BOM's Blank Title 72867

Yahoo Archive
1
It uses the rev with the newest effective date.



________________________________
From: Jeff Rogers <jeff.rogers@...>
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2012 5:38 PM
Subject: [Vantage] Re: BOM's


Â
Does anyone know how/where Vantage determines which mtlpart revision a BOM for a particular part and revision uses? The partmtl table gives you the parent partnum and revisionnum, but only the child partnum (not the child revisionnum).

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Lynn Thomas 83" <thomasl@...> wrote:
>
> OK, thanks. I finally found where/how to connect to those published
> columns, with less-than-usual-for-me head banging. This dashboard is
> a wonderful thing! I've added a query to show me the stock status for
> the parts associated with the BOM, and the combination will make one
> my users just sit there and cry [he's been pinging on me, and seems to
> have a bad case of ADD when it's time to hear answers, or give
> detailed explanations of what he wants so that I can find or make a
> solution....]
>
> Now to beat the demand into submission...
>
> Thank you!
>
> Lynn
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "andrew.tapper" <atapper@> wrote:
> >
> > The first BAQ is the BOM Parent BAQ and it is publishing the
> > PartMTL.PartNum and PartMTL.RevisionNum. The 2nd through 8th BAQs
> are the BOM MTL BAQs.
> >
> > The 2nd BAQ is filtered on the published info from the BOM Parent
> BAQ. This becomes the "1st" level of the BOM display. The 2nd BAQ
> publishes PartMtl.MtlPartNum (which is the highlighted line of the 1st
> level) to the 3rd BAQ to make the 2nd level of the BOM display.
> >
> > This pattern then repeats itself for as many levels you want to set
> up your dashboard to display.
> >
> > Sorry it has taken me so many posts to explain this. I guess I am
> not good enough at this yet to explain it.
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> > --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Thomas, Lynn A." <thomasl@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Andrew,
> > >
> > > How, or maybe where, do you have the first BAQ feeding into the
> > second? I've looked at your queries and the dashboard, but that bit
> > eludes me. The XML files didn't help, either. I'm learning how to
> > read them but it's a slow process.
> > >
> > > I like your dashboard, and it could be very useful to my users, but
> > we need a bit of warehouse and part-on-hand information too. I
> > _think_ I know how to add it, but I don't want to mess with that
> > existing relationship, nor get caught in the works.
> > >
> > > Thank you!
> > >
> > > Lynn Thomas
> > > Senior Engineer
> > > SAIC
> > > 317-357-4041 X255
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
>




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2
Hello - Where do you go in Vanatage to look at BOM's. The only way I
have been able to figure out is by Checking out the BOM I want to look
at from the Engineering Workbench and this "UnApproves" it. Also,
when creating a revision to a BOM is there any way to copy the
Materials from the old revision to the new revision? Thanks in advance!!
3
> Hello - Where do you go in Vanatage to look at BOM's. The only way I
> have been able to figure out is by Checking out the BOM I want to look
> at from the Engineering Workbench and this "UnApproves" it. Also,
> when creating a revision to a BOM is there any way to copy the
> Materials from the old revision to the new revision? Thanks in advance!!

Right mouse click on the Part Revision letter in Part Maintenance or Part
Tracker and open with "Method Tracker"

Mark W.
4
Whoops, forgot the second question:

> > when creating a revision to a BOM is there any way to copy the
> > Materials from the old revision to the new revision?

Do a Get Details from the Action Menu item (under revision).

Mark W.
5
Thanks A LOT Mark!!! Worked perfect!

-Sal

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Wonsil" <mark_wonsil@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Whoops, forgot the second question:
>
> > > when creating a revision to a BOM is there any way to copy the
> > > Materials from the old revision to the new revision?
>
> Do a Get Details from the Action Menu item (under revision).
>
> Mark W.
>
6
All,
I am pretty sure this is yet another paradigm where epicor leads many disconnected and convoluted processes to a cliff where all tracking and usability just falls off into the bowels of neverland, however, I thought I would ask.

The scenario seems simple enough: I have a certain number of purchased parts from inventory that seem to be faulty. They were never inspected upon receipt. Ok, no problem.

The documented process states that a non-conformance record be generated first. Done.
Second, a user will have to process the non-conforming part in the Inspection module (QA). Here, the purchased part can can be accepted right back into stock (a useless scenario for us) or rejected. So, I simply list the failed quantity, enter the reason code, and select the target warehose and bin and then save the inspection record.
Thirdly, a user will open the DMR processing program where, once again, parts can be accepted back to stock (useless for us) or rejected. So, inside the DMR processing application, I select RJECT DETAIL and can make a note of a Supplier RMA number and a quantity that will be returned to them. As soon as the total number of acceptances + total number of Rejects equals the total DMR quantity, the DMR record is closed.

