I'm relatively new to Maximo 4.1.x and see it uses both Equipment hierarcy and Location hierarchy.
There is no question on the need for a good equipment hierarchy.
I can see that for industries which are frequently moving assets between locations, there is value. But,if your assets don't move or rarely move; what value does the equipment location hierarchy bring (if you already have a good equipment hierarchy)?
Thanks,
Charlie

Is anyone using both?
Thanks,
Charlie

I use SAP R/3 and we use both (functional location and equipment) hierachies. In our case the FL hierachy helps to see statistics, by site / building / area within building and the equipment can be linked at any level of the FL hierachy.

It is usefull to answers managers questions like: How much maintenance costs where spent in packaging area 123 during last six months.

Eugene,
Thanks for taking the time to respond.
I'm not familiar with SAP. Could the same not be done using the equipment hierarchy (assuming the costs roll up)?
Thanks,
Charlie

I think it can be done, but it is waaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy easier with a well structured functional location / equipment hierarchy.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Eugene,

Your right, the 4.1 LOC hierarchy doesn't do much more for you. In the 5.x version, they introduce the concept of SYSTEMS. With this functionality you can now have a hierarchy of plant or production systems related to locations. Work orders can now be located systems or asset based. Cost roll up in either case would depend on your process integrity.