Co Part Costing

Epicor ERP 10
61

Is this in company config or something you set per job?

62

I’d have to find it, but I believe is resource group or operation? It’s a check box called “Split Burden” I believe.

1 Like
63

Thanks, I think I recall that having some scheduling implications too maybe??

Either way thanks a ton man. we don’t use scheduling right now either so I’ll cross that bridge when I get there.

64

Read up on these checkboxes.

image
image1032×778 40.7 KB

1 Like
65

Ah yes, it’s the split operations I was thinking of.

66

Thanks man, I will. thank you @Beth as well for spurring the conversation/

67

I think you’ll have to change how the issuing for the raw materials is done. So you’ll have to issue less than it calls for on each one (or return to stock). Not a huge deal, but if you are backflushing, it could get a little confusing.

1 Like
68

Yes man that’s what I am trying to avoid as well, but if that’s the only way to get the variances to come out then okay, we’ll weigh that option.

We are all lot tracked so we don’t backflush.

Thanks a ton for thinking so critically about this for me.

1 Like
69

@Banderson is correct. You will need to figure out how much material to issue to each job and return what you don’t use.

That’s why I liked co-parts but co-parts has some short comings that need to be corrected. :slight_smile:

1 Like
70

Thanks everyone. I will try and figure out which practice people want to try out.

1 Like
71

You know… I wonder what operation batching could do for this… I think it might just turn them into co-parts though… but maybe the variance posts back to the original operation? Probably not. But may be worth a FAFO if someone else doesn’t already know the outcome.

72

They do turn them into co-parts- I did the batching, the variance results in the same thing… all variance going to the part on the jobheader, not each one individually like it should.

73

Might I respectfully suggest

74

If only I could record scrap for that co-part you’re throwing away there

75

That’s the thing, the co-part never existed :ghost: :ghost:

1 Like
76

It existed the moment I received it to inventory at its standard cost. Furthermore, the variances don’t get factored till you complete and close the job so I don’t see any reason we couldn’t count that as “existing.” I think you were joking, but I’m still a little hurt by how weird this was programmed :sleepy:

1 Like
77

I was just reminded that scrapping of co-parts and nonconforming them has been fixed in the new version. They have added scrapping of coparts to the grid as well as nonconforming them. :slight_smile:

1 Like
78

Well, I can add that to the list of reasons we should go to kinetic.

1 Like
79

thank you!

80

I was going to look and see if variances were booking the way I want too. I gotta hop in my kinetic environment.