Here are the specific questions:
1) Does this process seem a little redundant and convoluted?
2) If the DMR is closed by rejecting the same number of parts that are listed on the DMR record, what should be used for tracking purposes to make sure that the parts I am sending back for rework are actually returned?
3) If I request a debit memo from the DMR Processing application, what actually happens?
4) How do I specify in the system that a parts is sent back to the vendor to be fixed versus returned for credit? By the existance of the "request debit memo" flag? That does not make much sense.
5) I was thinking as a pretty lame work-around that I could use the corrective actions application to track the return of the material because the corrective action id is tied to the conformance record id and dmr record id. Then, I could simply have the manager enter the audit date in the corrective action application which closes the corrective action record. Is this the intended idea for this program?
6) Since this is coming from inventory and not from a failing po receipt, how do the numbers flow? The directions state that the DMR TO BIN specification does not actually move inventory and it does not seem that the corrective action has any consideration for the material coming back and where it should go. It certainly does not make consideration for the vendor returning the non-conforming material in less-than-complete quantities.

I am thouroughly confused by the intended workings of this process methodology. Has this worked better in any Epicor software ever?

Thanks
Carey

_________________________________________________________________
Windows Liveâ„¢: Keep your life in sync.
http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t1_allup_howitworks_012009
7
I love this post. I agree 100% that this is one of the most
disconnected and convoluted processes in Vantage. I will try to answer
your questions as I recently implemented this process here.

1) absolutely. Welcome to the world of Epicor.
2) A separate spreadsheet outside of Vantage. Yes, it less then
desirable.
3) It will automatically create a debit memo for your accounts payable
personal to process with invoice authorization and check processing.
4) Spreadsheet. Take the debit memo and create a new PO for the part.
Yes, it less then desirable.
5) Let me know if you have success with this.
6) Not sure.

Regards,


Andrew Best
Kice Industries, Inc.
P(316)744-7151
F(316)295-2412

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Carey S
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 1:04 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] DMR with QA module 804.404


All,
I am pretty sure this is yet another paradigm where epicor leads many
disconnected and convoluted processes to a cliff where all tracking and
usability just falls off into the bowels of neverland, however, I
thought I would ask.

The scenario seems simple enough: I have a certain number of purchased
parts from inventory that seem to be faulty. They were never inspected
upon receipt. Ok, no problem.

The documented process states that a non-conformance record be generated
first. Done.
Second, a user will have to process the non-conforming part in the
Inspection module (QA). Here, the purchased part can can be accepted
right back into stock (a useless scenario for us) or rejected. So, I
simply list the failed quantity, enter the reason code, and select the
target warehose and bin and then save the inspection record.
Thirdly, a user will open the DMR processing program where, once again,
parts can be accepted back to stock (useless for us) or rejected. So,
inside the DMR processing application, I select RJECT DETAIL and can
make a note of a Supplier RMA number and a quantity that will be
returned to them. As soon as the total number of acceptances + total
number of Rejects equals the total DMR quantity, the DMR record is
closed.

Here are the specific questions:
1) Does this process seem a little redundant and convoluted?
2) If the DMR is closed by rejecting the same number of parts that are
listed on the DMR record, what should be used for tracking purposes to
make sure that the parts I am sending back for rework are actually
returned?
3) If I request a debit memo from the DMR Processing application, what
actually happens?
4) How do I specify in the system that a parts is sent back to the
vendor to be fixed versus returned for credit? By the existance of the
"request debit memo" flag? That does not make much sense.
5) I was thinking as a pretty lame work-around that I could use the
corrective actions application to track the return of the material
because the corrective action id is tied to the conformance record id
and dmr record id. Then, I could simply have the manager enter the audit
date in the corrective action application which closes the corrective
action record. Is this the intended idea for this program?
6) Since this is coming from inventory and not from a failing po
receipt, how do the numbers flow? The directions state that the DMR TO
BIN specification does not actually move inventory and it does not seem
that the corrective action has any consideration for the material coming
back and where it should go. It certainly does not make consideration
for the vendor returning the non-conforming material in
less-than-complete quantities.

I am thouroughly confused by the intended workings of this process
methodology. Has this worked better in any Epicor software ever?

Thanks
Carey

_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live(tm): Keep your life in sync.
http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t1_allup_howitworks_
012009
------------------------------------

Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must
have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder
and Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/linksYahoo! Groups Links
8
Andrew,
I have no choice but to laugh and spew swear words at the same time.
I too, am glad it is not just me. But, oh, how I wish that it were and I was just missing a section of help files.

Why do I have a feeling Rob is sitting out there somewhere shaking his fists about these Epicor cliffs?
Maybe they should call the help files "not-so-much help files".
Considering the standard response of "working as designed", let's lynch the fool that "designed" this.
I do not suppose this is fixed in Epicor 9? Anyone?

E10?
E11?

