Thanks again! You were a tremendous help!
In case another user has the same issue I want to post the solution for their reference.
I ended up creating a BPM the checked to see if an ADDED part had a date that equals TODAY. If this was true I had the BPM clear out that date. It was a bit quirky in that when the user entered the part and navigated to the cycle count date, todays date would appear, but it has actually been cleared out by the system by time it displays to the user. So it appeared like it didn't work, but if the user hit refresh they would see that the date has been cleared. It was rigorously tested and satisfied the customer and is working to this day. I would definitely go the BPM route.
In case another user has the same issue I want to post the solution for their reference.
I ended up creating a BPM the checked to see if an ADDED part had a date that equals TODAY. If this was true I had the BPM clear out that date. It was a bit quirky in that when the user entered the part and navigated to the cycle count date, todays date would appear, but it has actually been cleared out by the system by time it displays to the user. So it appeared like it didn't work, but if the user hit refresh they would see that the date has been cleared. It was rigorously tested and satisfied the customer and is working to this day. I would definitely go the BPM route.
--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Kirstin Brandt" <kirstin.brandt@...> wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, my ABC "project" was a few years ago and I remember making lots of changes and running lots of tests, but I've lost the report that detailed what did what. (And it was 8.03.405 so I'm not sure how helpful it would be anyway.) As far as I know, this version has blank counted dates when the partwhse record is created.
>
> Does the ABC Code Maintenance include both minimum unit cost and minimum volume values when defining ABC? This is what we used to make sure we counted our more expensive material more frequently even if it was (as of the last ABC Calculation) slow moving. I had to train my users that ABC was not a part classification, but a cycle count classification so if they were using it for any other reason, we needed to find another method to do that(usage dashboard, as it turns out). We're currently using codes A-F and parts are counted anywhere from 90 days to 10 years. We also use partplant.minABC to force some parts to be counted more frequently if needed.
>
> I also created some dashboards/reports so the warehouse manager can see what the count status of all the active parts is so she knows if they're falling behind.
>
> If you're going to write a BPM, rather than blanking out the date, consider putting in a date that's a couple months back, then you won't have to worry about "blanks" not processing as expected somewhere down the line. You might have to find another method of determining whether a part has been counted or not (save part entry date and compare, for example).
>
> HTH, Kirstin
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "chan213419" <chan213419@> wrote:
> >
> > Yes, I am try to do exactly what you described: I want "this date (to be) empty when the part is created (and have it) set by the Calculate ABC Codes process."
> >
> > I am currently building a BPM to do this, but now that I read this I believe there should be a much easier way to get this accomplished. Would you mind telling me how you prevented Part Maintenance from forcing the Last Cycle Count to be todays date, and instead be left empty when a new part is added?
> >
> > Your other suggestions are great too! I appreciate them very much, as well as your time. The customer I'm working with currently builds parts that are extraordinarily expensive. They want to do their cycle counts much earlier than 90 days to prevent any part from 'falling through the cracks'.
> >
> > Thank you VERY much!
> >
> > --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Kirstin Brandt" <kirstin.brandt@> wrote:
> > >
> > > You could write a bpm or data directive to change the value of the counted date (PartWhse.CountedDate?) for new parts. In my version, this date is empty when the part is created and gets set by the Calculate ABC Codes process so I don't know where the better place to set the value would be. You could also play with the ABC parameters and see if you could get some combination that could find these parts and count them sooner.
> > >
> > > I'm curious why your customer needs to count new parts sooner? It sounds like maybe their inventory process for new parts is a little loose? Maybe you could even go the route of tracking parts used in new projects, then just create a special cycle count for them once the project is released?
> > >
> > > Good luck!
> > >
> > > --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "chan213419" <chan213419@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Yes, that's what I was thinking too. Thank you very much! So I suppose if a customer wanted to count the part earlier a BPM would have to be created to flag something as 'new' and prompt an earlier cycle count. Do you think that would be a solution for their issue?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks again :)
> > > >
> > > > --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Kirstin Brandt" <kirstin.brandt@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > If you think about it, when you first create the part, there's no inventory. So it's automatically "counting" 0 for you.
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "chan213419" <chan213419@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > When users create a new part in the Part Maintenance screen and save, the system defaults the "Last Cycle Count" as the date the part was created. As a result of this, parts don't get counted till 90 days after they are created. Is this the way Epicor set this up??? It doesn't make sense to me.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This is in Epicor 9.05.607A
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>