I’ve never done POTF co-parts.
As a backup, it seems one can salvage just about anything from a job (except a Packers’ win on Saturday). Kinda manual and not POTF, but just a different thought.
1 Like
Also go lions baby!!! LETS GO
3 Likes
Thanks for the though Mark. I started this post with part on the fly, but quickly changed to just doing two normal parts to get it to work properly before moving on to nonvantage.
All Grit. The Niners can be beat! The Ravens? 
1 Like
#AllGrit
BTW, @Mark_Wonsil and @utaylor, I was there representing Detroit last night!! It was AMAZING!!!
1 Like
Nice Beth that’s awesome!
I can see how FAFO might be the best approach here.
@jkane @Beth @Mark_Wonsil , before I go trying to create batch jobs can anyone tell me if batched jobs have the same limitation as co-parts where a lot tracked co-part cannot be lot tracked?
Limitations
The following limitations apply:
• Co-Part functionality is only available at the main assembly level and is not available at the subassembly level.
To take advantage of co-part functionality, subassemblies must go through stock and be pulled as a material
to the job.
• Lot tracked co-parts are not able to be lot-tracked.
• Configured parts cannot be co-parts.
• Depending on the complexity and number of parts set up as co-parts, there exists the possibility of creating
a loop when processing low level codes.
I don’t even know what that bolded text means… like if I try and add a lot tracked co-part to the job does it throw an exception right then and there? Or does it let me do everything just when I go to use lot tracker, I can’t track the co-part back to the job it was produced on?
We lot tracked at PTI and never had an issue with coparts. I’m not sure where that came from or what it means. Our lot number was the job number and it automatically assigned it to both coparts when ending activity on the job.
2 Likes
Haha okay, that was from an APS guide for 2021.1 I believe thanks for confirming Beth.
I will say that if you have more than one operation on the job, you can only report quantity for the main copart until you get to the last operation where you report quantity for each copart. That was hard to teach.
Also, you can only report scrap for the main copart, not the child coparts. It’s one of the pet peeves I had with coparts.
I’m not sure whether the scrap issue exists in batching operations.
1 Like
that sucks about the scrap thanks for the heads up.
Hey Y’all
I tried a revision, I tried batching, I tried anything I could think of… it just doesn’t post the variance per co-part. It allocates all variance and the resulting “MFG-VAR” transaction to the part on the job header, not each co-part independently according to the cost yield factors.
This is a pretty large oversight in my mind and goes against any fundamental variance calculation out there. Standard Cost - Actual Cost = Variance. The standard cost of the part on the main job is 10 and the cost yield puts actual costs at 8. The same thing on the co-part, the standard cost is usually 8, but the yield on the job puts it at 6. That’s an overall variance of $4, sure, but don’t book it all under the one part number because that’s just incorrect. That’s not what the variance was for that one part number, it was $2.
Anyways, I put in an idea… it would mean a ton if we could vote together on it.
If you feel inclined here’s the link: Allow For Co-Part MFG-VAR Transactions | Epicor Kinetic Ideas Portal (aha.io)
Also thanks for all of the help everyone @jgiese.wci @Beth @jkane @Mark_Wonsil @Banderson
@Mark_Wonsil - I still need to try your salvage quantity approach to see if I can get this to post accordingly.
I do know of people who create separate jobs for each part and have the operator clock in to each job at the same time. That might give you the variance you are looking for from the jobs. The only issue with that is making sure the operator clocks in to both. It should split the operator time and the burden in half (half to one job and half to the other). You may want to give this a try…
1 Like
you mean out of the box the system splits the time evenly when an operator is clocked into multiple jobs?
1 Like
Yes. There are settings on whether you want to split the burden or not (like if they are running 2 machines at a time, you want full burden for both, but if they are only using one machine, you want the burden split like the labor), but the labor is split by however many operations they are clocked into.
3 Likes
Okay, I need to revisit the job costing tech ref guide then cause I overlooked this.