C



________________________________
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> From: abest@...
> Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 13:46:44 -0600
> Subject: RE: [Vantage] DMR with QA module 804.404
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I love this post. I agree 100% that this is one of the most
>
> disconnected and convoluted processes in Vantage. I will try to answer
>
> your questions as I recently implemented this process here.
>
>
>
> 1) absolutely. Welcome to the world of Epicor.
>
> 2) A separate spreadsheet outside of Vantage. Yes, it less then
>
> desirable.
>
> 3) It will automatically create a debit memo for your accounts payable
>
> personal to process with invoice authorization and check processing.
>
> 4) Spreadsheet. Take the debit memo and create a new PO for the part.
>
> Yes, it less then desirable.
>
> 5) Let me know if you have success with this.
>
> 6) Not sure.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Andrew Best
>
> Kice Industries, Inc.
>
> P(316)744-7151
>
> F(316)295-2412
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
>
> Of Carey S
>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 1:04 PM
>
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
>
> Subject: [Vantage] DMR with QA module 804.404
>
>
>
> All,
>
> I am pretty sure this is yet another paradigm where epicor leads many
>
> disconnected and convoluted processes to a cliff where all tracking and
>
> usability just falls off into the bowels of neverland, however, I
>
> thought I would ask.
>
>
>
> The scenario seems simple enough: I have a certain number of purchased
>
> parts from inventory that seem to be faulty. They were never inspected
>
> upon receipt. Ok, no problem.
>
>
>
> The documented process states that a non-conformance record be generated
>
> first. Done.
>
> Second, a user will have to process the non-conforming part in the
>
> Inspection module (QA). Here, the purchased part can can be accepted
>
> right back into stock (a useless scenario for us) or rejected. So, I
>
> simply list the failed quantity, enter the reason code, and select the
>
> target warehose and bin and then save the inspection record.
>
> Thirdly, a user will open the DMR processing program where, once again,
>
> parts can be accepted back to stock (useless for us) or rejected. So,
>
> inside the DMR processing application, I select RJECT DETAIL and can
>
> make a note of a Supplier RMA number and a quantity that will be
>
> returned to them. As soon as the total number of acceptances + total
>
> number of Rejects equals the total DMR quantity, the DMR record is
>
> closed.
>
>
>
> Here are the specific questions:
>
> 1) Does this process seem a little redundant and convoluted?
>
> 2) If the DMR is closed by rejecting the same number of parts that are
>
> listed on the DMR record, what should be used for tracking purposes to
>
> make sure that the parts I am sending back for rework are actually
>
> returned?
>
> 3) If I request a debit memo from the DMR Processing application, what
>
> actually happens?
>
> 4) How do I specify in the system that a parts is sent back to the
>
> vendor to be fixed versus returned for credit? By the existance of the
>
> "request debit memo" flag? That does not make much sense.
>
> 5) I was thinking as a pretty lame work-around that I could use the
>
> corrective actions application to track the return of the material
>
> because the corrective action id is tied to the conformance record id
>
> and dmr record id. Then, I could simply have the manager enter the audit
>
> date in the corrective action application which closes the corrective
>
> action record. Is this the intended idea for this program?
>
> 6) Since this is coming from inventory and not from a failing po
>
> receipt, how do the numbers flow? The directions state that the DMR TO
>
> BIN specification does not actually move inventory and it does not seem
>
> that the corrective action has any consideration for the material coming
>
> back and where it should go. It certainly does not make consideration
>
> for the vendor returning the non-conforming material in
>
> less-than-complete quantities.
>
>
>
> I am thouroughly confused by the intended workings of this process
>
> methodology. Has this worked better in any Epicor software ever?
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Carey
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________
>
> Windows Live(tm): Keep your life in sync.
>
> http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t1_allup_howitworks_
>
> 012009
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must
>
> have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
>
> (1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder
>
> and Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
>
> (2) To search through old msg's goto:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
>
> (3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/linksYahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Liveâ„¢: Keep your life in sync.
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t1_allup_explore_012009
9
Epicor is close to having a nice product, the problem is that they have
not addressed the fundamental issues that were present in Vantage 8.00.
These old issues combined with their newly created issues makes me
laugh. When we were beta testing Epicor 9, they have implemented a drop
shipment procedure which would be very useful and would be a HUGE time
saver for our company. I was very excited about this new feature.
Well, they left out so many necessary fields that it not be possible to
us this feature. They simply need to bring over two fields from the SO
to make this one of the best feature upgrades I have ever seen out of
any ERP software package. I was told it was working as designed.

And don't let me get started on Scheduling in Vantage.

Regards,


Andrew Best
Kice Industries, Inc.
P(316)744-7151
F(316)295-2412


-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Carey S
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 2:31 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] DMR with QA module 804.404


Andrew,
I have no choice but to laugh and spew swear words at the same time.
I too, am glad it is not just me. But, oh, how I wish that it were and I
was just missing a section of help files.

Why do I have a feeling Rob is sitting out there somewhere shaking his
fists about these Epicor cliffs?
Maybe they should call the help files "not-so-much help files".
Considering the standard response of "working as designed", let's lynch
the fool that "designed" this.
I do not suppose this is fixed in Epicor 9? Anyone?

E10?
E11?

