Community Discussions

This might already be reported, but I was not able to find it when I searched.Currently Chart only uses an internal, and very limited, unit conversion. It would be a big step forward if we could also use the native unit conversion in timeseries, which is much richer than what is offered via Charts.Since you might have timeseries with no CogniteUnit, Charts still needs to support unit conversion defined in the UI, as a backup solution 

This idea is related to a previously submitted request:https://hub.cognite.com/product-ideas-492/charts-canvas-streamlit-lock-feature-to-prevent-accidental-deletion-6058?tid=6058&fid=492In most cases, charts with scheduled calculations are highly important. However, currently there is no clear way to distinguish them from regular charts in the list view, which creates a risk of accidental deletion.If a scheduled chart is accidentally deleted, the schedule itself may continue to run, but users would no longer be able to review or verify the calculation logic.To prevent this, it would be helpful to have:A clear visual indicator showing that a chart has a schedule configured, so it can be identified at a glanceA warning message when attempting to delete such a chartAdditionally, it would be even more useful if there were a filter option to display only charts with schedules.

When scheduling calculations created in Charts, the calculated time series is currently written starting from the time the schedule is configured. However, there are many cases where we would like to apply these calculation results to historical data as well.For example, it would be helpful if users could specify a start point in the past using options such as:・“6 months ago,” “1 year ago,” or “3 years ago” from the current date・A specific date and timeWould it be possible to add an option that allows users to apply calculation results starting from a user-defined point in the past?

Two needs:- I want to monitor time series in charts for windows longer than 60 minutes. Current limit is 60 minutes and should be longer.- I want to subscribe common emails to monitored time series (for example <asset-specific.process-engineers>@akerbp.com). Current limitation is that only individuals can subscribe to monitored time series. This is an issue for roles on rotations.What impact would a change have? Time savings Fewer errors / less manual work Better decision-making foundation Better data qualityRequested by: Sindre Fjermedal

Hello :)  Use caseAs an AI evaluation engineer, I want graph relations returned by the agent to be resolved into the underlying equipment and time series instance IDs in the structured JSON output, so that recall metrics reflect the instances the agent actually identified, not only the relation objects it retrieved. BackgroundI am evaluating agents that retrieve process data from an industrial knowledge graph in Cognite Data Fusion. I use a simple Python-based recall evaluator that compares expected equipment/time series IDs against IDs returned in the agent’s structured JSON output. Current behaviorThe agent may identify the correct equipment or time series in the natural-language response, but the structured JSON sometimes only contains the relation objects it used to infer them. This is mostly invisible to the end user, because the answer can still be correct. The issue is automated evaluation: correct retrievals may be undercounted because the expected equipment/time series IDs are

It would be great if they could compare InField data with PI Data directly within InField checklist. The attached file shows InField values, but they would like to be able to display them for comparison with instrument readings (PI Data). 

Currently, when a Canvas or Chart is created, the creator is automatically assigned as the “Owner.” We would like to request the implementation of a feature that allows ownership to be transferred to another user.BackgroundIn our operations department, Canvas and Charts are used for long-term operational monitoring. However, the primary person in charge changes relatively frequently. Therefore, we need a mechanism that allows ownership to be transferred smoothly to the next responsible person.From a long-term operational perspective, having the original creator remain as the owner even after role changes or internal transfers raises concerns regarding internal security and governance.For these reasons, we would greatly appreciate it if an official ownership transfer function could be implemented.Additionally, ​@Shun Takase-san from Nippon Shokubai commented that since Canvas and Charts can be searched by the creator’s name, having the current responsible person listed as the creator si

The “Compare trends” function in the trend view is a great functionality to compare different trends. Today the Y-axis of the graphs does not align when comparing multiple trends. For example in the trend view below, the Y-axis of the purple trend is way higher than the axis for the blue trend line. 45% and 100% is placed at the same position.   It is possible to manually zoom in and out on the Y-axis and then align but it would be better if there was a way of aligning Y-axis on a more user friendly way or alternatively that the axis are lined by default :-)

At the moment, I believe users cannot see which users in their organization are using which CDF features, nor how they are being used.Would it be possible for users with administrator privileges to access this kind of information?If this were available, it would enable us to consider measures to make better use of CDF based on actual usage patterns within our organization. For example:A certain department frequently uses Charts but rarely uses Canvas, so we could interview them to understand the reasons.Specific features of Charts or Canvas are hardly being used, so we could improve the documentation and promote their usage.Although they are not very vocal and we had not noticed before, it turns out that Mr./Ms. △△ is actually a heavy user of CDF, so we could identify them as a key person.If there is already a way to obtain such information, we would greatly appreciate it if you could let us know.

