Repairs or Exchanges of Non-Rotable Parts

When filling out Purchase Requisitions in MfA, there is a gap in functionality that impacts smaller MRO operations.  For example, technicians may disassemble an engine (e.g., Lycoming IO-540) during preventive maintenance procedures or overhauls.  As they do, they will encounter a number of parts that have never existed separately in the system before.  If this same technician removes four connecting rods for inspection and repair at a specialty repair facility, they will not have serial numbers and cannot be easily tracked in Maximo for Aviation.  Once the parts are referenced on a Purchase Requisition and the Technician indicates this is for repair (or exchange, in the case where there is a core credit), Maximo immediately requires more information than the Technician can provide -- namely, the serial number and equipment number of the part.

The only alternative for the technician is to change the Part Master (setting the CM Managed and Rotable flags), then create a new Model for the IO-540, including every possible component that could be removed during overhaul, and updating those details for every engine in the fleet.  This is impractical when you consider the fact that many of the components sent out for testing, inspection, and repair will never return to the same organization that provided the original parts -- due to damage, failed testing, or simply being used as source material for future repair and reconditioning operations at the specialty service provider.

Given the effort required to conform to the required fields on the Purchase Requisition -- and its impact on MRO operations, warehouse & inventory management, and work management -- I am requesting that Maximo evaluate the type of Part record being included on the Purchase Requisition.  For the parts that are fully defined as both Items and Assets (i.e. Rotable, Config Managed parts), Maximo performs well, providing features that technicians need to handle the equipment records that are most critical, in terms of compliance, safety, and airworthiness.  For all other parts (i.e., Non-Rotable, Non-Config Managed parts), I would like Maximo to avoid the requirements for Serial Numbers or Equipment Numbers.  This would be needed for Repair and Exchange type PRs, such that users can simply indicate the part number and the quantity required.  Purchasing staff could then match up vendors with those capabilities, like they do today in their legacy system.  Upon receipt of the repaired/refurbished parts, warehouse staff have a specific record to receive, and a quantity of goods to match back to the PO that gets generated, following approval of the PR in the first place.  This allows a closed-loop operation without the artificial constraints related to parts that can never be tagged (due to oil, pressure, friction, heat, etc.) -- and will never be tracked individually during their lifetime.