Configurator Troubleshooting

[dcamlin (David Camlin)]

I didn’t want to necropost, but I’ll show the original below:

Configurator Test Rules doesn't show results of Actions

When you tested the rules in V8, it would provide a listing with the changes to the BOM. Things like "Keep = TRUE" JobMtl.QtyPer = 1.23 QuoteMtl.QtyPer = 1.23 etc… Other than testing it via creating a test Job or Quote, and examining the Mfg Details that result, is there a way to see or get a report of the Test results? The Test Results program/window only displays if the action was executed, and if it succeeded. It doesn’t show what the actual action did.

… wondering if this functionality was ever added/brought back?

Using Kinetic configurator… the Action Result claims success, but is there anywhere to view the resulting change?

I am VERY green to Configurator and also a beginner C# coder… so being able to easily test and verify my expressions are actually working as intended is pretty critical!

I’m trying to impact the QtyPer fields, specifically on QuoteMtl. I’m not even sure where to see that in quote entry if I created a test quote. Would I go into the Quote Line Engineering? If so, the assembly is currently empty, I’d have to get details from somewhere.

Again, being new to Configurator, I don’t know if my configurator isn’t working… or if quote engineering is completely separated and this is not the place to look.

Any advice for a beginner configurator-or on how to verify and troubleshoot this stuff?

[Steen (Austin Clark)]

Hey David,

I was asking myself the same questions a few months ago when we first started building configurators with App Studio and the Embedded Configurator.

From what I can tell up to this point, I don’t believe the functionality has changed. When we first started creating material selection rules and things like that, I tried using the “Test Rules” functionality but like Calvin stated in his post, it doesn’t show the actual action itself or populate the BOM after testing.

The way we test is similar to what you mentioned, by using a test quote. Our standard process is below:

1. Create the part and revision in the Part screen.
2. Create the Revision, and assign it to a configurator.
3. Check the part out to an ECO Group in Engineering Workbench and add the BOM/Operations.
4. Check the part back in from the Workbench.
5. Create the rules for each material on the BOM in Configurator Rule Entry.
6. Create a test quote, and create a line item for the configured part.
7. Click Configure on the quote card in the top right.
8. Make all of the selections that we are wanting to test for. (Cabinet color, voltage, model, etc.)
9. Save the configuration, and return to the quote screen.
10. Click Quote Engineering next to the overflow.
11. Click Get Details and make sure the part we’re testing for is selected, which then pulls in the Method which have the rules we just created attached.
12. Verify the correct materials pull onto the BOM based on the selections made in the configurator, verifying that our code works and the rule is effective.

A caveat to this process above though is that we’ve not defined any rules for the QtyPer fields, only materials and operations up to this point. So I’m not entirely certain if the above process would be the same for testing those.

However, if you can tie the QtyPer rules to a method, you could pull the details and assembly from there I would imagine.

To make sure I’m understanding correctly, are you trying to see the quantities of each material on the BOM for a configured part?

I’ve spent the better part of the past year learning everything related to the embedded config though, so please feel free to ask any questions and I’d always be happy to help if I’m able.

I’m gonna play around in test shortly this morning and I’ll see if I can figure out how we can see the results of those rules and I’ll update back soon!

[dcamlin (David Camlin)]

@Steen

To make sure I’m understanding correctly, are you trying to see the quantities of each material on the BOM for a configured part?

Yes, this is exactly what I’m after. My finished part is an assembly… trying to think of a good way to explain it… let’s say a choo-choo train. I have an engine and a caboose that are always there. But I could have let’s say 10 other cars in between. They could be tankers, flatbeds, containers, or personnel cars.

My configurator is set up so the user choose the option on each car:

Engine - Tanker - Tanker - Tanker - Flatbed - Container - Tanker - Caboose.

My Keep When is working because my rule test will show that “personnel” cars were not “kept”. But I’m also trying to count the instances of each TYPE, and adjusting my QtyPer values accordingly.

So my resulting BOM will say I need (1) Engine, (4) Tankers, (1) Flatbed, (1) Caboose.

Make sense?

@Steen

Click Get Details and make sure the part we’re testing for is selected, which then pulls in the Method which have the rules we just created attached.

THIS is the step I was missing/unsure of. I didn’t think I wanted to pull in the “method” because the initial method had QtyPer set to 1 for each material. So I was trying to Get Details from Quote, and that didn’t work.

I did try the method initially but everything was visible… this time I noticed this pop-out:

Before, I had answered YES, thinking I was “reconfiguring it” with the configurator results. But I actually needed to say NO.

Now I see my materials and the respective changes to their QtyPer… which are WRONG by the way, meaning my expression is not working correctly and is proof that even though the Action was “Successful” (syntax was acceptable and it did change the value), the result was not what I wanted.

So… my set-up is correct, by my C# is an issue (no surprise there, definitely my weak spot).

The fact that you have to go that far into things to test/verify is ridiculous! But I SUPER appreciate the help! At least I can finally see what’s going on!!

[Steen (Austin Clark)]

Haha that’s a fantastic analogy, a very good way to explain it!

Thanks for the breakdown, one thing that really sucks about configurator stuff is that it’s incredibly hard to explain because it has so many little nuances. It really is it’s own little world within Epicor.

Love to hear that it allowed you to see the results you were looking for, that’s awesome. Verifying that things are working as they should and testing are half the battle sometimes.

One additional thing I’d like to add too, is that the Expression Editor and the C# that App Studio operates off of is very unique. It’s not as freeform as I’d like it to be sometimes, so as you spend more time with it you’ll learn the limitations it has compared to other C# environments. It’s kinda like it’s own unique version of C#.

For example, certain inputs that you add into the Configurator Designer won’t always show up as inputs in the Expression Editor as you would expect (List box, Multilevel menu), functions/operators that you’d typically use aren’t recognized (boolean, string functions, checkbox logic) and sometimes the Check Syntax function has a tendency to lie even if it lets you save, so I always recommend testing everything just to be safe because it can be quite deceiving.

There are quite a lot of tricks and workarounds we’ve figured out as we’ve gone along to get around some of the bigger issues.

I’m glad you’re on the right track, and if anything else comes up feel free to shoot me a message anytime. It can be really frustrating to work with sometimes but it’s pretty awesome for what it CAN do (when it wants to anyways).

Welcome to crazytown