The checklist generated from an AO does not display any Work Order Number.In the example shown here, the AO ID is 30002314, but this is not visible in the checklist.For better usability, the AO reference should be clearly visible directly in the checklist, so users do not have to click into other objects for more information.The key need is to quickly and easily identify which work order the checklist belongs to.If we can add this as shown below in red it would be highly beneficial.It is possible to see the work order number clicking on the work order header. But the WO-number is needed quite often to indicate which check list it is and having it available reduces the amount of clicks for the end user. Additionally, the number is relatively short, and therefore does not take up much space. 

When opening trends for a transmitter, the width of the Y-axis seems to be set up randomly. An example is shown below. Here, the Y-axis goes from 15-35, while the range for the transmitter is from 0-100.  We have range data from LCI available to be able to set up the Y-axis as standard. Here is an example for the transmitter: (Upper limit 100, lower limit 0)The request is to use 'Calibrated Range Max' and 'Calibrated Range Min' to set up the Y-axis on the trend window to avoid the user having to adjust it each time.

In the InField app, it is possible to add comments to photos and videos when uploading them, but it is not possible to specify the file name.The file names appear to be (probably) inherited from the default names assigned by devices such as iPhones or Android phones. In most cases, even when checking the file name later, it is difficult to tell what the file actually contains.For this reason, I believe that having a feature that allows users to freely change the file name at the time of upload would be very useful for utilizing the information later.

When you select “Open in canvas”, the list of existing canvases includes all public canvases. Users need a quick way to filter down to just their canvases from this screen.   

Currently when filtering with certain column on Cognite Industrial Tool Search we have options to filter byIs Equal to Is not Equal to Starts With Doesn’t start with Is set Is not setCan we please add another option “Contains”?This would significantly improve the ability to filter data and files on text-based fields such as Title and Description, enabling more flexible and effective search capabilities. 

Today, when adding data (using data modelling), the Category defaults to CogniteTimeSeries.Would it be possible to have Chart remember your selection (some engineers always search via the Asset) so you do not have to select every time? 

Labels is a great functionality for easily finding templates/checklists based on defined groups. We have two improvement proposals for making it even better:Labels used for other locations should not be visible when looking at the drop down menu for labels. In our case, if we are at location ALV, we see labels that are in use for location ULD as can be seen below:  Labels are not shared across locations in our company, and its not possible to find templates and check lists for other assets when currently on a location. So not displaying labels would make the drop down for labels much better.Delete/Change labels: It would be great to have some way of managing labels. If one has created a label by mistake, or if a label no longer is needed it would be great if we are able to delete old labels. Or alternatively change already existing. I.e some way of managing labels.  

Current access management relies on explicitly defined scopes (spaces, data sets, and tables) that require a full textual match.  As a result, any time a new scope is added, corresponding access lists must be manually updated. Supporting wildcards or pattern-based matching when defining access scopes would make this management easier. This would allow access rules to be defined once using predictable naming conventions, rather than requiring explicit enumeration of every individual scope.For example, if users in GroupA require access to all data originating from the Alpha source system, access rules could be defined using a pattern such as:alpha:*Instead of listing each scope individually (e.g. alpha:files:engineering_diagrams, alpha:files:manuals, alpha:time_series:operations).  With this approach, when a new scope like alpha:3d:vessels is introduced, no updates to access lists would be required. 