C



________________________________
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> From: abest@...
> Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 13:46:44 -0600
> Subject: RE: [Vantage] DMR with QA module 804.404
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I love this post. I agree 100% that this is one of the most
>
> disconnected and convoluted processes in Vantage. I will try to answer
>
> your questions as I recently implemented this process here.
>
>
>
> 1) absolutely. Welcome to the world of Epicor.
>
> 2) A separate spreadsheet outside of Vantage. Yes, it less then
>
> desirable.
>
> 3) It will automatically create a debit memo for your accounts payable
>
> personal to process with invoice authorization and check processing.
>
> 4) Spreadsheet. Take the debit memo and create a new PO for the part.
>
> Yes, it less then desirable.
>
> 5) Let me know if you have success with this.
>
> 6) Not sure.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Andrew Best
>
> Kice Industries, Inc.
>
> P(316)744-7151
>
> F(316)295-2412
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf
>
> Of Carey S
>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 1:04 PM
>
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
>
> Subject: [Vantage] DMR with QA module 804.404
>
>
>
> All,
>
> I am pretty sure this is yet another paradigm where epicor leads many
>
> disconnected and convoluted processes to a cliff where all tracking
and
>
> usability just falls off into the bowels of neverland, however, I
>
> thought I would ask.
>
>
>
> The scenario seems simple enough: I have a certain number of purchased
>
> parts from inventory that seem to be faulty. They were never inspected
>
> upon receipt. Ok, no problem.
>
>
>
> The documented process states that a non-conformance record be
generated
>
> first. Done.
>
> Second, a user will have to process the non-conforming part in the
>
> Inspection module (QA). Here, the purchased part can can be accepted
>
> right back into stock (a useless scenario for us) or rejected. So, I
>
> simply list the failed quantity, enter the reason code, and select the
>
> target warehose and bin and then save the inspection record.
>
> Thirdly, a user will open the DMR processing program where, once
again,
>
> parts can be accepted back to stock (useless for us) or rejected. So,
>
> inside the DMR processing application, I select RJECT DETAIL and can
>
> make a note of a Supplier RMA number and a quantity that will be
>
> returned to them. As soon as the total number of acceptances + total
>
> number of Rejects equals the total DMR quantity, the DMR record is
>
> closed.
>
>
>
> Here are the specific questions:
>
> 1) Does this process seem a little redundant and convoluted?
>
> 2) If the DMR is closed by rejecting the same number of parts that are
>
> listed on the DMR record, what should be used for tracking purposes to
>
> make sure that the parts I am sending back for rework are actually
>
> returned?
>
> 3) If I request a debit memo from the DMR Processing application, what
>
> actually happens?
>
> 4) How do I specify in the system that a parts is sent back to the
>
> vendor to be fixed versus returned for credit? By the existance of the
>
> "request debit memo" flag? That does not make much sense.
>
> 5) I was thinking as a pretty lame work-around that I could use the
>
> corrective actions application to track the return of the material
>
> because the corrective action id is tied to the conformance record id
>
> and dmr record id. Then, I could simply have the manager enter the
audit
>
> date in the corrective action application which closes the corrective
>
> action record. Is this the intended idea for this program?
>
> 6) Since this is coming from inventory and not from a failing po
>
> receipt, how do the numbers flow? The directions state that the DMR TO
>
> BIN specification does not actually move inventory and it does not
seem
>
> that the corrective action has any consideration for the material
coming
>
> back and where it should go. It certainly does not make consideration
>
> for the vendor returning the non-conforming material in
>
> less-than-complete quantities.
>
>
>
> I am thouroughly confused by the intended workings of this process
>
> methodology. Has this worked better in any Epicor software ever?
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Carey
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________
>
> Windows Live(tm): Keep your life in sync.
>
>
http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t1_allup_howitworks_
>
> 012009
>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must
>
> have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access.
)
>
> (1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder
>
> and Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
>
> (2) To search through old msg's goto:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
>
> (3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/linksYahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live(tm): Keep your life in sync.
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t1_allup_explore_012009
------------------------------------

Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must
have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder
and Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/linksYahoo! Groups Links
10
I'm done shaking my fists.

We ended up entirely disabling the DMR disposition Reject BO method and let the (greatly simplified) process be driven by Acceptance reason codes that really reflect failures. These reason codes then drive (vb customization) disposition of the material to specific non-nettable whse/bins that represent SCRAP, REWORK and RTV (return to vendor).

At least then our planners have some visibility to the material. Prior to doing that, a true DMR Reject simply 'made the material go away' leaving only the time consuming task of sifting through inventory transactions as the sole method for a planner to figure out what happened.

It then also allows us to create a Job for rework of part ABC with a material detail of ABC & whatever custom rework OPs are needed. (Cost chain is preserved.)

Of more importance, for supplier rejections, it takes the Debit Memo request generation out of the hands of QC (not typically proper accounting method dollars and cents skilled people) and puts it back in the hands of purchasing (people who deal with dollars daily & interface well with accounting.

Finally, by collecting the inventory to be scrapped in a non-nettable whse/bin, the inventory can actually be disposed of (written off) when an offsetting accounting debit is applied to the correct source account.

Weaknesses of this 'never reject' simplified process:

The only way to RTV is via Misc Shipments (which does not relieve the inventory). A secondary step after the RTV shipment occurs is required to adjust the asset out of inventory. (I suppose given time we could customize Misc Shipments to do this automatically behind the scenes - or create an SC workflow to do it.)

Sub-contract PO/OPs 'accept' dispositions representing rejects work just like an PO inventory 'accept' reject - but makes the subcontract OP appear complete. I just realized this earlier this week & I think we'll end up using email communication to have a job scheduler immediately add another duplicative subcontract OP after the initial one (when the subcontract vendor can actually 'fix' what they have done - like a simple strip & re-plate or re-anodize). When the subcontract work truly has resulted on non-recoverable scrap, we'll have to add a QC OP and report the OP qty as scrap (effectively killing the balance of the job as we run OP yield recalc processing).

- Truly a pain on that last one - but fortunately a rarity!

The biggest pain is Vantage's total lack support for a simple Job receipt inspection (just as PO receipts are inspected). Why chose not to use the same paradigm for Jobs as they do for POs only convinces me further that no one in the design loop of this product ever actually managed a manufacturing business.

