I tried using DMT to add an assembly sequence to an existing job and use a specific assembly number (2000) but it ignored the number in the file and assigned the next available number (1167). There were no errors and everything is clean in the log file. The AssemblySeq is described as:
A sequence number that uniquely identifies the JobAsmbl record within the JobNum. This can be user assigned or assigned by the system. The system assigns the next available number during add mode if its left blank.
As of a couple years ago when I was importing WIP jobs at our Go-Live, this was NOT possible.
I had contacted Epicor DMT guru at the time (David Hogue) with that exact question… below is what I received from our emails back and forth:
~*~ My question is on the AssemblySeq values and whether they can be “user assigned” as the DMT description states.
Like Epicor… Assembly 000 is the top-most level.
However, the assembly sequences in our legacy systemare not sequential…
Assembly 001 is the first assembly (ParentAssemblySeq = 0) Assembly 022 is the next assembly (ParentAssemblySeq = 0) Assembly 024 is the next assembly (ParentAssemblySeq = 0) Assembly 116 is the next assembly (ParentAssemblySeq = 0) Etc.
So, based on that… I think the DMT “description” is just plain wrong and it is not possible.
If it is critical to maintain the assembly sequence numbers you have, then you can potentially inject placeholder assemblies (to eat up the sequential numbers) and then delete them in a subsequent DMT pass. I didn’t try this, so I can’t attest to whether that would work, but in theory, it should.
I went the route of resequencing my WIP jobs before importing (making sure materials and operations referenced the new sequence numbers, prior to importing those).
Like @dcamlin says, I don’t think you have control over it. I think about Phantom parts which moves parts “up” the assembly tree, which renumbers the assemblies as it goes. Product Configurator might do the same as well.
If it’s super important, you may want to add that as a UD Field to Part and JobAssembly and make sure that the field is copied during a Get Details… to ensure the value is retained.
Thanks for the information David and Mark. I have a couple of other options to handle the current situation and will work to decide the best solution now that I know I can’t control the sequence number.
Yeah, I know I spent a couple days banging my head against that wall (based on the same description you were referencing), only to eventually learn that it wasn’t the case.
That was back in October, 2022.
Wish they would update that description as it is definitely misleading (and a source of frustration).