We need an Excel-based solution for CDF that can serve as a practical alternative to PI Datalink, which is currently widely used across existing Aker BP assets.Today, importing data from CDF through OData is possible, but it is limited and cumbersome compared with the functionality and user experience provided by PI Datalink. My experience is that OData can be made to work in Excel, but it does not provide the same efficient workflow for engineering analysis, validation, and reporting.For users unfamiliar with PI Datalink, its main strength is that Excel cells can be directly linked to data tags. These links can return:current values archived values calculated values such as average, minimum, and maximum raw values based on a timestamp or time interval time references taken from other cells in the workbookA particularly important capability is dynamic date handling. If one cell contains the date or time reference, the user can change that single cell and automatically refresh the entir

The behavior of “Open in Canvas” is different between the Data Explorer search results and the Search search results.I am trying to use two screens with an open browser window on each screen (one screen for searching, and one for viewing my canvas).When I select an item in Data Explorer, I get an image of a Scroll with the caption “Open in Industrial Canvas”.  When I select the scroll, I have the option to “Choose Canvas” or select an open canvas (in my screenshot it is JP - Testing Canvas May 1).  (See screenshot Data Explorer). When I choose my existing Canvas, the item is added to my open Canvas, and the canvas refreshes instantly. When I select an item in Search, I have three dots next to the black icon with the text “Open”.  When I select the three dots, I have the option to “Open in Canvas”.  (See screenshot Search). When I select that option, a new tab opens, where I need to choose between existing canvas and new canvas.  If I choose existing canvas and select my open canvas, th

I think it would be very useful to have alignment features—such as top alignment and left alignment—for all objects that can be added to a Canvas. Ideally, this would work similarly to the alignment functionality available in PowerPoint.For detail-oriented users, a considerable amount of time is currently spent manually aligning objects on a Canvas they create. Having built-in alignment button would help reduce this time and improve overall usability.

Users are requesting that .eml (outlook email communications) are viewable in Canvas and Search.  Our teams consistently leverage different file formats, including emails, as part of their engineering packages and root-cause failure analysis. Users are noting that .eml files (outlook email communications) are not viewable in Canvas. Currently teams export the file to a PDF or other compatible format before they can be uploaded. This adds an additional step before use. 

Atlas AI Agent Developer Experience FeedbackIn this post I share some of my experiences as a developer of Atlas AI agents. My goal is to be able to define agents in a modular and reproducible way, making it easy to extend and maintain. I want a workflow that facilitates governance, and an evaluation framework that is flexible, transparent, and functional. All my feedback should be viewed in this light. I am not after the best user experience in the browser UI, although that is also important. This post is about all the stuff the end user does not see. ObservabilityWhen we call client.agents.chat(), the SDK returns a final answer, structured data items, and a reasoning trace. Here is a representative response:{"response": {"messages": [{"role": "agent","content": {"text": "Short answer: N08 flows to two manifolds ...","type": "text"},"data": [{"type": "instance","view": {"space": "sp_process_domain_model", "externalId": "ProcessEquipment", "version": "1.0.0"},"instanceId": {"space": "sp

The idea is to get a Search and Filtering options in the “Data Managament > 3D” tosearch something in the structure of the 3D model filter the nodes to display or not in the 3D model, this Filtering option should be possible with a “contain” option with multiple filters option. This should save the active filters to display the “cleaned” 3D CAD model in the Industrial tool domain. By this filetring we keep the original structure of the 3D CAD model and we can clean it for its display in the CDF

At our company, we frequently need to compare specific time‑series trends with historical data. For example, we may want to compare the temperature increase after a plant startup with the trend observed during a previous startup two years earlier.Currently, the “Shift time series” function in Charts allows us to overlay the same tag with a time offset. However, to do so, we must expand the global time range to cover the entire historical span (for example, setting the range from 2023 to 2025), even when our actual analysis focus is limited to a single year such as 2025. This makes detailed analysis more difficult and reduces readability when working with a clearly defined target period. Ideally, we would like to set the display range only to the target time span, while still being able to retrieve and overlay historical data from earlier periods using a time shift.This request has also been raised multiple times in the past, including by Mr. TAKASE , and we understand that many other u

There is a clear need for a native way to organize and classify time‑series data into reusable, condition‑based time segments (“capsules”) representing distinct operating states or events.Capsules enable users to define such periods based on signals, logic, or events (for example when a valve is open, a pump is running, a compressor is loaded, a system is in start‑up, or production is above a given threshold), and then apply analysis consistently within those time windows.This functionality is missing in Cognite Data Fusion, making it difficult to perform structured, state‑aware analysis without repeatedly rebuilding filters or custom logic. The problem occurs frequently during process optimization, production and injection accounting, energy and mass balance calculations, equipment performance analysis, and troubleshooting, where engineers need to calculate KPIs such as integrated flow, average efficiency, chemical consumption, or loss rates only during relevant operating conditions.W