Does anyone know what is causing this issue with certain assemblies in our standard BOM Cost Report?
Each report is being ran for a part with only one approved revision on a “Single-Level” parameter. Notice under this image where the unit cost (0.8174) multiplied by the quantity (1.5300 GAL) equals the extended cost (1.2506). This behavior is replicated further in the highlighted fields further down.
However in this scenario, the unit labor cost (2.4984) multiplied by the quantity of (133.9990 YDS) equals (283.3558). 2.4984 x 133.9990 = 334.7831. What is causing the extended cost to display such a smaller amount than what should be calculated? The only difference is we have setup hours along with a costing lot size for PS-864 assembly. Any help is greatly appreciated.
In looking at the report and your numbers, aren’t you crossing Material and Labor? I don’t know why in the first example the math works out that you multiply the GAL times Labor Cost it equals the Extended Labor Cost. If you look at the Material Cost column the math works here as well. When you jump to the second example, the math works for Material Cost as it should and doesn’t for Labor as they are two different things.
I would guess the setup hours make the difference. I’m fairly certain that the per unit labor cost of setup decreases as the quantity of units increases. Not positive about that, you may want to do some testing.
That makes me think it’s got to be the Setup Hours. Since setup hours are not multiplied by quantity as ProdStandard / Production hours are, the per unit labor cost of 1 unit will be higher than the per unit labor cost of 133.9 units. I’m guessing that’s what happened here. Can’t be sure without testing or playing with it.
It does come in for calculating the labor cost for the part, but I didn’t think would have anything to do with the extended cost. But I am going to do some digging and see if I can figure out the math behind it.