To get around it, we end up having all of our Job methods (except those on KanBan receipt processing) end with a final inspection (pre-receipt) OP. When rejections then occur (also fortunately not the norm), just like the subcontract PO/OP issues above, it makes the job appear complete and ready to receive. Fortunately, a simple form from QC can be attached to the traveler so receiving knows what to do (receipt specified qty on form to either RTV - if vendor raw material - say a bad casting that wasn't discovered until the machine broke into an air pocket, or SCRAP, or RTV). Balance (if any) that is truly QC Accepted can do to inventory.

Maybe in v10 they'll bring someone into development that actually understands manufacturing and rewrite this thing for simple, opaque (to the organization) processing.

Rob

--- On Tue, 1/13/09, Andrew Best <abest@...> wrote:
From: Andrew Best <abest@...>
Subject: RE: [Vantage] DMR with QA module 804.404
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, January 13, 2009, 3:42 PM











Epicor is close to having a nice product, the problem is that they have

not addressed the fundamental issues that were present in Vantage 8.00.

These old issues combined with their newly created issues makes me

laugh. When we were beta testing Epicor 9, they have implemented a drop

shipment procedure which would be very useful and would be a HUGE time

saver for our company. I was very excited about this new feature.

Well, they left out so many necessary fields that it not be possible to

us this feature. They simply need to bring over two fields from the SO

to make this one of the best feature upgrades I have ever seen out of

any ERP software package. I was told it was working as designed.



And don't let me get started on Scheduling in Vantage.



Regards,



Andrew Best

Kice Industries, Inc.

P

F



-----Original Message-----

From: vantage@yahoogroups .com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups .com] On Behalf

Of Carey S

Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 2:31 PM

To: vantage@yahoogroups .com

Subject: RE: [Vantage] DMR with QA module 804.404



Andrew,

I have no choice but to laugh and spew swear words at the same time.

I too, am glad it is not just me. But, oh, how I wish that it were and I

was just missing a section of help files.



Why do I have a feeling Rob is sitting out there somewhere shaking his

fists about these Epicor cliffs?

Maybe they should call the help files "not-so-much help files".

Considering the standard response of "working as designed", let's lynch

the fool that "designed" this.

I do not suppose this is fixed in Epicor 9? Anyone?



E10?

E11?



C





____________ _________ _________ __

> To: vantage@yahoogroups .com

> From: abest@...

> Date: Tue, 13 Jan :46:

> Subject: RE: [Vantage] DMR with QA module 804.404

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> I love this post. I agree 100% that this is one of the most

>

> disconnected and convoluted processes in Vantage. I will try to answer

>

> your questions as I recently implemented this process here.

>

>

>

> 1) absolutely. Welcome to the world of Epicor.

>

> 2) A separate spreadsheet outside of Vantage. Yes, it less then

>

> desirable.

>

> 3) It will automatically create a debit memo for your accounts payable

>

> personal to process with invoice authorization and check processing.

>

> 4) Spreadsheet. Take the debit memo and create a new PO for the part.

>

> Yes, it less then desirable.

>

> 5) Let me know if you have success with this.

>

> 6) Not sure.

>

>

>

> Regards,

>

>

>

> Andrew Best

>

> Kice Industries, Inc.

>

> P

>

> F

>

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

>

> From: vantage@yahoogroups .com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups .com] On

Behalf

>

> Of Carey S

>

> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 1:04 PM

>

> To: vantage@yahoogroups .com

>

> Subject: [Vantage] DMR with QA module 804.404

>

>

>

> All,

>

> I am pretty sure this is yet another paradigm where epicor leads many

>

> disconnected and convoluted processes to a cliff where all tracking

and

>

> usability just falls off into the bowels of neverland, however, I

>

> thought I would ask.

>

>

>

> The scenario seems simple enough: I have a certain number of purchased

>

> parts from inventory that seem to be faulty. They were never inspected

>

> upon receipt. Ok, no problem.

>

>

>

> The documented process states that a non-conformance record be

generated

>

> first. Done.

>

> Second, a user will have to process the non-conforming part in the

>

> Inspection module (QA). Here, the purchased part can can be accepted

>

> right back into stock (a useless scenario for us) or rejected. So, I

>

> simply list the failed quantity, enter the reason code, and select the

>

> target warehose and bin and then save the inspection record.

>

> Thirdly, a user will open the DMR processing program where, once

again,

>

> parts can be accepted back to stock (useless for us) or rejected. So,

>

> inside the DMR processing application, I select RJECT DETAIL and can

>

> make a note of a Supplier RMA number and a quantity that will be

>

> returned to them. As soon as the total number of acceptances + total

>

> number of Rejects equals the total DMR quantity, the DMR record is

>

> closed.

>

>

>

> Here are the specific questions:

>

> 1) Does this process seem a little redundant and convoluted?

>

> 2) If the DMR is closed by rejecting the same number of parts that are

>

> listed on the DMR record, what should be used for tracking purposes to

>

> make sure that the parts I am sending back for rework are actually

>

> returned?

>

> 3) If I request a debit memo from the DMR Processing application, what

>

> actually happens?

>

> 4) How do I specify in the system that a parts is sent back to the

>

> vendor to be fixed versus returned for credit? By the existance of the

>

> "request debit memo" flag? That does not make much sense.

