat.
thanks,
Praveen
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 9:32 AM, in2data <in2data@yahoo.com> wrote:
> **
>
>
> Hi,
>
> There is a classification catalog available from IHS Intermat that can be
> loaded into Maximo. It gives you a starting point on how to build
> classifications. We've been using that for about 12 years. We've modified
> it and added classifications.
>
> You should always start at the top with what the item is. In the case of
> your printer Electronic is probably a sub-class or even just an attribute
> like PRINTER/LABELER or PRINTER with an attribute of TYPE.
>
> We use a classification of LABELER with sub-classes of MANUAL, ELECTRIC
> and NO MODIFIER. In the attributes are the tape width and type.
>
> For the TAPE we use TAPE/LABEL.
>
> Dave Bone
>
>
> --- In MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com, david_teece@... wrote:
> >
> > Travis,
> > We also generate descriptions from the classification and it works well
> for us. As I see it, there are actually two issues causing what you are
> seeing. One is part of how the system functions and you can actually fix
> it. The other is philosophical and you will need to decide if you want to
> change your philosophy.
> >
> > Let's start with the system based issue. We also use a hierarchical
> classification process, like you suggest, and had an issue with one
> classification that was putting the word PUMP into the description twice.
> It took me quite a while to figure out why since all of the rest of the
> classifications were working fine. Our system is set up like this.
> Classification 1400 is PUMP; classification 1400-01 is PUMP, CENTRIFUGAL;
> classification 1400-02 is PUMP, POSITIVE DISPLACEMENT; etc. Classification
> 1400 has no attributes and the generate description checkbox is unchecked.
> All of the sub-classification have attributes, and their Generate
> Description box is checked. So when we generate a description it starts
> with the sub-classifications text and builds from there. What was causing
> the double word of PUMP was that the top classification of PUMP had somehow
> gotten the Generate Description checked and it was being added in front of
> the sub-classification description.
> >
> > So, what all of that means is, you could uncheck the upper level
> Generate Description boxes and they would not be added to your description.
> >
> > Now let me tackle the philosophical issue. In my opinion, your
> descriptions should be top down. For your printer you are doing OK.
> ELECTRONIC \ PRINTER \ LABELMAKER means it is a piece of electronics that
> is a printer and is more specifically a labelmaker printer. So, again in my
> opinion, the description that is being generated for your tape is incorrect
> because it is incorrectly classified, not because of the way the system
> functions. In my way of thinking, since tape is not a piece of electronics,
> it should classified at the highest level as Tape and then sub-classed and
> attributes added. The description would then be something like TAPE \
> PRINTER \ LABELMAKER \ RED.
> >
> > Hope that helps.
> >
> > Dave Teece
> > Reliability Analyst / CMMS Support, CMRP
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
Hi,
http://www.ihs.com/products/mro/smd-cataloging-methodology.aspx
Dave Bone
--- In MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com, Praveen M <praveen.muramalla@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> could you please provide a link for the classification catalog from IHS
> Intermat.
>
> thanks,
> Praveen
>
> On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 9:32 AM, in2data <in2data@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > There is a classification catalog available from IHS Intermat that can be
> > loaded into Maximo. It gives you a starting point on how to build
> > classifications. We've been using that for about 12 years. We've modified
> > it and added classifications.
> >
> > You should always start at the top with what the item is. In the case of
> > your printer Electronic is probably a sub-class or even just an attribute
> > like PRINTER/LABELER or PRINTER with an attribute of TYPE.
> >
> > We use a classification of LABELER with sub-classes of MANUAL, ELECTRIC
> > and NO MODIFIER. In the attributes are the tape width and type.
> >
> > For the TAPE we use TAPE/LABEL.
> >
> > Dave Bone
> >
> >
> > --- In MAXIMO@yahoogroups.com, david_teece@ wrote:
> > >
> > > Travis,
> > > We also generate descriptions from the classification and it works well
> > for us. As I see it, there are actually two issues causing what you are
> > seeing. One is part of how the system functions and you can actually fix
> > it. The other is philosophical and you will need to decide if you want to
> > change your philosophy.
> > >
> > > Let's start with the system based issue. We also use a hierarchical
> > classification process, like you suggest, and had an issue with one
> > classification that was putting the word PUMP into the description twice.
> > It took me quite a while to figure out why since all of the rest of the
> > classifications were working fine. Our system is set up like this.
> > Classification 1400 is PUMP; classification 1400-01 is PUMP, CENTRIFUGAL;
> > classification 1400-02 is PUMP, POSITIVE DISPLACEMENT; etc. Classification
> > 1400 has no attributes and the generate description checkbox is unchecked.
> > All of the sub-classification have attributes, and their Generate
> > Description box is checked. So when we generate a description it starts
> > with the sub-classifications text and builds from there. What was causing
> > the double word of PUMP was that the top classification of PUMP had somehow
> > gotten the Generate Description checked and it was being added in front of
> > the sub-classification description.
> > >
> > > So, what all of that means is, you could uncheck the upper level
> > Generate Description boxes and they would not be added to your description.
> > >
> > > Now let me tackle the philosophical issue. In my opinion, your
> > descriptions should be top down. For your printer you are doing OK.
> > ELECTRONIC \ PRINTER \ LABELMAKER means it is a piece of electronics that
> > is a printer and is more specifically a labelmaker printer. So, again in my
> > opinion, the description that is being generated for your tape is incorrect
> > because it is incorrectly classified, not because of the way the system
> > functions. In my way of thinking, since tape is not a piece of electronics,
> > it should classified at the highest level as Tape and then sub-classed and
> > attributes added. The description would then be something like TAPE \
> > PRINTER \ LABELMAKER \ RED.
> > >
> > > Hope that helps.
> > >
> > > Dave Teece
> > > Reliability Analyst / CMMS Support, CMRP
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>