Hello,
I am seeing an issue when I try to import Alt Revisions. It seems as though when I use DMT to create alt revisions (I have a few hundred), it copies the BOO and BOM of the parent revision. This is undesirable as out alt methods nearly always vary in terms of operation (number of ops and opcode). The parent revisions already exist.
Here is a screenshot of my DMT file:
That is default functionality in Epicor. When you create an AltMethod, it automatically copies the entire MOM from the parent, which then you would modify to suit your requirements.
You’d need to have 3 different DMT loads… first one on PartRev to create the alt methods, then one each for Bill of Operations and Bill of Materials to modify those records.
Sounds like a HUGE pain in the butt, but still better than using Engineering Workbench and doing it all manually.
Ah, I think I see now. So I should have imported Alt Methods the same time as I import the standard methods?
And essential, this workflow would look like:
Correct.
The only caveat there would be if your Alt Method has FEWER operations or materials than the Parent Method, you’d need to delete those “extra” items separately.
Say your Parent Method has 5 material records, MtlSeq 10-50. If your Alt Method only has 4 material records, and you modify MtlSeq 10-40, MtlSeq 50 won’t go away all by itself.
Ernie, how do alt methods work?
Is it just a different way to make it?
I keep asking and people keep saying why not make another revision and have them both approved or something like that.
What is the most common reason people use alt methods? Is it for quoting, is it for planning, is it for scheduling?
In one word Routing… You can assign a different site to an alt method.
Caveat. I am no Manufacturing expert. 
Yes… if you make the same items in different plants, you might have different machines or people… and some operations might be in-house instead of subcontract.
It’s hard to automate except on a “Use Alt Method” for everything basis though.
Ernie,
Say my company just wanted a method for times when we want to see what it could cost if we ran it on machine X instead of machine Y, is that a decent enough way to use it?
Or not really worth it?
Depends on how “official” the output of your trial needs to be. If you want a full BOM Cost Report and you want to maintain all the things you’ve tried, then yes that would work.
If it is more of a one-off and you don’t need anything like that, I’d go into a TEST environment, create a Quote, and modify the Engineering in there.
(accidentally deleted)
Just so I understand - if I import the above BOO and BOM files, since the Alt Method has fewer ops and materials, I will see the “extra” things from the parent Method in this import?
In other words, there is no way to import Alt Method truly “separately” from parent method?
Correct.
It’s not a trial it’s an actual method based on data collection and standard costing variances.
I just want it so people could pull it in a quote and get the cost… don’t really care if it shows on the bom cost report.
If it’s data you need to keep, then yes that would be a way to do it.
Ernie, but now reading @kwolkens I am totally upside down haha. So my method would now have multiple resources in there one for each alt method?
Can you only have one alt method?
You can have a gazillion alt methods if you wish. Some of the questions you need to think about are WHO will be doing this, HOW OFTEN do they need to do this, WHAT output is required, WHAT needs to be kept after the output is produced, WHO is responsible for cleanup (if any)…
Those are the ones I can think of right off the bat, but there will be more.
Thanks Ernie, my mind was already deep down that rabbit hole, but the only thing I wanted to point out to management is that this functionality exists AND then they need to think about all those pertinent questions 
and commit to managing them… cause otherwise it’s a waste of time.
That is too bad, lol. Because if the alt method is a change to an operation with materials assigned to it, do I need to delete all the materials underneath to change the top operation?
Or can I DMT an updated operation code for that one op? And will that work if the parent op is subcontract Operation, but alternate operation is in-house?
Sorry for all the questions - I understand Alt Methods from UI, but trying to mass DMT correctly is very confusing…
Techincally, there is no way to CREATE Atl Methods truly separately. Once they’re created they go their separate ways… but I’d be sure to test the living daylights out of that statement before I present it as gospel.
You can probably MODIFY an operation that has materials related to it, but I strongly doubt you can DELETE it. Generally speaking, it’s best to upload the BOO first for precisely that reason… but if the BOO already exists and it s SHORTER or THE SAME as the parent BOO, you might want to upload the BOM modifications first. If the new BOO is LONGER and there might be materials related to ops that don’t exist yet, that will be a problem.
Using any “automation” tool removes some level of choice. It has to. I think you need to go into Engineering Workbench and manually go through the steps of what you want to do, and make notes on anything that happens that you don’t want to happen SO you can design your eventual automated process to account for those things.
DMT is not magic. It uses the Epicor Business Objects (almost) exactly the same way that a user would if they were doing that process manually… so it’s usually best to find out what is really supposed to happen.
(sermon completed)
@utaylor One other thing to keep in mind with Alt Methods, unless something has changed over the last year or so, MRP ignores them. (which is why my company went the multiple approved revision route)
@Ernie, please correct me if I’m wrong about that!
So if you enter a sales order line for Part 123 - Rev A… MRP will create an unfirm for Part 123 - Rev A, Method (1). You can’t dictate Method (2).
You would have to manually change the method on the job (perhaps @Ernie knows how that works… you can call out an Alt Method when you “Get Details” but not sure if you have to manually wipe the job first, or if “Get Details” will automatically over-write the old??).
So, it takes a little more effort on the Job Management side.
Using multiple approved revisions allows you to call out the revision on the Sales Order. For example, if we enter a sales order for Part 123 - Rev B, as long as you have the “Use Part Revision” checkbox on the part checked, it will create a job for Part 123 - Rev B.