>

> 5) I was thinking as a pretty lame work-around that I could use the

>

> corrective actions application to track the return of the material

>

> because the corrective action id is tied to the conformance record id

>

> and dmr record id. Then, I could simply have the manager enter the

audit

>

> date in the corrective action application which closes the corrective

>

> action record. Is this the intended idea for this program?

>

> 6) Since this is coming from inventory and not from a failing po

>

> receipt, how do the numbers flow? The directions state that the DMR TO

>

> BIN specification does not actually move inventory and it does not

seem

>

> that the corrective action has any consideration for the material

coming

>

> back and where it should go. It certainly does not make consideration

>

> for the vendor returning the non-conforming material in

>

> less-than-complete quantities.

>

>

>

> I am thouroughly confused by the intended workings of this process

>

> methodology. Has this worked better in any Epicor software ever?

>

>

>

> Thanks

>

> Carey

>

>

>

> ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _

>

> Windows Live(tm): Keep your life in sync.

>

>

http://windowslive. com/howitworks? ocid=TXT_ TAGLM_WL_ t1_allup_ howitworks_

>

>

>

> ------------ --------- --------- ------

>

>

>

> Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must

>

> have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access.

)

>

> (1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder

>

> and Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:

>

> http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/vantage/ files/.

>

> (2) To search through old msg's goto:

>

> http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/vantage/ messages

>

> (3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:

>

> http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/vantage/ linksYahoo! Groups Links

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _

Windows Live(tm): Keep your life in sync.

http://windowslive. com/explore? ocid=TXT_ TAGLM_WL_ t1_allup_ explore_

------------ --------- --------- ------



Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must

have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )

(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder

and Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:

http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/vantage/ files/.

(2) To search through old msg's goto:

http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/vantage/ messages

(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:

http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/vantage/ linksYahoo! Groups Links
11
I hear you and I agree with Andrew.
Â
I can answer number 6.
Â
6) We create an inventory location called Inspection. The part(s) is transfered to that location and dealt with from there. The location is non-nettable and the QC person can either create a job to re-work the part, return it to inventory or scrap it.Some bins are used for Inspection holds on certain parts and are labled as such.
Â
On the Numbers the part(s) is accounted for by the DMR to RMA's.  When inspection Creates the RMA that removes or voids the PO (Not sure what word to use here). This puts the part back into the system.
Â
Jonathan LangÂ
Oil Rite Corporation
Sr. Network Administrator
Ph: (920) 682-6173 Ext: 126
Fax: (920) 682-7699


--- On Tue, 1/13/09, Andrew Best <abest@...> wrote:

From: Andrew Best <abest@...>
Subject: RE: [Vantage] DMR with QA module 804.404
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, January 13, 2009, 1:46 PM






I love this post. I agree 100% that this is one of the most
disconnected and convoluted processes in Vantage. I will try to answer
your questions as I recently implemented this process here.

1) absolutely. Welcome to the world of Epicor.
2) A separate spreadsheet outside of Vantage. Yes, it less then
desirable.
3) It will automatically create a debit memo for your accounts payable
personal to process with invoice authorization and check processing.
4) Spreadsheet. Take the debit memo and create a new PO for the part.
Yes, it less then desirable.
5) Let me know if you have success with this.
6) Not sure.

Regards,

Andrew Best
Kice Industries, Inc.
P(316)744-7151
F(316)295-2412

-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups .com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups .com] On Behalf
Of Carey S
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 1:04 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups .com
Subject: [Vantage] DMR with QA module 804.404

All,
I am pretty sure this is yet another paradigm where epicor leads many
disconnected and convoluted processes to a cliff where all tracking and
usability just falls off into the bowels of neverland, however, I
thought I would ask.

The scenario seems simple enough: I have a certain number of purchased
parts from inventory that seem to be faulty. They were never inspected
upon receipt. Ok, no problem.

The documented process states that a non-conformance record be generated
first. Done.
Second, a user will have to process the non-conforming part in the
Inspection module (QA). Here, the purchased part can can be accepted
right back into stock (a useless scenario for us) or rejected. So, I
simply list the failed quantity, enter the reason code, and select the
target warehose and bin and then save the inspection record.
Thirdly, a user will open the DMR processing program where, once again,
parts can be accepted back to stock (useless for us) or rejected. So,
inside the DMR processing application, I select RJECT DETAIL and can
make a note of a Supplier RMA number and a quantity that will be
returned to them. As soon as the total number of acceptances + total
number of Rejects equals the total DMR quantity, the DMR record is
closed.

Here are the specific questions:
1) Does this process seem a little redundant and convoluted?
2) If the DMR is closed by rejecting the same number of parts that are
listed on the DMR record, what should be used for tracking purposes to
make sure that the parts I am sending back for rework are actually
returned?
3) If I request a debit memo from the DMR Processing application, what
actually happens?
4) How do I specify in the system that a parts is sent back to the
vendor to be fixed versus returned for credit? By the existance of the
"request debit memo" flag? That does not make much sense.
5) I was thinking as a pretty lame work-around that I could use the
corrective actions application to track the return of the material
because the corrective action id is tied to the conformance record id
and dmr record id. Then, I could simply have the manager enter the audit
date in the corrective action application which closes the corrective
action record. Is this the intended idea for this program?
6) Since this is coming from inventory and not from a failing po
receipt, how do the numbers flow? The directions state that the DMR TO
BIN specification does not actually move inventory and it does not seem
that the corrective action has any consideration for the material coming
back and where it should go. It certainly does not make consideration
for the vendor returning the non-conforming material in
less-than-complete quantities.

