+ Start a Discussion
Yogesh DYogesh D 

Issues with Trailhead Superbadge "Apex Specialist"


For this superbadge in the given entity relation diagram there is no connection that depicts the direct relation between Maintenance Request (case) and Equipment (Product). It is very confusing looking at the diagram given to understand this. Earlier in my solution to challenge 1 I assumed that there is no direct relation between the said objects and that I need to access the Equipment data by traversing the junction object (Work Part). Solution became much simpler when I swa that there is already a direct relation between Maintenance Request (case) and Equipment (Product).
Please look into this. Correct me I am wrong. Thank you.

 User-added image
You do want to create a Lookup to Product from Work Part to match what is required for the challenge.  Yes a Case can have a Product, but the Case doesn't link to products, Work Parts do.
Yogesh DYogesh D
I understand that, but in the package that I installed for the challenge.... there is a lookup to product on Case which we have to use to clear the first challenge and lookup to product is also there on work part as shown in the entity diagram. I first solved the challenge by accessing product from related work part and I failed to clear the challenge. Then I checked my logs and was amused to see that there is product lookup on Case which they are using while testing my code. So I reverted back my code to use the product on Case instead of work part. There something amiss here, either entity diagram should be updated to show that there is product lookup on Case or else the lookup should be removed from Case in the package that we install.
From what I found, the Product on Case is really a picklist, not a Lookup.  But I'm frustrated with this too.  I did it exactly the way they are saying with the new cases using the Work Parts and Due Date, it works, and the check states it can't find the new cases.
Yogesh DYogesh D
Ohhh no...... don't fall for that Product picklist thing... there is one more field which is labelled as Equipment with API name as Equipment__c  .... this field is a lookup to Product (check its data type).... I solved this problem and have completed the Superbadge.... let me know if you run itno some issues that I can help you with.
Jeff DouglasJeff Douglas
We updated all of the superbadges yesterday so please double check the requirements (some have changed) and try the challenge again. 

Thanks for trying superbadges!

Jeff Douglas
Trailhead Developer Advocate
Chris SweetChris Sweet
One thing that the spec leaves out is that the Equipment (Equipment__c) field on Maintenance Request also needs to be copied over to the newly generated request. Maybe the line should say, "This new request is tied to the same vehicle and equipment as the original closed service request."

Send this back to the BA! No "First Ascent" flag for me :(
Jeff DouglasJeff Douglas
Thanks Chris! We noticed this ommission as well. It will be included in out next content release.

 Jeff Douglas
Trailhead Developer Advocate
Daniel Hamilton 7Daniel Hamilton 7
Looks like this thread hasn't been active for a few months, but I am still seeing the same inconsistency between the entity diagram and installed package that Yogesh originally pointed out - there is a Lookup(Product) field added to the Case object as part of the installed package. That doesn't seem appropriate if a Maintenance Request should be associated with Equipment only through a Work Part object.

Am I missing something here or is this still an outstanding issue?
Endrit M. SinoEndrit M. Sino
Hello Daniel, 

   In case it might help you, here is a complete version of the Trigger and the Helper, in order to pass the first challenge: https://gist.github.com/EndritSino/652ad3033bf7a998ab2912b4a2d75541

Andrew KulikAndrew Kulik
This still looks to be an issue to me as the requirements say you need to check the maintenance cycle of every work part but there looks to be a 1:1 relation between maintencance request and equipmet. I've passed the challenge but it's not clear what the data structure actualy is.

Another aspect about parts is they all have different lifespans. Therefore, you need to calculate and set the next due date using the maintenance cycle defined on the related work part records. If multiple work parts are used in the maintenance request, choose the shortest maintenance cycle to define the service date.
nihal srivastavanihal srivastava
Hi,  I'm facing this error how to solve this....
Challenge Not yet complete... here's what's wrong:
Inserting a new Maintenance Request of type 'Routine Maintenance' and then closing it did not create of a new Maintenance Request based upon the original record correctly. The challenge is expecting to find the closed Maintenance Request plus an 'New' Maintenance Request of type 'Routine Maintenance' with the same Vehicle as the closed one.
Close errors
Urvashi BabbarUrvashi Babbar
After being stuck on this challenge for 5 days I finally got my solution:

Please check answer at: 
Dinesh RaghuDinesh Raghu

Yogesh D ..,

still i would not understand what you've comes to say., 

and im still strugling on the same iisue..,



Challenge Not yet complete... here's what's wrong:
Closing a Maintenance Request of type 'Routine Maintenance' or 'Repair' did not create of a new Maintenance Request with the correct due date. The challenge is expecting the due date to be calculated using the maintenance cycle defined on the related equipment records. If multiple equipments are used in the maintenance request, choose the shortest maintenance cycle to define the service date.
Close errors


Thanks In Advance..

Keerthi MaduruKeerthi Maduru
@Dinesh Raghu Were you able to resolve this? I have the same issue. Please suggest. 
Mihir Maniar 8Mihir Maniar 8
I am not able to view the work part object in my playground. i created a new playground for this badge and also installed the package as advised.04t6g000008av9iAAA but still i am not able to view the object. Please guide. Thanks in advance.
Mihir Maniar 8Mihir Maniar 8
Since I cannot view it which means I cannot follow the implementation provided in this thread to complete the challenge. Has anyone else ever faced this issue?
Vaibhav Patil 44Vaibhav Patil 44
Mihir Maniar I'm facing the same issue as you!!...did you find solution for it??
Anyone with solutions please provide!.
Thanks in advance.