Disable POD start for an operation

[Former Member]

Hi,

Are there any possibilities to prevent a user from Starting an SFC through the POD in a certain operation?

E.g. In a operation performing a test we have a tester interface that we want to force the operator to use.
Today some operators use the POD instead of doing a re-test after repairing.

Naturally we are working with education for these operators, since we can see who they are , but I am
anyhow wondering if it is possible to prevent in the system.

Best Regards,

Johan

[former_member210324 · Accepted solution]

Dependend on your configuration and exact requirements you could build and use a custom activity hook, that checks if the SFC is allowed to be started on that operation.

Regards,

Christoph

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Cristoph,

Yes, I have thought of that as one solution. I was hoping to find some base functionality to use
instead of having to write customizations.

Best Regards,

Johan

[sergiy_katerinich · Accepted solution]

Hi Johan,

Never tried but if the operation is meant for execution via tester interface exclusively I would try these items:

1) assign each POD to a specific operation/resource and forbid changing the operations, but no POD for the tester-related operation;

2) assign no resource to the resource type of the operation: possibly WS or DX (whatever is used by your tester interface) will not check assignment of a resource to the resource type and let the reqeust pass through - yes, kind of cheating;

3) add Special Instruction to the operation to warn an operator to signoff the SFC if started - this does not prevent Start, but can be used for notification purpose;

4) assign some activity at Start like printing but configure it to fail constantly, however, not sure if it is possible to do for a specific operation.

Regards,

Sergiy

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Sergiy,

Thank you for the suggestion. At least option 1 we have already considered, but it will be a lot of POD's to maintain in the future if we want to make some change (e.g. add a button).

One other idea we have is to use certificates only given to one user for the test operation and then the tester interfaces will always send with that user. What do you think of that? Can you see any negative impact it might have?

Best Regards,

Johan

[sergiy_katerinich · Accepted solution]

Hi Johan,

Certification is a cool solution if it meets requirements of your process. If configured in a proper way, I can hardly foresee any negative impact.

Regards,

Sergiy

[Former Member]

Hi Johan & Sergiy,

i am looking for the same goal - i am trying to use certification but it is not working on the operation level.

I Opened conversation maybe you can advise please: 

Certification Assignment to operation

Johan - did you succeded to use certifications for the goal ?

thank you

Dmitry Frenkel

[Former Member]

Hi Dmitry,

No, we did not go for using certifications because of two reasons:
1) Not all our tester interfaces have the possibility to send a logged in user.

2) Even if we have the tester interface sending the logged in user, someone must maintain the
    certifications.

We actually went for a solution that is not mentioned here.

1) Add a data-collection parameter with only valid value of 1.

2) Tester interface sets this data-collection parameter to 1

3) Data-collection permission is removed in POD.

4) A Data-collection check (DC520) is added as a pre-complete to the test operation

This way we achieve the same result. A normal operator can never complete a test operation manually.

Best regards,

Johan