I am thouroughly confused by the intended workings of this process
methodology. Has this worked better in any Epicor software ever?

Thanks
Carey

____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
Windows Live(tm): Keep your life in sync.
http://windowslive. com/howitworks? ocid=TXT_ TAGLM_WL_ t1_allup_ howitworks_
012009
------------ --------- --------- ------

Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must
have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder
and Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto:
http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/vantage/ files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto:
http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/vantage/ messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto:
http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/vantage/ linksYahoo! Groups Links


















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
12
After I create a new Revision and I go to Revision - Get Details - Get
From Methods/Jobs/Quotes... the original Part Revision is not
available for me to copy from. Am I doing something wrong here? Thanks!!

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "idiabos" <idiabos@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks A LOT Mark!!! Worked perfect!
>
> -Sal
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Wonsil" <mark_wonsil@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Whoops, forgot the second question:
> >
> > > > when creating a revision to a BOM is there any way to copy the
> > > > Materials from the old revision to the new revision?
> >
> > Do a Get Details from the Action Menu item (under revision).
> >
> > Mark W.
> >
>
13
> After I create a new Revision and I go to Revision - Get Details - Get
> From Methods/Jobs/Quotes... the original Part Revision is not
> available for me to copy from. Am I doing something wrong here? Thanks!!

Is the original revision unapproved? I think you can only copy approved
revisions.

Mark W.
14
Hi Mark,

I've tried approving and unapproving the original revision to no
avail. The weird thing is that i can copy from any Revision that is
created after the first Revision. So if I have Part 10000 Revision 1A
then I create Revision 1B. The only Revision I can copy from is 1B.
I've tried this on multiple Parts. Anyone else have this issue?
Thanks!!

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Wonsil" <mark_wonsil@...> wrote:
>
> > After I create a new Revision and I go to Revision - Get Details - Get
> > From Methods/Jobs/Quotes... the original Part Revision is not
> > available for me to copy from. Am I doing something wrong here?
Thanks!!
>
> Is the original revision unapproved? I think you can only copy approved
> revisions.
>
> Mark W.
>
15
OK I figured it out Mark - I created the original Revisions via the
Part Master then went into the Engineering Workbench to create the BOM
versus creating the Revision directly through the Engineering
Workbench. All is well now. Thanks!

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "idiabos" <idiabos@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> I've tried approving and unapproving the original revision to no
> avail. The weird thing is that i can copy from any Revision that is
> created after the first Revision. So if I have Part 10000 Revision 1A
> then I create Revision 1B. The only Revision I can copy from is 1B.
> I've tried this on multiple Parts. Anyone else have this issue?
> Thanks!!
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Wonsil" <mark_wonsil@> wrote:
> >
> > > After I create a new Revision and I go to Revision - Get Details
- Get
> > > From Methods/Jobs/Quotes... the original Part Revision is not
> > > available for me to copy from. Am I doing something wrong here?
> Thanks!!
> >
> > Is the original revision unapproved? I think you can only copy
approved
> > revisions.
> >
> > Mark W.
> >
>
16
Sounds like a buggy control. WHat version are you running?

--- On Fri, 1/16/09, idiabos <idiabos@...> wrote:

From: idiabos <idiabos@...>
Subject: [Vantage] Re: BOM's
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, January 16, 2009, 12:01 PM






Hi Mark,

I've tried approving and unapproving the original revision to no
avail. The weird thing is that i can copy from any Revision that is
created after the first Revision. So if I have Part 10000 Revision 1A
then I create Revision 1B. The only Revision I can copy from is 1B.
I've tried this on multiple Parts. Anyone else have this issue?
Thanks!!

--- In vantage@yahoogroups .com, "Mark Wonsil" <mark_wonsil@ ...> wrote:
>
> > After I create a new Revision and I go to Revision - Get Details - Get
> > From Methods/Jobs/ Quotes... the original Part Revision is not
> > available for me to copy from. Am I doing something wrong here?
Thanks!!
>
> Is the original revision unapproved? I think you can only copy approved
> revisions.
>
> Mark W.
>
17
The Method tracker works, but to get a bit more BOM listing feel and
to add some more custom data (Manufacturer name and part number), I
created a couple of BAQs and made a dashboard. The first BAQ gives me
the parent part info and feeds into the second BAQ which provides the
PartMTL data. I then continued to nest these PartMTL BAQ's to get
subsequent BOM levels.

It works pretty well, with only the typical vantage hiccups. Now if I
could only figure out how to get a decent printout of it.

Andrew

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Wonsil" <mark_wonsil@...> wrote:
>
> > Hello - Where do you go in Vanatage to look at BOM's. The only way I
> > have been able to figure out is by Checking out the BOM I want to look
> > at from the Engineering Workbench and this "UnApproves" it. Also,
> > when creating a revision to a BOM is there any way to copy the
> > Materials from the old revision to the new revision? Thanks in
advance!!
>
> Right mouse click on the Part Revision letter in Part Maintenance or
Part
> Tracker and open with "Method Tracker"
>
> Mark W.
>
18
Andrew,

If your company policy doesn't prohibit it, would you mind uploading your dashboard & supporting BAQs to the user group files section?

It sounds like you have a pretty nifty little tool others might benefit from (and you may then benefit if someone then takes your code and tweaks it to develop a BAQ report that provides equivalent hard copy output).

Rob

--- On Fri, 1/16/09, andrew.tapper <atapper@...> wrote:
From: andrew.tapper <atapper@...>
Subject: [Vantage] Re: BOM's
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, January 16, 2009, 4:32 PM











The Method tracker works, but to get a bit more BOM listing feel and

to add some more custom data (Manufacturer name and part number), I

created a couple of BAQs and made a dashboard. The first BAQ gives me

the parent part info and feeds into the second BAQ which provides the

PartMTL data. I then continued to nest these PartMTL BAQ's to get

subsequent BOM levels.



It works pretty well, with only the typical vantage hiccups. Now if I

could only figure out how to get a decent printout of it.



Andrew



--- In vantage@yahoogroups .com, "Mark Wonsil" <mark_wonsil@ ...> wrote:

>

> > Hello - Where do you go in Vanatage to look at BOM's. The only way I

> > have been able to figure out is by Checking out the BOM I want to look

> > at from the Engineering Workbench and this "UnApproves" it. Also,

> > when creating a revision to a BOM is there any way to copy the

> > Materials from the old revision to the new revision? Thanks in

advance!!

>

> Right mouse click on the Part Revision letter in Part Maintenance or

Part

> Tracker and open with "Method Tracker"

>

> Mark W.

>
19
Andrew,

Can you send a copy of your dashboard & how you created it?

You can send direct to Carol_M_Pelowski@...

Thanks much

Â



________________________________
From: andrew.tapper <atapper@...>
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2009 3:32:03 PM
Subject: [Vantage] Re: BOM's


The Method tracker works, but to get a bit more BOM listing feel and
to add some more custom data (Manufacturer name and part number), I
created a couple of BAQs and made a dashboard. The first BAQ gives me
the parent part info and feeds into the second BAQ which provides the
PartMTL data. I then continued to nest these PartMTL BAQ's to get
subsequent BOM levels.

It works pretty well, with only the typical vantage hiccups. Now if I
could only figure out how to get a decent printout of it.

Andrew

--- In vantage@yahoogroups .com, "Mark Wonsil" <mark_wonsil@ ...> wrote:
>
> > Hello - Where do you go in Vanatage to look at BOM's. The only way I
> > have been able to figure out is by Checking out the BOM I want to look
> > at from the Engineering Workbench and this "UnApproves" it. Also,
> > when creating a revision to a BOM is there any way to copy the
> > Materials from the old revision to the new revision? Thanks in
advance!!
>
> Right mouse click on the Part Revision letter in Part Maintenance or
Part
> Tracker and open with "Method Tracker"
>
> Mark W.
>






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
20
I have posted the files in the Files section in a BOM Tracker directory.

The basic principal is that the Parent Info BAQ publishes subassembly
starting information to the PartMtl BAQ and then each PartMtl BAQ
publishes down to the next level PartMtl BAQ.

I put 7 levels of PartMtl BAQs on my dashboard, which makes the
dashboard load a bit slow and a little prone to crashing, but since it
isn't hard for our BOMs to be 7 level deep, it was necessary.

Thanks for your interest.

Andrew

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, Robert Brown <robertb_versa@...> wrote:
>
> Andrew,
>
> If your company policy doesn't prohibit it, would you mind uploading
your dashboard & supporting BAQs to the user group files section?
>
> It sounds like you have a pretty nifty little tool others might
benefit from (and you may then benefit if someone then takes your code
and tweaks it to develop a BAQ report that provides equivalent hard
copy output).
>
> Rob
>
> --- On Fri, 1/16/09, andrew.tapper <atapper@...> wrote:
> From: andrew.tapper <atapper@...>
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: BOM's
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Friday, January 16, 2009, 4:32 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The Method tracker works, but to get a bit more BOM
listing feel and
>
> to add some more custom data (Manufacturer name and part number), I
>
> created a couple of BAQs and made a dashboard. The first BAQ gives me
>
> the parent part info and feeds into the second BAQ which provides the
>
> PartMTL data. I then continued to nest these PartMTL BAQ's to get
>
> subsequent BOM levels.
>
>
>
> It works pretty well, with only the typical vantage hiccups. Now if I
>
> could only figure out how to get a decent printout of it.
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups .com, "Mark Wonsil" <mark_wonsil@ ...> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > Hello - Where do you go in Vanatage to look at BOM's. The only way I
>
> > > have been able to figure out is by Checking out the BOM I want
to look
>
> > > at from the Engineering Workbench and this "UnApproves" it. Also,
>
> > > when creating a revision to a BOM is there any way to copy the
>
> > > Materials from the old revision to the new revision? Thanks in
>
> advance!!
>
> >
>
> > Right mouse click on the Part Revision letter in Part Maintenance or
>
> Part
>
> > Tracker and open with "Method Tracker"
>
> >
>
> > Mark W.
>
> >
>